Fair treatment of citizens by public bodies is the ethical foundation of good governance. Sometimes, it is not a matter of equality but equity because a government should spend more of its social development dollars to support lower-income and vulnerable groups.
However, in the exercise of public functions, all citizens have the right to equality of treatment.
If that right had been observed in the implementation of property tax, there wouldn’t have been any disparities. The decision-making process and planning were not based on a governance model for citizen-centredness; that would have resulted in a systematic and comprehensive approach to the rollout.
The Minister of Finance made a statement that referred to properties at the lower level that have “not yet been valued, and these proportions may change.”
Is it right to send assessments of the actual tax payable to property owners within 30 days when the Valuation Division has yet to assess many properties or send notices of the annual rental values of the properties to all owners?
That happened before the decrease of the tax from three to two per cent, as some people have already paid.
If the Inland Revenue cannot send assessments of tax payable by all citizens by March 31 (amended to June 30 for this year), that will be a denial of some citizens’ right to the productive use of their money, while others have use of theirs until whenever they are assessed and notified of the tax payable.
Under the Constitution, there is a right of the individual to equality of treatment by public authorities in the exercise of their functions.
Are all citizens being treated justly?
The authorities have a mammoth task, but they had about ten years to perfect the system. Notwithstanding section 18 (2) of the Property Tax Act, Inland Revenue should take care not to breach Section 4 of the Constitution.
The process of objections remains cumbersome and challenging for property owners, as they still don’t know, or some don’t understand, the method used to assess the annual rental values.
On what objective basis could they object other than pay for a valuation, which is likely to cost more than $3,000, depending on the value of the property?
Don’t expect a prompt solution, as the Commissioner of Valuations doesn’t have to respond to an objection in under a year.
If the Government were as passionate about addressing the actual issues as they are defending criticisms, including the dereliction of duty of municipal corporations who flout the Exchequer Act with impunity, it would show its citizen-centredness and that it cares about mismanagement of taxpayers’ money.
All we hear is that citizens are objecting to the property tax, but they are not. The Opposition is, although it was the UNC government that announced the intention to implement property tax in 2014.
Showing arrogance and the impression that citizens’ criticism is anti-government and above reproach sends a message that citizens are bothersome pests because they complain about a lack of accountability and transparency.
Such postures have done nothing to convey Government’s good intentions or whatever good they have done.
Citizens aren’t convinced that more money to corporations will make a difference because of corruption.
Not my words—read Hansard’s reports on Municipal Corporations.
The Government argues that citizens owning property abroad pay property tax.
But the schools there are fit for children. Citizens don’t wake up to find that a neighbour’s garage became a repair shop, or that the bar around the corner and near a school became a mini one-arm bandit casino.
They will not find ugly billboards blocking their views of mountains and seas. They will not have to clean public drains themselves for their well-being.
All these things happen here daily and are preventable if Government holds accountable the agencies over which they have lawful administrative direction and control.
Reducing the tax by one per cent and extending the period for objecting to a valuation are welcome.
This column has cited the waste of millions of taxpayers’ dollars given to municipal corporations.
Either they failed to account for these monies, submitting no annual financial reports for years, or the Auditor General had to qualify many reports because proof of payment and receipts were unavailable.
But they are not the only ones culpable. So, too, is the ministry responsible for local government and Cabinet, each member being accountable under the doctrine of collective responsibility.
If a corporation or a state enterprise fails to submit accounts by the statutory date, the responsible ministry should act against the CEO and other members of the corporation.
The ministry can send warning letters and give public updates in Parliament or recommend they be fired for breaking the law.
That won’t happen because Government and the Opposition will not act against their errant corporations’ leaders.
A couple of weeks ago, the chairman of Couva/Tabaquite/Talparo Municipal Corporation, Ryan Rampersad, lamented the loss of income due to the decrease of the property tax rate from three to two per cent.
However, his party wants the tax axed. The last financial report for that corporation was for the fiscal year 2008 and was laid in Parliament in 2022.
As expected, the auditor couldn’t reconcile the accounts. We don’t know how that corporation spent our money for the past 15 years.
That is not a trivial matter.
It is professionally unethical, meaning abuse of standards and the Exchequer law that governs accountability for the public purse.
Many people responsible for such negligence are the same ones expected to reform local government.
What exasperates citizens is how politicians try to manipulate failure.
MP Marvin Gonzales, in his presentation last week on property tax, admitted that Government did nothing to collect an estimated $14 billion in taxes since 2010.
As cumbersome and archaic as the old regime was, it was foolish to forgo that amount of income rather than wait until complete readiness to implement the new system.
You don’t break down your house unless you have another shelter.
Then MP Faris Al-Rawi used the murder of people at Harpe Place to justify fiction when he argued that the revenue earned from the property tax could provide security for housing development projects in communities like Harpe Place.
If Government hadn’t stopped the old property tax, resulting in the loss of billions in income, and if the Inland Revenue had collected the billions in arrears, there is no guarantee that Harpe place would have had security and the murders would not have happened—murders resulting from gang warfare, by gangs that may have benefited from taxpayers’ dollars.
Just two years ago, in 2021, speaking on the PT Bill, Senator Allyson West said that the country was “at the bottom” of the list in effective tax collection among several Caricom countries, including Guyana. $11 billion was “reported due but uncollected.” Who’s responsible?
Those who abide by the law and pay taxes are being asked to endure leadership failures.
These citizens are not treated fairly.