27 October 2025

The Independent Revenues and Benefits (R&B) Discussion Group gathered for another lively Monday session chaired by Malcolm Gardner, who began on a light note from “sunny Yorkshire” before steering conversation into some very grounded policy terrain — business rates, council tax reform, and the pressures facing local authorities.

Snail Farms and Business Rates Avoidance

Malcolm opened with an unusual headline: Westminster City Council’s discovery of “snail farms” being used to claim agricultural exemption from business rates. “Has anyone else come across anything similar?” he asked.

Bob Wagstaff noted that while the Westminster case was urban, rural authorities had long grappled with the reverse — genuine farms running non-agricultural activities. “Twenty years ago, the Valuation Office did a purge,” he recalled, “adding millions into the valuation list for farmers running supermarket-driven packing houses.”

Robert Fox confirmed that “dubious charitable occupations” were far more common than snail farms, while Ian Savigar described “a store inside Reading’s Oracle Centre turned bike hub” that was controversially claiming rate relief.

Rachael Walker, drawing on her IRRV studies, explained that the law technically allows beneficial occupation “for the purpose of rates avoidance itself,” making enforcement complex. Her conclusion was clear: “There should be rates-avoidance clauses — but if there are no snails, it’s fraud.”

Council Tax: The Mansion Band Debate

The group then turned to reports that the Treasury was considering new council tax bands for higher-value properties. Robert Fox and Bob Wagstaff both warned that such a change would “benefit southern councils while doing little for the rest of the country.”

Paul Howarth took a broader view: “If it’s part of genuine tax reform, it’s positive. But piecemeal fixes won’t work. Council tax is regressive — we need a review of what taxation is actually for.”

Sean O’Sullivan doubted the political appetite for revaluation: “London’s already paying the highest rates. Why would a government hit its own heartlands?”

Rachael Walker observed from her TikTok outreach that “most people don’t understand council tax at all — many believe it’s pooled nationally.” She urged better public education if reform was to gain traction.

Bob Wagstaff warned that extra bands could “make council tax appear even more unfair” by widening the gap between areas like Kensington and Pendle.

Enforcement and the Cost of Collection

Malcolm next raised figures showing a 30 per cent rise in referrals to enforcement agents. Bob Wagstaff attributed this to “COVID backlogs,” while Richard Hanby agreed that councils were “catching up” rather than becoming more punitive.

Gareth Morgan countered that for many residents “chasing them just adds cost onto something for no return,” arguing instead for “schemes that genuinely support those in need.”

Naomi Armstrong spoke of the personal toll: “It’s not just financial cost — it’s health cost. For households already on 40 per cent liability, recovery leaves them with nothing.”

Sean O’Sullivan echoed that “asking for £1,000 from someone who can’t pay £500 means you’ll get nothing at all.”

Rachael Walker shared that several councils had ignored public consultations favouring more generous schemes: “Every poverty and collection indicator has gone in the wrong direction since.”

When asked where the push for such restrictive schemes came from, Sean O’Sullivan suggested it was often “driven by benefits managers wanting to design new schemes,” though Robert Fox countered that some councillors were “very astute and genuinely interested in directing help where it’s needed.”

Labour Market Pressures

The group closed with discussion on ONS labour market data. Paul Howarth highlighted that “economic inactivity remains around 21 per cent — a persistent issue rather than a new one.” The real challenge, he said, lies with “people who are sick, disabled or out of the labour force long-term.”

Gareth Hughes pointed to AI as a looming factor: “Employers believe automation will eliminate entry-level jobs. The government should focus on direct job creation.”

Rachael Walker objected to the framing of “economic inactivity” altogether: “We’re all economically active — calling people inactive tells a false story that they contribute nothing.”

Richard Hanby ended on a practical note from the private sector: his firm had expanded through apprenticeships. “They’re not just cheaper; they get up to speed faster and bring real value.”

Malcolm closed the session by welcoming Rachael Walker as Visionary Network’s new Director of Policy and Strategy, thanking all participants — “no snails harmed,” he joked — before promising next week’s discussion would return to fraud and the “two-child” policy.

The Independent Revenues & Benefits Discussion Group continues to provide a vital forum for expert analysis, shared learning, and open debate at a time of significant policy flux.

For more information or to join future sessions, contact Malcolm Gardner at Visionary Network. info@visionarynetwork.co.uk

Files to be downloaded

Please note that the handout contains additional slides covering other items of interest in the news and job adverts, which are provided in partnership with Business Smart Solutions (https://www.businesssmartsolutions.co.uk/).