Petition Against an Unfair Council Tax Surcharge on Bands F, G, and H

To: The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Members of Parliament

We, the undersigned residents and concerned citizens of the United Kingdom, petition against any proposal to impose an arbitrary surcharge, levy, or disproportionate increase on Council Tax bands F, G, and H.

While we acknowledge the need for sufficient funding for local services and the desire for a fairer system of property taxation, targeting specific existing bands with a surcharge is not the equitable solution. Such a measure is fundamentally unfair and will have adverse consequences on hard-working families and the stability of the housing market.

Reasons Why a Surcharge on Bands F, G, and H is Unfair and Flawed:

1. It Fails to Target Current Wealth and Income

• Outdated Valuations: Council Tax bands in England are based on property values from April 1991. A surcharge based on these outdated bands fails to accurately reflect the current value of a property or the current financial capacity of its occupants.

• Asset-Rich, Cash-Poor: Many residents in Bands F, G, and H are long-term homeowners, including pensioners or older households, whose property value has increased significantly over decades but whose income remains fixed or low. A sudden, sharp increase in their annual council tax bill could place them in genuine financial hardship, forcing them to sell their homes or live in fear of their next bill.

• No Link to Income: Council Tax is a tax on property, not a tax on income or wealth. Punishing a household simply for living in a property that fell into a higher band 34 years ago is an indiscriminate tax that ignores the crucial factor of disposable income.

2. It Exacerbates Existing Regional and Market Distortions

• Regional Inequality: Property price growth since 1991 has been highly uneven across the UK, concentrated predominantly in London and the South East. A surcharge on Bands F-H will therefore disproportionately penalise a narrow geographical segment, including many homes that are now only moderately above the national average price, while leaving multi-million-pound properties in less gentrified areas of the country relatively untouched.

• Distortion of the Housing Market: Introducing a substantial and sudden additional annual cost on higher-band properties may capitalise into lower property prices for those bands, unfairly penalising existing homeowners by reducing their hard-earned equity and potentially causing instability in the local housing market.

3. It is a Temporary Fix, Not a Genuine Reform

• Avoids True Reform: A surcharge on existing bands is a quick, political fix that avoids the necessary, comprehensive, and difficult reform of the entire property tax system. The true unfairness in the Council Tax system lies in its regressive nature and the reliance on 1991 valuations.

• Need for Revaluation: The fairest and most logical approach to property tax is to base it on up-to-date valuations and a genuinely proportional structure. Introducing a surcharge to outdated bands simply overlays an additional layer of unfairness onto an already flawed system.

Conclusion

We urge the Chancellor to abandon the proposal for a surcharge on Council Tax Bands F, G, and H. This measure is an arbitrary, blunt instrument that will unfairly target a subset of UK homeowners based on decades-old valuations and without regard for their current financial means.

Instead, we call for a commitment to a full and equitable review of property taxation that ensures any future system is genuinely proportional, based on contemporary property values, and includes safeguards to protect asset-rich but cash-poor residents.

We believe in fairness, and a surcharge on these bands is demonstrably unfair.