You pay less on a second home than the person next door. The "logic" is you are using less "services" but then that's not land value tax. You are occupying the land, there is an opportunity cost, you should pay full whack.
The UK is a total nightmare for this and the education level is very low especially in economics so any mention of it is met with "it's me house".
There are all sorts of exemptions. A common source of complaints is that it's possible to have a huge area of Scotland as grouse moor but not pay business rates on it.
No, properties are allocated to 'bands' (A-H, +I in Wales), and the rates set as a percentage of the 'D' band.
Generally, properties are assigned bands according to density/cost of providing services to an area: an area with a difficult garbage pickup route may get a higher band, or a place with more schools.
More typically, bands are allocated based on the ability of the occupiers to pay, and the funds are combined (reallocated) at the local authority level so that deprived areas can be subsidised by wealthy areas.
Council tax bands are based on the property's value on 1 April 1991 (a couple of years before it was introduced.) Within a local authority, the cost of providing services to a property does not effect the band.
Insofar as a house with lots of land attached will probably have a higher value, then yes. But not directly, and only for land that is within the curtilage of the residential property.
