header-logo header-logo

Non-domestic rating

05 March 2010
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Legislation
printer mail-detail

Non-Domestic Rating (Unoccupied Property) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Amend the Non-Domestic Rating (Unoccupied Property) (England) Regulations 2008, SI 2008/386.

Where a property is excepted because it has a rateable value of less than £2,200, that amount is increased to £2,600 to take account of changes to rateable values of hereditaments due to occur with effect from 1 April 2010 as a result of revaluation.

However, for the financial year beginning on 1 April 2010 only, the amount is increased so the owners of unoccupied properties with a rateable value of less than £18,000 will not be liable for rates in respect of that year in relation to such properties.

 

In force : 1 April 2010

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll