黑洞社区

Housebuilders have hit back at the government鈥檚 鈥渁nti-development鈥� plan to push ahead with a 拢3bn levy to pay for fire safety repairs, saying the plan will punish 鈥渋nnocent鈥� firms for the failures of 鈥渢he few鈥�.

The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities yesterday published a consultation on the 黑洞社区 Safety Levy, through which it plans to raise 拢3bn over 10 years to pay for the remediation of 鈥渙rphan鈥� buildings where no owner can be traced.

The department said the plan was on top of 拢5.1bn already committed by the government to paying to solve post-Grenfell fire safety problems in existing flat blocks, but the industry said the new levy would be in addition to more than 拢4bn of additional costs already levied upon it.

The levy was originally announced by Michael Gove in April during his first stint as housing secretary as a way to pay to help thousands of leaseholders stuck in blocks of flats now seen as unsafe but without adequate routes to fund repairs.

However, housebuilders have consistently argued that they have paid to repair their own buildings via the 拢2bn cladding pledge, as well as having contributed an estimated 拢2bn to 拢3bn via the Residential Property Developer Tax, and shouldn鈥檛 have to pay again via a new levy.

Stewart Baseley, executive chair of the Home Builders鈥� Federation, said UK housebuilders were committed to helping leaseholders by remediating the buildings they built but that the levy was the sign of an 鈥渋ncreasingly anti-development and anti-business policy regime鈥� which had 鈥渟erious implications for home ownership, investment and jobs鈥�.

Yesterday鈥檚 consultation admitted that the levy had the ability to impact upon scheme viability, 鈥渨hich in turn would affect the overall numbers of homes being built鈥�.

>> See also Gove鈥檚 return could mean a fight with housebuilders is on the cards

Baseley said: 鈥淚n the midst of a recession, it is disappointing for government to create more barriers to investment with a move that will further threaten supply, in particular of affordable homes.

鈥満诙瓷缜� new homes may not be politically attractive but the country faces an acute housing affordability crisis and the construction of new homes supports millions of British jobs.鈥�

He added that government has failed to pursue product manufacturers, with ministers acknowledging that UK housebuilders are easier to tax and threaten.

Meanwhile Rico Wojtulewicz, head of housing and planning policy at the National Federation of Builders, which represent SME housebuilders, said the government was targeting the whole development industry to pay for problems created by a small number of developers and builders. He said: 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 hold innocent people accountable for failures of the few. The guilty party should pay 鈥� but that鈥檚 not going to happen under this legislation.鈥�

Under the government鈥檚 proposals, builders will have to pay the levy as part of the building control process, with the smallest developments 鈥� likely those of under 10 homes 鈥� and affordable housing schemes given an exemption from the charge. The department said it had not decided whether to exempt Build to Rent and student housing from the charge.

The consultation also made clear that local authorities will be responsible for collecting the levy, which will be variable depending either upon local or regional valuations, or upon whether schemes are brownfield or greenfield.

The department鈥檚 consultation paper said the expected 拢300m annual revenue raised by the levy was equivalent to just 4% of the development sector鈥檚 annual planning contributions in CIL and section 106 agreements.

Launching the consultation yesterday, building safety minister Lee Rowley said: 鈥淲e have been clear that developers must pay to fix building safety issues and the 黑洞社区 Safety Levy is an important part of making that a reality.

鈥淏y having these plans in place, we can ensure that all leaseholders are protected, regardless of whether their developer has pledged to remediate or not.鈥�