Infrastructure Levy powers and how they differ from CIL

The Infrastructure Levy in England exists as a set of powers in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, not as a charge anyone currently pays. Part 4 of that Act inserts a new levy regime into the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and nothing in it operates until the Secretary of State makes regulations and a charging authority adopts a rate. As at 9 September 2026, developers budget for the Community Infrastructure Levy where a charging schedule is in place and for planning obligations under section 106 everywhere else.

That is the practical answer. The design of the levy is still worth understanding, because it shapes the policy argument about developer contributions and because the powers remain on the statute book.

Where the powers sit

The levy was introduced by Part 4 of and Schedule 11 to the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, which insert the framework into the 1990 Act. The Act sets the architecture and leaves almost every operative detail to regulations: the rate-setting process, the valuation method, exemptions, instalments, appeals and enforcement.

That drafting choice matters. A framework Act with the substance in regulations can sit unused indefinitely, and it can also be brought forward in a materially different shape from the one debated. Ministers have revisited the direction of developer contributions policy since the Act received Royal Assent, so check the current position on gov.uk and in the provisions bringing the Act into force before relying on anything written about the levy, including this article. The planning law timeline is a reasonable place to follow the topic.

How the charge was designed to work

The structural difference from CIL is the base of the charge. CIL is a fixed pound-per-square-metre rate applied to net additional floorspace, set by a charging schedule and indexed annually. The Infrastructure Levy was designed as a charge on the gross development value of a completed scheme, above a locally set minimum threshold, with the liability calculated on values realised rather than on floorspace consented.

Charging on value rather than floorspace was meant to fix a known weakness. A fixed rate per square metre takes the same amount from a scheme that sells at £2,500 per m² and one that sells at £6,000 per m², and it takes the same amount whether the market rises or falls between permission and completion.

What was intended to happen to section 106

Under the design, most matters currently secured by planning obligations would be funded by the levy instead. Site-specific infrastructure integral to the development, such as an access junction or an on-site play area, was expected to remain in a narrowed form of obligation.

Affordable housing was the difficult part. The Act includes a mechanism sometimes described as a right to require, allowing a charging authority to require a proportion of the levy liability to be delivered as on-site affordable housing rather than as cash. Without it, a value-based cash levy would have converted a system that delivers homes into one that delivers receipts, and the delivery risk would have moved to authorities with no development capacity.

For anyone modelling a scheme today, the Affordable Housing Statement still answers a policy requirement negotiated through section 106, and the Viability Assessment is still the document that tests whether that requirement can be met. Neither changes until regulations do.

Test and learn, and why the timetable stretched

The rollout was described as a test-and-learn approach: a small number of authorities first, then wider adoption over a period measured in years rather than months. Two features of the design drive that caution.

Valuation is one. Charging on gross development value requires an agreed method for measuring value at completion, a dispute process, and a way of handling schemes that are built out over a decade in phases with different sale prices. Every one of those is a source of litigation risk.

Cash flow is the other. Authorities currently receive CIL when development starts and section 106 payments at trigger points during construction. A levy settled against realised values arrives later, which affects the borrowing needed to build infrastructure ahead of occupation. Borrowing powers were part of the design for that reason.

What developers should actually budget for now

Work from what is in force.

1. Check whether the charging authority has an adopted CIL charging schedule and the current indexed rates, since CIL is indexed annually and the published rate is not the rate you pay.
2. Identify the CIL exemptions and reliefs that apply, including self-build, residential extensions and annexes, social housing relief and charitable relief, and note that each has strict procedural steps.
3. Model section 106 heads of terms from the adopted plan policies and any supplementary planning document on contributions, rather than from a neighbouring authority's tariff.
4. Price the affordable housing policy requirement in full, and only then test it through viability if the numbers do not work.
5. Keep the levy out of the appraisal entirely until regulations are laid.

Illustrative example: a 120-unit scheme in an authority with an adopted CIL schedule. The appraisal carries indexed CIL on the net additional floorspace, a section 106 package covering education, open space and highway works, and the policy affordable housing percentage on site. Adding a speculative allowance for a future levy would double-count the same infrastructure and make the scheme look unviable against a policy position that has not changed.

Reading the direction of travel

Two things are worth watching whatever happens to this particular levy. The first is the continuing pressure to make contributions more predictable and less negotiable, which survives any change of mechanism. The second is the treatment of affordable housing as tenure delivered on site rather than as a payment, which every version of the debate has come back to.

For now the honest position is that the powers exist, the regulations do not, and the system in operation is the one described in the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 as amended and in section 106 of the 1990 Act. Anyone telling you otherwise should be asked which regulation bringing it into force they are relying on.

Browse the full set of report types to see which documents a scheme with obligations and levy liability is likely to need, and enter your postcode on PlanScope to start a draft.

As at 9 September 2026, the Infrastructure Levy has not been brought into operation by regulations. This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.