Hey Beanie Girl,
I have 2 houses on about 950m2 each in Slacks Creek the rates are about $800 a quarter. There was a class action (I think that's what they're called) recently against Logan City Council recently regarding the cost of rates. Apparently they were charging different amounts depending on whether it was a PPOR or an IP. Do you remember hearing anything about that?
Cheers
Hey Northy, did some research on that class action -
Excerpts from this article :
http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/...er-council-charges-for-investors.html?start=1
"Earlier this month (July 2014), Queensland's Supreme Court set aside a decision by the Mackay City Council to charge property investors increased rates, following a class action suit from investors.
Mackay City Council is reportedly considering an appeal to the decision. Margaret Lomas believes that the Supreme Court's judgement is likely to affect other councils who use a differential rating system based on land use. While she is only aware of the practice in Brisbane City and Logan City, she says she "does not doubt it happens in other councils".
It seems that differential rates for investors does occur in other local Queensland councils, with Local Government Association of Queensland chief executive Greg Hallam telling The Morning Bulletin that "many councils presently use the differential rating power to categorise residential land based on whether it is used as a principal place of residence, or for investment purposes.?"
As for the council's argument that the differential rating system is equitable because investors receive tax deductions that home owners do not, Lomas disagrees.
"The fact is that all property investors get different rates of tax reduction. So if they want to make it fair, your rates would have to be linked to the size of the deduction you get. [The practice] is very inequitable, even among property investors."
In another article, specifically about Logan Council.
http://www.jimboombatimes.com.au/st...uling-could-cost-logan-city-council-millions/
Logan is just one of 20 councils across Queensland charging higher rates for property investors than owner-occupied residential properties.
The issue was taken to the Supreme Court by a group of Mackay Investors who were being charged $200 a year above normal residential rates.
The court ruled in favour of the investors, stating that the Local Government Act permitted differential rates to be charged based on the characteristics of the land but not on personal characteristics of the owner of the land.
Logan City Council introduced differential rates in 2006. It currently charges residential rates of 0.3262 cents to each dollar of rateable value.
Non-owner occupied residential land is charged at 0.4326 cents to the dollar.
This means a difference of $266 a year for a $250,000 property.
A council spokeswoman said it was unlikely Logan would be affected by the court case, as its rates were categorised differently to Mackay's.
She said if the council was forced to abolish differential rates, all ratepayers would suffer.
"Between them, Logan's ratepayers would need to fund an additional $6.8 million annually," she said.
The Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) has lodged an appeal against the Supreme Court's decision.
With a date yet to be set for the appeal, CEO Greg Hallam said the LGAQ was seeking advice from the state government on how councils should proceed in formulating their 2014-15 budgets.
"We need to get clear advice from the Queensland government about how they intend to work with us to make sure that we can properly levy these rates into the future," he said.
Mr Hallam said if the appeal was lost, it was possible councils would be forced to repay the rates.
"That is a possibility but we have to be very careful that we don't get into subjudice and presume to speak for the court of appeal," he said.
"But it is a theoretical possibility, that's for sure.
"The court might find in favour of us, they might find in favour of the other side, and then there's still the possibility either parties might decide to go to the High Court as well.
"So this could take a long while."