London Banter - View Single Post - Higher congestion charge for thirsty cars

Aidan Stanger · July 14th 06, 05:56 AM posted to uk.transport.london

wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
John B wrote:

True. However, the fact that they'll contribute an extra £650-ish each
a year to TfL coffers is no bad thing - it partially addresses the
outrageous anomaly that Council Tax stops at Band H...

Why is that an outrageous anomaly? Such people don't throw away
substantially more rubbish, or use more other council services, than
those in lower bands.

If you want a local income tax you may as well do it properly, that
said.

Neil, your argument against banding is intellectually correct: a Band A
property does not inherently require less Council services than a Band
H property. That being so, why should there be any distinction based on
property value?

Taxing land value is desirable because otherwise the price of land would
just increase more. I can't think of a good reason to tax the value of
the buildings, but ISTR council tax assessment for houses in London is
based on footprint rather than value.

Moreover, why should there be a distinction based upon earnings either?
Does a high-earner necessarily use more Council services than a
low-earner?

No. Of course, when a question includes "necessarily", the answer is
nearly always "no", but in this case I doubt there's even a correlation.

--
Aidan Stanger
http://www.bettercrossrail.co.uk