S106 §1:100 · NPPF

NPPF December 2024 refresh

Reviewed by Chartered Planner (MRTPI) and Chartered Surveyor (MRICS) · 2026-06-21
Direct answer · 51 words
The NPPF refresh of 12 Dec 2024 retained para 58 on viability with a minor recalibration of policy-compliant tariff treatment. Benchmark land value methodology continues to follow RICS FVP guidance. The refresh did not change the reg 122 necessity test or the per-head structure of S106 contributions.

What the refresh did

Para 58 was retained [NPPF (Dec 2024)]: the position on policy-compliant tariffs is that they are presumed deliverable unless viability is demonstrably an issue, with the burden on the applicant. The minor recalibration tightened the evidence expectation for late-stage viability challenges.

BLV and threshold-test profit

Benchmark land value continues to follow RICS Financial Viability in Planning guidance [RICS Financial Viability in Planning]. Threshold-test profit (typically 15% to 20% on GDV) was not changed by the refresh; the position remains negotiated with the LPA viability consultant.

Policy-compliant tariff versus open-book review

The refresh reinforced the open-book review mechanism as the preferred response where viability cases reduce the contribution at consent. Camden and RBKC are notable for using late-trigger reviews (50% sales, practical completion) to recover contribution upside.

Live para citations for a viability appeal

Paras 58 (viability), 60 (housing requirement), 61 (delivery), 78 (rural exception sites) and the Glossary entries for residual land value and benchmark land value are the live citations for a viability appeal.

S106 §1:50 · related

Related

LURA 2023Devolution Act 2026ViabilityAHChangelogSources