National response to Tax Working group final report

Simon Bridges set the National tone to the Tax Working Group final report prior to it’s release.

NZ Herald:  National Leader Simon Bridges says a capital gains tax would lead to Kiwis leaving NZ for Australia

Speaking to media this morning, Bridges came out swinging and said such a tax would come at the detriment to middle New Zealand.

“[It would be] a recipe for more people buggering off to Australia.”

Interest.co.nz:  Bridges says a capital gains tax would cause people to leave for Australia (where there is a capital gains tax)

That point was hammered on Twitter as well.

Bridges’ initial response to the release of the report yesterday:

That has also been widely ridiculed.

A Labour friendly report that is likely to be watered down substantially by Winston Peters is not exactly an all out assault.

A prior tweet is closer to the mark:

One distinct possibility is Peters demanding a farm exemption. And possibly a small business exemption. And a hobbled CGT quickly becomes a crippled CGT, if it gets NZ First approval at all.

Regardless of this, National have been hammering the report.

Simon Bridges: More costs as tax monster unleashed

The Tax Working Group has gone much further than a Capital Gains Tax with a raft of new taxes targeting hard-working New Zealanders, National Leader Simon Bridges says.

There are eight new taxes including; an agriculture tax, a tax on empty residential land, a water tax, a fertiliser tax, an environmental footprint tax, a natural capital enhancement tax, a waste levy and a Capital Gains Tax.

“This is an attack on the Kiwi way of life. This would hit every New Zealander with a Kiwi Saver, shares, investment property, a small business, a lifestyle block, a bach or even an empty section,” Mr Bridges says.

“For farmers, who are the backbone of our economy, this is a declaration of war on their businesses and way of life. They would pay to water their stock, feed their crops and even when they sell up for retirement.

“Labour claims this is about fairness, but that’s rubbish. The CGT would apply to small business owners like the local plumber, but not to investors with a multi-million dollar art collection or a super yacht who won’t pay a cent more.

“The TWG has recommended one of the highest rates of Capital Gains Tax in the world. The Government would reap $8.3 billion extra in its first five years from ordinary Kiwis – small business owners, farmers, investors, bach and lifestyle block owners. After 10 years it would be taking $6 billion a year from Kiwis.

“It will lead to boom times for tax lawyers and accountants and even Iwi advisers, given recommendations for exclusions that include Māori land in multiple ownership.

“We believe New Zealanders already pay enough tax and the Government should be looking at tax relief, not taking even more out of the pockets of New Zealand families.

“National says no to new taxes. We would repeal a Capital Gains Tax, index tax thresholds to the cost of living and let Kiwis keep more of what they earn.”

Amy Adams: Massive tax grab will hammer NZ economy

New Zealand might have been expecting a capital gains tax to be announced today but the full suite of taxes proposed by the Tax Working Group would threaten the very viability of large swathes of the NZ economy, National’s Finance Spokesperson Amy Adams says.

“The new taxes proposed today will create a compliance mine field, massive distortions in the market and weaken our international competiveness at the very time the Government acknowledges the international economic risks are growing,

The proposal from the Government’s handpicked Tax Working Group doesn’t line us up with other countries as has been claimed, instead it would impose one of the most onerous capital taxation regimes in the world with 100% of the gain taxed at full marginal rates, limited relief for capital losses, no inflation adjustment and limited rollover relief.

“The Capital Gains Tax proposed by Sir Michael Cullen and the Tax Working Group will hit every small business owner, KiwiSaver account, farm, family bach, lifestyle block and investment in New Zealand. It will act as a massive disincentive to save, invest or build a productive business.

“There is nothing fair about saying owners of baches and lifestyle blocks will face a tougher CGT than corporates.

“It would add significant complexity to our relatively simple tax system, likely exempt Iwi assets, require all eligible assets to be re-valued within five years and further drain New Zealand’s already shallow capital markets.

“New Zealand doesn’t need a Capital Gains Tax and the Government has to date failed to confirm this would be a revenue neutral package. The CGT alone would raise an additional $32 billion over ten years and there is no evidence any offset will be of the same magnitude.

“On top of the Capital Gains Tax, other new and increased taxes, include a vacant residential land tax, a water tax, a fertiliser tax, an environmental footprint tax, a natural capital enhancement tax, extending the waste tax.

“It is quite simple, a country can’t tax itself to prosperity.

“New Zealanders already pay enough tax and National believes if you want New Zealanders to succeed on the world stage the tax burden should be reduced, not increased.

“National has promised to repeal the Capital Gains Tax, index tax thresholds to inflation, repeal the Regional Fuel Tax and not introduce any new taxes in our first term. Our full tax package will be released closer to next year’s election.

“The longer the Government dithers over its response to this report, the more our economy will be hurt by the fear and uncertainty these recommendations will rightly cause.”

Labour will likely have predicted and prepared for this sort of over reaction.

And what Labour ends up getting NZ First to agree to is likely to take much of the sting out of these attacks.

78 Comments

  1. Blazer

     /  22nd February 2019

    usual scaremongering and emotive nonsense about how ‘hardworking Kiwis’ will be affected.

    We already know the answer to…’hey does ANYBODY want to pay tax?

    • Trevors_Elbow

       /  22nd February 2019

      NZers already paid a very large amount of monies over to the NZ Government each and every year in taxes, levies, duties and a wide array fees – under a Labour government its never enough, after all there are lots of lattes to be bought in Wellington by career ‘public’ servants. And of course obligatory Labour wasteful spending with no targets to achieved for the money spent because ‘feelzzzz’

      The National is almost as bad as Labour – they love tax as well…..

      Basically less tax needs to be taken from kiwis…. the Government already takes too much…

    • Pink David

       /  22nd February 2019

      When are you going to pay your fair share?

      • Blazer

         /  22nd February 2019

        Trevor is clever…why would he?

        • Duker

           /  22nd February 2019

          using legal loopholes like property… but that will change.
          Once you could buy and flip properties sometimes on the same day ( ie settlement day) for large tax free profits with little consequences. Even holding brand new properties reduced taxes as you had depreciation and negative gearing to make your other taxable income magically decrease.

          Slowly its been chipped away . first to go was depreciation for buildings, that was a game big companies and major office building landlords could play along with housing investors. Then it was a little bright line test and now a 5 yr bright line to distinguish between flippers and long term investors.

          So I can see negative gearing mostly disappearing ( which encourages investors to push up house prices) and perhaps some restrictions on professional flippers who can ‘accumulate gains’ without paying tax by buy buying more houses ( eventually they have to pay but there would be Big accounting firm dodges available for that)

          • Trevors_Elbow

             /  22nd February 2019

            “Once you could buy and flip properties sometimes on the same day ( ie settlement day) for large tax free profits with little consequences”

            When could you do this? For as long as I can recall buying and selling quickly meant a tax bill unless you could prove you had no intention of selling when you purchased…..

            Look forward to you evidence…

          • Pink David

             /  22nd February 2019

            “( eventually they have to pay but there would be Big accounting firm dodges available for that)”

            You do realise the single most important tool in creating big accounting firm dodges is complicated tax law like CGT?

        • Trevors_Elbow

           /  22nd February 2019

          Do you specialise in being a retard or is it a natural family trait?

          I pay large sums of tax and have done for a number of years…. and it irks me to see it pissed away by people like Shane Jones mulching seedlings because he was too lazy to make sure the land was right for planting….. as one example.

          More than enough tax is collected. The middle management layers in our government departments do very little and need to be cleaned out….. the wasteful endless working groups and committees and bullshit pc correct agendas need to go …..

          i know you love the thought of a CGT to savage those “rich pricks” but tolerance levels have been reached and the backlash made be more than socialists expect…

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  22nd February 2019

            I remember a woman whose marriage broke up buying a house and selling it again when they reconciled. That was years ago, and her lawyer said that she would be all right this time, but not if it happened again.

            I think that it’s nobody’s damned business when one sells a house. If I bought a house and someone offered me a lot more than I’d paid for it, why shouldn’t I be able to sell it to them ?

  2. Gerrit

     /  22nd February 2019

    There is a lot of unfairness in the proposed CGT. Nationals job is to highlight these.

    They are doing the job as the opposition should. National will have a voter relatable point of difference from Labour/Greens.

    Giving New Zealander’s real options at the next election.

    Peters wants the farms exempted as he is beholden to the racing industry (buy a yearling for $10K at Karaka, invest time and money to turn it into a multi million Melbourne Cup winner, sell the horse to a Irish syndicate and the state takes 33% by doing SFA). Similarly expect capital gains from selling fishing quotas to be exempted as well.

    I think the CGT is actually dead in the water. Labour wont implement any recommendations for political expediency. They will get support from the envious blazers, lurchers and partisanZ (already Labour/Green voters anyway), but from the biggest group of employers in New Zealand (SME’s) a short shift down the ladder.

    • Duker

       /  22nd February 2019

      Bridges is saying Kiwis will leave for Australia ? – where they have a broader capital gains tax which covers property, collectibles etc

      • High Flying Duck

         /  22nd February 2019

        Both countries are regulated by myriad rules, regulations, subsidies and taxes. The current situation has us with a small advantage that encourages some businesses to ignore Australia’s advantages of size and population and set up here.
        The CGT takes away or lessens that differentiator. The fact they have a CGT does not affect his argument.

        • Blazer

           /  22nd February 2019

          does not affect his argument….which therefore is….??

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  22nd February 2019

            What is likely is that people would give Labour the finger and vote National.

          • High Flying Duck

             /  22nd February 2019

            That introduction of this tax would tip the scales further in Australia’s favour overall as a place to set up and do business, leading to a loss of businesses and investment from NZ

        • Duker

           /  22nd February 2019

          HFD you are smarter than Bridges …have you thought of ..you know

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  22nd February 2019

            Was it the Greens who decided to tax farmers out of existence ?

  3. Gerrit

     /  22nd February 2019

    Worth a read

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12206085

    ” Labour’s plan was that Cullen’s Tax Working Group (TWG) would unanimously recommend a modest new tax, Parliament would legislate for it to come into force in 2021 along with compensating tax cuts, and the 2020 election would be a referendum on a done deal, proposed not by politicians but by so-called experts.

    If it opposed the CGT, National could be smeared for allegedly standing with the rich against the combined wisdom of the nation’s taxation establishment.

    It hasn’t worked out this way. Cullen has recommended the world’s most severe CGT, with a rate of 33 per cent for those earning over $70,000 a year in their ordinary job.”

    • High Flying Duck

       /  22nd February 2019

      It’s Hooten, so partisan, but I did think this part was interesting:

      “Cullen’s plan also fails to meet the Prime Minister’s fairness test, especially intergenerationally.

      Baby boomers have enjoyed 40 years of tax-free asset-price inflation and are often cashed up, but can now look forward to the income-tax cuts on their superannuation payments that Cullen recommends.

      The economic effect is that Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z will be paying new taxes on gains they make on their businesses, retirement savings and other investments in order to pay for their Boomer parents to receive higher superannuation payments.”

      • Blazer

         /  22nd February 2019

        those are worthwhile criticisms.

        The proposals are too messy.

        I am in favour of catch all transaction tax,and a land tax/levy on unused land.

        A stamp duty on investment property when sold might have merit.

    • PartisanZ

       /  22nd February 2019

      Based on a skim read only I have to mostly agree with Hooton on this …

      “The long-standing argument for a CGT is to rebalance investment away from unproductive residential property towards productive businesses and the capital markets … Cullen’s proposal does the opposite …

      The one major asset class to be exempt from the new tax will be the two-thirds of residential properties that are owner-occupied. As the TWG itself noted, this risks a “mansion effect”, with homeowners investing in their CGT-free homes, rather than in their businesses or the capital markets, to escape the new tax.”

      TOP, of course, had the answer. A much more moderate but comprehensive Wealth or Asset Tax on … wealth and assets … revenue neutral, offset by income tax reduction …

      And we continue to not tax financial transactions, which, at rates of 1/10 of 1% or less, could earn billions for health, education and welfare.

      • Trevors_Elbow

         /  22nd February 2019

        Gareth ideas as set out in the Big Kahuna are interesting – especially the history of taxes in NZ. The reduction in income tax offset by a simple CGT makes sense to a certain extent with a key driver of allocation to productive assets…

        • PartisanZ

           /  22nd February 2019

          Gareth Morgan developed TOPs Tax Policy from being a member of the 2nd TWG in 2010-11 (I think?) which was a much more impartial and non-partisan investigation of Tax domiciled at Victoria University despite being under a National government …

          National, as far as I know, did nothing or bugger all about it.

          Morgan, as I recall, dissented on a number of points, including that we shouldn’t really investigate Tax alone, divorced from Transfer … because that’s what the system is: Tax and Transfer.

          • Trevors_Elbow

             /  22nd February 2019

            And he is right that the mechanism we use for redistribution and funding essential services is an input/output machine so looking at Tax in isolation is an incorrect tinkering strategy.

            But Gareth is also a proponent of a UBI which is a dangerous money for nothing concept….

    • Blazer

       /  22nd February 2019

      evidence that this is a fact please.

      ‘It hasn’t worked out this way. Cullen has recommended the world’s most severe CGT, with a rate of 33 per cent for those earning over $70,000 a year in their ordinary job.”

      • High Flying Duck

         /  22nd February 2019

        We would be equal 3rd highest in the word, and well above OECD average.

        https://taxfoundation.org/us-taxpayers-face-6th-highest-top-marginal-capital-gains-tax-rate-oecd/

        • Blazer

           /  22nd February 2019

          so just another mischievious lie then….’ the world’s most severe CGT, ‘

        • High Flying Duck

           /  22nd February 2019

          Denmark is the highest rate at 42% with a 27% rate for gains below 48K.
          France was second, but they have reduced theirs to 30% so we would be equal 2nd highest.
          Most countries have exemptions and thresholds that are not included in the TWG proposal, so overall we would be at 1 or 2 for taxing CG if this gets passed.

          • Blazer

             /  22nd February 2019

            1- the world’s most severe CGT’

            2-We would be equal 3rd highest in the word’

            3-so overall we would be at 1 or 2 ‘

            want another go or are you…’done’!👏

            • High Flying Duck

               /  22nd February 2019

              On headline rates the stats said we were equal third. Then I saw France at number 2 has lowered their rate, so we are elevated to equal second.
              However, other countries have exemptions and relief that are not proposed in our CGT package. This makes our tax more onerous than others with an equal headline rate. This puts us either outright 2nd, or No 1 for most punitive CGT regime.
              Sorry for the lack of clarity – I was in a rush.

  4. Corky

     /  22nd February 2019

    “National says no to new taxes. We would repeal a Capital Gains Tax, index tax thresholds to the cost of living and let Kiwis keep more of what they earn.”

    Very good, National. You need to keep” the fairness brigade ”in their place.

    But can’t you be more adventurous? Come up with something from left field? Geez, just reacting to Labour policies is so blinkered.

    What about a modified point of sales tax..anything the is innovative?

    • Blazer

       /  22nd February 2019

      some questions for Simon…

      Replying to @simonjbridges
      Hi Simon, university educated, single income family here with 3 kids under six. We can’t afford afford to buy a house. The rental market is scarily tight. We live in quiet dread of our rental being sold from beneath us. Is this the kiwi way of life you are talking about?

      Southern Limits
      @southernlimitnz
      If we get kicked out can we come and live in one of your four declared properties?

      9
      5:24 PM – Feb 21, 2019
      Twitter Ads info and privacy
      See Southern Limits’s other Tweets

      Simon Bridges

      @simonjbridges
      · 21h
      This Tax Working Group report is an assault on the Kiwi way of life. I will fight it every step of the way.

      Shane Henderson
      @HendoWest
      Will you commit to repealing the “bright line test” that you implemented while in government?

      • Corky

         /  22nd February 2019

        Fair questions:

        Three declared properties. The fourth, I believe, is a commercial property inherited by his wife.

      • Pink David

         /  22nd February 2019

        “university educated, single income family here with 3 kids under six.”

        I hate to break this to you, but a single income earner is competing with dual income earners for the same properties. That is one of the primary causes of high house prices, and the main cause of the inequality.

        How are you proposing to solve that?

        • Blazer

           /  22nd February 2019

          breathtakingly stupid comment…’a single income earner is competing with dual income earners for the same properties. That is one of the primary causes of high house prices, ‘

          see yourself ..out.🐱‍🚀

          • Pink David

             /  22nd February 2019

            It is a simple truth. You’re failure to understand it is the ‘stupid’.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              so educate….how could it be ‘a primary cause of high house prices’

              this is a revelation….unheard of before today!

            • Pink David

               /  22nd February 2019

              “this is a revelation….unheard of before today!”

              I understand this is a shock, but people’s incomes are a significant factor in the housing market. It is the household income that controls the ability to pay more for houses, also a shock I know.

              Dual income, professional households have the ability to pay far more for a house than a single income household. Auckland is the location with the highest number of dual professional income households.

              It’s almost like there is some level of correlation.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              so you now retract this statement then…’. That is one of the primary causes of high house prices’

              Many examples of a single income earner ,earning more than a dual income household….undeniable-fact.

              ‘It’s almost like there is some level of correlation.’

            • Pink David

               /  22nd February 2019

              “so you now retract this statement then…’. That is one of the primary causes of high house prices’”

              No I don’t.

              “Many examples of a single income earner ,earning more than a dual income household….undeniable-fact.”

              Many? I kind of doubt that. They will exist, but it’s very hard to out earn two people. Please note, I was quite specific for a reason; ‘dual professional incomes’.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              ‘ Please note, I was quite specific for a reason; ‘dual professional incomes’.

              no you were not…you changed this from your original post…’I hate to break this to you, but a single income earner is competing with dual income earners for the same properties.

              you are franzed..very deserving…

  5. Finbaar Rustle

     /  22nd February 2019

    I have to admit the final report is brilliant.
    No doubt this Labour led Government is doing a great job
    on all fronts and is to be commended highly.
    After nine years of stagnation and backward thinking under national
    Labour is making all New Zealand great again.
    Well done Jacinda and the team.
    All true kiwis love Labour.

    • Gezza

       /  22nd February 2019

      Jacinda wasn’t invloved in the TWG & most likely doesn’t understand it anyway.

    • Trevors_Elbow

       /  22nd February 2019

      “All true kiwis love Labour.” You’re a parody account right? or an ex Pravda writer?

      • Corky

         /  22nd February 2019

        Yes, just a little too obvious. Trying to troll for easy meat.

  6. High Flying Duck

     /  22nd February 2019

    • Blazer

       /  22nd February 2019

      at least ‘dreams are free’ Thom.

      You too can be rich…roll up your sleeves,stop drinking so much coffee,no smashed avocados and you’re on your way to the top 10% and the’ fuck u I’m alright Jack’ ,segment of society.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  22nd February 2019

        All of that but the last little dig at the end is true Blazer. In fact, if you’re an arse, even the end bit can be true.

  7. High Flying Duck

     /  22nd February 2019

    There is plenty to criticise the TWG report on, but Bridges seems to be tone deaf as to how to frame his arguments. “An attack on the kiwi way of life” is simply embarrassing.
    He needs to tone down the ridiculous emotive nonsense and stick to the actual arguments, otherwise he will simply continue to come across as a whiner.

    • Gezza

       /  22nd February 2019

      I can’t see this happening. You are talking about a bloke who is such a piss poor comminicator they even tried using a childlike caricature cartoon to get his message across. I can’t even remember what it was about. But I remember that they thought maybe a cartoon Bridges would work better than Bridges in the flesh. Bridges ain’t got the common touch. And there’s no way he or National can try & create that impression.

  8. duperez

     /  22nd February 2019

    Air New Zealand will be ecstatic with flights full and fights for seats in business class;
    “[It would be] a recipe for more people buggering off to Australia.”

    Maybe to kill the time the escapees could read stuff like this;

    How New Zealand’s income tax ranks against the world
    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money/2019/01/how-new-zealand-s-income-tax-ranks-against-the-world.html

    NZ income tax rate second lowest among developed nations
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11836883

    • High Flying Duck

       /  22nd February 2019

      Total tax is a different story, but yes, we have a broad low tax system on Income, which makes a mockery of Cullen talking about relieving the suffering of income earners paying too much tax.

    • High Flying Duck

       /  22nd February 2019

      We’re in the top third of countries for total tax take as % of GDP:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio

      • Blazer

         /  22nd February 2019

        all OECD countries are in the top 3rd.

        Persojnal IncomeTax rates of up to 80% prevailed when the U.S was at its most ..prosperous.

        • Pink David

           /  22nd February 2019

          “Persojnal IncomeTax rates of up to 80% prevailed when the U.S was at its most ..prosperous.”

          The highest tax rate in the was 92%. I’t rather fun when you realise how many people actually paid the tax at that rate. Do you know?

          The US was also at it’s most ‘properous’ when the rest of the industrialised world had been flattened by a world war, perhaps they should also do that again?

          • Blazer

             /  22nd February 2019

            well as the U.S has invaded 37 countries since WW2 ,and dropped twice as many bombs on Indo-China(Vietnam War)than they deployed in the whole of WW2 …it makes a mockery of your rather misguided …’query’!

            • Pink David

               /  22nd February 2019

              I’m sure the US was only bombing Vietnam to destroy the productive capacity of the Vietnamese that then allowed the US to dominate the world market.

  9. Zedd

     /  22nd February 2019

    Natls response (read between the lines): How can we further avoid ANY taxes & shift this ‘burden’ to the bottom 50% (who likely dont vote for them).

    just a reminder: 90% of wealth/assets in Aotearoa/NZ is reportedly owned by the top 50%.. they probably spend their spare time (or pay accountants) looking for ‘loophole’ to avoid paying Tax.

    As an ex-MP once said (paraphrased) ‘they is difference between ‘tax evasion’ & ‘tax avoidance’

    Echoes of the ‘Panama papers’ ??! :/

    “The TRUTH is out there….” 😀

    • Gerrit

       /  22nd February 2019

      “just a reminder: 90% of wealth/assets in Aotearoa/NZ is reportedly owned by the top 50%.. they probably spend their spare time (or pay accountants) looking for ‘loophole’ to avoid paying Tax.”

      Is there a link you can post that shows this to be true? Or are the figures a figment of your biased imagination?

      Does this wealth ownership include the state? Thinking off things like DOC land, Seabed and Foreshore ownership, Mineral Mining Rights, SOE (even 51% owned ones), civil infastructure, etc., etc.

      Nearest I could find was this old 2016 report

      https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/307458/10-percent-richest-kiwis-own-60-percent-of-nz%27s-wealth

      But even this does not break out the state owned wealth that is owned by ALL. Just covers individual asset wealth (mainly ones owner occupied dwelling) .

      • Zedd

         /  22nd February 2019

        ‘Is there a link you can post that shows this to be true? Or are the figures a figment of your biased imagination?’

        I think it was called ‘The Panama papers’ ! WAKE UP !!

        • Gerrit

           /  22nd February 2019

          So a figment of your biased imagination!

          Maybe a link to those Panana Papers?

          Yers, awake to false information. peddled as the “truth”.

          Seeing you are so conversant with the “Panana Papers”, can you tell me if they include New Zealand state owned wealth?

          • Gerrit

             /  22nd February 2019

            Surprisingly the Panama Papers do not show who owns the wealth in New Zealand. They show a New Zealand tax loophole exploited by overseas wealth to store money in New Zealand (now closed).

            Perhaps Zedd is being disingenuous?

            Worth a read Zedd;

            https://www.transparency.org.nz/remember-the-panama-papers/

            And wake up to being led astray.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              this ‘loophole’ was created by the Key Govt to benefit a handful of people who included his lawyer(ex).

            • Gerrit

               /  22nd February 2019

              Another blazing squirrel.

              “Since 1988, the New Zealand income tax law allowed foreigners to use trusts established in New Zealand (referred to as “foreign trusts”) to avoid or evade the tax they would otherwise have had to pay in their home country. It would seem to have been possible, too, for foreigners to use such trusts for other illicit purposes, in particular money laundering and perhaps even financing terrorism.”

              https://www.austaxpolicy.com/using-new-zealand-trusts-escape-countries-taxes/

              PM at the time?

              David Lange

              Now Key did nothing to prevent their use till the Panama Papers, but I cant find any concrete evidence he promoted them either.

              Love shooting conspiracy theories to bits.

              Bring on 911 as a John Key organised Jewish conspiracy.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              you may love shooting conspiracy theories to bits….unfortunately that is an unrequited …’love’…

              stick this in thy pipe and smoke it…

              ‘New Zealand is a tax haven. We became a (much more attractive) tax haven in 2011 as a result of a law change directly instituted by John Key. Chapman Tripp – “New Zealand’s leading full service law firm” – helpfully explains:

              New Zealand now an attractive tax location for offshore managed funds

              10 October 2011

              Foreign investors in a New Zealand fund with only foreign investments will now bear no New Zealand tax on their income, whether or not the fund distributes that income. The tax change, which came into force in September 2011, should make New Zealand managed funds an attractive alternative to funds resident in Luxembourg, Ireland or the Caymans.

              In 2008 when the PIE tax regime was introduced, it did not treat non-resident investors well. They could not be zero rated. Instead they had a PIR equal to the top tax rate (currently 28%). This made them unattractive to foreign investors, especially for a fund with income from non-New Zealand sources.

              The Government recognised that this tax treatment was not sensible from a policy perspective. … Accordingly, the tax change now allows a New Zealand fund to elect to pay tax at 0% on foreign income attributable to foreign investors. The fund will treat the foreign investor as if it were a New Zealand company or trust. However, unlike a New Zealand company or trust, the foreign investor will have no New Zealand tax liability on the income attributable to it, either when earned by the fund, or when distributed. [My emphasis]

              The proposal to change to 0% tax was the direct instruction of John Key:

              “I have told Gerry to deliver me a paper that has zero rating of funds and we’ll work on that.”

            • Gerrit

               /  22nd February 2019

              Be nice to have a link to your control C and control V postings.

              Just to get a bit of context, not just your cherry picked information.

            • Blazer

               /  22nd February 2019

              patted yourself on the back before you were annihilated…you deserve one too…

            • Gerrit

               /  22nd February 2019

              Blazing Saddles;

              Thanks for the link.

              Your financial literacy is lacking. These are two vastly different set ups.

              The Lange set up was for dodgy foreign individuals to establish trusts where the donors and recipients were hidden from sight.

              The Key proposal was to set up investment back office administration functions for international fund managers to administer their funds from New Zealand. from your link;

              “Key is confident New Zealand will be able to attract financial funds to place their back office administration here saying a chief executive of one of the world’s most powerful banks had told him: “If you are prepared to zero-rate foreign funds that are not invested in NZ, we’re going to move $2.5 billion of funds here in two years because you’re 50 per cent cheaper than Australia.””

              The Key proposal had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with foreign individuals hiding their money here in blind trusts.

              Epic blazing fail…try harder.

            • Blazer

               /  23rd February 2019

              ‘ but I cant find any concrete evidence he promoted them either’..you must be blind.😆


              ‘Last year’s revelations in the Panama Papers showing foreigners used New Zealand to hide their wealth embarrassed the government and forced it to take action after earlier saying there was no problem.

              Foreign trusts will have to be registered with IRD from the beginning of July, and file annual returns.’RNZ


              ‘recent figures released by the New Zealand government show users and abusers of trusts abandoning the country after it implemented transparency laws to regulate the trust industry.

              New Zealand trusts have built up a particularly good reputation amongst offshore service providers for their ability to hide assets. They’ve been called the “Fort Knox of asset protection”.

              But in response to the Panama Papers the New Zealand government changed the law to compel all New Zealand foreign trusts to register (a foreign trust being a New Zealand trust where the money comes from a resident outside New Zealand), and provide details of who benefits from the trust, and who controls it.

              Given that there are of course many entirely legitimate reasons why someone would want to hold an offshore, tax-free trust, we would expect operators and beneficiaries of trusts to welcome such transparency!

              Well, it seems not. Recent data revealed in response to parliamentary questions from New Zealand’s Green Party shows that weeks ahead of the deadline to register trusts, most trusts have failed to register and many have abandoned New Zealand. In total, out of more than 11,500 foreign trusts in New Zealand, fewer than 70 had signed up to the new register three weeks before the deadline for doing so.’

              Gerritman’…mild mannered executive by day….fearless conspiracy dismantler in his spare time….with his trusty sidekicks….’Google Eyes and Sheep Boy’.

              🤣✌😎🐱‍💻😂✨🎯🤢😜

    • Trevors_Elbow

       /  22nd February 2019

      So 50% of the population owns a heap of the wealth – well colour me surprised….. ever heard of being 18 and just left home? Not surprisingly you have a sum totaling near to zero….. or you have a large mortgage but a good cashflow to service it but the mortgage means you have a negative net worth…. peoples wealth changes a lot over a persons lifecycle – their wealth growths over time.

      The whole notion that a static group of people are hoarding all the wealth is false and classic stupid socialist/communist propaganda commonly referred to as jealousy politics. Lefties sure love being covetous of others wealth, and are envious of others success…. hell the Left seem to work through most of the seven deadly sins as though they are virtues….

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  22nd February 2019

        Good luck with finding an accountant who’ll find a loophole that means breaking the law.

        There’s nothing to stop anyone legally avoiding tax.

  10. Blazer

     /  22nd February 2019

    ‘The whole notion that a static group of people are hoarding all the wealth ‘-has been proved beyond…ALL DOUBT.

  1. National response to Tax Working group final report — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition