There’s been a fair bit of commentary on twitter re. the household charge numbers and speculating in the media. Having just watched RTE1 News at 6pm it seems incredible to me that the Local Government Management Agency seems to have little idea as to how many housing units are liable for the household charge. It seems even more odd that number seems to be floating between 1.6m and 1.8m. There seems to be a conflation between households (1.654m according to Census 2011) and housing stock minus exemptions/waivers (1.755m based on calculation below, probably 1.72m +/- 20k with the other minor exemptions taken out). It is housing stock that is the base for the household charge (a vacant house is just as liable as an occupied house – this is a tax on property not occupancy). Namawinelake has a post up about who is and isn’t eligible. Working off the data contained in his post (I’ve updated a couple of his figures to Census 2011 data and added a couple, but otherwise I’m quoting his figures and sources) we come up with the following. [On request, I have updated this post to match the data to the exemptions and waivers exactly as set out on the householdcharge.ie website – 21.15pm, Apr 1st]
What is eligible:
All housing units in the state, with seven exemptions and two waivers
Housing units in the state according to Census 2011: 1,994,845
What is exempt:
(1) Residential properties that are part of the trading stock of a business and have not been sold or been the source of any income since construction
18,638 unoccupied vacant housing units in unfinished estates the vast majority of which are unsold (under-construction were not counted in Census), plus small amount of unsold one-offs
(2) Residential property vested in a Minister of the Government or the Health Service Executive
Not known but small, ask govt depts and HSE
(3) Residential property vested in a housing authority, including property where households are purchasing their homes under the Shared Ownership Scheme and where the local authority still retains an ownership stake,
129,033 (renting social housing, Census 2011, Table 39), DECLG should have exact figure
23,547 (being bought from LAs, Census 2006 – I can’t find in Census 2011), DECLG should have exact figure
(4) Voluntary and co-operative housing,
14,942 (renting voluntary housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
(5) Residential property subject to commercial rates and wholly used as a dwelling,
Not known but small, ask local authorities (there was a question on the Census, Table 38, but the class also includes apts in converted houses – total was 27,666 so know it was less than that – could ask CSO if it could disaggregate; )
(6) Residential property owned by certain charities or comprised in a discretionary trust, and
Not known but small
(7) Residential property where a person has to leave their house due to long-term mental or physical infirmity (e.g. a person that has moved into a nursing home).
Not known but small, possibly ask HSE. There was a question on the Census. Table 11 shows 28,395 people live in nursing and children’s homes, not all in nursing home will own property, so know less than that; could see if CSO can disaggregate.
What is waivered:
(1) Owners of residential property entitled to mortgage interest supplement
19,000 (mortgage interest relief, Keane Report), Dept Soc Protection should have exact figure
(2) Owners of residential property located in certain prescribed unfinished housing estates
34,000 (category 3/4 unfinished estates, Money Guide Ireland, exact figure can be obtained from the Housing Development Survey undertaken by DECLG)
Houses eligible – a calculation based on above:
1,994,845 (housing units, Census 2011)
-18,638 (unoccupied vacant housing units unsold, Housing Development Survey, DECLG, 2011)
-129,033 (renting social housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
-14,942 (renting voluntary housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
-23,547 (being bought from LAs, Census 2006 – I can’t find in Census 2011)
-19,000 (mortgage interest relief, Keane Report)
-34,000 (category 3/4 unfinished estates, Money Guide Ireland)
= 1,755,685 (this still needs other small amounts of property taken-off namely exemptions 2, 5, 6, 7 – all of these will be very low in number and should not substantially alter this figure, probably 1.72m +/- 20k based on data above) (update Apr 2nd: also see my comment (no. 10 in list below – 1.72m to pay, 1.77m to register +/- 20k)).
Households paid, minus the 12,500 who have registered but qualify for the waiver
621,717 (already processed)
+89,000 (by post awaiting processing)
+ 82,175 (registered in local authority offices yesterday)
= 792,892
The percentage of those paid, based on those figures = 45.16% (54.84% left to pay)
Now if we outside the system can get that far, one would think that LGMA could get an even more precise figure by talking to the people who hold the relevant data (basically CSO, DECLG, Dept Social Protection, HSE). I appreciate it is difficult to get an exact number because it’ll be difficult to know how many are exempt for reasons 2, 5, 6, 7 as set out above, but we can certainly make a reasonable estimate within a few thousand based on known data (rather than somewhere between 1.6-1.8m!) This is not rocket science.
Rob Kitchin
Ireland after NAMA 
April 1, 2012 at 6:33 pm
Getting the numbers right- On the issue of numbers of households and the debate that is on-going – there is a sense that the integration of databases will begin in earnest following the initial feedback with the CSO, E.S.B. etc.. and the geocoded database least mentioned – the Geo-Directory (Ordnance Survey Ireland / An Post) product; which should prove interesting for “next years” revenue generation trawl.
April 1, 2012 at 6:41 pm
You left out dwellings owned by ministers being exempt… Maybe that’s where the discrepancy is;)
April 1, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Its great to see that over half the country have refused to pay the household charge. Ireland has finally spoken.
April 2, 2012 at 12:44 pm
I don’t think it matters if it slightly above or below 50%, either way it’s a lot. I expect the outstanding non-payments will go down over the week as the weekend registrants are processed. The point of the post was not to say whether above or below 50% but that it is possible to make a reasonable estimate of eligibility, even if it has some parameters.
April 1, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Given your overview Rob, I am more interested in the issues that will undoubtedly be met in the integration of all database sources – the integration issues, maintenance, currency and population mechanisms required to be put in place , administrative and data rights etc…to make it work long term for effective revenue generation.
This initial compilation is just the initial trawl but the on-going issues will remain. Your views welcome Rob.
April 2, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Whilst there are ethical issues here, the key thing with regards to this is the legal situation of such cross-referencing. This really something for the Data Commissioner to answer rather than me. I believe that the LGMA are working within the legal parameters and are complying with the DCs recommendations.
April 2, 2012 at 2:29 am
[…] […]
April 2, 2012 at 8:00 am
[…] […]
April 2, 2012 at 8:14 am
It was also wonderful to hear you introduced as someone who had paid their charge. Because that matters to your analysis.
April 2, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Perception does matter regardless of whether it should or not is all I can say to this. I guess the point they were trying to make is that I was coming at this from a technical ‘can this be done?’ point of view, rather than having a specific agenda of undermining or campaigning against the household charge. Which is true – the post expresses a frustration that the figure of eligible housing units is floating and that this is adding to the confusion as to what is and isn’t eligible. Whilst we cannot put an exact figure on it (because some data is unknown as detailed above), we can certainly get within a reasonable ballpark figure.
April 2, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Its not really possible to be neutral on this Rob – but leaving the seduction of technocracy and the ethics of numbers of aside for now – I think the ‘ballpark figure’ is not only where we should be looking. In linking household tax to the provision of local services, the government has unwittingly and without foresight, done more to shake up local democracy than 40 years of local government legislation. As soon as people’s mind shift from paying/not paying the tax, a new wave of questions will arise, like where is this money going to being spent, on what, and how well? Unfortunately given what we have learned about the competency of this Ministry in the last weeks, and the state of local government and planning from the Mahon Tribunal, one could be forgiven for saying, that the social and political consequence of these questions will not be so good. Especially, when this tax rises next year, local politics is likely to shift further to the Right, as compliant tax-payers [who have no doubt a very distinct geography] will seek to ensure than non-compliant ones [who are most likely fixed in poor places] – have their services run down. Is this not the punitive line already being provided by the current Minister, when he says that poorly performing local authorities will face higher cuts? “Ireland Inc.’ with its eye on global business seem totally unprepared to think through and address these issues– but I guess we have to remind ourselves that’s not an unexpected outcome when the pace of political change is lead by the IMF.
April 3, 2012 at 8:37 am
What Denis said. Mostly.
April 2, 2012 at 8:24 am
The LGMA claim they don’t have the figures. This is not incredible, it’s simply convenient. Hogan and company don’t want any figures coming out suggesting that most people didn’t pay. Even with their own ridiculous figures, the government only had 50.3% compliance.
Remember, the government figures include estimates provided by subordinates who were motivated to estimate “high” in order to please Hogan.
April 2, 2012 at 9:06 am
I have been to both the Rally in the National Stadium on the 24th March and again on the March to the Convention Centre from Parnell Sq. 31st March 2012. Seeing with my own eyes the anger and disgust at this government from old and young has really strengthen my own cause to fight this tax all the way. I saw men in suits staring out from the forth floor of the convention centre, the sight they must of seen from the comfort of their surrounding surely should have touched a nerve in them?? Thousands of people booing and chanting “OUT, OUT, OUT,OUT!”…….this was what it felt like if only for a fleeting few moments what real People Power felt like.
However, my digust at how little print space this recieved in all the media was quite shocking. RTE were particularly cruel to the people’s cause by misrepresenting not only the number of people who where there but also the tiny postage stamp coverage of the event. What is going on? if I wasn’t there on the day I would not have known that a march actually took place at all.
As for the figures quoted above I am not shocked anymore by the farcial figures and propagandaism that is taking place every single day.
We need a change and we need it now.
April 2, 2012 at 2:29 pm
Based on this article I have one revision to make – http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/government-figures-underestimate-numbers-liable-for-household-charge-545940.html
In it the head of LGMA agency states: “those are exemptions that don’t have to register at all – unlike waivers, which do.” In other words, the number of expected registrations is above the number of expected payments (by the number of expected waivers, by my calculation above 53,000 – 19,000 mortgage interest supplement and 34,000 cat 3/4 estates). As such, the number of registrants would change to c.1.77m +/-20k and number of payments to c.1.72m +/-20k
re. the same piece, I still think talking about households is a misnoma – it is houses that are liable not households (if a property is vacant, such as a holiday home, a payment is required).
April 2, 2012 at 5:14 pm
Here Here Suzanne Dunne..well said..RTE = Propagandaism at the highest level in Ireland…they report what they are told to report….this has been going on for years…
April 2, 2012 at 6:05 pm
Very helpful stats – thank you, Rob Kitchin.
April 2, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Even you seem to have a low figure for households in the 2011 Census. I read it saying there were 2,004,175 dwellings recorded in 2011, and increase of over 230,000 since 2006. Here’s the quote:
“Housing:
“Housing numbers (dwellings) have increased more rapidly than total population between 2006 and 2011, with a 13.3 per cent increase in dwellings compared with 8.1 per cent for the population.
“The number of dwellings increased by 234,562 from 1,769,613 in 2006 to 2,004,175 in 2011, representing an annual average increase of 46,912.
“The largest percentage increase in households was seen in Laois (21.2%) followed by Cavan, Donegal, Leitrim and Longford which all showed increases of above 19 per cent.”
Which would mean that not much more than 40% had registered by 31 March.
April 3, 2012 at 7:37 am
The figure you have of 2,004,175 was the prelim calculation off of the enumerator initial counts released last June. It was reduced down to 1,994,845 once communal dwellings had been reconciled in the official release last week. 1,649,408 of these units were occupied by the usual resident (there were 1.654m households – can have more than 1 household in the same dwelling). Of the remainder, 289,451 were vacant, 45,283 were absent on the night of the census but usually occupied, and 10,703 were occupied by guests. Of the vacant stock, 59,395 were classed as holiday homes.
The figure to work off is the 1.994m and then work backwards on exemptions from there (remember vacant dwellings are liable). Waivers have to register, but don’t pay.
I guess my question with respect to the ‘1.6m eligible housing units’ being touted by the government is this: where are the 400k of exemptions coming from? That’s 20% of stock supposedly exempt. LA/voluntary occupied+LA being bought = 8.4%. I can’t see the other exemptions, which are all small, adding up to 11.6% (and certainly not on the data above).
June 19, 2012 at 6:01 pm
[…] there are some exception that need to be taken out of the total number of liable housing units (exemptions 2, 5, 6, 7 – all small, but not in the public domain; might account for up to c.20K […]