JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Monday, July 7, 2025

Govt loses $600m in revenue

...Howai to bring back prop­er­ty tax

by

20130713

The Gov­ern­ment has lost $600 mil­lion in the non-col­lec­tion of prop­er­ty tax over the last three years says Fi­nance Min­is­ter Lar­ry Howai. And now, he is con­sid­er­ing bring­ing back the tax–if not in the 2014 bud­get, some­time there­after."Giv­en what I am see­ing, it's prob­a­bly un­like­ly that you would get any kind of prop­er­ty tax on res­i­den­tial prop­er­ties be­cause the length of time it will take to bring those up-to-date. So it is very un­like­ly that you would see any kind of land and build­ing tax­es at that lev­el for a while.

"But again, I want to put a cap on what I said be­cause as we (Gov­ern­ment) go through the dis­cus­sions, if we come up with a pos­si­bil­i­ty, we may cer­tain­ly ex­plore those. One could see some­thing hap­pen­ing in the bud­get. At this stage, it is dif­fi­cult for me to say with any de­gree of fi­nal­i­ty that any­thing could hap­pen or not."This was Howai's re­sponse when asked if there were plans to bring back the tax in the 2014 bud­get.

"It is very like­ly that some­body could come up with some bright idea of how they could do cer­tain things. So I don't want to dis­count any of those things. As we go through the next few weeks and we (Gov­ern­ment) car­ry on the dis­cus­sions on the prop­er­ty tax, or what we are go­ing to do, or how we are go­ing to do it, if there is go­ing to be one and if it could be done, I prob­a­bly would not want to go any fur­ther with that at this stage, un­til such time we firm up the arrange­ments and per­haps, we can then say some­thing in this year's bud­get."

Howai's biggest hur­dle...Govt can face ju­di­cial re­view

Howai said his biggest hur­dle was that the rules of the tax­es first need­ed to be up­dat­ed, as dif­fer­ent prop­er­ties car­ry dif­fer­ent val­ues.It may take as much as two years to get the rules up­dat­ed as homes in each com­mu­ni­ty have to be val­u­at­ed."For ex­am­ple, one per­son may be un­der a 1990 rule, while an­oth­er per­son may be on a 1970 or a 2000 rule. So there­fore, the val­u­a­tions may be dif­fer­ent. So you can be pay­ing a sub­stan­tial­ly greater tax than your next door neigh­bour even though the prop­er­ties may be the same val­ue."

Fail­ure to ad­dress the is­sue, Howai said, can re­sult in the Gov­ern­ment fac­ing pos­si­ble ju­di­cial re­view from the pub­lic."It's not that we are fac­ing ju­di­cial re­view. There is a po­ten­tial for ju­di­cial re­view if we im­ple­ment the tax in a way that be­came in­equitable...sim­ply be­cause the rules have not been up­dat­ed. On that ba­sis, we are say­ing we need to sort that out first be­fore we could im­ple­ment that tax."Though up­dat­ing the rules start­ed a while ago, Howai said it fell through the cracks in 2010.

Retroac­tive taxnot rec­om­mend­ed

The de­lay was caused when the Peo­ple's Na­tion­al Move­ment (PNM) brought leg­is­la­tion un­der the Prop­er­ty Tax Act of 2009 that would have es­sen­tial­ly pro­vid­ed new rates up­on which prop­er­ties would have been taxed.The leg­is­la­tion was passed in De­cem­ber 2009.This prompt­ed for­mer deputy leader of the Con­gress of the Peo­ple (COP) Prakash Ra­mad­har to launch an "Axe the Tax" cam­paign.

The Peo­ple's Part­ner­ship in its 2010 man­i­festo had al­so promised to re­scind the tax if vot­ed in­to of­fice.Howai said last year he as­sessed the over­all po­si­tion and was un­able to pro­ceed with the is­sue, but he has been try­ing to put mea­sures in place to tax every­one on a con­sis­tent ba­sis.One of Howai's op­tions was to deal with the tax on a phased ba­sis."This is un­der con­sid­er­a­tion."If the tax is im­posed this year, Howai said cit­i­zens would not pay for the pe­ri­od 2010 to 2013.

"It will not be retroac­tive be­cause we have al­ready giv­en the waivers for the years up to 2013. In any event, retroac­tive tax is not a good tax."Asked how soon cit­i­zens were like­ly to see prop­er­ty tax be­ing im­posed Howai said, "I need to have some more dis­cus­sions with the com­mis­sion­er of val­u­a­tions to de­ter­mine what his time frames might be."

Pub­lic con­sul­ta­tion at all lev­els

Howai said be­fore a de­ci­sion is tak­en, there would be pub­lic con­sul­ta­tion at all lev­els.

"I think what we need to be very clear on is there is no land and build­ing tax that will be puni­tive in na­ture. That will be a heavy bur­den on in­di­vid­ual house­holds and so on. Nev­er­the­less, we recog­nise the fact that the Gov­ern­ment pro­vides ser­vices to homes. These ser­vices through­out the world are taxed. The cost of these ser­vices con­tin­ues to in­crease. As the cost in­creas­es one has to de­ter­mine how you will meet the re­quire­ments and to pro­vide a ser­vice that are lev­elled... that the con­sumer feels ac­cept­able. In or­der to do that, you have to gen­er­ate some lev­el of rev­enue to be able to cov­er the costs."

In­sist­ing that the mat­ter had not yet been dis­cussed by Cab­i­net, Howai said one needs to have a tax that is fair, eq­ui­table and trans­par­ent.In or­der to in­tro­duce the tax, Howai said all the mech­a­nisms and sys­tems need­ed to be in place to en­sure it is prop­er­ly done and every­one un­der­stands the nec­es­sary de­tails and in­for­ma­tion.He ex­plained that res­i­den­tial, busi­ness­es, in­dus­tries and agri­cul­tur­al lands would be charged dif­fer­ent rates.

$189m-$200m in tax­es an­nu­al­ly

Un­der the old land and build­ing tax­es, Howai ex­plained, the Gov­ern­ment earned be­tween $189 to $200 mil­lion an­nu­al­ly.For the last three years, Howai said on av­er­age "$600 mil­lion" in rev­enue was lost."This is a pret­ty fair sum for us. It is some­thing we have to look at. Some peo­ple say in the con­text of the na­tion­al bud­get $200 mil­lion out of $50,000 mil­lion is not a big num­ber. But I don't think so. Every hun­dred mil­lion adds up, so to speak. We most def­i­nite­ly have to con­sid­er how we are go­ing to deal with that."

Ques­tioned about the PP's promise to re­scind the prop­er­ty tax Howai said, "I don't think they cam­paigned on a plat­form that we should not have any form of land and build­ing tax­es be­cause that al­ways ex­ist­ed be­fore and it was nev­er an is­sue."Howai said prop­er­ty tax be­came an is­sue be­cause of the in­creased rates when com­pared to what peo­ple paid be­fore.

"And there­fore, peo­ple saw it as a very bur­den­some tax as it was be­ing in­tro­duced." He, how­ev­er, does not think there should be a sit­u­a­tion where there is no land and build­ing tax­es at all.He thinks the rates of the old tax need to be stopped, re­vis­it­ed and re­vised to make it more rel­e­vant to the en­vi­ron­ment.

Asked if the mat­ter was dis­cussed in Cab­i­net re­cent­ly Howai said, "We cer­tain­ly have not dis­cussed fis­cal mea­sures for next year in Cab­i­net. That is some­thing that would not be dis­cussed any time in the near fu­ture. When I say in the near fu­ture... with­in the next two or three weeks. Even­tu­al­ly we will have a dis­cus­sion about it. Cer­tain­ly, since I have been there, we had some brief dis­cus­sions around it."

Ra­mad­har: COP stooda­gainst PNM ver­sion of tax

Hav­ing fought against the PNM's pro­posed tax rates, Ra­mad­har said the COP stood against the PNM's ver­sion of the tax, which would have led to many cit­i­zens los­ing their homes as a re­sult of the ex­or­bi­tant rates."Their prop­er­ty tax had every­thing to do with ar­bi­trary val­u­a­tions, and that the mon­ey raised from tax­es would not have gone in­to the com­mu­ni­ties from which the tax­es were raised but would have gone in­to the con­sol­i­dat­ed fund."

Ra­mad­har said many of their cit­i­zens had ex­pressed the view that they want to pay prop­er­ty tax­es, but it must be fair with a prop­er as­sess­ment and that they must get ben­e­fits from that tax."So these are the philo­soph­i­cal is­sues that we will look at and see if there is to be the re­turn of a tax­a­tion on prop­er­ty. We've had the land and build­ing tax­es. So we have to be care­ful of the term and it is not as­so­ci­at­ed with the PNM's ver­sion."

Ra­mad­har said the COP stands firm with fair­ness and eq­ui­ty and "to en­sure that we are not taxed with­out prop­er­ty rep­re­sen­ta­tion."

MORE IN­FO

Pres­i­dent of the Joint Con­sul­ta­tive Coun­cil for the Con­struc­tion In­dus­try and char­tered sur­vey­or and man­ag­ing di­rec­tor of Ray­mond & Pierre Ltd, Afra Ray­mond on his afraray­mond.com Web site in De­cem­ber of 2010 stat­ed that he was in sup­port of the pro­posed changes to the prop­er­ty tax sys­tem as be­ing long over­due.

In a pre­vi­ous ar­ti­cle in 2009, Ray­mond ex­plained that the es­ti­mates of rev­enue pub­lished by the Min­istry of Fi­nance, in 1995 prop­er­ty tax was 2.0 per cent of tax rev­enue and in 2009 it was ex­pect­ed to be a mere 0.18 per cent.

"Pro­por­tion­al­ly speak­ing, prop­er­ty tax is now less than one-tenth the size it con­tributed 15 years ago. Even when one takes in­to ac­count the pre­dict­ed in­crease in prop­er­ty tax­es to $325 mil­lion in 2010, the pro­por­tion con­tributed by this source is ex­pect­ed to be 1.06 per cent of the whole tax rev­enue. Now, while this dra­mat­ic de­cline in its pro­por­tions is al­so due to the im­mense in­crease in the size of oth­er types of tax rev­enues, there are oth­er as­pects which are re­vealed on a clos­er ex­am­i­na­tion. When one con­sid­ers the im­mense stores of wealth which are held in prop­er­ty, be­yond the ba­sic fam­i­ly home, it is sober­ing to re­alise how lit­tle the sec­tor con­tributes to tax rev­enues."


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored

Today's
Guardian

Publications

The Executive of the National Parang Association 2025-27. Back row, from left: Kervin Preudhomme, assistant secretary; Shaquille Headley, committee member; Cheriese Pierre, committee member; Lisa Lee, trustee; Joanne Briggs, PRO; Yarelis Touissant, committee member; William Calliste, trustee. Front row, from left: Jenais Carter, secretary; Alicia Jaggasar, president; Henrietta Carter, vice president; Joseph Bertrand, youth officer. Missing: Kerrylee Chee Chow, treasurer; Chevone Pierre, committee member.

The Executive of the National Parang Association 2025-27. Back row, from left: Kervin Preudhomme, assistant secretary; Shaquille Headley, committee member; Cheriese Pierre, committee member; Lisa Lee, trustee; Joanne Briggs, PRO; Yarelis Touissant, committee member; William Calliste, trustee. Front row, from left: Jenais Carter, secretary; Alicia Jaggasar, president; Henrietta Carter, vice president; Joseph Bertrand, youth officer. Missing: Kerrylee Chee Chow, treasurer; Chevone Pierre, committee member.

The Executive of the National Parang Association 2025-27. Back row, from left: Kervin Preudhomme, assistant secretary; Shaquille Headley, committee member; Cheriese Pierre, committee member; Lisa Lee, trustee; Joanne Briggs, PRO; Yarelis Touissant, committee member; William Calliste, trustee. Front row, from left: Jenais Carter, secretary; Alicia Jaggasar, president; Henrietta Carter, vice president; Joseph Bertrand, youth officer. Missing: Kerrylee Chee Chow, treasurer; Chevone Pierre, committee member.

The Executive of the National Parang Association 2025-27. Back row, from left: Kervin Preudhomme, assistant secretary; Shaquille Headley, committee member; Cheriese Pierre, committee member; Lisa Lee, trustee; Joanne Briggs, PRO; Yarelis Touissant, committee member; William Calliste, trustee. Front row, from left: Jenais Carter, secretary; Alicia Jaggasar, president; Henrietta Carter, vice president; Joseph Bertrand, youth officer. Missing: Kerrylee Chee Chow, treasurer; Chevone Pierre, committee member.

Jaggasar returns as National Parang president

Yesterday
Charles Town junior drummers and dancers take to the stage

Charles Town junior drummers and dancers take to the stage

Charles Town junior drummers and dancers take to the stage

Charles Town junior drummers and dancers take to the stage

Jamaican Maroons celebrate, question land rights

Yesterday
Sherron Harford

Sherron Harford

Sherron Harford

Sherron Harford

Sherron Harford’s holistic mission

to transform the lives of girls

Yesterday
Despite finding out just three days earlier—on December 23—that I had breast cancer, I still got dressed and showed up on December 26, Boxing Day, for a birthday party. I didn’t go to escape the truth. I went to remind myself I was still here, still living, still me.

Despite finding out just three days earlier—on December 23—that I had breast cancer, I still got dressed and showed up on December 26, Boxing Day, for a birthday party. I didn’t go to escape the truth. I went to remind myself I was still here, still living, still me.

Despite finding out just three days earlier—on December 23—that I had breast cancer, I still got dressed and showed up on December 26, Boxing Day, for a birthday party. I didn’t go to escape the truth. I went to remind myself I was still here, still living, still me.

Despite finding out just three days earlier—on December 23—that I had breast cancer, I still got dressed and showed up on December 26, Boxing Day, for a birthday party. I didn’t go to escape the truth. I went to remind myself I was still here, still living, still me.

Nicole Drayton’s breast cancer journey–Fear, faith, and fighting back

Yesterday