Decision details

To approve:

(a)  the Council’s scheme of discretionary discounts to deliver relief to council tax payers in the Borough of Gedling as detailed in the report at paragraph 2.1 and devised in accordance with the Council Tax, Covid-19 Hardship Fund 2020/21 guidance issued by the Government;

(b)  The establishment, by virement, of a Council Tax Discretionary Hardship Fund budget of £873,000 to be funded by Government Grant;

(c)  The delegation to the Director responsible for Revenues and Welfare Support Services the authority to determine applications for discretionary reduction in council tax under section 13A(1)(c) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 in relation to the Council Tax, Covid-19 Hardship Fund discretionary discount scheme in the Borough of Gedling in line with the scheme outlined in this report; and

(d)  That the scheme be reviewed on a monthly basis and an update on the progress be provided for consideration by the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council

The Council is expected by Government to use its discretionary powers and provide council tax reliefs in line withthe guidance it has published to be funded by the grant allocation provided.

The delegation is requested in order to ensure that no unnecessary burden is placed on the Executive but continued reporting to the Executive is facilitated through the recommendations.

There is a strong expectation from government that support is provided for council taxpayers with the proposal at 2.1 (i) to be implemented as a minimum.  An alternative to the proposed wider local support scheme could be to adopt an alternative local support scheme outside of the council tax system.  This may not benefit those experiencing immediate financial difficulties in paying their council tax liability which is the primary purpose of the grant funding. 

An alternative to the proposal at paragraph 2.3 would be to report each application for local discretionary relief to the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Reputation for his determination. Currently this would mean that the Portfolio Holder would have to consider approximately 1000 cases. This would place an unnecessary burden on the Executive which is not considered necessary where there is criteria for eligibility and policies available for the determination of the reductions proposed at 2.1 above.