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 6000. 31% disagreed and 20% did not know. In the comments related to this feature, some thought it was too big a drop from the current 16000 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.
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 417 155 84 178 37% 20% 4 412 133 3 424 143 3 244 59% 78 18% 35 8% 203 48%
The following questions relate to additional features for all three options. Total Strongly agree 1763 356 20% 439 86 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 680 39% 190 4 Neither agree or disagree 383 2 91 21% Disagree 237 1 48 11% 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. 444 86 19% 130 29% 90 20% 98 2 40 9% 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. 441 92 21% 183 41% 98 2 47 11% 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. 439 92 21% 177 40% 104 2 44 10% 22 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 6000. 31% disagreed and 20% did not know. In the comments related to this feature, some thought it was too big a drop from the current 16000 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 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 1 205 Agree 49% 116 Neither agree or disagree 27% 29 Disagree 7% 10 Strongly disagree
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 114 26% 121 28% 202 46%
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 377 86% 42 10% 2 0% 17 Age Group 16 19 20 24 25 34 35 44 45 54 55 64 65 74 75+ 473 8 33 7% 70 1 112 2 134 28% 83 18% 33 7% Religion Christian Muslim Hindu Sikh Jewish Buddhist Other None Prefer not to say 439 255 58% 6 1% 2 0% 16 138 31% 22 441 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% 52 1 37 8% 126 29% 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 456 427 9 29 6% Gender Male Female 477 240 50% 237 50% 477 Long term illness or disability 62 Yes 1 415 No 87%
Ward Ashley Avonmouth Bedminster Bishopston Bishopsworth Brislington East Brislingto West Cabot Clifton Clifton East Cotham 477 17 15 17 17 18 9 11 18 14 12 14 Easton Eastville Filwood Frome Vale Hartcliffe Henbury Hengrove Henleaze Hillfields Horfield Kingsweston Knowle Lawrence Hill 9 19 16 9 13 8 10 12 16 13 16 15 11 Lockleaze Redland St George East St George West Southmead Southville Stockwood Stoke Bishop Westbury on Trym Whitchurch Park Windmill Hill 10 14 22 23 7 1% 15 14 9 12 9 13
Acorn category Wealthy Achievers Urban Prosperity Comfortably Off Moderate Means Hard Pressed 474 38 8% 113 2 152 3 112 2 59 1 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 474 11 8 19 59 1 26 28 6% 76 16% 54 11% 18 4 1% 1 0% 46 10% 65 1 37 8% Singles high Rise Hardship Inner City Adversity 6 1% 2 0% Burdened 14