Families package praise plus tax nonsense

John Tamihere praises the Families Package that was passed in Parliament just prior to Christmas, but repeats the ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation of the tax cuts that were scrapped in Tax cuts are the wrong approach

When the Labour-led government passed its Families Package Act the week before Christmas, it signalled a culture and direction switch for this country and a beacon of light for thousands of New Zealanders.

The main features of the reforms mean that at a minimum, 384,000 New Zealand families will increase their weekly income by $75. On top of that, there is a $450 energy payment that can be deployed on anything targeted at beneficiaries and superannuates.

A $60 per week best start baby benefit for the first year of a child’s life, extends to three years for low income families. The package is complex, given the amount of individual household variations for different compositions of families. In general terms, households with children with incomes below $60,000 will receive additional payments.

That’s a good thing – for families.

Children, who through no fault of their own are born into low waged and/or beneficiary families, had a brighter Christmas and New Year because of this package.

That’s nonsense. The package was passed in Parliament just prior to Christmas but children are unlikely to be aware of it and it doesn’t take effect for a few months yet.

This Act is significant in itself because it was able to repeal the $8.4 billion worth of tax cuts promised by the National Government. Cuts that would have increased the income of very well-off New Zealanders, not the large numbers of working Kiwis who are on struggle street.

That’s just straight bullshit – a line largely spun by Jacinda Ardern and Labour during and after the election campaign.

For people with the supposed knowledge of how tax works and what the tax cuts would have done this is blatant false information, lying.

Everyone who pays income tax would have benefited from National’s tax cuts, including those on lower and average incomes.

The Families Package benefits families more, or more accurately, households with children up to eighteen years of age.

But it has taken away legislated tax cuts for all those families without children at home or with older children.

Households in Auckland who use cars will pay additional fuel tax, people who smoke tobacco will pay more tax, superannuates will get no tax relief, rates continue to rise around the country.

Low income earners with no children will not benefit – they will be left on struggle street.

The new direction set with the Families Package legislation means we will no longer accept the mantra that tax cuts are good.

I don’t know who Tamihere refers to as ‘we’ – perhaps that’s Labour’s PR department.

He also doesn’t mention that while “very well off New Zealanders” who have children will not now get tax cuts they will benefit from the Families Package.

More money for people with low incomes and with children is fair enough, to an extent.

But Tamihere should be honest about how the re-targeting still benefits many richer people, and it takes away tax cuts from a lot of poorer people.

 

Previous Post

24 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  January 4, 2018

    To the loony Left, tax is their revenge on the rich for being smarter and working harder than them. Welfare is their reward for being more virtuous than anyone else – or having the right ancestors. Their politicians are happy to oblige these fantasies.

    • PartisanZ

       /  January 4, 2018

      “What he [E.G. Wakefield] did bequeath the young colony of New Zealand, however, was a legacy of private capitalist speculation underwritten by public resources and state power – the same poisonous nexus of rapacious businessmen and ambitious politicians that was to plague New Zealand for the next 166 [177] years.” – NO LEFT TURN, Chris Trotter, Ch 1 ‘E.G. Wakefield’s Wicked Dream’ pg 33

      “And therein lies the source of so much of the strife that has driven our history forward: the quarrel between those whose legal title to the nation’s resources garnered them the lion’s share of the nation’s wealth, and those whose labour transformed those resources into something worth exchanging.” – (ibid) Ch 2 ‘Smashing the unions; round one’ pg 56

  2. Blazer

     /  January 4, 2018

    Tamihere speaks for himself…not Labour.’tax is their revenge on the rich for being smarter and working harder than them. ‘…gee you talk some crap Al.There is NO evidence to support your statement.The consultants at the Super City and M.B.I.E are so smart and work so hard,that they are embarrassed to release the details of their work….’commercially sensitive’.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  January 4, 2018

      Nothing like a Government job, B. Beats welfare.

      • Blazer

         /  January 4, 2018

        Welfare has many forms Al.The rich have managed to direct the angst and venom away from their own chicanery and direct it at beneficiaries who make up a small proportion of the population.The old boy network relies on being neither hardworking or being…particularly ..smart.

        • PDB

           /  January 4, 2018

          Who are ‘the rich’? In this case we are likely talking about people without kids who are always unfairly taxed. The people most concerned about beneficiaries ripping off the system are hard-working people that aren’t particularly rich, don’t live off the taxpayer and make an effort to work and pay their taxes. They especially become annoyed at a time that jobs in NZ are plentiful and good workers are in very short supply.

          Blazer: “and direct it at beneficiaries who make up a small proportion of the population”

          Funny then that you direct your attacks at the ‘mega-rich’ who make up even a smaller % of our population.

          • Gezza

             /  January 4, 2018

            Interesting point. Be good to see some numbers from each of you.

            • Blazer

               /  January 4, 2018

              here’s some…
              https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/fraud-prosecutions/index.html
              and then ,the real deal,M.B.I.E consultants spending last 4 years..Phil Pennington Radio NZ..
              ‘The data shows $251 million in payments to more than 2000 individual contractors over a four year period, rising from $44m four years ago to over $80m in the last financial year.

              It also shows a quadrupling of non-employees being paid more than $200,000 a year.

              For example, one immigration management consultant was paid $145,000 last year on a $200-plus hourly rate.

              The ministry is understood to be on the hunt for the person who leaked the data.’
              plenty more ‘hardworking’…gravy trainers.

            • Blazer

               /  January 4, 2018

              supply some numbers and get plenty of downticks.I suspect there are a few consultants posting on here…2 very strong suspects.

            • PDB

               /  January 4, 2018

              Numbers are no good without detail as to what the contractors were doing for that money.

            • Blazer

               /  January 4, 2018

              ‘Numbers are no good without detail as to what the contractors were doing for that money’….EXACTLY THE POINT!!..they don’t release the details because people would be…appalled at this sham construct to enrich those in the…loop.

          • Blazer

             /  January 4, 2018

            show me where I isolate it to…’mega’ rich.You can’t…can you?

            • PDB

               /  January 4, 2018

              Again I ask (and you choose to avoid): who are ‘the rich’ you speak of?

              Your mention of an ‘old boy network’ strongly suggests the mega-rich, especially as you add ” relies on being neither hardworking or being…particularly ..smart”. Hardly describes ordinary hard-working taxpayers, small business owners or families.

              Hard for you to worm your way out.

            • Blazer

               /  January 4, 2018

              the rich I speak of are the top 5% ,hardly the mega.

            • PDB

               /  January 4, 2018

              Caught in the headlights bullshitting again Blazer – the top 5% are the ‘mega-rich’ of NZ even if that may not be much in world terms.

              Again you are a hypocrite for saying we shouldn’t attack one “small proportion of the population” (your words) whilst in the same breath attacking another.

          • Gezza

             /  January 4, 2018

            What I really had in mind was to see any numbers anyone might have found showing how many people are actually very wealthy (however that’s defined) and how many are actually beneficiaries, seeing a point being argued was that both, while often being targeted for criticism, are actually a very small % of our population.

  3. Corky

     /  January 4, 2018

    Good to see holiday boozing hasn’t dulled your bs detector, Pete. These are unusual pronouncements from Tamihere. Usually he is more circumspect with his utterances, and can back them up with good arguments. Maybe he wrote this crap after a barbie and liberal ‘refreshments’.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  January 4, 2018

      It’s true that anyone without children has been given the finger. It costs as much for us to do many things-it’s as expensive to heat and light a room for one person, it’s as much to use an oven for one and so on…but we have been shown that we are unimportant and can sub those on much higher incomes than we have, Tough titty, suckers.

      • patupaiarehe

         /  January 4, 2018

        Any smoker who has children, has been ‘given the finger’ too Kitty. I can afford to smoke, even with the recent tax increase. The tax hike won’t make me spend less on food for my kids, it will just mean I have to work for cash, for 1/2 an hour longer on the weekend. Unfortunately for some, they don’t have the skills necessary to offset the tax increase. And their kids will suffer. From less food, or grumpy parents.

  4. PartisanZ

     /  January 4, 2018

    “The wealthiest 20 per cent of households in New Zealand hold 70 per cent of the wealth, while the top 10 per cent hold half the wealth … At the other end of the household wealth spectrum, the bottom 40 per cent of households account for just 3 per cent of total wealth.

    IT WASN’T ALWAYS LIKE THIS

    Whichever way it’s measured – and there are multiple measures – inequality increased markedly in New Zealand in the late-1980s and 1990s.”

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/88455171/the-truth-about-inequality-in-new-zealand

    https://www.oxfam.org.nz/reports/working-few-political-capture-and-economic-inequality

    Meantime NZInitiative and others are in a von Hayek von Mises Rothbard & Friedman ‘Rogerednomics & Ruthanasia’ time bubble of denial, deception and diversion, arguing that the housing crisis is the cause of inequality …

    https://www.interest.co.nz/property/84143/nz-initiative-argues-housing-crisis-behind-inequality-nz-and-modern-society-and

    I liked reena’s comment “Shame and support #National party” …