Edinburgh’s proposed 300% council tax surcharge on second homes will do little to tackle the city’s housing shortage, according to DJ Alexander. The agency also doubts the measure will reduce house prices or rents.
Edinburgh City Council will vote on the proposal.
Under the plans, owners of second homes and long-term empty properties could face significantly higher council tax bills.
Owners of a Band A property would pay £4,336 a year. Those with a Band H property could face a bill of £15,935.
Edinburgh has more than 1,400 second homes and around 1,700 long-term empty properties.
The council estimates the surcharge could generate around £4m in additional revenue each year. It also hopes the measure will encourage owners to bring empty homes back into use.
A report going before councillors argues that higher premiums could increase the supply of affordable housing. The council also believes the measure could ease pressure on house prices and rents.
However, DJ Alexander questions how much difference the policy would make. It points to the relatively small number of second homes in Edinburgh.
The city has 264,990 homes across all tenures. Second homes therefore account for around 0.5% of the total housing stock.
The agency argues that increasing housing supply remains the more pressing challenge.
Developers started work on 1,850 new homes in Edinburgh during the 2025-26 financial year. Social housing accounted for just 539 of those homes.
Meanwhile, the city’s social housing waiting list reached 31,589 in July 2026. Around a third of applicants have waited more than five years for a home.
The figures also highlight the scale of homelessness in the city.
At the end of March 2025, Edinburgh had 7,866 homeless households covering 14,219 people. This included 3,980 children and 2,820 young people aged between 16 and 25.
The Scottish Parliament has reportedly suggested that some MSPs could qualify for an exemption. This could cover MSPs who need a second home in Edinburgh because their constituency lies far from Holyrood.
David Alexander, the chief executive officer of DJ Alexander Scotland, commented: “While this policy appears to be addressing the housing emergency in Edinburgh it is instead a largely performative exercise in that the amount raised is relatively low, it will not substantially increase the availability of affordable homes and will not reduce rents or prices as claimed. Empty houses are something of a red herring as they are often vacant because someone is in long term care or has died and their estate is taking some time to be concluded.”
“For some of the people who have a second home in Edinburgh it may be their original family home which they have inherited and wish to return to having worked elsewhere in the UK. They may have family ties, or elderly relatives that they must see and that home is an essential component of fulfilling these duties.”
He continued: “Too often with such policies there is an assumption that these homes are owned by the very wealthy in society when the truth is they can simply be a long-standing family home. Elsewhere in Scotland, for example, you often find rural family homes that are kept as a link to the past but are intermittently occupied.”
“This policy has the potential to break family ties with home for those who may have retained a family home but work elsewhere. Those who may want to return to Edinburgh when they retire may now be put off. This may not matter to councillors in Edinburgh, but it is unfair and the message it gives is one of an unwelcome city desperate to raise funds from property owners.”
Alexander added: “This policy which is being portrayed as resolving the complex housing situation Scotland’s capital now faces is, in reality, something that is being done which appears to address the housing emergency when in truth this is a sticking plaster to cover a gaping wound. We need action, we need real policies, and we need commitments to increase the volume of housing being built, more encouragement for investment in the private rented sector, and a major push to generate thousands more social housing if the current housing emergency is to be addressed.”
