Deadweight Figure

Does anyone know how the 0.4% deadweight figure was arrived at last year?

Was it from the CTB1?

We are mulling over whether it is Line 4 - Line 18 or Line 1 - Line 3 - Line 18?

Anyone clever enough to know?

 

Thanks

Sue

Forums: 
New Homes Bonus

I take it as line four, 0.4% of total stock. So if your total stock is 100,000  growth of 0.4% is expected. So a Local Authority with a TS of 100,000 would have to have net additions of 400 before any New Homes  Bonus would be allocated. So if  a LA has 500 new builds and they reduced their long term empties by 50 they would be allocated 150 NHBs. But, maybe not.... 

To prepare myself for understanding what the government does and doesn't include  in calculations of NHB, I find it most useful to refer to the 'Battle of Wits' in the film The Princess Bride. I recommend others do the same, preferably on company time if they let you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6TQ7ljcsjk

But leaving this gem aside, whilst I claim to have sufficient intelligence (disputed), I don't know the answer.

However, the NHB Calculator does make it clear that 'dwelling stock'  takes into account demolitions and LTEs (figures are 'net of demoliltions and long-term empties'). It would therefore be counter-intuitive if the deadweight figure did not work off the same figure. (Yes, I realise that 'counter-intuitive' in 2019 means very little).

See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-homes-bonus-calculator-2019-to-2020 for the New Homes Bonus Calculator.  The first link on the home page explains how the calculation works.

So on that basis, 1 - 3 - 18. I think I can safely say that Line 4, which takes into account exempt dwelllings, would certainly not be used. (If there were an alternative to 1 -3 -18 it would be 1 - 3 or simply 1).

David Gibbens

Think David is correct with line 1.

For Barking and Dagenham the NHB calculator for 2018-19 gives net addittions of 516 when adjusted to Band D equilivilent it is 494, the calculator says 232 NHBs allocated above baseline, so Im assuming 496 - 232 gives the rough baseline (deadweight?) of 262. The closest (262.8) I can get to that figure is by taking bands A to H of line1  of the CT Baseform for the previous year, adjusted to Band D equivilent, divide by 1000 multiply by 4.

 

Hi Carson

There is actually a logic to what you are sayiing, given that the rationale around the deadweight is all about taking into account the rate of housebuilding i..e new homes. As Line 3 (it demolitions in the 3 weeks or so between the CTB1 being issued and being returned to MHCLG) is nearly always 0 the differences in the two line 1s is pretty much the new house-building over the year. And your calculations seem to prove it so thanks for that input which is really the clincher.  The NHB Practitioner Guide should be updated accordingly.

Line 1 alone then.