Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

19 Comments

  1. Okay, but the promise from the government is, no wasting taxpayer money.

    And since Michael Wood is topical, politicians like him who demonstrates he thinks the taxpayer is a bottomless pit of funds need to be banned the moment they waste our money!

    1. It’s the work of the devil conving poor people that there interests are the same as the 1%.

  2. Yep, we need to tax the tax dodgers, those that use their money to dodge paying tax. But invoking such terminology as ‘envy’ and ‘rich pricks’…that’s playing their game, nothing useful comes from this. Try harder, find terminology that targets the exclusive few, because it is them that are really stuffing us all over.

  3. I think if we’re looking at implementing inheritance taxation in particular then we ought to begin with a low to medium rate of between ten and fifteen percent

  4. Completely agree Bomber. The system has been skewed for decades and the imbalance we have now is because of poll driven governments whose pursuit of power (and therefore personal wealth) has resulted in the vast inequalities we have now. Not just poor financial policies but also poor social welfare related policies (like state house sales and benefits and regional development).

    I think that given our divided population and the recent belief in ‘I want xxx for myself and I want it now!’ that some of it is the politics of envy. We do see this increasingly from the young in particular however for the most part, it is simply the realisation that the system is groaning under the weight of it all and that something needs to change.

    Many of us have been aware of the rorts and inequities in the system for a very long time, what’s different now is that we can see something has to be done immediately to close the loopholes and be more responsible. And the more right leaning posters are not incorrect in saying that something also needs to be done about the quality of govt spending.

    But I do think something can be done to make it all work in a way that doesnt politicise the issue as much as political parties are trying to do now.

    IE: GST off food and education and/ or differentiated amounts of GST on luxury goods ie: 10 % on basics, 30 -35% on luxury items. There has to be a way to lower the tax on basics but direct it at luxury spending.

    Financial transaction tax (Hits everyone equally but for most is only a minor contribution)
    Windfall taxes (on banks and mega corporates etc) as and when so we dont frighten off business by raising the business rate too much

    Maybe increase the business rate by 1%

    Agree with a Trust Tax of moderate proportions

    And support a targeted capital gains tax or some kind of sensible way of taxing assets over and above a reasonable amount.

    Greater taxes on tourism directly or indirectly

    Greater taxes on people coming to NZ to live – an infrastructure levy perhaps. For wealth immigration classes, maybe a fee system – $50K or more to the government for the privilege. (They do this in parts of the Caribbean)

    Inheritance tax – only over a particular level and capped somewhere in single digit % points.

    Land banking tax? Flight tax?

    There are many opportunities, but we must have a good look at all the options and accurately determine their downstream effects in a non partisan way.

    On top of this we need a David Seymour type sharp knife through the public service but with the aims of ‘Back to Basics’ and ‘Value for Money’ — Again a non partisan no agenda approach. This is equally as important as tax policy.

    The government recently held a 5 year contract for multi million dollar services where ‘price’ or ‘value’ was not one of the factors considered by the procurement panel. Sadly this situation is not unique in Wellington.

    After that we need to prioritise spending and start looking at Welfare Reform in an honest non partisan way. Setting aside all the decolonisation bullshit and look at how welfare can be managed along with other things like education and housing to bring about the best long term outcomes whilst discouraging generational welfare dependency.

  5. Don’t get how you can tax something which isn’t realised. There’s a difference between taxing money made. Rates already are a type of land tax.

    Don’t mind some type CGT on non family home though.

  6. Does anyone not think that by changing the taxation system, it will affect the markets? Particularly the property market and the share market?

Comments are closed.