| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
12 Nov 2009 : Column 874W—continued
There have been no significant changes since May 1997 in the Valuation Office Agency's methodology and guidance for valuing car spaces, which is set out in Rating Manual Volume 5 Section 200 for Car Parks and in the individual practice note issued for each five yearly revaluation. The methodology has remained one of Rental Comparison by parking space. Current and earlier practice notes can be compared on the Valuation Office Agency's website at:
Non-Domestic Rates: Peterborough
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which 50 individual hereditaments in the local authority area of Peterborough had the greatest percentage increase in rateable value from the 2005 Rating List to the draft 2010 Rating List; and what the (a) address and (b) rateable value in each list was of each. [298680]
Barbara Follett [holding answer 9 November 2009]: The following table shows the rateable value on the 2005 Rating List and the draft 2010 Rating List for the 50 individual hereditaments in the local authority area of Peterborough that had the biggest percentage increase between the two lists, as at 29 May 2009. These data are consistent with the consultation document titled: "The transitional arrangements for the non-domestic rating revaluation 2010 in England", published on 8 July 2009. A copy of the consultation document is available at the following link:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/local government/nndrrevaluation2010
No address information other than postcode is held in the dataset used for the analysis. The address, 2005 list rateable value and 2010 draft list rateable value from the live database for each hereditament in the central and local rating lists are published on the Valuation Office Agency's website. This information is updated weekly:
The figures are rounded to the nearest 1,000.
| £ | ||
| Rank | Rateable value on the 2005 ratings list | Rateable value on the draft 2010 ratings list |
| (1) Less than £500. | ||
The five-yearly business rates revaluations make sure each business pays its fair contribution and no more by ensuring the share of the national rates bill paid by any one business reflects changes over time in the value of their property relative to others. The 2010 revaluation will not raise a single extra penny for Government.
Ratepayers occupying over a million properties-60 per cent. of total properties-will see their business rate liabilities come down as a result of revaluation. The Government intend to put in place a £2 billion relief scheme to limit the impact on the minority with bill increases. This is on top of the wider support available as part of Real Help Now to help ease business pressures including discounted rate bills for small businesses and deferring tax payments.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the average rateable value was for an (a) average hereditament, (b) hereditament classed as a small business and (c) hereditament paying the standard rating multiplier in the local authority area of Peterborough according to the (i) 2005 Rating List and (ii) draft 2010 Rating List. [298681]
Barbara Follett [holding answer 9 November 2009]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Putney (Justine Greening) today (PQ 297432).
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the estimated (a) average rateable value on the (i) 2005 and (ii) draft 2010 Rating List and (b) percentage change in rateable values between the two lists was for hereditaments in each special category code in the local authority area of Peterborough or nearest comparative local unit of administration. [298682]
Barbara Follett [holding answer 9 November 2009]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Putney (Justine Greening) earlier today, (PQ 297432) on the rateable value on the 2005 and draft 2010 Rating List.
I have placed a table of estimates of the percentage change in rateable values by special category code, for the local authority area of Peterborough between the 2005 rating list and the 2010 draft rating list, as at 29 May 2009, in the Library of the House of Commons. These data are consistent with the consultation document titled: "The transitional arrangements for the non-domestic-rating revaluation 2010 in England", published on 8 July 2009. A copy of the consultation document is available at the following link:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/local government/nndrrevaluation2010
The five-yearly business rates revaluations make sure each business pays its fair contribution and no more by ensuring the share of the national rates bill paid by any one business reflects changes over time in the value of their property relative to others. The 2010 revaluation will not raise a single extra penny for Government.
Ratepayers occupying over a million properties will see their business rate liabilities come down as a result of revaluation. The Government intend to put in place a £2 billion relief scheme to limit the impact on the minority with bill increases. This is on top of the wider support available to help ease business pressures including discounted rate bills for small businesses and deferring tax payments.
Non-Domestic Rates: Ports
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of a two year business rate holiday for port businesses in (a) Humber, (b) Liverpool and (c) other ports which have recently become liable for business rates. [299632]
Barbara Follett: No estimates of the cost of a two year holiday for ongoing business rates for port businesses have been made. The information is not readily available centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on
their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what estimate he has made of the reduction in business rate assessments on newly-rated businesses on Hull docks consequent on the Valuation Office Agency's decision to transfer the charges to Associated British Ports; and what estimate he has made of the equivalent figures should such a decision be taken in relation to the port businesses in (a) Grimsby, (b) Immingham and (c) Goole. [299633]
Ian Pearson: I have been asked to reply.
For the port of Hull, some areas have been merged with the assessment for the statutory port on the basis of new information and agreement of the facts between the parties. This reflects the success of the "fast-track" appeals process applied by the Valuation Office Agency to cases involving a backdated liability. Where ratepayers co-operate and provide the information requested, the Agency has been able to review the rating lists and make amendments to reflect new information that has a material affect on the assessment. In the port of Hull this has resulted in a reduction of £1.1 million in the total rateable value of occupations separately assessed for the first time from 1 April 2005.
Where changes have not been made this is either because the facts do not support correction of the rating lists or the parties have not agreed the facts that may still prove material. It is not possible to provide an estimate of whether there will be similar changes in the ports of Grimsby, Immingham and Goole.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |