Proposed changes to Council Tax discounts, disregarded persons and exemptions: summary of responses

Council Tax discounts and exemptions play a vital role in supporting households facing financial hardship, reducing poverty across communities, and improving the efficiency of tax collection. Many of these provisions have been in place since the introduction of Council Tax in 1993, and it is essential to ensure they continue to reflect current needs and remain fair and effective.

The Welsh Government conducted a consultation on proposed changes to some Council Tax discounts, disregards and exemptions. This followed a comprehensive review of each category to assess whether existing arrangements align with our policy objectives and contribute to fair system. These proposals applied to Wales only. 

This summary provides an overview of responses received during the consultation period which ran from 23 May to 15 August 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 66 responses were received reflecting a broad range of views. Not all respondents answered every question, but each response has been carefully analysed, and this document presents the key themes, opinions and issues raised.

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 of an organisation. 

66 responses were received from a range of stakeholders and members of the public. 

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: To help us understand your views, please tell us if your household currently receives a Council Tax discount, exemption or reduction of any kind?

Summary of views about the Disabled Band Reduction

Question 3: A reduction applies to a property’s Council Tax band in recognition that some people with disabilities need to live in adapted homes.  Do you have any views on how the Disabled Band Reduction for adapted properties can be improved? 

A total of 36 respondents provided feedback for this question.

Views on the Disabled Band Reduction were mixed. Several local authorities noted that the scheme is well established and should be retained in its current form. Others expressed concerns that the scheme no longer follows its original purpose, and greater consideration should be given to whether property adaptations have genuinely resulted in a reduction in the value of a property. One local authority proposed that the reduction should not apply to nursing homes. This proposal was echoed by the Welsh Local Government Association and the Institute of Revenues Rating and Valuation though they acknowledged this could lead to unintended consequences, such as increased fees for residents.

One respondent from an advice sector agency highlighted several practical challenges, particularly delays in securing home adaptations and completing assessments. They recommended that the band reduction should take effect from the date a Disabled Facility Grant is approved, ensuring that occupiers are eligible from that point onward rather than waiting for adaptations to be completed. The respondent also raised concerns about a general lack of awareness regarding available financial support. They noted that this can leave older individuals especially vulnerable, potentially missing out on vital assistance due to limited access to clear and accessible information.

Some respondents felt that the scheme is outdated and should be more flexible and responsive to individual circumstances. Some respondents suggested replacing the current band adjustment with a fixed percentage discount, which they felt could offer fairer support, particularly for those living people in smaller properties, and others proposed means-testing. Others proposed updating the eligibility criteria to reflect modern housing layouts and to recognise adaptations like stair lifts, hoists and wet room conversions that enable disabled individuals to use facilities safely and independently. Some respondents suggested that any future changes should be shaped in collaboration with disabled individuals and subject-matter experts to ensure the scheme delivers effective support.

Summary of views about the carers disregard 

Question 4: There are 2 categories of carers that can be disregarded (not counted) for the purposes of paying Council Tax. Do you agree with the proposal to update the carers disregard and remove outdated provisions? 

A total of 59 responses were provided for this question. 

A significant majority of respondents (85%) agreed with the proposal. Only a small number disagreed (6) and a further 3 did not answer the question but provided comments.

There was strong overall support for removing outdated and unused provisions to improve clarity, fairness, and administrative efficiency.

Question 5: We believe an existing carer category no longer applies to anyone in Wales and we have found no records of it in use. Do you know of any people, or are you a person who: is a carer engaged by a charity or local council working at least 24 hours a week, and not receiving more than £44 per week, and who lives in a premises provided by, or on behalf of, the organisation? 

The overwhelming response suggests that this category is no longer relevant or in use within Wales.

Question 6: Are you a charity or local council that employs carers working at least 24 hours a week, but not receiving more than £44 per week, and provide premises where the carer is required to live in? 

This further supports the view that the category is obsolete and may be removed without impact.

Summary of views about the apprentice disregard

Question 7: Apprentices are disregarded (not counted) when calculating Council Tax for a household, but the qualifying criteria are out of date. Do you agree with the proposal to adjust the earnings threshold for apprentices in line with the minimum national wage for apprentices? 

A total of 60 responses were provided for this question. 

A significant majority of respondents (82%) agreed with the proposal. Only a small number of respondents (9) disagreed. A further 2 respondents did not answer the question but provided comments.

All 14 local authorities that provided a response supported the proposal and acknowledged the change would help future proof the disregard. This view was echoed by 6 other respondents.

One professional body supported the proposal but suggested that the eligibility criteria should be expanded to include apprentices of all ages, promoting parity of treatment. A representative body suggested the disregard should also apply to apprentices earning above the national minimum wage for apprentices. These views were shared by 2 additional respondents.

Two respondents questioned the need for the apprentice disregard altogether, suggesting it may not be necessary.

Summary of views about exemptions A and C

Question 8: Exemption A, a property that needs or is having major/structural repair work, or is undergoing structural alteration, can be exempt from Council Tax for a period of up to 1 year, but this exemption can only be applied once. Do you agree that exemption a should be amended to provide a 12 month exemption when a new owner has purchased a property? 

A total of 61 responses were provided for these questions. 

A significant majority of respondents (84%) agreed with the proposal. Eight respondents (13%) disagreed, and 2 (3%) did not answer the question but provided comments.

The majority of local authorities that responded (13 of 14) supported the proposed change describing it as a positive step. Many noted that allowing a new exemption for new owners could incentivise the purchase and renovation of empty or derelict properties, contributing to housing supply and regeneration efforts. Several authorities also highlighted the potential to address perceived unfairness in the current system, where new owners may miss out on exemptions despite actively working to bring properties back into use. These views were echoed by other respondents. 

One local authority disagreed with the proposal, arguing that it could discourage timely renovation, delay the return of properties to the housing market, and reduce Council Tax revenue, potentially affecting funding for homelessness services and the broader revenue settlement for local authorities.

Additionally, 1 respondent, while supportive of the proposal, suggested that local authorities should retain discretion to extend the 12-month exemption period in specific circumstances, such as delays caused by lengthy planning permission processes.

Question 9: Exemption C, a property that is empty and unfurnished can be exempt from Council Tax for up to 6 months after the property became vacant, but this exemption can only be applied once. Do you agree that exemption C should be amended to provide a new 6 month exemption when a new owner has purchased a property? 

A significant majority of respondents (84%) agreed with the proposal. Only 8 disagreed and 1 respondent did not answer the question but provided comments.

Among the local authorities that responded, 12 out of 14 supported the proposal, many of them reiterating the reasons for supporting the change to exemption A. 

Of the 2 local authorities that did not agree with this proposal, 1 was concerned the proposal was too generous and suggested a shorter period of 3 months exemption for a new owner.The other reiterated concerns previously raised in relation to exemption a. 

Other respondents echoed their earlier support for exemption A, and 1 individual felt no exemption should apply in these circumstances.

Question 10: Do you consider registration with HM Land Registry to be sufficient evidence of a property sale for exemption a and exemption C? 

Is there any other evidence that should be provided? 

A clear majority of respondents (75%) supported the proposal. In contrast 14 respondents disagreed and 1 did not answer the question but provided comments.

Twenty-five respondents commented specifically on the issue of evidence. Many suggested that HM Land Registry documentation should include both the transaction and sale value. However, concerns were raised about delays in the registration process, which could hinder timely validation of Council Tax exemption applications. To address this, several respondents recommended allowing alternative forms of evidence, such as confirmation of sale from a legal representative. One respondent stressed the importance of ensuring the evidence reflects a genuine change of ownership, rather than intra-family transfers intended to avoid Council Tax liability.

Summary of views about exemption E

Question 11: An empty property is exempt from Council Tax when the person who would otherwise occupy it has their permanent home in a hospital or a residential care home. Do you agree that a hospital should not be considered someone’s long-term or permanent home? 

A total of 61 responses were provided for this question. 

A narrow majority of respondents (54%) agreed with the proposal. However, 26 responses (42%) disagreed or were unsure. A further 2 responses did not answer the question but provided comments.

Views on this proposal were mixed. Most respondents felt that hospitals should not be considered a permanent residence for Council Tax purposes, citing their primary purpose as facilities for medical treatment rather than long term residency. One respondent noted that although hospital stays can sometimes be prolonged, their core purpose remains clinical care, not accommodation. Other respondents highlighted that patients typically remain responsible for other household expenses during hospital stays (utilities, mortgage, rent) and Council Tax should be treated in the same way. 

However, several organisations, including a few local authorities, the Institute of Revenues, rating and valuation, and the Welsh Local Government Association, suggested that exemptions could apply in specific circumstances. These included extended hospital stays while awaiting placement in a residential care home or while receiving palliative care or because it is unsafe to move a patient due to their injuries. 

An advice agency organisation argued that patients should not be financially penalised due to delays in discharge beyond their control. They suggest that extended hospital stays should be considered a permanent residence for exemption purposes. They emphasised that such a measure could ease financial stress rather than encourage longer hospital stays.

One local authority proposed a 52-week threshold to determine permanent residence, aligning with the existing Council Tax Reduction Scheme, which remains payable for that period where there is an intention to return home. Another authority suggested a shorter threshold of 12 weeks before the exemption should apply.

Question 12: Are there any circumstances when a hospital could be considered someone’s long‑term or permanent home? 

Several respondents offered a range of views on this question, highlighting specific scenarios where a hospital might reasonably be considered a long-term or permanent home.

Eleven respondents proposed that when a patient is receiving end‑of‑life or palliative care and is unlikely to leave hospital or return home, the hospital should be considered their permanent residence for Council Tax purposes. However, 1 local authority noted that such cases should be treated as exceptional and assessed individually, rather than prompting a change in policy.

Four respondents suggested that individuals who remain in hospital for extended periods while waiting for a residential care placement or a suitable care package to return home could be considered as having a long-term hospital residence. Three local authorities supported this view, suggesting that in such cases the hospital effectively becomes the persons long‑term home.

Two respondents proposed that when a person lacks capacity to make decisions about their care and requires continuous supervision and support that can only be provided in a hospital setting, this could justify considering the hospital as their permanent home.

Summary of views about exemption H

Question 13: Exemption H is an exemption from Council Tax for empty properties being held for future use by ministers of religion from which they will perform religious duties. Do you agree there should be a new time-limit on exemption h to discourage properties from being left empty and exempt from Council Tax for an indefinite period? 

A total of 60 responses were provided for this question. 

A significant majority of respondents (85%) agreed with the proposal. Only 12% of respondents disagreed and 2 respondents did not answer the question but provided comments.

Many respondents supported the proposal recognising that it would encourage vacant properties to be brought back into use and promote consistency in the treatment of empty properties and long‑term empty properties within the Council Tax system.

However, the Representative Body of the Church in Wales disagreed with the proposal, stating that exemption H remains fit for purpose. The current exemption supports the Church’s ability to house clergy and maintain community services. Most of its residential properties are occupied by clergy, with some let privately when not immediately required. The exemption for empty properties enables the Church to retain housing for clergy, acknowledging that recruitment can take months or even years. The Church also highlighted that the Renting Homes (Wales) Act requires a minimum 12‑month tenancy, which conflicts with its need for flexibility. This has resulted in more properties being held vacant rather than let. They expressed concern that removing the exemption could lead to property sales, potentially reducing clergy presence in some communities.

Question 14: What do you consider is a reasonable period for a property being held for future use by ministers of religion to be empty before it becomes liable for Council Tax? Please chose 1 option: 1 year / 2 years / 3 years / Other

The majority of respondents (57%) considered 1 year to be a reasonable period before a property becomes liable for Council Tax. A smaller proportion supported longer periods with 12% favouring 2 years and 5% supporting 3 years. 23% of respondents selected “Other”, with 9 of these proposing a 6-month period. An additional 2 respondents did not select a specific timeframe but provided comments. 

Eight local authorities supported a 1-year exemption period, suggesting this aligns with the treatment of other empty and long‑term empty properties within the Council Tax system. One authority noted this would be consistent with the class a exemption, while another suggested its alignment with their Council Tax premium policy. Two authorities favoured a 2-year period. One proposed alignment with the class f exemption, and another recommended a 6-month period to match the current class c exemption.

The Representative Body of the Church in Wales restated their view that the current exemption is fit for purpose. However, if a time limit were to be introduced, they recommended a minimum of 3 years, starting after the expiry of exemption C.

Five respondents expressed the view that no exemption from Council Tax should apply.

Question 15: Are there circumstances when an empty property being held for future use by ministers of religion could not be a suitable home? 

Seven respondents noted where an empty property is held for future use by ministers of religion and is physically attached to a place of worship with direct access, it is unlikely the property could be offered for rent or sale as a suitable home.

Similarly, 3 respondents highlighted that limited access, particularly where the property lies within the curtilage of church land, could also present a barrier to letting or selling the property for residential use.

The Representative Body of the Church in Wales commented that vacant clergy housing is generally maintained in good condition for future use. However, they acknowledged that vacancies may persist while clergy are recruited, and this process can be unpredictable, making long-term private letting (e.g., 12-month leases) impractical. Where properties are not needed for up to 3 years and are suitable for residential use, the Church states they are let on the open market. They also noted that a small number of properties are physically integrated with church buildings, making them unsuitable for private rental due to the lack of separation.  However, they indicated that this issue is more commonly associated with properties owned by other churches and denominations than with those owned by the Church in Wales.

In contrast 18 respondents stated that there were no circumstances in which an empty property being held for future use by ministers of religion could not be a suitable home. 

Summary of views about a new exemption for refuges

Question 16: Refuges are emergency temporary accommodation for survivors of domestic abuse. Do you agree with the proposal to exempt refuges in Wales from paying Council Tax? 

A total of 60 responses were received for this question. 

A clear majority of respondents (73%) agreed with the proposal and 27% disagreed.

There was broad support for the proposal from a range of stakeholders, including 12 local authorities. Two local authorities disagreed with the proposal, 1 expressing concern that the proposal could set a precedent, potentially prompting providers of accommodation for other vulnerable groups to seek similar exemptions.

The advice sector was supportive, with 1 respondent noting that the proposal would help to safeguard the sustainability of refuge services and that survivors should not be burdened with Council Tax while residing in a refuge. Another respondent suggested extending the exemption to survivors who are unable to access refuge accommodation and are forced to rent a second property to escape abuse. 

Welsh Women’s Aid (WWA) welcomed the proposal and supported limiting the exemption to local authority-commissioned provision, as this would help prevent avenues for Council Tax avoidance. WWA also recommended that the proposal should adopt a broader focus on Violence Against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) to better reflect the language used in local commissioning practices. They expressed concern that defining refuges solely as temporary emergency accommodation for survivors of domestic abuse may not fully capture the range of refuge services across Wales, which also support survivors of rape, sexual assault, sexual exploitation and coercive control. WWA cautioned that this narrower definition could unintentionally exclude some existing refuge provision as ineligible, although they acknowledge this is not the intention of the proposal. 

In addition, WWA recommend placing greater emphasis on the purpose of the accommodation rather than its specific model. They suggest this would better support local authorities in administering future service models and reflect the evolving nature of refuge provision.

WWA also highlighted wider considerations outside the scope of the consultation. 

Summary of the responses about the Welsh Language

Question 17: 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?

Question 18: 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

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

The majority of respondents did not provide an answer to the questions relating to the impact of the proposed policy on the Welsh language. Among those who did respond some were unsure of the potential impacts, while others did not believe the policy would have any impact on the Welsh language. 

Summary of other comments 

Question 19: We have asked a number of specific questions. If you have any related points which we have not specifically addressed, please use this space to record them.

Two local authorities highlighted the need for additional funding to support the implementation of proposed changes. 

Two respondents raised concerns about Council Tax liability after an occupier is deceased, where the property is either jointly owned with someone else or it has been let to the occupier. The respondents noted that bereaved families that are owners (or joint owners) of properties will not be subject to probate and therefore often face Council Tax charges starting from the date of death. In contrast, for estates where probate is required and properties are inherited, a 6 month grace period is allowed before Council Tax liability begins, giving families time to manage the property and its contents.

Government response

The Welsh Government acknowledges and values the range of views shared in response to this consultation.  We remain firmly committed to ensuring that the framework of discounts, disregards and exemptions continues to meet current needs and remains fair and effective. The Local Government Finance (Wales) Act 2024 provided the Welsh Government with more flexible powers to amend and consolidate the complex framework and a comprehensive review of 53 categories has been carried out.

Following a review of the consultation responses, the revised regulations which make provision in relation to discounts, disregards and exempt dwellings will include the following changes.

• Carers and apprentice disregards: these will proceed as proposed in the consultation.
• Exemptions A and C: these will be updated as proposed to apply to newly purchased properties, with ownership verified through legal transfer documents or HM Land Registry records.
• Exemption H: a 1 year time limit will be introduced. After this period, affected properties will become liable for Council Tax.
• New refuge exemption: a new exemption will be introduced for refuges, with a definition designed to encompass the full scope of refuge services.

Exemption E 

The Welsh Government agrees with the view shared by many respondents that hospitals are medical institutions, not residential dwellings. Their primary purpose is to provide treatment, not long-term accommodation. However, we recognise that for some patients, particularly those awaiting placement in residential care, or unable to be safely discharged, hospitals may in practice become their permanent residence. While we considered revising the exemption in narrowly defined cases, doing so would introduce complex administrative challenges, requiring strict oversight and could lead to inconsistencies in its application, potentially placing a further burden on medical professionals to verify circumstances. 

Considering consultation feedback and the mixed nature of views, the exemption will remain unchanged at this time. 

Disabled band reduction

The consultation did not propose any changes at this time but sought general views, which were informative, detailed and mixed. These views will inform longer term consideration and further analysis of the effectiveness of the scheme. Any change to the scheme would not occur during this Senedd term and will be subject to extensive further engagement.

Other considerations

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

The Welsh Government acknowledges that 2 respondents raised concerns regarding Council Tax liability after an occupier is deceased, where the property is either jointly owned with someone else or has been let to the occupier. This issue falls outside the scope of the consultation and is not addressed within the existing framework of Council Tax discounts, disregards, and exemptions. While no changes are proposed at this time, the feedback has been noted.

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.

• Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council
• Cardiff City Council
• Care and Repair Cymru
• Carmarthenshire County Council
• Ceredigion County Council
• Citizens Advice Cymru
• CLA Cymru
• Denbighshire County Council
• EFT Swansea Council
• Flintshire County Council
• Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation
• Low Incomes Tax Reform Group (LITRG)
• Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council
• Money Advice Plus
• Monmouthshire County Council
• Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council
• Newport City Council
• Pembrokeshire County Council
• Representative Body of the Church in Wales
• Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council
• Tanyfoel Holiday Barns
• Torfaen County Borough Council
• VTW
• Welsh Women’s Aid
• WLGA
• Wrexham County Borough Council

14 responses were received from private individuals.

26 respondents requested to remain anonymous.