To submit the report of the Cabinet Member for Finance.
Decision:
The following was agreed for the 2026/27
financial year:
·
That
Cyngor Gwynedd allows NO discount on class A second homes, in accordance with
Section 12 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e. no change).
·
That
Cyngor Gwynedd allows NO discount and RAISES A PREMIUM OF 150% on class B
second homes, under Section 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (i.e.
no change).
·
That
Cyngor Gwynedd allows NO discount on homes that have been empty for 6 months or
more and RAISES A PREMIUM OF 150% on homes that have been empty for 12 months
or more, under Section 12A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992) (i.e.
increase the premium from 100% to 150%).
Minutes:
The report was submitted, noting in line with the Local Government
Finance Act 1992 that an annual decision was needed on charging a council tax
premium. It was explained that if no decision was made, then they would be
forced to offer a discount of 50%. The current situation was noted, i.e.
that a premium of 150% was payable on second homes, and 100% on long-term empty
properties, and that this had been the case since April 2023. The
officer stated that the money being raised through the premium had
been used for housing schemes.
It was highlighted that the number of long-term empty properties
had remained high, with around 1120 long-term empty properties in
June 2025. It was expressed that the department had looked at the experiences
of other counties and that it had strongly highlighted that a premium of 150%
was most effective to get houses back into use, and as a result it was noted
that this was one of the recommendations in the decision sought.
The Cabinet Member took the opportunity to respond to some of the
comments he had received during the day, e.g. he emphasised that there was no
council tax payable when working through probate, or for 6 months following the
decision. Attention was also drawn to the exemption system that was now in
place in the Council.
Members were given an opportunity to ask questions and offer
observations.
An enquiry was made on taking an individual vote on
each clause; however, it was explained that it was a single
decision within the process and that the only way to adapt the clauses was by
proposing an amendment to the whole proposal.
It was expressed that charging a premium on second homes was not intended
to place an unfair financial burden on locals who let houses to visitors on a
small-scale; however unintentional harm had been caused to these
families from a decision that was made without fully considering them; and
they faced huge, unexpected bills out of the blue. Assurances
were sought that it would be possible to refine the exemption policy
to incorporate these types of cases at pace, as some of these were a perfect
example of sustainable tourism.
It was highlighted that two things were missing in terms of information
about empty homes; the reasons why they were empty, as well as the Exemption
Policy. The need for an exemption policy from the outset was expressed, as
there were situations and circumstances where there was no reason to charge a
tax, such as renting rooms within homes. It was noted in response that the
Exemption Policy was now in place since the introduction of Council Tax,
such as individuals going into care homes. It was expressed that
the Revenues Service does not collect information on why properties are
empty as there is no reasons to do so, but that
the Housing Department was carrying out research into this and to see
how people could be assisted to bring houses back into use.
Concern was expressed about charging 150% for empty properties as this affected individuals who were working to upgrade
houses and that 12 months was not enough to complete the work. It was noted
that having an exemption policy which allowed for an extension to the statutory
12-month period, would alleviate concerns.
Comments were raised about business rates and the impact that this would
have on businesses such as hotels, but it was noted that this was a Government decision, not a Council decision.
It was emphasised that charging a premium on empty houses to 150% was not
intended as a money-making scheme; rather it was an attempt to bring houses
back into use. It was explained that the staff in the Finance department were
available to discuss and to give a fair hearing for individuals to appeal.
RESOLVED
The following was agreed for the
2026/27 financial year:
Supporting documents: