/ 28 April 2000

Another tax on property?

Heather Hogan

Home owners, already taxed to the hilt, can expect to face yet another burden if the new Property Rates Bill, which aims to tax the public on the value of all improvements made to their properties, is passed.

Ratepayers who already pay varied amounts on the value of the land will now have to pay tax on “any building attached to land, whether removable or not, or any other immovable structure, on or under the land or pertaining to a right in property”, says the Bill’s 10th draft.

The Bill is due to be discussed in Parliament in June before being gazetted, and a closed workshop discussing it will be held in Johannesburg on May 12.

Bruna Haipel, chair of the United Ratepayers Alberton Group (URAG) has already received hundreds of calls from concerned ratepayers reacting to various unconfirmed reports that new rates will be as high as 7% or 9%.

Mike Madlala, chair of the executive committee of the Kempton Park Thembisa Metropolitan Local Council, says: “I don’t know where people are getting those figures from.

“That depends on the valuer, who is independent from the council; it could be 1%, it could be 60%.”

Haipel says the allegations are probably premature because the Bill is still very vague: “Should we [URAG] feel the need to object to anything in the proposed Bill, we will call a public meeting.”

Residential, commercial and industrial properties, including farms and conservation areas, are to be taxed, which could see rents as well as the prices of holidays and basic commodities increase sharply.

Individual municipalities are expected to set rates under their jurisdiction at their discretion. However, the Bill says communities, residents and ratepayers will be consulted.

Municipalities may phase payment in over a period of three years, unless it involves tribal land or special conditions apply.

In these cases, phasing in could take six years.

People paying rates phased in over three years will have to pay 25%, 50% and 75% of the total rates respectively over the three-year period.

A single amount may be paid annually on the value of improvements, although monthly instalments will probably be accepted.

The rates policy will take into account the effect of rates on the poor and must be reviewed annually.

It is unclear at this stage whether properties will be re-evaluated before the annual payment is determined, but Madlala thinks this may happen after June.

He says it is difficult to say what might happen to ratepayers who cannot pay.

Pensioners may not be exempted but he doesn’t think the government will go as far as repossessing the houses of those unable to pay.

“The government doesn’t make policies with a view to punishing people,” according to Madlala, adding that the Bill is aimed at regulating payments, but like any other payments, the public would be subject to the credit control policy, which differs from municipality to municipality. He says people who benefited in the past will probably not be eligible for rebates.

However, Yunus Carrim, chair of the provincial and local government portfolio committee, told The Star newspaper that nothing “outlandish or unfair” would be imposed and that the government is nowhere near finalising the Bill.

The Institute of Realtors speculated to The Star that the new rates combined with capital gains tax would cripple the middle class in South Africa. If such speculation is correct, it would only broaden the level of poverty, leaving the poor even poorer.

Objections can be lodged as soon as the Bill is passed.