Scotland has enacted the Non-Domestic Rates (Liability for Unoccupied Properties) (Scotland) Act 2026, restoring councils’ ability to charge owners for rates on vacant commercial properties. The Bill passed on 27 November 2025 as an emergency measure; it became an Act on 7 January 2026 and takes effect the day after Royal Assent. ([parliament.scot](https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/votes-and-motions/S6M-19948?utm_source=openai))
Ministers moved after discovering that amendments made by the 2020 Act left no legal basis to bill owners of unoccupied properties from 1 April 2023. The Scottish Government’s own assessments warned that, without a fix, councils could face refunding all charges since that date, with interest, and a one-off exposure in the £350m–£400m range. ([gov.scot](https://www.gov.scot/publications/non-domestic-rates-liability-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill-equality-impact-assessment/pages/3/?utm_source=openai))
The Act inserts a new section 24ZA into the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1966. Where a property on the valuation roll has no occupier, the owner is liable for the non-domestic rates that would have been due from an occupier, and the rating code applies as if the owner were in occupation. This sits alongside existing relief schemes and uses the 1947 Act definitions of “owner” and “occupier”. ([parliament.scot](https://www.parliament.scot/-/media/files/legislation/bills/s6-bills/non-domestic-rates-liability-for-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill/introduced/spbill78s062025.pdf))
A consequential change to section 16 of the Valuation and Rating (Scotland) Act 1956 confirms that the usual rule-rates payable by occupiers-yields to section 24ZA when premises are empty, making owners the target for billing. This closes arguments that would otherwise have pushed liabilities back onto tenants or left them uncollectable. ([parliament.scot](https://www.parliament.scot/-/media/files/legislation/bills/s6-bills/non-domestic-rates-liability-for-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill/introduced/spbill78s062025.pdf))
Crucially for estates in distress, these changes are backdated to 1 April 2023. Expect rating authorities to revisit balances for 2023/24 and 2024/25 as well as the current year, subject to any local relief or transition already in place. The Government has flagged the backdating repeatedly and councils have operated on that basis. ([parliament.scot](https://www.parliament.scot/-/media/files/legislation/bills/s6-bills/non-domestic-rates-liability-for-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill/introduced/spbill78s062025.pdf))
The Act goes further than simply restoring liability. It allows Scottish Ministers to make regulations-including about payment or repayment to a person of sums incurred in enforcing liability. That opens the door to directions on when sheriff officer fees and similar charges must be reimbursed or can be recovered if earlier action is unwound. Any such regulations must be consulted on with those representing liable owners and laid under the affirmative procedure. ([parliament.scot](https://www.parliament.scot/-/media/files/legislation/bills/s6-bills/non-domestic-rates-liability-for-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill/introduced/spbill78s062025.pdf))
For administrators, the immediate question is priority. Pre‑appointment empty rates landing between April 2023 and the appointment date are provable unsecured debts. Post‑appointment, councils may argue for expense status where property is used to preserve or realise value for creditors. That is a fact‑specific assessment: using a building to store stock pending sale is a different proposition from passively holding a vacant shell. Insolvency teams should document decisions on use from day one and take rating advice before conceding priority.
Liquidators in Scotland continue to hold the disclaimer tool for onerous property; administrators do not. Where a property SPV is in administration with no realistic prospect of sale, moving quickly to CVL to disclaim may reduce ongoing exposure, but only after weighing floating‑charge and creditor dynamics. Any attempt to funnel backdated rates into the expense waterfall without scrutiny will face challenge from unsecureds who have already seen asset values eroded by fees.
Landlords and property funds that had been eyeing refunds will not get them. The Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment is explicit that the policy aim is to avoid windfall repayments and align the statute book with how councils have billed since April 2023. That is a political choice with distributional consequences for owners of void space in retail and secondary offices. ([gov.scot](https://www.gov.scot/publications/non-domestic-rates-liability-unoccupied-properties-scotland-bill-business-regulatory-impact-assessment/?utm_source=openai))
Billing practice will still be shaped by reliefs and transition. The 2025 leying and transitional regulations continue to define poundage, supplements and caps; councils can also exercise discretion on local reliefs. Owners should not assume a uniform approach across Scotland’s 32 authorities, and should check whether buildings qualify for any short‑term re‑occupation relief or transitional protection. ([legislation.gov.uk](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2025/38/made?utm_source=openai))
Creditors need transparency. Where IPs agree to treat post‑appointment rates as expenses, committees should see the basis, the period, any reliefs claimed and steps taken to minimise liability. Councils should be pressed to justify back‑billed sums against the roll and to apply reliefs correctly, not to rely on generic demands. If sheriff officers have already acted on disputed sums, owners should preserve evidence of costs in case ministerial regulations require repayment.
What to watch now: publication of the first regulations dealing with enforcement payments and any repayment mechanism; guidance to councils on handling pre‑commencement enforcement steps; and early case law on whether minimal or incidental use in administration tips rates into the expense column. The intention to fix an error is clear; the test will be whether the system now treats distressed estates fairly while keeping councils’ cashflows intact.