While many homeowners across the country are lamenting the valuation of their properties, Finance Minister Colm Imbert admitted in Senate yesterday that his home was valued “much too high”.
He made the comment as he moved the second reading of The Property Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2024.
He said his home was given a monthly rental value of $25,000, which amounts to $9,000 in property tax per year.
He said although he does not approve of the figure, he has no intention of challenging it.
“I, myself, when I saw it thought it was a little bit on the high side because my house is 35 years old and it is not architect designed and I have no intention of objecting. I will pay $9,000. It would be bad form for me to object to myself for a valuation that I consider to be much too high, much too high, about 50 per cent too high but that is beside the point,” he said.
Imbert also defended the Valuation Division against critics who have condemned the formula used to value people’s properties.
He said the division consulted with the premier property tax institute in the world—the International Property Tax Institute (IPTI)—which he said is widely recognised as the world’s leading organisation on property tax policy and practice.
The minister explained that in a 57-page document, the experts in property tax made recommendations after looking at T&T’s legislation—the Valuation of Land Act and the Property Tax Act—reviewed commentary on property tax, combed through T&T’s database and other measures.
“They did a lot of scientific analysis. So what I think people should be looking at is the challenge process. But this idea that the valuation division are a set of crazy people and they didn’t follow any formula and they did no analysis and they haven’t followed international best practice is nonsense.”
UNC doubles down, Independent Senator supports
However, Opposition Senator Jayanti Lutchmedial-Ramdial maintained that the Opposition does not support property tax, adding that the system was not equitable.
She also doubled down on the criticism of the formula used to calculate the value of properties, as she demanded the minister reveal the qualifications of the field assessors who conducted the valuations.
“You know what the People’s Partnership government never did and what we will never do, we will never send a host of unqualified people to stand up and conduct curbside valuations,” she said.
Lutchedial-Ramdial went on to slam the logic behind having individuals challenge the valuation of their properties before the Commissioner of Valuations who approved the initial value in the first place. She said the second step, to go before a Valuation Tribunal which currently does not exist, is also a faux pas on the Government’s part.
Nevertheless, she said a timeframe within which all objections will be dealt with ought to be established.
“You have a specified period of time in which you must file these objections but there’s no timeframe in which they must respond to you. Giving people six months to file the objection and they hadda wait six years for a response makes no sense and they have to pay the tax,” she added.
She also said people were not opposed to paying property tax, but wanted it to be fair.
Meanwhile, Independent Senator Hazel Thompson-Ahye condemned those making mischief with property tax.
“Sometimes when I hear what is outside there in the public I remember what some primary school teachers used to say to the students who are giving trouble ‘why you don’t behave yuhself and let people like yuh’ because some of what is happening outside there makes absolutely no sense, just making trouble,” she said.
She also said she did not support the two-year deferral for people who get a waiver to pay the tax if they can’t afford it. She believes it should be reconsidered as their circumstances will likely remain unchanged in that timeframe. She also expressed concern that beneficiaries of properties from individuals who get deferrals may have a burden she considers “too much to bear”. Thompson-Ahye also recommended tax sweeteners where people could possibly pay a reduced tax if done early.
Thompson-Ahye recommended that the tax be paid online or via mail and took issue with the UNC’s ‘axe the tax’ campaign in 2010 which has become ‘scrap the tax’ in 2024.
She said people had no qualms about paying property tax in 2009.
“It was the norm, there were no protests, we thought it fair and reasonable. No one would have dreamt of saying ‘axe the tax’ but an election was won on that mantra. It was undoubtedly an unwise decision to axe the time then.”