search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
POLITICS


Making business rates fairer with Dutch inspiration


A


nnual revaluations carried out by local authorities rather than Government would make business rates fairer, according to an economic think-tank.


The Centre for Cities has set out a 10-point


plan of recommendations for how the much- maligned system can be overhauled as part of a Government consultation, which precedes a fundamental review, due to be published in the spring, of how the levy is applied. Business rates are collected on commercial


property and linked to the estimated underlying rental value of the premises. But the tax is widely regarded as outdated because it penalises companies that need a presence in town and city centres, where property values are higher, resulting in them paying more in rates than online rivals. Kathrin Enenkel, a senior analyst at Centre for


Cities, said: “Currently, revaluations are infrequent. This means that rates are paid based on property values that can be as much as seven years out of date. And this causes a number of problems.” “The first is that it creates a cliff edge when


valuations finally occur as assessments must catch up with how the market has changed over the previous years.” She said the current phased-in approach to


new tax liabilities means businesses that have been underpaying for years benefit from staggered increases, but those overpaying will continue to overpay as transitional relief staggers the fall in rates due.


Kathrin Enenkel


This is at odds with the levelling up agenda as northern businesses have been more likely to have seen drops in their rateable value, and therefore continue to overpay, while those firms in the South are effectively being subsidised by these characteristics of the tax. A third issue highlighted is that recent changes in demand for bricks and mortar retail have meant the lack of revaluation has resulted in shops partially subsidising warehouses.


DUTCH INSPIRATION The Centre for Cities’ annual revaluation recommendation is based on many changes in the Netherlands when it went through a comprehensive reform of its overly complex business rates system in the mid-1990s.


Andrew Carter


By moving property valuations from every four years – which disincentivised growth – to annually, and taking local market information into account alongside property-specific details, the number of appeals have reduced by 80% and the costs of valuations were cut by 20%. Speaking at an online briefing of the Reforming Business Rates report, Centre for Cities chief executive Andrew Carter said: “We deliberately looked at the Dutch model because it shows us the system can be reformed to make it more efficient, more timely, less complex and more responsive.”


BCC RESPONSE TO BUSINESS RATES REFORM Dr Adam Marshall (pictured opposite), director- general of the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), welcomed the Centre for Cities recommendations during the online discussion. He said: “The business rates system does


The Netherlands put annual revaluations at the heart of its business rates overhaul in the mid-1990s 60 business network December 2020/January 2021


remain fundamentally broken. It creates so many disincentives for investment, it’s a burden on many businesses regardless of their ability to pay and makes no allowance for structural changes that have taken place in the UK economy. “We all know it doesn’t work for local economic needs or at national level.”


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100