Council tax will double for second homes and empty properties in Brighton and Hove from the start of April next year.
The Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 gave councils the power to double council tax on homes that had been empty for two years.
But the council has to make the decision to impose a premium on second homes at least a year before it comes into force.
So on Thursday (25 January), at Hove Town Hall, senior members of Brighton and Hove City Council agreed to bring in the measure in just over a year’s time.
At the council’s Strategy, Finance and City Regeneration Committee meeting yesterday, council finance chief Nigel Manvell said that the measure was aimed at dealing with the effect of empty and second homes on the housing supply.
Mr Manvell said that the idea was to incentivise “behavioural change” by home owners and landlords.
The empty homes premium is expected to generate about £500,000 from 461 properties.
There are almost 1,400 second homes which Mr Manvell expected to generate about £1.6 million.
Labour councillor Gill Williams, who chairs the council’s Housing and New Homes Committee, said that she had higher figures for both empty homes and second homes in Brighton and Hove.
Councillor Williams said: “I’m sure I’m not alone here, as every councillor gets their mailbox full of people that are really desperate, asking you to help, begging, living in terrible conditions, asking for us to help them find a home.
“It’s really heartbreaking. While we’re doing all we can, this won’t solve all the problems but it will certainly go some way to entice people to bring these empty homes back to life and help thousands of people to have a decent home.”
Councillor Williams said that she looked forward to the council exercising its devolved powers for a registration scheme for short-term holiday lets.
Her research suggested that there were more than 4,000 such lets in the city which, if freed up, would help solve the housing crisis.
Green councillor Sue Shanks said that she received lots of complaints about short-term holiday lets in her West Hill and North Laine ward, particularly around Kensington Gardens.
Councillor Shanks said: “They’re not paying anything to use our facilities, our waste facilities.”
Labour councillor Tim Rowkins said that the housing crisis in the city was “existential.
When he moved to his home in Hanover and Elm Grove ward five years ago, the houses either side of his, in a terrace of eight, were empty – one for 10 years at that time while the other is still empty.
Councillor Rowkins said: “These are family homes where people could be raising young kids and contributing to the future of the city.
“The idea you would have empty homes like this and others in the face of the kind of crisis we have is nothing short of offensive.”
He said that the balance of power was in landlords and letting agents’ hands, with high rents and huge deposits driving young professionals in their thirties and forties away from Brighton and Hove because they could not afford to live here.
Labour councillor Jacob Taylor, who chairs the Children, Families and Schools Committee, said: “It’s very bad in Brighton in terms of the number of families presenting as homeless each week.
“But also really bad in terms of the effect it’s had on the city and we’re having to make very difficult proposals in terms of our schools.
“So many families have left the city and there’s so few children now being brought up in certain areas of the city because of the cost of housing.
“This policy is one small measure towards trying to reduce the number of empty homes.”
The committee unanimously agreed to impose the premium rate on council tax for empty homes and second homes from the start of the 2025-26 financial year.
Under the sale of Goods and Services Act 1982, the Council would need to explain how an empty property uses twice as many goods and services as an occupied one or it’s an invalid contract between householder and council.
That is not the point, i’m from Cumbria so many properties were used for second homes and let for holiday homes it killed villages off. Schools, shops, pubs etc could not survive. Now lots of sales you have to have a local connection to buy. It is saving towns and villages.
Now look here in Brighton and Hove walk around at night as i do with my dog many properties are in darkness all the time. Lots of new builds lie in darkness, my friend lives in a new block at the Marina hardly anyone lives in his building. He thinks foreign buyers use properties to get money into the UK.
Even on Grand Avenue a new build there lies mainly empty more than a year after completion.
When so many properties are second homes it hits the local area, the council is staring to close schools as not enough pupils so what happened in Cumbria is happening here.
So its quite right second homes should pay double to compensate on the damage they are causing.
All these new builds in our area is not helping the housing shortage, we need affordable new housing that should be sold to people with a local connection. Also social housing should go to people with a local connection.
The reason the newbuild on Grand Avenue is empty is some of the flats were sold to a social housing association and they have serious issuse with the occupants and no one normal wants to buy the rest due to this and the fact they are being sold on a part buy rent thing.
I have looked into it, Southern housing are marketing the properties as part ownership as you say. But the price you pay is high with the mortgage and rent so no wonder only few occupied. Not sure if any are social housing. But other blocks also lie in darkness, new builds are not helping its just giving foreign buyers a legal route to get money into the UK in a lot of the cases.
I don’t think you’re right, Barry. As I understand it, there is no contract between council and householder to supply specific goods and services to a particular householder at a particular level. Council tax is a statutory levy which councils are required by law to collect and isn’t dependent on what services are or are not provided to an individual dwelling. I believe there is later legislation (the Local Government Finance Act 1992 maybe) that sets out the position on council tax specifically.
Council Tax is an assumed contract which residents pay in the belief and the expectation of receiving full statutory goods and services in return. However with no wet signatures on either side, it is open to challenge if it’s not fair on either party or one side of the party breaches the agreement by not providing said goods and services. Council Tax is not exempt from the Supply of Good and Services Act 1982. Nothing is if you make a payment in return for goods or services in this country and then do not receive what you believe you have paid for.
Barry, I suggest you get your pipes checked for lead.
It’s a tax. The clue is in the name. Not an assumed contract. Not a sale of goods and services
Sorry Barry; it is an interesting position, but legally it doesn’t hold water. GSA doesn’t apply when it comes to statutory levies, and rates are devolved to local authorities up to the mandated cap.
Labour, always the party of envy. Many of those homes form part of someone’s retirement income for which they have worked hard and paid taxes. It’s called investment and now they are being robbed by socialists again.
Brightons problem is that there are too many people who live in the city that don’t pay community charge. Too busy pouring their benefits down their throats or putting it up their noses. New Rd is testament to that.
Nothing to do with being a socialist to many 2nd homes to many abnb people need housing infra structures need to be maintained can’t see a problem with these proposals regards new road these people on the whole are broken they need support like many other people.
Yet it was the Tory government that introduced this legislation and Tory controlled councils are also using these very same powers as B&H are!
The reality is owning a second home is an investment and for too long it’s been made far too easy of an investment with no real chances of significant loss while continued profit was guaranteed at the expense of a potential home for another person. Like any investment, there are and should be risks – now we’re in a risk period as people need housing which was always a risk and fundamentally people aren’t going to feel more sympathetic towards landlords who have profited for decades under an extremely profitable letting system compared to people who haven’t been able to be able to get onto the property ladder for years due the overpricing of homes from landlords using them for effectively a free asset + additional profits (charging tennants your entire mortgage + additional profit).
It’s a system that’s been broken for a long time, yet people have gone along with it as it was an easy method of profit for those who had a fair amount of money which involved next to no risk, now that there are people who desperately need homes however the labour government will and should do everything they can to influence individuals with second or third homes to sell up as it’s not just an investment, it’s a home – if people want to invest they can play the stocks market, which many avoid as it actually involves risk while housing was an easy and safe bet.
Times are changing, and considering the housing need in this country – people should be charged more for having unoccupied homes if they are suitable to inhabit. We have had decades of some landlords taking advantage of less fortunate people for their own profits, now landlords owning 3+ properties really aren’t going to get a lot of sympathy in return.
Here we go… yet another plan by Labour to rinse residents. And there will be more – many more. Remember the auditors said they would have to find numerous new ways of taking money from residents as well as increasing costs on everything?
Bet there are some Labour voters who are kicking themselves now
Do you mean non-residents?
Especially those labour voters that have cars and are seeing their parking permits as well as their council tax bills going up to UK wide almost record levels.
Still giving student housing a free ride!
Making students pay council tax would require a change in the law.
There isn’t some special B&H policy to exempt students!
But there is a national policy to exempt full-time students from paying council tax so that is not something which BHCC has the power to change on a local level. They even scrapped the student cap which limited universities on how many students they could accept, meaning this figure is now unlimited. That is the real disaster for student-dominated towns and cities who now see their city centres turning into a jungle of overpriced student blocks.
It is the landlords of the student properties, not students in general, who need to pay taxes for the family homes which have been taken out of circulation due to their profit making.
They rake in a huge income and yet they are not contributing to the local economy, and causing so much hardship through lack of unaffordable housing for others and the knock on effects of families born here having to move away from the city as unaffordable to rent.
The ongoing effects are less blue collar workers to run services, less nurses, less teachers, and many of our schools are in danger of closing in due course through lack of pupils. Many services will cease to exist soon, and already our city high streets have been reduced to charity shops, nail and tattoo parlours and coffee shops and fast food shops to cater for the overwhelming influx of students and young people, to the detriment of the indigenous populations.
North Moulsecoomb and Coldean have 69% student occupancy with an average age of 20 years old (Government Census 2021) so this is proof of the uneven demographics of a student top heavy city, where over 40,000 university students plus many language schools and other temporary students and residents live, yet do not pay taxes.
Add to that some pensioners and poorer families who do not pay council taxes, and who is left?
Whilst we do not expect poorer indigenous students to pay taxes until they graduate, there could be some investigations into getting the richer overseas students to pay taxes for using the services and infrastructure of a city they will call home for a few years. That would be a Government issue.
The demographics of having such a huge amount of under 25 year olds as opposed to any other section of society has come to roost, and the city is becoming just another student and commuter dormitory of London.
Students pay in a myriad of other ways to be fair. And if we’re talking about a fair share of wealth distribution ie. tax, the conversation needs to be around the top earners who pay a lot less percentage-wise through tax avoidance. Compare that to a student whose main income is already borrowed money from the government, they already pay tax in another form.
Benjamin
This doesn’t make any sense, what do students pay that’s different from anybody else ?
Borrowed money from the Government is just that, borrowed and is not paid back.
So what tax do they pay ?
30 years of student loans repayments is a big one.
This seems a totally sensible and reasonable revenue raising idea. Homes should not be empty, and if you own a second home extra taxation seems proportionate
Absolutely right
Good, no one, should have second homes, all accomodations, should be for all, end homelessness. Have social housing at affordable rents
Thank you Stalin.
It’s a good way to decentivise holiday homes purely for profit purposes by making them less financially attractive. I like to remind people that we’re currently looking at 4,500 whole properties being let through AirBnB this month, and an average of 40% of them are being used. I did the math and it equates to a silly amount of time left empty.
No wonder there is a housing shortage in Brighton. It’s not the whole issue, of course, but it is not an insignificant contributing factor.
All very well, the haves and the have lots, but some haves are hogging 2 or more homes, likely as not, several in different locations and all at the ‘expense ‘ of the have nots. Selfish are creating a shortage, bunging up prices as a result making it ever harder to get on the housing ladder. Soaring prices also lines the pockets of the already haves.
Make ’em pay! If they are wealthy enough to own 2 or more properties, they could easily afford odd weeks here and there in a hotel or b n b, with the added flexibility to stay in many more locations.
Personally, I don’t think there is a problem with owning several properties. The problem for me comes when they are being used as profit-making schemes. I’d like to see more things like community land ttrusts start to eat into the private sector and create more social housing.
A big part of the problem is that a significant if not major proportion of residents pay no local tax. The sensible soloution is to replace council tax with local income tax, thus ensuring all those who use services and can afford to pay do so.
This is all well and good for the empty homes, but what about the second homes that are already rented out? The landlords don’t pay council tax in most circumstances in private renting? This to me sounds like it will just drive up the price of rent AGAIN, making it even further out of reach for people on a normal wage to afford?
Would only make those who pay over the odds already pay more!
For what it’s worth (probably nothing) , Barry Johnson is completely wrong on the legal stuff, although I think readers may have worked that out already. The legislation he refers to has been mostly superseded by later legislation and had, in any case, nothing to do with council tax or the right of councils to impose rises on empty properties etc.
Whatever law school he may or may not have attended, by correspondence course or otherwise, I suggest he pursues a refund of fees for incompetent tuition, if not too late, and allows everyone else to debate the subject without irrelevant and uninformed legal stuff.
In fairness, compared to some things Barry has said in the past, this was at least pretty well-grounded. I appreciate the effort made to use a legal evidence base in his assertion.
airbnb is so attractive because of its tax advantage. it needs to be taxed the same way that rentals are (ie before mortgage costs etc), then there is far less financial advantage and a lot of holiday lets will be moved back to rental.
Absolutely, I would like to see it classified as a non-domestic dwelling, and therefore eligible for business rates.
I wonder if the council will change themselves double for the empty social housing that they have on their books ? The ones that are uninhabitable due to the lack of maintenance by the council.
We challenged them on that a while back, the numbers have been improving, but I also would like to see them take on more apprentices, as that seems to be a really good way of providing more jobs for people who don’t have a trade.
What about the empty council houses? There’s a nice one right next to the proposed new Royal Mail depot in Patcham, been empty over 5 years now. Renovated when the last tennant left too.
Send an email to your councillor, that should be an easy win.
It makes sense for empty properties however I’d expect the second home tax will simply be passed on through higher rents further pushing up costs – was that possibility debated?
if a second home is fully occupied then the double countil tax won’t be applied!
Also rents don’t usually include council tax as it’s paid by the occupier not the owner.
A sensible idea that both raises a little extra revenue for the Council and discourages homes being left empty/ underused, when they are needed. This has been done elsewhere in the Country where many properties are bought by multiple home owners, who clearly have a lot of money. It only surprising that this hasn’t been done here earlier!
As long as there are good exceptions. Probate can take two years at the moment.
It wasn’t done earlier because the necessary legislation wasn’t in place until last year. The previous legislation only allowed 2x council tax on empty homes whereas the new law also covers second homes
Now it is Councila across the country – even Conservative controlled ones – are passing exactly the same sort of policies as this one to come into effect in April 2025 (it’s 2025 because a year’s notice has to be given)
We have a problem with education placements at the moment. One of the core ways we help to resolve this is through increasing social housing. Anything that is hostile towards empty homes is beneficial towards this, in my opinion.
I am from Sussex and left to live and work in contential Europe, where I currently own a flat. I wanted to keep my foot in the UK so when my parents passed away I sold the family home and bought another place in East Sussex which I use as a holiday home. I don’t let it out and I come over regularly, every month, because I love the area.
Although I am from Sussex and this is my only property there, I had to pay a massive premium on stamp duty to buy it, as a second home owner expat.
Now I will have to pay double council tax. Although I accept I am lucky to ultimately afford two properties, it still seems unfair to me to have to pay 200% council tax as an expat.