Tuesday, 3 August 2010

Could a puppy tax be the answer?

On Twitter there is much talk about last night's Panorama and the issues the upsetting show churned up.
A relatively new idea has surfaced - a breeding tax to help pay for the collection and destruction of unwanted, surplus dogs.
I'd like to throw this concept over to you for debate.
Should it be licensed commercial breeders only that are taxed?
Should it be every dog bred ?
A one-off tax or should it be like road tax and be annual?
Could it be cheaper for some dogs than others - (neutered, rescued, highly trained etc)
How would the tax be collected?
Should any people be tax-exempt?
Would chips be used to link owners/breeders and the tax register - or is that too much like Big Brother.
Should there be a visible tax disk to show your pup is taxed? (In some countries there are coloured disks on the collar to show if rabies shots are up to date.)
Standing back ready to hear your views...
What if people don't pay the tax?
Would the Gov be able to take your dog like they take your car if you don't tax it?
Should neutered dogs be tax exempt?
Devil's advocate time here - I want to hear your views.
We need something radical, we can't be killing this many healthy dogs each year.


Lindsay said...

As with many things, in the end it would probably be the responsible and ethical breeders who end up bearing the brunt of this. While it may seem like a great idea, I doubt that will have much of an effect on the animals in shelters. It could have an adverse effect and actually increase the number of animals in shelters depending on how the tax is divvied up. When things get tight, the pets are the first to go. And getting taxed isn't really appealing to most people to begin with. The majority of reputable breeders have a clause in their contracts that animals of their breeding be returned to them no matter what if the original owners are unable to keep the animal for any reason. Many will go to great lengths to get dogs of their breeding back and while a lot of the dogs you're seeing shelters may be purebreds, that doesn't mean that they are of good breeding.

Anonymous said...

I would like to see a law passed where NO-ONE can ask for money for an animal unless they are a rescue and the costs cover the looking after of dogs. Many these horrible idiots who breed from their dogs(normally staffies) to make a few hundred pounds every few months actually take care not to let them mate as they will have to spend money in care for them with no return.
It would also make all breeders scream "no money??? why would we breed dogs???" - therein answering their own question

sharon said...

What about people who want to breed their dogs have to apply for a licence (each time they breed and monies for these licences goes to rescue centres). They could then be vetted, like a home check, the licence then granted or refused. Anyone found selling pups without said licence pays really hefty fine (for a first offence £1,000, rising for each offence thereafter or hard jail time) and the puppies are confiscated, all proceeds of the fine goes to helping the rescue centre care for these dogs until they are rehomed.
This would work along side a puppy contract.

Wendy Coyne said...

I think we need a big name superstar to head a campaign against puppy farms and bad breeding, and to re-inforce how much work is involved in raising a puppy. Someone that young people will listen to and tv programes they will watch which would ram home the message that dogs are not throw away accessories.
Cinemas could show clips of unwanted dogs being euthanised for example.
I thought the saddest thing in the Panorama show was the little black dog being put into a plastic sack.

Anonymous said...

these idiots who breed and sell andthen buyt these staffies and cross staffies dont appear to be that clever and I suspect reading is not one of their biggest skills, so what would the point of puppy contract be for them!!!

Danni Damon said...

I think all of these ideas such as breeders tax, puppy contract, compulsory microchipping etc are good ideas in theory. However, who will police these changes and how? The people these measures are aimed at (irresponsible and/or backstreet breeders, puppy farmers and status dog owners) are by virtue of their personality, not the kind of people who would bother to chip their dogs or pay a tax to breed them. It will be the responsible owners/breeders who will end up being penalised and paying for those in society who treat dogs as money making commodities or who use them for protection/status or fighting.
In an ideal world, prospective dog owners should go through a compulsory process similar to that of the adoption procedure for children and be assessed on their suitability as owners. If they are not suitable, they can't own a dog, with huge penalties for those who ignore that recommendation. But again, who and how would that be policed? I also believe that all dog owners should be made to train their dogs, which would also go a long way to reducing the stress placed on the already overburdened rescue centres.
It's a tough one because at the end of the day, the people who want to use a dog for financial gain will always find a way to do so.

Anonymous said...

It's a nice idea in theory but it wouldn't reach those who need to pay and the responsible ones would end up futting the bill and getting the blame - again.

Bear this in mind. Car tax doesn't go on paying for roads and tobacco tax doesn't go to the nhs.

We have seen already that the government are not interested in dog welfare issues and have never been interested in taxes being spent wisely and on the right things.