The implementation of the controversial Property Tax is now underway in Trinidad and Tobago, marked by a series of official announcements and the issuance of revised Notices of Valuation to an estimated 400,000 residential taxpayers. While these revisions are necessary, there is a critical flaw in the system that must be addressed: the restricted access to the Valuation Roll database. This column explores the implications of this restricted access, argues for the necessity of transparency, and identifies who stands to gain from maintaining the status quo.
The new Property Tax system in T&T aims to deliver equitable taxes through a crowd-sourcing approach, which promises transparency and low operational costs. Property owners were asked to submit detailed returns – about 60,000 of which were sent – which were then analyzed by the Valuation Division of the Finance Ministry. Selected properties were inspected and measured, leading to provisional tax assessments. Taxpayers have the right to object to these assessments, which would be refined through this iterative process of public feedback, ensuring fairness and accuracy.
The key point about the new Property Tax, and the source of most of the significant opposition, is that almost all owners of investment properties currently avoid paying Income Tax or Corporation Tax on their rental earnings. The new Property Tax aims to function as a crowd-sourced, open-access system, enabling taxpayers to view other assessments to determine if their own is fair. This level of transparency, which was absent in the previous paper-based system, has provoked a fierce and deceptive backlash from many property owners. These owners often disguise their opposition as concern for the elderly and poor, when in reality, their primary motive is to continue evading taxes. In my numerous discussions with residential taxpayers who have received these notices, there is a broad consensus that the assessments are fair.
The Valuation Roll is the comprehensive database of all property details and assessments, so it is central to this transparent, crowd-sourced system. Public access to this database is intended to allow taxpayers to compare assessments, identify discrepancies, and ensure their own assessments are fair. However, the current legislation restricts access to this vital information to certain officials only, undermining the system’s transparency.
Apart from obvious gross errors in terms of the property address, etc., it is that comparison between assessments which would be the most likely basis for a taxpayer making a formal complaint. Six of the ten Grounds of Objection printed on the Notices of Valuation issued by the Commissioner of Valuations refer to the Valuation Roll, therefore vindicating my observation. (See below)
There is an irreconcilable conflict between the logic of the new tax with its crowd-sourced approach and the fact that the Valuation of Land Act (the Property Tax legislation) restricts access to the Valuation Roll to certain officials only. This restriction undermines the principles of transparency and accountability essential to the crowd-sourced approach. Without public access, it becomes difficult to verify the fairness and accuracy of property assessments, which could only facilitate corruption and tax evasion. Furthermore, the limited access hinders public participation and oversight, silencing taxpayers who could otherwise help refine the system through objections and feedback. Requiring taxpayers to request extracts from the Valuation Roll, instead of providing direct access, leads to significant inefficiency and increased administrative costs. This process generates unnecessary paperwork and delays, burdening both taxpayers and the administration. In an era where digital transparency and open data are standard practices for modern governance, restricting access to the Valuation Roll is a regressive step that contradicts the principles of good governance and civic engagement
The manifest unfairness of this restricted access is being justified by officials on the grounds of data protection concerns, yet these objections lack clarity and consistency. All property ownership details are already publicly available through the Registrar General’s online database, raising questions about the true beneficiaries of restricted access to the Valuation Roll. This inconsistency could lead to legal challenges, (there the entire property tax policy and the Valuation Roll would remain stalled in a legal quagmire) as it appears to conflict with the fundamental purposes of the Property Tax legislation and taxpayers’ constitutional rights to fair play and transparency.
AfraRaymond.net 
Let the sun shine.
Hi Afra,
I enjoyed reading your article, but the critical flaw is that the imbecile Imbert tried to do this with the full knowledge that the civil service is completely incapable of doing it efficiently, whereas a simple percentage added to each householder’s electricity bill would have provided a Land Tax to the government that is fair, easily collected and effective and no fuss. Instead, I expect that the matter will be bogged down in the courts for years to come as more and more people challenge the valuations they have received and if the UNC wins the next General Elections, they may scrap it completely. What a mess this has created, but it is sadly typical of our politicians, on both sides!
Best regards,
Brian..
Hello Brian, I have two responses to your points –
Firstly, the TTEC bill is an entirely unreliable way to levy a property tax, which is fundamentally a tax on wealth…just a simple, personal, example will suffice, my own TTEC bill is less than $65 most months, so what to do?
Secondly, the use of TTEC bills will obscure the revenue streams the process is meant to disclose, see the preceding point…
Hey Afra,
If your T&TEC ill is only $65 per month, something is very wrong or you do not use air conditioning nor a water pump, nor lights, fridges, freezers…….! We disagree, as I think the T&TEC bill is usually indicative of the value of most persons’ properties. Plus, there is no reason for the collection of it to an obscure the revenue stream as surely it can simply be added as a separate line item on each T&TEC bill and then that amount is forwarded to the relevant account along with a copy of the bill payment showing the amount collected. Too easy?
Regards,
Brian.
Hi Brian, I am just a frugal soul who only uses the lights where I am at that time and live alone!
The revenue stream which would be obscured is the rental value of the property which is being largely denied to the BIR at this point…
Hi Afra,
I take your point and of course like everything else in sweet T&T, the people cannot be told what is happening, we must simply accept the word of our politicians when they say that they are doing everything for the good of the country but cannot divulge details for one silly reason or another (when we all know that it would expose incompetence as in this case, or corruption)……but we must agree to disagree because I believe that this would have been a much easier way to get a rough value and to collect the revenue. No problem. One thing for sure, there will be no transparency and their valuations of properties will never be made public!
Kind regards,
Brian.
Hi Afra ,
Speaking to some persons in the Pinto Rd Arima area, I was told they did receive any valuation notice since their properties under the HiArima venture.
This, I believe, is unfair since most have more than 1 property on the land and is being rented.
I live in the Santa Rosa area and is sacrificing to pay my mortgage while they are collecting multiple rent and not paying for their own property.
Their argument is that it’s squtters land.
Also in LA Horquetta area this is also happening during to “being a high risk ” area.
Is this facts or just heresy?
I’m enquiring…
Alana
Hi Alana, Is this ‘you’?
Your points are very important, so that is all the more reason for us to have a publicly-accessible online database of all Property Tax Assessments, the Valuation Roll! The alternative is the persistence of these lacunae, which only benefit the tax-evading wrongdoers…
Why not HDC Homes as a Basic Reference/Standard in Valuations? Variation Adjustments can be Approved for Differences in Properties/Location/etc.
Hello St Car, there is no need to stretch that far as there is enough info from the Returns to set a proper framework…the HDC approach you are suggesting would in my view offer fertile grounds for timewasting appeals
Thank you Mr. Raymond
Thanks, much appreciated and quite insightful, despite the many imperfections and the various ambiguity that this particular tax has attracted, we must begin from somewhere , because the tax is long over due and has been evaded for far to long. Hopefully with your watchful eyes and commitment we can be guided and advised when its necessary. However the Government has its part to play in demystifying the process and all other fundamental concerns for John Public. Great article as usual.
Yes, Erica – thank you for this comment, I quite agree that the Govt’s Information on the new Property Tax system has been very low quality thus far – hopefully some proper PR could be activated before too long…
Hi Afra
I read your article its very insightful. Thanks for your contribution, its quite timely. I also posted a comment on your page.
Have a very productive week ahead.
Regards
Erica
Erica Banfield Moore CIM, PGDip, MBA
Managing Director
Merabic Utophia Concepts Limited
Office : 1-868-691-2604
Mobile: 1-868-774-8336
I’m of the firm belief that the roll is incomplete and disclosure to the public would give way to critical challenges against the system in its entirety. Updating the roll is likely a labour intensive exercise and best undertaken sooner than later – until this is done, we’d be in a holding pattern indefinitely.
Great article and great comments…
Hi Gregory, by definition, the Valuation Roll can never actually be ‘complete’, in the strict sense of that word, since it is being continually refined and corrected by the various objections and revisions – just like that fantastic free online map called ‘WAZE’ which is also crowd-sourced – you see?
thanks for the clarification, and it’s understandable, seeing that it’s a ‘living’ document. My concerns are really about the overall land registry I guess, and I’m hoping that our records are indeed reasonably up to date – regardless of if it contributes to the withholding of easy public access to the valuation roll.
Thanks much
Yes. Gregory – as a constant user I am satisfied with the state of our online records at the Registrar General’s Dept
This sounds like reverse red-lining where the boundaries here exclude selected properties and though in the US red-lining laws were repealed, surreptitious acts re-enforce the practice and objections are swept away. We have mastered the art of evasion.