What will a Labour Goverment do to my pocket come April 2018 Tax Cuts?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › What will a Labour Goverment do to my pocket come April 2018 Tax Cuts?

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#221426 10-Aug-2017 13:06

OK so we inline for some tax cuts starting 1April 2018. From memory it was not very much, around $20.38 per week, $1059 per year.

Whats everyones thoughts around this? I know labour have said countless times that this will go. So looking at the economical side of things, it does not make very much sense for my wife and I to vote Labour. In the end we will be $2118 worse off per year.

Added to this, there are the other tax increases that labour has been hinting at.

Is it just me that thinks tax increases are a bad idea?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 20

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1843538 10-Aug-2017 13:23

National should not have considered a tax cut , they would be better served using the funds to retire debt or to ease poverty and housing issues . As for the proposed tax increases by a Labour Government I am okay with it if the funds are put to good use, eg assist easing poverty, improve housing and cleaning our environment.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

pedrogarcia

250 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

#1843542 10-Aug-2017 13:29

So looking at the economical side of things, it does not make very much sense for my wife and I to vote Labour.

Overly simplistic (and selfish) way to look at being a Kiwi.

Don't even know where to start on this (so I won't).

GO JACINDA!

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1843546 10-Aug-2017 13:35

MikeB4:

National should not have considered a tax cut , they would be better served using the funds to retire debt or to ease poverty and housing issues . As for the proposed tax increases by a Labour Government I am okay with it if the funds are put to good use, eg assist easing poverty, improve housing and cleaning our environment.

Tax cuts or election year bribe? Best to spend the limited funds wisely before there is any spare to distribute. Given the waterways, roading are way behind upgrades, and I read the other day one of the DHB's is in a bad way, budget wise, there is no spare. Tax cuts were a bad idea, and non affordable, but aimed at voters. Not responsible

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1843547 10-Aug-2017 13:36

I've never voted for a particular party on the basis of what's in it for me or my family (especially in a financial sense), but rather the party that espouses the policies and values for the country that best align with my own.

Why is it that National has a habit of dangling tax cuts just prior to an election? Clearly they expect (and probably correctly) many people do vote with their hip pocket in mind.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1843548 10-Aug-2017 13:39

MikeB4:

National should not have considered a tax cut , they would be better served using the funds to retire debt or to ease poverty and housing issues . As for the proposed tax increases by a Labour Government I am okay with it if the funds are put to good use, eg assist easing poverty, improve housing and cleaning our environment.

My wife and I plan to use some of this money to increase our World Vision donations. I would rather have the choice of giving it to whoever I please, and to whom I feel is in real need of it. We pay plenty of taxes already, I don't understand why labour needs to increase taxes, they could just shuffle around what taxes/income government already gets.

pedrogarcia: Overly simplistic (and selfish) way to look at being a Kiwi.

Don't even know where to start on this (so I won't).

I'm not really sure whats selfish about it? There are plenty of working Kiwis (non beneficiaries) that are living close to the breadline in this country which everybody just wants to pretend do not exist. I am sure these people are going to really benefit from the extra cash. Its enough to pay some electricity, or can even go towards a weekly shop.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1843552 10-Aug-2017 13:54

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

National should not have considered a tax cut , they would be better served using the funds to retire debt or to ease poverty and housing issues . As for the proposed tax increases by a Labour Government I am okay with it if the funds are put to good use, eg assist easing poverty, improve housing and cleaning our environment.

My wife and I plan to use some of this money to increase our World Vision donations. I would rather have the choice of giving it to whoever I please, and to whom I feel is in real need of it. We pay plenty of taxes already, I don't understand why labour needs to increase taxes, they could just shuffle around what taxes/income government already gets.

pedrogarcia: Overly simplistic (and selfish) way to look at being a Kiwi.

Don't even know where to start on this (so I won't).

I'm not really sure whats selfish about it? There are plenty of working Kiwis (non beneficiaries) that are living close to the breadline in this country which everybody just wants to pretend do not exist. I am sure these people are going to really benefit from the extra cash. Its enough to pay some electricity, or can even go towards a weekly shop.

Hang on you have been pounding on about no real hardship or poverty in NZ?????? and , how can you exclude folks on Income Support from those "on the breadline"?

If National wanted to give a meaningful tax cut they should have applied only to low income brackets. If National wins (doubtful) myself and my wife will get money we just do not need.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1843560 10-Aug-2017 14:06

MikeB4:

Hang on you have been pounding on about no real hardship or poverty in NZ?????? and , how can you exclude folks on Income Support from those "on the breadline"?

If National wanted to give a meaningful tax cut they should have applied only to low income brackets. If National wins (doubtful) myself and my wife will get money we just do not need.

Where did I say there was no hardship in NZ? I have said numerous times that I don't believe there is real poverty in NZ, very different thing.

Living close to the breadline is the poorest condition in which it is deemed acceptable to live. (There are working/non beneficiaries, who pay rent or mortgages, have jobs) in this situation, there are also beneficiaries in this situation. None in real poverty.

Thanks for answering my question though, you have stated that you will quiet happily not take the tax cut come April 2018. Its interesting, because unlike you, there are plenty of New Zealanders who really need that money, and who will be voting for their pocket.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1843561 10-Aug-2017 14:06

As a lifelong National voter and supporter I am looking to change my vote especially since Metiria Turei is out of the picture as a possible person in Govt. I do like the freshness of the new labour leadership but nothing much has changed behind that....it is still the same old faces, just like National.

The main issues I am not happy about this year is National Govt complacency and the state of Housing, welfare and health (no particular order). I feel after 9 years national are ignoring their social responsibilities and encouraging private health facilities (eg cancer clinics) that a lot of NZ will never be able to afford. We are 10 years behind Australia in some cancer treatments and the system needs a major shakeup. I dont know if more money is the answer, but urgent attention is needed as the needy are being left out on health, welfare and housing.

Paula Bennett has been in charge of both Housing and Welfare over the years and in my mind has done more harm than good in both portfolios.

Still unsure what Labours policies are at this stage with respect to the above, but time will show.

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#1843563 10-Aug-2017 14:08

If labour get in, the tax cut will go. For me personally, thats not a particularly strong negative strike against them (nor is it a positive tick to keep National in), but, its the "what else will labour do" question that is their biggest weakness in my book.

Ultimately I think National have done a decent enough job over the past 9 years for them to stay in. Has it worked for everyone, probably not, but no Govt in the history of the world has kept everyone happy.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1843566 10-Aug-2017 14:15

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Hang on you have been pounding on about no real hardship or poverty in NZ?????? and , how can you exclude folks on Income Support from those "on the breadline"?

If National wanted to give a meaningful tax cut they should have applied only to low income brackets. If National wins (doubtful) myself and my wife will get money we just do not need.

Where did I say there was no hardship in NZ? I have said numerous times that I don't believe there is real poverty in NZ, very different thing.

Living close to the breadline is the poorest condition in which it is deemed acceptable to live. (There are working/non beneficiaries, who pay rent or mortgages, have jobs) in this situation, there are also beneficiaries in this situation. None in real poverty.

Thanks for answering my question though, you have stated that you will quiet happily not take the tax cut come April 2018. Its interesting, because unlike you, there are plenty of New Zealanders who really need that money, and who will be voting for their pocket.

You seem to take reality and replace it with something I cannot figure out. As others said in another thread I am out of these discussion with you. Live long and prosper in your reality.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1843569 10-Aug-2017 14:17

Pumpedd:

The main issues I am not happy about this year is National Govt complacency and the state of Housing, welfare and health (no particular order). I feel after 9 years national are ignoring their social responsibilities and encouraging private health facilities (eg cancer clinics) that a lot of NZ will never be able to afford. We are 10 years behind Australia in some cancer treatments and the system needs a major shakeup. I dont know if more money is the answer, but urgent attention is needed as the needy are being left out on health, welfare and housing.

...

Still unsure what Labours policies are at this stage with respect to the above, but time will show.

Labour health spokesman David Clark said the party had proposed a new $10m national cancer agency, and supported a separate fund that would enable early access to drugs, that he said could be delivered through Pharmac but "through a slightly different brand name". "It's something Pharmac is not that comfortable with because they think it creates demand for the drug in the market, but as the evidence comes out that would give Pharmac another opportunity to negotiate as to whether drugs continue." (souce: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/95565791)

This from the same article in which Coleman is reported as saying "If you stand back and go to the World Health Organisation, where I was two months ago, you will realise we have got a health system that's the envy of the world. And I think we have got to have that perspective". I don't think anyone listening to CheckPoint the last few days, with their detailed reporting on the trials and tribulations of Dunedin Hospital, could agree with this spurious claim. Sure, we're luckily not as bad as the US, but health is one of many areas where the current govt's majorly dropped the ball.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#1843573 10-Aug-2017 14:25

MikeB4:

If National wanted to give a meaningful tax cut they should have applied only to low income brackets. If National wins (doubtful) myself and my wife will get money we just do not need.

Are you being deliberately disingenuous here?

National's proposed tax package DOES only apply to low income brackets. (as well as increase WFF, Accom. supplement, etc.)

From 1 April 2018, the Package:

Increases the $14,000 income tax threshold to $22,000, and the $48,000 tax threshold to $52,000.
Discontinues the Independent Earner Tax Credit.
Increases the Family Tax Credit rates for young children to the level of those for children aged 16 to 18, while increasing the abatement rate and decreasing the abatement threshold.
Increases the Accommodation Supplement maximum amounts, and updates the Accommodation Supplement areas to reflect 2016 rents.
Increases the weekly payments of the Accommodation Benefit for eligible Student Allowance recipients by up to $20.

In fact, it's interesting to contrast this with Labour's recent "flat tax" proposal for a regional fuel levy. That would disproportionately effect their poorer constituents compared to the well off.

(for the record - I'm a big proponent of a flat tax system. I believe that if you earn twice as much as I do, you should pay twice as much tax as I do. Nothing is more universally applicable, simple and fair. However, I also accept that being elected on a flat tax policy is about as likely as pigs taking flight.)

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#1843574 10-Aug-2017 14:25

Pumpedd:

Still unsure what Labours policies are at this stage with respect to the above, but time will show.

Here's a link to Labour's announced policies; while they appear to not have released an overall health policy, there are policies on mental health and a national cancer agency.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1843582 10-Aug-2017 14:36

6FIEND:

MikeB4:

If National wanted to give a meaningful tax cut they should have applied only to low income brackets. If National wins (doubtful) myself and my wife will get money we just do not need.

Are you being deliberately disingenuous here?

National's proposed tax package DOES only apply to low income brackets. (as well as increase WFF, Accom. supplement, etc.)

From 1 April 2018, the Package:

Increases the $14,000 income tax threshold to $22,000, and the $48,000 tax threshold to $52,000.
Discontinues the Independent Earner Tax Credit.
Increases the Family Tax Credit rates for young children to the level of those for children aged 16 to 18, while increasing the abatement rate and decreasing the abatement threshold.
Increases the Accommodation Supplement maximum amounts, and updates the Accommodation Supplement areas to reflect 2016 rents.
Increases the weekly payments of the Accommodation Benefit for eligible Student Allowance recipients by up to $20.
In fact, it's interesting to contrast this with Labour's recent "flat tax" proposal for a regional fuel levy. That would disproportionately effect their poorer constituents compared to the well off.

(for the record - I'm a big proponent of a flat tax system. I believe that if you earn twice as much as I do, you should pay twice as much tax as I do. Nothing is more universally applicable, simple and fair. However, I also accept that being elected on a flat tax policy is about as likely as pigs taking flight.)

@6FIEND No and I did not intend to, so I apologize for any misunderstanding. What I was trying to say was that any tax relief if given should have been restricted to low income and families and should be given as targeted assistance. NZ is well overdue for a complete tax overhaul, like you I would rather see a flat rate of tax with targeted assistance by other means given to those in need.

I am not a tax expert, the opposite in fact, but if the thresholds are raised does that not flow on as tax cuts to all levels given the way in which our tax liability is assessed?

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#1843639 10-Aug-2017 16:04

6FIEND:

MikeB4:

(for the record - I'm a big proponent of a flat tax system. I believe that if you earn twice as much as I do, you should pay twice as much tax as I do. Nothing is more universally applicable, simple and fair. However, I also accept that being elected on a flat tax policy is about as likely as pigs taking flight.)

I pay 3x more tax than someone earning 1/2 my salary (less than 6 figures), its one of the things that really gets my heckles up when "the rich don't pay their fair share" is bandied about by all and sundry, yet for the bulk of NZ workers (who simply earn a wage and pay PAYE), it simply is not the case.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 20