GOVERNMENT must prove that the legitimate number of voluntary property valuations have been submitted in order to implement the property tax.
The Progressive Empowerment Party (PEP) has instructed its attorneys to file a Freedom of Information Act request in order to obtain the information.
In a media statement on Tuesday, PEP’s political leader Phillip Alexander said the filing of the request was the first step in challenging the legitimacy of the tax which Imbert announced would be implemented by the end of this year.
He said, “The PEP insists that government’s haste to pick the pockets of citizens while the country enjoys an energy boom should leave a sour taste in the mouths of all those whose properties the minister intends to set arbitrary rental values on, in a bid to what amounts to double taxing for items that are fully taxed already.”
Alexander continued, “The PEP calls on all of Trinidad & Tobago to join us in resisting this obscene attempt at taxing those already carrying the largest share of the nation’s expenses, while the government continues its squandermania in stunts and overpriced, unnecessary projects, rewarding its investors and supporters at taxpayers’ expense.”
In January, the Court of Appeal made its decision on an appeal filed by Devant Maharaj in 2017 in which he was challenging a data collection exercise commenced by the Commissioner of Valuations in 2017.
“The Court of Appeal’s decision made it clear that nothing in their decision was intended to apply to or affect the present data collection exercise being carried out by the Commissioner of Valuations,” the Ministry of Finance stated in a press release issued shortly after.
The judgment of the Court of Appeal stated, “This decision relates solely to the state of affairs that ended on June 10, 2017 and the collection of information pursuant to the data collection exercise that was then. We have been informed that another data collection exercise is now being conducted on a different statutory basis. Nothing herein is intended to be construed as affecting that exercise which is not before this court on this appeal.”
