Improving the administration and enforcement of Council Tax in Wales: summary of responses

The Welsh Government conducted a consultation on proposed changes to the administration and enforcement of Council Tax in Wales. The aim of proposals is to support households struggling with missed Council Tax payments and support local councils to manage Council Tax collection more effectively, by encouraging earlier engagement and intervention to prevent households from becoming trapped in harmful cycles of escalating debt.

The proposals included clarifying the legislative steps in the collection process, extending the timeframe before enforcement action and introducing best practice guidance for councils. These proposals applied to Wales only. 

This summary provides an overview of the responses received during the consultation period which ran from 30 April to 23 July 2025. Respondents were invited to share their views online, by email or by post and could respond in either Welsh or English.

A total of 272 responses were received reflecting a broad range of views. Each response has been carefully analysed, and this document presents the key themes, opinions and issues raised by respondents.

The consultation questions are listed below along with a summary of the responses.

Question 1: Please specify if you are responding as a member of the public or on behalf or an organisation.

A total of 272 responses were received from a range of stakeholders and members of the public. 

Just over 60% of the respondents (170) answered the questions using a standard reply template co-ordinated by Acorn Union. We welcome all contributions to the consultation. Given the high volume of common responses, we have, where appropriate reported separately the views provided in the standard reply template to ensure transparency.

For reporting purposes, where no organisation name was provided, we have assumed the respondent participated in a personal capacity. A list of respondents excluding those who requested anonymity is at Annex A. In accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), individuals who asked for their details to be withheld are listed as ‘Anonymous’.

Question 2: Which council area do you live in?

Question 3a: Has there ever been a time when you have had difficulty paying Council Tax or fallen behind with your Council Tax payments?

Only a small number of respondents (7%) reported having experienced difficulty paying their Council Tax or falling behind on payments, although 53% preferred not to say. In the 7% of cases experiencing difficulty, contacting their local council was the most common way of seeking help or advice.

Question 3b: Your local council or Citizens Advice can provide information and advice if you have difficulty paying or have fallen behind with your Council Tax payments. Did you seek help or advice? 

Summary of views about reminder notices

Question 4: The Welsh Government proposes that councils should always issue at least 1 reminder notice to households each time a Council Tax instalment is missed. Do you agree with this proposal?

A strong majority of respondents (92%) agreed with the proposal for reminder notices, including 168 responses who used the standard reply template. Support amongst those who provided independent responses, remained high at 79%. Only a small number of respondents (17) disagreed with the proposal. 

Nine local authorities in Wales agreed or supported the proposal in principle but highlighted concerns about additional administrative burdens and costs they may not be able to absorb within existing resources. The remaining 11 local authorities who disagreed with the proposal expressed similar concerns. They also suggested that issuing reminder notices without a clear payment deadline could lead to confusion amongst taxpayers. These concerns were echoed by the Welsh Local Government Association and the Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation.

The advice sector and charities supported the proposal, highlighting its potential to promote fairness and consistency across Wales. They emphasised that reminder notices should be timely, clear and compassionate, offering households a chance to seek support.

Other respondents in support of the proposals suggested that reminder notices include advice on contacting the council and accessing debt advice.

Some respondents who disagreed believed the proposals did not go far enough. They advocated for greater engagement from local councils with residents to understand individual circumstances before issuing a reminder notice.

Summary of views about final notices

Question 5: The Welsh Government proposes that councils should always issue a final notice for a missed instalment if the household does not pay after receiving at least 1 reminder notice. We propose the final notice can only be issued 41 days after the instalment was missed and more than 14 days since the last reminder notice was issued. Do you agree with this proposal?

A significant majority of respondents (85%) agreed with the proposal for final notices including 167 respondents who used the standard reply template. Support amongst those who provided independent responses, remained high at 63%. Only 24 respondents disagreed.

Nine of the local authorities supported the proposal, viewing it as a fair and structured approach. One authority noted that the proposal provides a clear pathway that helps avoid premature enforcement but emphasised the importance of retaining flexibility in cases where there is clear evidence of intentional avoidance. The remaining 11 disagreed, raising concerns that the proposed 41-day period was too long and could result in an overlap between reminder and final notices being issued, potentially causing confusion for households. They also highlighted the risk of delays in engagement and an increased number of final notices being issued, which could lead to additional administrative burdens and associated costs. The Welsh Local Government Association highlighted their support for the increased use of pre-reminder action through electronic forms, as a modern way of delivery and suggest that as part of any New Burdens funding provided by Welsh Government consideration is given to ensure this is delivered by all councils in Wales.

Advice sector organisations and charities broadly welcomed the proposal, viewing it as a consistent and fair approach across Wales. They suggest that notices should include clear contact information for local councils and signposting to debt advice services.

Other respondents supported the proposal but called for an extension to the period, although no specific timeframe was suggested. Similar to responses for reminder notices, they echoed the call for final notices to include advice on how to contact the local council and where to access debt support.

Some respondents who disagreed with the proposal, shared the concerns raised by local authorities that the length of the notice period was too long. Several respondents felt that households should be given more time to pay, while others emphasised the need for local councils to improve engagement with households to understand their situation before sending a final notice. 

Summary of views about when households are asked to pay the full amount of Council Tax

Question 6: It is always best for households to keep up with their regular Council Tax instalments to avoid falling into debt, and to contact their council as early as possible, ideally before missing an instalment. However, when an instalment is missed, currently households can become liable for the annual balance of Council Tax if they haven’t paid within 7 days, and this is set out in law. 

To provide more time for households to recover from missing an instalment and get back on track, the Welsh Government proposes that households should not become liable to pay the remaining annual balance after missing an instalment until 62 days have passed. This includes ensuring 21 days have passed since a final notice has been issued. Do you agree with this proposal?

A significant majority (86%) supported the proposal, including 169 respondents who used a standard reply template. Excluding these, support amongst those who provided an independent response remained high at 63%. Only 10% of respondents disagreed.

Responses from local authorities in Wales were more evenly divided. 10 local authorities broadly agreed the proposal, viewing it as a means of providing enhanced support for households facing financial difficulties. However, 10 local authorities disagreed with the proposal maintaining that the 62‑day period was too long a period. These authorities expressed concerns that such an extension could reduce the time available to recover debts within the same financial year, potentially allowing arrears to carry over into the next year and worsening financial hardship for households. An alternative period of 55‑days was suggested by 4 local authorities. Several authorities also raised concerns about the potential impact on Council Tax collection more broadly, that a longer period might encourage disengagement over time and foster a reliance on reminders and final notices rather than proactive payment. These views were echoed by the Welsh Local Government Association and the Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation. 

Organisations and charities within the advice sector broadly supported the proposal but recommended an extended timeframe. Suggestions ranged from 90 days to 6 months, based on the need for households to stabilise their finances, access support services and be supported by affordable repayment plans. Several respondents also proposed removing the provision that makes households liable for the full annual balance altogether.

Other respondents offered mixed views. Some felt that 62 days was too long, while others believed it should be extended further. A small number of respondents considered the proposal unfair to those who consistently paid their Council Tax on time.

Summary of views about when a council can obtain a Liability Order

Question 7: The Welsh Government proposes that councils can apply to a court for a liability order 1 day after the remaining annual balance has become due, and the household has not made a payment or contacted the council to arrange an alternative payment plan. In total, this will be a minimum of 63 days after missing the first instalment. Do you agree with this proposal?

A significant majority of respondents (85%) agreed with the proposal, including 167 who used a standard reply template. Excluding these, support remained high at 63% amongst those who provided an independent response. In contrast 29 respondents disagreed with the proposal.

Just over half of the local authorities who responded (11 of 20) broadly agreed with the proposal, noting that it aligns with existing recovery timescales in some areas. One authority did not answer the question or provide any comments in support or against the proposal. In contrast 8 local authorities disagreed and expressed concerns that the extended timeframe could undermine the enforcement framework by delaying action without delivering improved outcomes. To mitigate these risks, some recommended that payment notices should include clear information that specifies the missed instalments, the total amount owed, a payment deadline, and the consequences of non‑payment. Several also proposed the introduction of an expedited recovery route for cases where there is evidence of intentional avoidance. 

The advice sector and charities generally welcomed the proposal but expressed concerns that local councils may continue to routinely escalate cases to the liability order stage. They suggested extending the 63‑day period to 77 days or even 90 days, emphasising the importance of early engagement, providing realistic payment plans and the use of court enforcement only after all other options have been exhausted. They highlighted the financial and emotional harm caused by bailiff action, which they view as costly and largely ineffective in addressing the root causes of non-payment.

Other respondents who agreed with the proposal also suggested the timeframe should be longer but did not suggest a specific alternative.

Amongst those who disagreed with the proposal, some echoed the concerns raised by others, suggesting a longer period of 3 to 6 months should be provided before liability orders are pursued. 

Summary of views about the proposal to allow time for a household to get help and advice

Question 8a and 8b: The Welsh Government wants to ensure that households having difficulty paying their Council Tax bill have reasonable time to contact the council and seek help. We propose that 63 days is a reasonable period, which provides further time for receiving wages or benefit payments, contact the council and contact a range of other advice agencies. What is your level of agreement with the proposal?

Please explain your reasons for your rating for Question 8a.

22% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with 63 days. A majority of respondents (64%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the proposal because they considered the 63 days timeframe insufficient and called for a longer period to support households in financial difficulty. This included 169 responses submitted using a standard reply template, which, while registering disagreement, acknowledged that the proposal was an improvement on current arrangements.

Only a small proportion of respondents (7%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the proposal because they wanted a shorter timescale. A further 6% neither agreed nor disagreed, and 1% did not provide a rating.

Eight local authorities agreed with the proposal of 63 days, some viewing it as a fair balance between giving households time to respond and maintaining effective Council Tax collection. Whilst in broad agreement several authorities continued to raise concerns regarding potential delays, increased costs to councils and whether the advice sector has sufficient capacity to provide timely support. One local authority strongly disagreed with the proposals and 8 others disagreed. They viewed the 63-day period as being too long suggesting it could normalise late or non-payment leading to households accumulating significant debt and making Council Tax collection more difficult. As an alternative, a number of authorities suggested reducing the timeframe to either 55 days or 50 days. Three local authorities neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal.

Advice sector organisations and charities agreed that the proposals are a positive step forward but maintained that a longer more flexible timeframe would better serve households in financial distress. They reiterated their previous recommendations to extend the period to 90 days or even 6 months to allow sufficient time for individuals to seek help and avoid court-based enforcement.

Summary of views about best practice guidance for councils

Question 9: All councils in Wales endorse the Council Tax Protocol which outlines best practice and guidance around how to deal with vulnerable customers. In addition to the Council Tax Protocol for Wales, the Welsh Government proposes producing best practice guidance for councils to ensure a fair and consistent approach to collecting Council Tax across Wales. Suggestions about what may be included in the guidance are outlined in this consultation. Do you agree with this proposal?

The proposal received strong support, with agreement from 91% of respondents, including 170 through a standard reply template. Only 3% disagreed with the proposal, and 6% did not provide a clear answer.

Fifteen local authorities across Wales welcomed the introduction of best practice guidance, emphasising the importance of achieving consistency and fairness in dealing with vulnerable households. However, many stressed that any new guidance should avoid being overly prescriptive, allowing authorities to retain flexibility and adapt to local circumstances. Some local authorities suggested that any new guidance should be co-produced with them, drawing on the practical experience in authorities. One authority did not answer the question or provide any comments in support or against the proposal.

The 4 local authorities that disagreed with the proposal suggested the existing Council Tax Protocol, introduced in 2019 and adopted by all 22 Welsh authorities, already provides sufficient guidance. In their view, the current mechanisms for benchmarking and sharing best practices are functioning effectively, making additional guidance unnecessary.

Advice sector organisations and charities expressed strong support for the proposal to develop statutory best practice guidance aimed at promoting consistency and fairness in Council Tax collection across Wales. They highlighted that making the guidance statutory is essential to creating a fairer, more transparent, and accountable system. Their responses emphasised the need for clear standards in areas such as early intervention, effective communication, tailored support for vulnerable households, and collaboration with debt advice services.

Other respondents shared similar views reinforcing the importance of consistent practices across Wales and recommended consideration of debt write-offs when repayment is not feasible.

Summary of other comments on the proposals

Question 10: Do you have any other comments on the proposals?

A range of issues were raised in response to this question, with many respondents reiterating points made in previous questions. 

While most local authorities acknowledged the policy intention to allow taxpayers more time to seek help and support, they expressed concerns about the practical implications, collection rates, and costs. Many felt the proposals would increase administrative burdens and lead to additional costs and called on the Welsh Government to provide further support should the changes be implemented. 

Local authorities also raised concerns about potential unintended consequences. They suggested the proposals could normalise cycles of arrears, with some households perpetually delaying payment until after receiving a reminder rather than paying on time. Longer enforcement delays, authorities suggest, may result in larger arrears that are more difficult for individuals to then manage, potentially leading to more severe enforcement action. Some authorities also raised concerns about the lack of enforcement tools available particularly in light of the removal of committal to prison in 2019, which they believe limits their ability to engage effectively with debtors who can pay but choose not to.

The Welsh Local Government Association echoed many of the concerns raised by local authorities, while also drawing attention to how Council Tax collection data are currently reported. With arrears continuing to rise, the WLGA has suggested the Welsh Government considers publishing additional measures within its annual publications, including cumulative collection rates. The WLGA and authorities suggest this would offer a more accurate and meaningful reflection of long-term collection performance, rather than a snapshot at a point in time.

One of the representative bodies proposed introducing a statutory ‘pre‑action protocol’ that would require local authorities to carry out vulnerability checks and establish repayment plans before initiating court-based enforcement. 

Many other respondents emphasised the need for local authorities to improve their engagement practices and explore new ways to connect with households in financial difficulty. Some responses recommended prohibiting the use of bailiffs for Council Tax debt collection entirely, suggesting that it disproportionately effects people in poverty and exacerbates hardship.

Other respondent’s comments were about wider Council Tax matters outside the scope of the consultation.

Summary of the responses about the Welsh language

Question 11: What, in your opinion, would be the likely effects of the proposals on the Welsh language? We are particularly interested in any likely effects on opportunities to use the Welsh language and on not treating the Welsh language less favourably than English. 

• Do you think that there are opportunities to promote any positive effects? 

• Do you think that there are opportunities to mitigate any adverse effects?

Responses to this question varied with 18% choosing not to answer and 6% providing comments outside the scope of this consultation. Amongst those who did respond, 28 (10%) indicated that the proposals would have no impact on the use of the Welsh language. 

Most responses (61%) used a standard reply template and suggested that extending the time to resolve Council Tax debt would benefit Welsh language speakers by reducing the risk of language-based misunderstandings. They maintain more time will allow for clearer communication to help prevent unintentional discrimination.

A small number of respondents recommended that all Council Tax-related documents should be consistently bilingual to support equal access. A few respondents (2%) raised concerns about the potential costs associated with producing bilingual materials.

Question 12: In your opinion how could the proposals be formulated or changed so as to:

• have positive effects or more positive effects on using the Welsh language and on not treating the Welsh language less favourably than English; or

• mitigate any negative effects on using the Welsh language and on treating the Welsh language no less favourably than English

Most respondents did not answer this question, and the responses that were received were similar to those provided for the previous question.

Welsh Government response

The Welsh Government acknowledges and appreciates the range of views put forward in response to this consultation. We remain committed to changing the law to create a fairer and more effective enforcement process for collecting unpaid Council Tax. Most notably, we do not believe the current regulatory framework reflects the work local authorities are already doing to help households resolve debt sympathetically, and the timeframes already followed at their discretion which are commonly longer than the statutory minimum. However, we know there is a balance to be struck between supporting payments and reducing tax avoidance, and fairness to those who do pay.

Reminder notices

Some respondents who disagreed with the proposal raised concerns that issuing reminder notices without a clearly stated new payment deadline could cause confusion among taxpayers. We acknowledge this concern will work closely with local authorities on the operational detail around this to ensure reminder notices clearly indicate the original due date has passed and payment is overdue. The notice may also include details of any instalments due within 7 days of its issue, as is the current practice. To support households who are struggling to pay, these notices will provide clearer guidance on how to contact the local authority for assistance and where to access debt support services.

Final notices

To address concerns that the timing of final notices could lead to an overlap with reminder notices, potentially causing confusion for households, the Welsh Government has carefully considered the operational implications of the proposed legislation. A final notice will include all payments missed up to the point of its issue which cannot be issued until a minimum of 14 days has passed since the last reminder notice was sent. This approach ensures there is no overlap between notices and provides households with a clear understanding of the total amount due and the relevant payment deadline. The Welsh Government will work with local authorities to ensure these notices also include clearer guidance for households struggling to pay, signposting them to seek assistance or access debt support.

Overall timeframe

While we recognise that many stakeholders support extending the proposed 63-day timeframe during which individuals can seek help before authorities initiate enforcement action, we must also consider the stability of the Council Tax system and those who are intentionally avoiding payment. In fairness to households who pay on time, and in recognition of the need for authorities to collect income to fund essential services, on balance the Welsh Government does not consider it appropriate to extend this period beyond the proposed 63 days.

Other considerations

The Welsh Government intends to provide funding to local authorities for implementation costs. This includes costs related to software updates, revisions to local procedures, and the updating of local communications materials such as websites, bills, and forms.

We acknowledge the differing views about further increased administrative burdens and are working with local authorities to assess the ongoing financial impacts, as part of our statutory duties to undertake a Regulatory Impact Assessment where legislation is required. The Welsh Government considers that some of these costs could potentially be balanced with savings, through the enhancement of digital engagement strategies at the local level which we intend to support. Preliminary evidence indicates improvements to self-service platforms; greater promotion of e-billing and use of SMS text reminders could reduce reliance on physical notices and improve operational efficiency over time. In addition, more effective communication and targeted preventative interventions have the potential to deliver long-term savings, if this results in more efficient collection processes.  This, in turn may reduce the need for costly enforcement measures, such as court proceedings, a larger cost to the wider public purse. To further support this approach the Welsh Government will explore options for investing in data analytics and software tools to support local authorities to improve engagement practices and deliver tailored support to council taxpayers across Wales. Ultimately, the effects of the proposals will need to be monitored over time.

Finally, we acknowledge the value of the Council Tax Protocol which has been adopted by all local authorities in Wales; however, this protocol is not able to be made statutory due to its joint nature and legal standing. To complement and strengthen this framework, the Welsh Government will work collaboratively with local authorities to design and develop best practice guidance. This guidance will be statutory in nature and will be issued under section 60 of the Government of Wales Act 2006.

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Welsh Language has made a statement to the Senedd. Following consideration of the consultation responses, the Welsh Government will take the steps required to enable the proposals, taking account of the issues set out above, to take effect from 1 April 2026. 

• ACORN the Union
• Barry Town Council
• Bethesda Community Council
• Builth Wells Town Council
• Caernarfon Town Council
• Christians Against poverty
• Citizens Advice Cymru
• Citizens Advice Swansea Neath Port Talbot
• Citizens advice Rhondda Cynon Taf
• Coedpoeth Community Council
• Community Money Advice
• Credit Services Association
• Cwm Environmental Ltd
• Civil Enforcement Association
• Cynhgorydd Cyngor Cymuned Llanrug
• Debt Justice
• Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation (IRRV)
• Llanddulas and Rhyd Y Foel CC
• Llandough Community Council
• Llanfairfechan Town Council
• Lowell Financial
• Member of Caerwys Council
• Money Advice Trust
• Money and Mental Health Policy Institute
• Money Wellness
• One Voice Wales
• Professional Association of Self-Caterers (PASC)
• Propertymark
• StepChange
• Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA)

Local authorities

• Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council
• Bridgend County Borough Council
• Caerphilly County Borough Council
• Cardiff City Council
• Carmarthenshire County Council
• Ceredigion County Council
• Conwy County Borough Council
• Cyngor Gwynedd
• Denbighshire County Council
• Flintshire County Council
• Isle of Anglesey County Council
• Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council
• Monmouthshire County Council
• Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council
• Newport City Council
• Pembrokeshire County Council
• Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council
• Torfaen County Borough Council
• Vale of Glamorgan County Borough Council
• Wrexham County Borough Council

54 responses were received from private individuals.

168 respondents requested to remain anonymous.