Click on images
Pub of the Year's rates rise prompts council challenge
9 February, 2010
The Pelican in Tacolneston presented with 130 per cent hike
Councillors in South Norfolk that have been campaigning to save their rural pubs look set to challenge rises in rateable values in their area.
They are fuming that the winner of the council’s Pub of the Year award scheme, designed to promote and support rural pubs, has been penalised for winning the gong.
The Pelican in Tacolneston has been presented with a 130 per cent hike. And Councillor Keith Weeks - chair of the Rural Pubs Task group – said that the publican was told by the rating officer that it must be doing more business since winning the award. Weeks added: “That is not acceptable, and has no regard to actual turnover and profitability.”
He added: “The irony of this is that it was declared pub of the year really because local people said they did so much for the community - not because they are making so much money.”
Weeks is now compiling evidence to take to the House of Commons All Party Parliamentary Beer Group. He said: “We are 102 pubs but they come and go with alarming regularity and I really want to get the data for the majority of them.”
Weeks added that if the evidence compiled does paint as bleak a picture as is now thought he would suggest that the Beer Group might push the government to raise the threshold for business rates relief.
Readers' comments
smithers. I have not made a comment. My rates have risen by some 25 per cent, but I am not whinging. Perhaps because my rise is the lowest in the area, yes, I did check everyone in walking distance and I still do not think they have found my true cieling! Happy days. I work on BMT, not FMT, that is Better than Maintainable Trade!!
Paul, thank you for these posts, these are extremelly important bits of information for publicans, well done with your rates reduction.
the vo has used the t/o from your 07/08 accounts for the re valuation, you can apply for a 10% reduction because of the smoking ban, but if you can produce t/o for the last 2 years they will look at it, if material changes have taken place you have a right to appeal. i have just go one of my pubs a 50% reduction in rateable value.
Karl, thanks for your last posting, some of us were not aware of these connections.
Steve w-thank you for the reply, I hope this thread can run with sound advice as this affects all of us. The voa are not taking into account material change in business I.e. Smoking ban and rise of costs and will not disclose how they have come to their figures other than taking old trading history and applying five years of rpi on top without taking into account diminished trade and costs. I would like for others to research all advice given to see how it can help all of us. The voa are also not taking into account the recession due to the time that they are taking the valuation from which I also think is up to be challenged. The only way forward is to pool resources with those already raising objections as I fear there will still be many publicans who think they have no choice but to pay. It is quite clear that chasing the BBPA for answers is a waste of time and effort which sums them up. I also think that the tie in with the BBPA was done to try and justify the fmt rental valuations carried out by the pub companies. This however should be set aside for the time being whilst we try to work out a way to help each other as divided we will be taxed into the ground.
Have you actually tried going to any of these rates appeals and tribunals ? whilst i thoroughly recommend it, I have to sy, the whole thing is a sham. you won't achieve anything. these people demand proof of "Material changes" that affect your trade and even when you give them several, they simply ignore it, they know they have to get their pension fund money from somewhere.
The failed pub rating system is of course the doing of the wonderful BBPA headed by the effervescent Brigid Simmonds OBE. Close friends of the BBPA and its members are of course the All Party Parliamentary Beer Group. The correct way for the publican to go is to appeal the decision and then head to Court for a declaration to ensure that the Local Government Finance Act applies and not some hamfisted agreement between the BBPA and the taxman. The BBPA can't agree a tax scheme on behalf of the taxpayer and the VO knows that .
colin/hl, try to keep your infantile biased comments away from this topic, the points i made here are extremelly important and anyone with a pub should familiarise themselves with the practices of valuation offices, preferably long before they take on a pub.
Mary - I asked the BBPA for some answers last year. Got a reply after a week saying they were looking into it. Chased them again a month later and got another reply a week after that saying they'd look into it (from the same person). Chased them again 3 weeks ago and still waiting...
Colin - agreed. Paul - fair point but my gripe is more to do with the actual calculation per se than with what figure it comes up with, as they have used my actual turnover in their calculation (and I wonder why it isn't the same for everyone, as you're obliged by law to give them your correct, and current, turnover figure)? The level of tax payable, based on turnover using their current calculation, is simply unfair. For one, no tax should be based on turnover, as turnover isn't earnings? And for two, I believe they have an inflated opinion of how much profit a pub can expect from a given turnover these days, which is why their calculation is wrong? As an example, two of the local, private dental surgeries in my town have rateable values of less than 20% of mine - but consider that my business creates enough profit for one owner (me) to make a reasonable wage from it, whereas the dental surgeries generate enough profit to give at least 4 owners (the dentists) a bloody good wage! I assume they all earn at least twice my wage and work at least half the hours - how is that in any way a fair and representable tax?
the vo has a rating value of 11.25% of turnover after vat.for pubs, it is not rocket sience to appeal a vo's officers decision, if your tunnover was 125k after vat then your rates would have been 14k if the vo has guessed your new t/o at 250k your new rates will be set at 28k, if his guess is wrong you can appeal the assesment. you just need to produce the evidence. it just takes a bit of time. simples meeps!!
I am glad they are challenging the rates. The BBPA should be brought to book on their involvement in this tax grab.
Steve, as always I respect your opinion just as I know you respect mine. The point of logic I expressed was I think really how the Council sees it. I'm not saying it's right , I was just playing Devils Advocate. Oh and yes, I'm spot on with Smithers, difficult not to be.
Colin, on this one you're truly wrong I'm afraid (though maybe right about Smithers :o) Many pubs have seen massive hikes in their rates bills without a similar hike in profits to help pay for it, which can only be down to the relationship between turnover and rateable value in the VOAs calculations? My own rateable value is rising from 20K to 54K, which is an actual rise in payments of over 1K per month. I don't mind paying taxes but when the taxman decides he's going to take an extra grand a month from my wage simply because he's changed his calculations then it can't be right!
Smithers, you're really not much of a cerebral character are you? By the way, it's currently 39 pubs a week closing so less exaggeration would be handy. Logic dictates that when the natural culling of pub closures is complete, the surviving pubs will do much better based on Thomas Malthuus' simple econnomic principle. On that point alone, rates rises are justified. We all have to pay our taxes so stop bleating about it.
If these guys really do get the threshold for business rates reduced, this is excellent news and the effects will be far reaching, as valuation offices usually manage to set pub business rates at around 500 pouinds P.A. over the threshold, sadly though, this story just shows how the Gravy Train of fleeceing pubs and other small business really works. It is also worth noteing that the "Fair Maintainable Trade" that these valuation officers usually arrive at should now be called "Unfair Non-maintainable Trade" as, despite 58 pubs per week closing, they intend to put the rates UP, rather than down! its Outrageous!