Our new coalition government.

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

Forums › Politics › Our new coalition government.

1 | ... | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | ... | 182

642 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2175649 9-Feb-2019 21:29

GV27:
If I make money through a business I set up, that productive gain is bad, but if I'm a salary worker who pays down a mortgage, that's exempt because....well it doesn't make any sense.

It makes perfect sense because it's the politically expedient thing to do. It doesn’t matter whether it distorts the tax system (should the family home be GST exempt too?) because any party that included the family home in the initial policy would be voted out at the next election.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2175657 9-Feb-2019 21:40

wsnz:
GV27:
If I make money through a business I set up, that productive gain is bad, but if I'm a salary worker who pays down a mortgage, that's exempt because....well it doesn't make any sense.

It makes perfect sense because it's the politically expedient thing to do. It doesn’t matter whether it distorts the tax system (should the family home be GST exempt too?) because any party that included the family home in the initial policy would be voted out at the next election.

I suspect taxes on KiwiSaver gains will prove equally unpopular.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2175718 10-Feb-2019 09:30

GV27:

Tax law isn't a mess as a rule because it involves a lot of time and effort from people who have a bit more skin in the game than "wealth bad, state good".

Without going down the all-tax-is-theft road (because lol) I don't believe it's ethical to campaign on a tax you're bringing in because *house prices are too high* and then apply it to all assets at the same rate. It's also disingenuous to talk about how other countries have them without going into the allowed exemptions, deductions, indexation etc that other jurisdictions allow that have already been ruled out in New Zealand.

I also think it's a giant waste of time to "spur investment into productive areas and away from speculation" or whatever the talking point is when you plan on taxing Kiwisaver withdrawals, family business sales and other investments but don't tax the family home, which has a documented (the McMansion) effect. If I make money through a business I set up, that productive gain is bad, but if I'm a salary worker who pays down a mortgage, that's exempt because....well it doesn't make any sense.

Then there's the merits of bringing in a tax with a valuation day that seems to be on the precipice of a general slowdown and off the back of loss ring-fencing and a foreign buyer ban; should those things be effective, it's possible we end up with high initial valuations and no gains being made whatsoever.

Tax is a Theft.

Salary is my income, business profit might be your income, tax is a Governments income. Unless tax is excessive, its 100% normal, not theft. The issue with tax is that people are inherently selfish, they want what they want, and choose a blind eye as to what tax is used for

Campaign on a tax you're bringing in because *house prices are too high*

Don't recall that. CGT is already in. Its being extended to make it fair. Making but fair means this that receive income that is tax free is nit fair, when others receive income that is taxed. Then that extra tax, is distributed back into the tax chain, so that those of us that DO pay tax, pay a little less, as others who are getting off scott free are now contributing. Again, its merely a "tax is evil" mindset.

Countries

I dont have the document, neither do you, so hoe can you decide its disingenuous to mention other countries who have various exemptions when that is not known? Clearly everything has been discussed in detail, and its being made public 2 years before commencement, to discuss all that.

Valuation Day

Its impossible to set a valuation day based on getting the most tax in, or if we will get less tax in. The point of all this is a fairer tax system where those that get an income and do not pay tax, pay their dues. Its starts with a line in the sand. There might be high initial valuations, or low, or middle range, but it would be deceitful if a Govt set the valuation day to artificially get more tax in.

If you feel we should tax some income and not others, I guess that's one way to manage Government income, but my opinion is that everyone who receives income should contribute to the tax collection.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2175726 10-Feb-2019 09:53

GV27:

I suspect taxes on KiwiSaver gains will prove equally unpopular.

Where did you hear Kiwisaver gains will be taxed?

Most KS are invested in PIE's, these are already legislated as capital gain tax free. A bigger issue is the fees providers clip, that is being reviewed. Its been stated that should KS gains be taxed, they will offset that for low to middle income earners.

This is all public knowledge. I get the feeling its more anti Coalition commentary than anti CGT?

To be fair, Capital Gains Tax has a negative connotation, after all we all hate tax. This move makes it fairer, it doesn't add more tax take into the Govt coffers. In any case, National will repeal it, so CGT is up for a vote. Those that don't want a fairer tax system can vote it out

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2175760 10-Feb-2019 10:32

tdgeek:

GV27:

I suspect taxes on KiwiSaver gains will prove equally unpopular.

Where did you hear Kiwisaver gains will be taxed?

Most KS are invested in PIE's, these are already legislated as capital gain tax free. A bigger issue is the fees providers clip, that is being reviewed. Its been stated that should KS gains be taxed, they will offset that for low to middle income earners.

This is all public knowledge. I get the feeling its more anti Coalition commentary than anti CGT?

To be fair, Capital Gains Tax has a negative connotation, after all we all hate tax. This move makes it fairer, it doesn't add more tax take into the Govt coffers. In any case, National will repeal it, so CGT is up for a vote. Those that don't want a fairer tax system can vote it out

Most, but not all. I have read the Interim Report but I have also read Cullen's comments dismissing the value of the interim report; so I'm not sure what we consider to be 'public knowledge' is really that relevant anymore. Guess we'll just have to find out.

I'm not going down the 'fair' route' given the net tax paid in this country is a bit of garage compactor of an argument that no one wants to have for good reasons, but legitimate criticism of the potential issues of a Capital Gains Tax based on the actions of Robertson the the TWG comments to date is not 'anti-Coalition' - at least not on my part.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2175768 10-Feb-2019 10:42

GV27:

tdgeek:

GV27:

I suspect taxes on KiwiSaver gains will prove equally unpopular.

Where did you hear Kiwisaver gains will be taxed?

Most KS are invested in PIE's, these are already legislated as capital gain tax free. A bigger issue is the fees providers clip, that is being reviewed. Its been stated that should KS gains be taxed, they will offset that for low to middle income earners.

This is all public knowledge. I get the feeling its more anti Coalition commentary than anti CGT?

To be fair, Capital Gains Tax has a negative connotation, after all we all hate tax. This move makes it fairer, it doesn't add more tax take into the Govt coffers. In any case, National will repeal it, so CGT is up for a vote. Those that don't want a fairer tax system can vote it out

Most, but not all. I have read the Interim Report but I have also read Cullen's comments dismissing the value of the interim report; so I'm not sure what we consider to be 'public knowledge' is really that relevant anymore. Guess we'll just have to find out.

I'm not going down the 'fair' route' given the net tax paid in this country is a bit of garage compactor of an argument that no one wants to have for good reasons, but legitimate criticism of the potential issues of a Capital Gains Tax based on the actions of Robertson the the TWG comments to date is not 'anti-Coalition' - at least not on my part.

IMO its just conjecture until the final document is out, from both sides. Dismissing the value of the interim report isn't actually that odd, its interim, it can change, we dont want people locking themselves into that, especially on a topic like tax.

I agree, there are legitimate concerns of extra CGT, but until the final detail is known, we dont know what they are, and that it will be transparent for a good while for discussion purposes is important, and our vote can keep it or remove it. There are no secrets, nor we will all be locked in. Its best to wait, not speculate.

What do you mean by "'fair' route' given the net tax paid in this country is a bit of garage compactor of an argument that no one wants to have for good reasons"

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2175807 10-Feb-2019 11:47

tdgeek:

What do you mean by "'fair' route' given the net tax paid in this country is a bit of garage compactor of an argument that no one wants to have for good reasons"

Because we like things like hospitals, schools and hospitals but we are increasingly reliant on a small group of tax payers to provide them. It's awkward because it involves admitting we don't spend anywhere near enough in some areas and then some other well-meaning Government spending is possibly having some not-so-great consequences that make us all worse off.

Unfortunately I suspect actually having that discussion would result in a thread of David Seymour erotic fan-fiction and various postulations on the best method for seizing the means of production, with very little meaningful discussion actually taking place. This is the internet, after all.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2175823 10-Feb-2019 12:36

GV27:

tdgeek:

What do you mean by "'fair' route' given the net tax paid in this country is a bit of garage compactor of an argument that no one wants to have for good reasons"

Because we like things like hospitals, schools and hospitals but we are increasingly reliant on a small group of tax payers to provide them. It's awkward because it involves admitting we don't spend anywhere near enough in some areas and then some other well-meaning Government spending is possibly having some not-so-great consequences that make us all worse off.

Unfortunately I suspect actually having that discussion would result in a thread of David Seymour erotic fan-fiction and various postulations on the best method for seizing the means of production, with very little meaningful discussion actually taking place. This is the internet, after all.

Thanks. Yes, many taxpayers are net credit. The rest I find a bit vague, without any examples.

Many feel we are over taxed, but it seems to me we are either undertaxed as we complain about stuff not bing done, or we are fairly taxed so we shouldn't complain about stuff. But yes, there is also we need of tax to pay for the necessary items, but we are also spending tax on this desirable, but low priority item, so we are worse off, in terms of outcome. That what you are getting at?

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2176062 10-Feb-2019 19:45

tdgeek:

Thanks. Yes, many taxpayers are net credit. The rest I find a bit vague, without any examples.

Many feel we are over taxed, but it seems to me we are either undertaxed as we complain about stuff not bing done, or we are fairly taxed so we shouldn't complain about stuff. But yes, there is also we need of tax to pay for the necessary items, but we are also spending tax on this desirable, but low priority item, so we are worse off, in terms of outcome. That what you are getting at?

Can you explain what you mean with 'net credit'? My understand is a very small portion of taxpayers pay a relatively large portion of the income tax take, even before accounting for transfers like WFFTC.

I suspect the amount of tax we pay is probably generally spot on; I feel our current situation is possibly made worse as a result of politically expedient policies being put ahead of things like infrastructures; or not being able to accept that some interventions have had long-term consequences in a cure-worse-than-the-disease sense (e.g. WFFTC being a wage subsidy, the accommodation supplement's creation of a de facto rental price floor, school zones etc).

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2176076 10-Feb-2019 20:23

GV27:

tdgeek:

Thanks. Yes, many taxpayers are net credit. The rest I find a bit vague, without any examples.

Many feel we are over taxed, but it seems to me we are either undertaxed as we complain about stuff not bing done, or we are fairly taxed so we shouldn't complain about stuff. But yes, there is also we need of tax to pay for the necessary items, but we are also spending tax on this desirable, but low priority item, so we are worse off, in terms of outcome. That what you are getting at?

Can you explain what you mean with 'net credit'? My understand is a very small portion of taxpayers pay a relatively large portion of the income tax take, even before accounting for transfers like WFFTC.

I suspect the amount of tax we pay is probably generally spot on; I feel our current situation is possibly made worse as a result of politically expedient policies being put ahead of things like infrastructures; or not being able to accept that some interventions have had long-term consequences in a cure-worse-than-the-disease sense (e.g. WFFTC being a wage subsidy, the accommodation supplement's creation of a de facto rental price floor, school zones etc).

By net credit, I mean that while all salary and wage earners pay tax, there is a huge amount of tax credits coming off those PAYE deductions, so the net amount of tax paid is very low, or in credit. WFFTC is the obvious one but all those accommodation allowances, and many so ons, mean that the tax take per some of these people is well offset by other credits and allowances. Which is what I thought you meant "by very small portion of taxpayers pay a relatively large portion"

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2176147 11-Feb-2019 07:58

tdgeek:

By net credit, I mean that while all salary and wage earners pay tax, there is a huge amount of tax credits coming off those PAYE deductions, so the net amount of tax paid is very low, or in credit. WFFTC is the obvious one but all those accommodation allowances, and many so ons, mean that the tax take per some of these people is well offset by other credits and allowances. Which is what I thought you meant "by very small portion of taxpayers pay a relatively large portion"

What I meant was that a very small portion of taxpayers pay the actual income tax even before WFFTC transfers, ACC etc. It's something like 11% of taxpayers pay almost half of the total income tax take the Govt receives, even before allowing for those credits.

tdgeek

29587 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2176157 11-Feb-2019 08:40

Yes, its about that https://treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/financial-management-and-advice/revenue-expenditure/revenue-effects-tax-changes/who-pays-income-tax

Not sure of the relevance? More people are on lower wages, so they pay less absolute tax, but also less % tax. Fairness-wise, those who earn more should pay more as long as thats not excessive. If a person on say 40k pays x% they probably have a very low PDI, the person on 100k pays more $ and a higher %, but still has a high PDI, so is less "tax affected"

Is 11% of people paying 48% of income tax unfair?

gzt

16904 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2176266 11-Feb-2019 11:39

tdgeek: Is 11% of people paying 48% of income tax unfair?

Depends what they get out of it. A stable safe country on the least corrupt index to earn a high income and raise children is one benefit for example.

wsnz

642 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2176631 11-Feb-2019 16:47

tdgeek:

Fairness-wise, those who earn more should pay more as long as thats not excessive.

Is it fair? By what and who's definition?

What is the definition of "excessive"?

In terms of spending the collected tax dollars, what one person views as reasonable, another will not.

Then we have the issue of effectiveness of the programmes to which those dollars are deployed.

These are all very subjective, so it is unlikely there will ever be universal agreement, hence the argument will never be resolved.

networkn

Networkn
32200 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2176635 11-Feb-2019 16:54

I predict that Shane Jones's "fund" will be subject to reports of mis-use and mis management in the coming few months.

1 | ... | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | ... | 182