Rates: There has got to be a better way

GUEST EDITORIAL

Let's face it, getting your council rates bill in the mail isn't exactly an exciting experience - rather depressing in fact, especially when they tend to rise year after year.

US President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, "Taxes are the dues that we pay for the privileges of membership in an organised society".

Well, that may indeed be the case, but council rates certainly aren't cheap when the average ratepayer coughs up around $36 a week as his or her contribution to the $47million the Wanganui District Council collects from ratepayers. Rates are becoming forever more difficult to afford, as incomes do not appear to be keeping pace with the cost of living. Even the so-called wealthy, given economic conditions that have reduced investment returns substantially, find making rate payments far more difficult.

Neither is it easy for the council. There are always important projects, like flood protection works currently under discussion that the council has to plan for.

Now seems as good a time as any for central and local body governments to step back and consider how local government is funded and to consider the unfairness of the current system.

I have two questions regarding rates that I feel should be given serious thought, rather than just continuing with what we already have simply because that's the way we have always done it.

Firstly, is it fair and equitable that only 20,547 residents/businesses that own properties, pay rates out of a total population of about 43,000 (about 32,000 of which are of working age)? I would suggest this load should be spread much wider, given that far more people use the services the council provides.

Some will be quick to argue that even tenants pay rates as part of their rent, so to speak. I would argue that, in reality, they do not. For years I managed a group of investment properties, and there were several times rates kept increasing but rents had to be reduced because of a depressed rental market. So even though the council increased the rates, we were unable to pass that increase (or even part of it) on to our tenants.

Secondly, is it fair and equitable to base a tax simply on the value of a property regardless of the services used or the people that live there? Granny, who lives alone, may pay more than a family of five using far more services than her, because Granny lives in a more expensive home. That may sound fair enough to some, but it isn't Granny's fault the value of her home has increased exponentially because she has lived there for 40 years - but she still has to pay rates based on the value of the property, even though she has a meagre income from government superannuation.

There are other options that could be considered. Poll taxes (tax per head) or community tax, as it was known in the UK under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, is one option.

However, they were very unpopular and inefficient to collect. A service tax, or a local income tax, that operates separately from the national tax system has often been suggested, although that would also incur significant costs to collect. Perhaps a more equitable and simpler way to fund council services would be through central government taxation, which already funds a large amount of council spending. That would simply mean raising national tax levels slightly and spreading the load throughout society. If council services were to become funded in that way, a specific scientific formula would need to be designed to ensure fairness of distribution for councils.

Regardless of how councils are funded, another important consideration is how councils allocate budgets. One option becoming popular throughout the world, and often used locally in Wanganui, is referendums (plebiscites, actually - to be accurate). Those allow ratepayers to prioritise council spending and give residents more control over how their money is spent. Wanganui residents have had a say on many issues, including gang insignia, water softening, recycling options, the Splash Centre extension and also various options on rate increases. Those referendums have proved very popular, with referendum voting higher than the council elections.

Interestingly, an empirical study by Professor John Matsusaka from the University of California has shown that American states that have the referendum system spend up to 19 per cent less than those who do not. The difference is that, in the US and Switzerland, those referendums are binding on local government and citizens even have the power to initiate referendums on issues that concern them.

To many the current rating system is held in the same regard as the old TV licensing fee: it is hated and simply not fair. Council rates are a regressive tax because they are not linked to the income of the ratepayer, nor to the amount of services used, therefore they are inherently unfair and should be replaced.

Steve Baron holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and Economics. He is a published author, a regular columnist in various publications throughout New Zealand, the Founder of Better Democracy NZ, a former businessman and Waipa mayoral candidate.