Scrap stamp duty and council tax to fix housing crisis claims think tank
3 months ago | 3 comments
Council tax surcharge plan leaves landlords uncertain
8:57 AM, 3rd August 2026, 3 weeks ago
5
Categories:
Landlords do not yet know whether they or their tenants would be responsible for paying the proposed High Value Council Tax Surcharge.
Now Propertymark is calling for the liability rules to be clarified before the charge is introduced.
It argues that the government has not fully considered the effect on landlords or the supply of high-value homes to rent.
The proposed surcharge would apply to residential properties in England valued at £2 million or more from April 2028.
Fewer than 1% of homes are expected to fall within its scope, representing an estimated 165,000 properties.
Landlords should not be liable
Propertymark says landlords should not automatically be made liable simply because they own the property.
Instead, the professional body wants owners to be allowed to decide whether they or their tenants will pay.
That will, it adds, reflect the flexibility available under existing council tax arrangements.
The proposal does not currently establish that landlords must pay the surcharge when a home is let.
Liability remains one of the issues being considered through the government consultation.
Possible landlord consequences
Propertymark said the possible consequences for institutional landlords and the availability of high-value homes had not been examined fully.
Valuing the properties presents another difficulty.
Many homes worth more than £2 million have not changed hands for several years, making it harder to establish an accurate current value.
Propertymark warns that online estimates and estate agency appraisals would not provide a sufficient basis for imposing the charge.
It said a full inspection by a qualified surveyor would be needed to determine the value of an affected home.
However, there may not be enough qualified valuers available to inspect about 165,000 properties before April 2028.
Questions to be answered
Local authorities would also need additional funding, staff and specialist expertise to oversee valuations, collect payments, handle challenges and enforce the surcharge.
Propertymark supports allowing eligible homeowners to defer payments, although it wants the proposed income and savings thresholds reviewed.
It said this would help protect people on lower incomes who live in valuable homes but may not have enough readily available money to meet the charge.
The organisation also backs exemptions and discounts for specialist accommodation, including purpose-built student housing, care homes and refuges for people escaping domestic abuse.
It has opposed a further surcharge for owners who are not resident in Britain.
Propertymark argues that an additional charge could discourage international investment in England’s high-value housing market.
The organisation said the government must settle questions covering valuation, liability, enforcement and council resources before introducing the surcharge.
Tags:
£2 million homes, England landlords, High Value Council Tax Surcharge, high-value property tax, landlord council tax liability, propertymark
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
or
Member Since January 2015 - Comments: 1559 - Articles: 1
10:12 AM, 3rd August 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Qualified property surveyors, especially those that “value” a property’s worth, usually contact a couple of estate agents to ascertain the value/likely sales price.
Member Since March 2018 - Comments: 197
2:11 PM, 3rd August 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Surely any tax should be based the net value, ie the market value Minus the outstanding mortgage on it, because if the landlord sold the property his “wealth” would be this amount of residue money.
And would this value be a threshold of £2 million, so doctors and other middle class professionals (people who are not the WEALTHY) are not caught up in this net?
And will inflation also be deducted from the market value, as it always was?
Member Since March 2018 - Comments: 197
3:42 PM, 3rd August 2026, About 3 weeks ago
A wealth tax only seems fair on idle assets on which no taxes are currently paid, eg the 2nd home lying empty – not the asset achieved by the efforts of developers who are already paying taxes when they build homes that generate taxes, eg Stamp Duty from owners and Council Tax from Renters.
Gary Stevens is also right. Billionaires and Wealthy people (UK assets over £5 million) should pay UK taxes on their UK assets, even if they live outside the UK. Just as the USA and other countries do.
Member Since September 2018 - Comments: 3710 - Articles: 5
5:33 PM, 3rd August 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Peter G at 03/08/2026 – 15:42
err no.
I would argue that in terms of the PRS, assets are bought by money earned and saved (which is already taxed). They are not all ‘idle’ (ie a valuable painting). Property to let is utilised, ultimately creating more generated tax by default.
Member Since October 2024 - Comments: 226
4:22 PM, 8th August 2026, About 2 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 03/08/2026 – 17:33
I agree assets bought with money earned, for which taxes have been paid. Why should landlords pay land value taxes. The tenants are on that land.
It is all because the government has overspent public or our taxes, more like misappropriation of our taxes and then they want more.
They need to stop flying people from abroad and give them housing. Putting up so called asylum seekers, all the foreign aid, that all needs to cut before this stupid land value tax.
If it is not stopped, let properties will be sold and reduced to pay this stupid land value taxes. The landlords already pay huge taxes, directly or through having various maintenance and compliance work done. At every stage the government is earning huge tax through let properties.
No landlord can afford to have empty properties unless selling them or using them. If someone wants to use 2 properties one in the country and one in central London, why charge double council on one of them. People can be allowed a lifestyle.
This is total outrageous.
Government needs to sort out people who can actually but claiming benefits.
Paying for student loans like 90k for 3 years and never getting the full whack back. Some students going abroad for work as there are no jobs for all. So these students never pay back a single penny.
It is very hard to get money from those people but easy to get money from the landlords for unmoveable property.
Yes it would be good get more landlords to sell and prices falling for some tenants to enable them buy their home.
This is what this government want follow communism lifestyle.
Just as businesses have moved or moving or threatening to move, the landlords can sell up and move abroad.
The countrywillbecome a shell company with mainly benefits people and immigrants and lots of pensioners. Small number of people paying taxes will remain.
Citizens would have enough of it and will want to leave the country.
This may take 3 to 5 years. Even the new government if elected will take a while to turn around the country.
Lot of harm will be done. It all sound very futile and distressing.
No landlords or tenants would be happy.
I am selling 3 within a year. Last year sold 2. Next year 3 more, as the mortgages are paid off or fixed rates expire. The rest may stay for another 3 to 5 years.