Local Council Tax Support Consultation

Transcription

1 Local Council Tax Support Consultation Background The September 2012 Citizens Panel questionnaire was sent to 1863 Citizens' Panel members. In total 658 people responded, a 3 response. The following analysis only shows results of the citizens panellists who said they had not already taken part in the public consultation on a new local council tax support scheme, 478 people. 86% of respondents are Council Tax payers. 10% are in receipt of Council Tax benefit and Other. Summary Opinion was divided between options 1 and 3 with similar proportions of people selecting each as their first or third choice. Option 2 was the most popular second choice. 6 agree that the level of income not counted for Council Tax support should be increased to provide additional incentive to start work. 48% agree that Council Tax support should not be paid to those with savings over % disagreed and 20% did not know. In the comments related to this feature, some thought it was too big a drop from the current allowance for savings. 6 agreed that working age adults living with a Council Tax Support recipient should be assumed to contribute 50%, and the claimants support entitlement should be reduced accordingly. 61% agree that where a claimant s income is too high to receive Council Tax Support, they should not receive a second adult rebate for low income second adults in the household. 6 agree that the criteria listed is appropriate for identifying and protecting a vulnerable household. 27% neither agreed of disagreed.

2 Opinion was divided between options 1 and 3 with similar proportions of people selecting each as their first or third choice. Option 2 was the most popular second choice. Please rank the following options for a local Council Tax Support scheme in order of preference. Option 1: A scheme very similar to the current national Council Tax Benefit scheme, to enable all working age claimants on low incomes to continue to receive very similar levels of reduction in council tax liability as now. Option 2: A scheme similar to the current national Council Tax Benefit scheme, but all nonprotected low income households will pay a minimum of 12. of their Council Tax liability. Option 3: A scheme similar to the current national Council Tax Benefit scheme but all nonprotected low income households to pay a minimum of 2 of their Council Tax liability. Total 1st 2nd 3rd % 20% % 78 18% 35 8% %

3

4 The following questions relate to additional features for all three options. Total Strongly agree % Feature 1: In order to provide additional incentive to start work, the level of 20% income not counted for Council Tax Support should be increased. Agree % Neither agree or disagree % Disagree % Strongly disagree 107 6% 24 Feature 2: Council Tax Support should not be paid to those with capital or savings of 6,000 or above % % 90 20% % Feature 3: Where other working age adults live with a Council Tax Support recipient, increase their assumed Council Tax contribution by 50% and reduce the Council Tax Support entitlement accordingly % % % 21 Feature 4: Remove Second Adult Rebate for low income second adults in a household where the claimant's income is too high to receive Council Tax Support % % % 22 6 agree that the level of income not counted for Council Tax support should be increased to provide additional incentive to start work.

5

6 48% agree that Council Tax support should not be paid to those with savings over % disagreed and 20% did not know. In the comments related to this feature, some thought it was too big a drop from the current allowance for savings.

7 6 agreed that working age adults living with a Council Tax Support recipient should be assumed to contribute 50%, and the claimants support entitlement should be reduced accordingly.

8 61% agree that where a claimant s income is too high to receive Council Tax Support, they should not receive a second adult rebate for low income second adults in the household.

9 6 agree that the criteria listed is appropriate for identifying and protecting a vulnerable household. 27% neither agreed or disagreed. 422 It is proposed that the qualifying criteria listed in 3B of the information booklet is appropriate to identify and protect a vulnerable household. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this? 62 Strongly agree Agree 49% 116 Neither agree or disagree 27% 29 Disagree 7% 10 Strongly disagree

10 46% of people did not know whether the proposals would adversely affect individuals or groups more than others. 437 Do you feel that any of our proposals will adversely affect particular individuals or groups more than others? Yes No Don't know % % %

11 Demographics of respondents 438 Are you responding as: A Council Tax payer Someone in receipt of Council Tax Benefit Someone in receipt of Second Adult Rebate Other % 42 10% 2 0% 17 Age Group % % 83 18% 33 7% Religion Christian Muslim Hindu Sikh Jewish Buddhist Other None Prefer not to say % 6 1% 2 0% % Highest level of educational or technical qualification GCSE / olevel or equivalent Alevel of equivalent NVQ or other vocational qualification First degree or equivalent Higher degree Other No educational or technical qualifications 80 18% % % 82 19% 29 7% 35 8% 434 Sexual Orientation Lesbian, Gay, 15 Bisexual 400 Heterosexual 9 Prefer not to say 19 Ethnicity White Black, Black British or minority ethnic group % Gender Male Female % % 477 Long term illness or disability 62 Yes No 87%

12 Ward Ashley Avonmouth Bedminster Bishopston Bishopsworth Brislington East Brislingto West Cabot Clifton Clifton East Cotham Easton Eastville Filwood Frome Vale Hartcliffe Henbury Hengrove Henleaze Hillfields Horfield Kingsweston Knowle Lawrence Hill Lockleaze Redland St George East St George West Southmead Southville Stockwood Stoke Bishop Westbury on Trym Whitchurch Park Windmill Hill %

13 Acorn category Wealthy Achievers Urban Prosperity Comfortably Off Moderate Means Hard Pressed % Acorn Group Wealthy Executives Affluent Greys Flourishing Families Prosperous Professionals Educated Urbanites Aspiring Singles Starting Out Secure families Settled Suburbia Prudent Pensioners Asian Communities Post Industrial Families Blue Collar Roots Struggling Families % 76 16% 54 11% % 1 0% 46 10% % Singles high Rise Hardship Inner City Adversity 6 1% 2 0% Burdened 14