Issue - meetings

The Chair began the discussion by reading out the purpose of the report and the recommendation of this report to the Group. The Chair decided to split the discussion for this item into the three sections and vote separately on the A, B and C elements of the Recommendation.

Rushcliffe Borough Council’s Revenue Manager led a presentation which outlined the current context of the Authority's Second Homes Premium. This included both a brief history and the statutory bases for the policy, as well as the policy’s implementation at the Authority from April 2025. The Revenue Manager provided the Group with some key information which was aimed at showing an overview of the policy’s performance.

The Revenue Manager noted the following:

·       Applies a 100% Council Tax premium to qualifying second homes

·       175 properties have been subject to the premium at some stage

·       121 properties currently liable for the premium

·       72 properties have remained continuously classed as second homes

·       54 properties have had the premium removed since April 2025

·       Generated £576,000 in additional Council Tax income over two years; note this is subject to the usual precepts, for example, to the upper-tier council, fire and police authorities.

The Revenue Manager also noted the £576,000 was the total figure of Council Tax collected by the Authority as the collecting authority, but that this number, as with all Council Tax raised, was split between the various precepts, e.g. the upper-tier authority, Police and Fire etc.

The Revenue Manager noted the officers' view, and recommendation was to continue the Second Homes Premium. Officers formed this view as the policy had had a positive impact on bringing long-term unoccupied properties into use, coupled with additional Council Tax revenue. The Revenue Manager also noted the earliest the premium could be removed was from 1 April 2027.

Following the presentation the Group had a wide discussion on the topic, which allowed it to clarify its understanding of what a second home was classed as, and its difference with other policy areas such as empty homes.

The Director for Finance reaffirmed the officers' view that this policy was linked to bringing more houses back into use and noted the evidence presented did not show justification for removing the Second Homes Premium.

Councillors asked different questions related to the various housing types this policy impacted, for example, family homes, holiday homes, renovations, homes people used for work or people changing what their main residence was. It was confirmed the Council did not hold data on any subcategories. The Revenue Manager also confirmed the Council had not collected any feedback from impacted residents. The Revenue Manager went on to confirm that within the presentation no enforcement or administrative costs had been included. The Revenue Manager advised that within the presentation no enforcement or administrative costs were included as those were incorporated within the overall costs of the Revenues Team, with enforcement costs recovered separately.

Prior to the vote, Councillors Matthews and Parekh noted their intention to support revoking the policy as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4