SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

It Pays to Pay - improving council tax collection in Scotland

CHAPTER 3: EVIDENCE: CONSULTATION AND RESEARCH

33. To obtain evidence and views on the many issues relevant to council tax collection we decided to consult and commission research.

Consultation

34. Our consultation paper "It Pays to Collect" was launched on 26^th November 1998 at a joint Ministerial/COSLA news conference. The main focus was on the measures proposed by COSLA and the Accounts Commission, but we also invited other views or suggestions.

Annex B lists the original COSLA proposals.

Annex C lists the questions.

Annex D lists the respondees.

Annex E gives detailed responses.

Responses

35. We had 50 responses. Twenty five came from councils, the others came from a variety of organisations and 2 individuals. We are grateful to everyone who commented.
36. Local authority responses mainly supported all the proposals. There was some concern that individually the measures proposed would not have any significant impact on council tax collection levels, however, it was thought that taken together they represented a package that would, and should be broadly welcomed.
37. There was a mixed reaction among the replies from the voluntary and professional sector. Some felt the paper was too shallow and focused on administrative procedures for collection of council tax, with too little consideration given to the reasons for non-payment. Some noted that no attempt had been made to separate out those who "can’t pay" from those who "won’t pay". But generally the proposals were acceptable.

Other suggestions to improve council tax collection levels

38. Responses also included a considerable number of alternative suggestions to improve collection levels. These were:

• Scottish councils should be given the same powers as councils in England and Wales to arrest wages and bank accounts without having to employ sheriff officers.

• Local authorities should be given powers to refuse to grant licences, e.g., liquor, street traders, taxi drivers etc to those with council tax arrears.

• Legislation should be introduced to prohibit improvement grants being awarded where arrears were owed to councils.

Concerns raised by respondents

39. General concern was expressed as to whether councils were in fact making the most effective use of existing methods.

• Councils should make better attempts to collect from within, i.e. use of data matching to identify council staff owing money to their employer.
• Councils should establish teams of investigators who could visit debtors not known to be in receipt of rebate, (i.e. those with an assumed income). These visits would give an indication of ability to pay and could establish entitlement to rebate.
• Councils should issue guidance to sheriff officers clearly setting out how they should negotiate with the debtor at all stages of the process.
• There was criticism of the effectiveness of the sheriff officer enforcement process, particularly given the levels of debt still outstanding even after instructions were given to the sheriff officers. There appeared to be an inability to recover the debt and it was suggested that a study into the reasons for this should be mounted.
• Councils should examine with Scottish Executive ways of maximising effectiveness of the enforcement process.

Review of local taxation

40. Finally, there was a suggestion that the Scottish Parliament should review the system of local taxation, paying particular attention to the plight of students who become liable without any means of paying the charge imposed.

Research

41. The consultation paper also proposed and suggested a remit for a research study to determine why English and Welsh authorities were apparently more successful at collecting council tax than their Scottish counterparts. The study was carried out by the research section of the Institute of Rating, Revenues and Valuation. Annex F is the Executive Summary for this report.
42. The IRRV team carried out extensive surveys and interviews to clarify the institutional and procedural differences between Scotland and England and Wales. They also obtained views and offered assessments of the extent to which such differences explain the lower council tax collection levels in Scotland. We are grateful to the team for a very comprehensive and rigorous report that clarifies a very complex set of issues and sets out clearly a basis on which conclusions can be drawn. We are also grateful for their helpful suggestions.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]