Nom­i­nal in­crease for all would do the trick

Sunday Tribune - - NEWS&VIEWS -

I RE­FER to the let­ter from M Doubell of Cowies Hill, “The aged suf­fer in city’s re­bate rip-off”, (Sun­day Tri­bune, Septem­ber 3).

The writer should not blame the Anc-run ethek­wini Mu­nic­i­pal­ity for de­creas­ing the thresh­old on prop­er­ties from R3mil­lion to un­der R2m to qual­ify for a pen­sioner’s re­bate. I be­lieve our of­fi­cial op­po­si­tion and watch­dog in the coun­cil should be blamed for not ag­i­tat­ing strongly on this mat­ter.

The DA should have re­jected or op­posed this in­sid­i­ous move but failed to do so. The mu­nic­i­pal­ity chose to squeeze the 20% of ratepay­ers who sus­tain the city by rais­ing prop­erty val­ues and re­duc­ing the ex­emp­tion level, se­verely prej­u­dic­ing the ma­jor­ity of ratepay­ers who are in the mid­dle-in­come group, many of whom are in the 60-plus age bracket liv­ing on a fixed in­come.

A bet­ter op­tion, I be­lieve, would have been to levy a nom­i­nal amount on every prop­erty owner ir­re­spec­tive of the value of the prop­erty, which would have helped con­trib­ute to the fis­cus.

JAYRAJ BACHU Clare Estate

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa

© PressReader. All rights reserved.