NZ 2023 Election Thread

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

Forums › Politics › NZ 2023 Election Thread

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 102

2275 posts

Uber Geek

#3122378 31-Aug-2023 19:23

On2or3wheels:

GV27:

That's the nature of a progressive tax system. If you give relief to the people at the low end, the people paying more get it too.

Oh I realise that but you can counteract it by adjusting the top rate.

Its the people at the top you need to keep, and their skills make them the most transportable world wide.

10% of NZ registered nurses now work in Australia.

Those that do better in life is inevitable, however they are not an infinitely exploitable resource.

Sharesies kids

Free kids accounts - trade shares and funds (NZ, US) with Sharesies (affiliate link).

gzt

15223 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3122389 31-Aug-2023 20:14

GV27:
gzt: In other words, always just over the horizon for the National Party.
Not quite. Labour repealed tax cuts that Bill English had already legislated when they came into power. There were there and ready to go. Funny how that doesn't get labeled a 'tax increase' even though it definitely was.

It was exactly over the horizon - exactly as the National Party of the day specifically planned and announced in 2014 as part of a re-election strategy.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122444 1-Sep-2023 07:20

gzt:

It was exactly over the horizon - exactly as the National Party of the day specifically planned and announced in 2014 as part of a re-election strategy.

You are really stretching the definition of 'over the horizon' if you think legislation that is already in place doesn't count as having been enacted. That's what delivery looks like, so I understand if there is now some confusion about that, given the paucity of it that we have been exposed to over the last six years.

Labour undoing it actively took tax relief away from Kiwis that had already been passed into law.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122445 1-Sep-2023 07:22

On2or3wheels:

Oh I realise that but you can counteract it by adjusting the top rate.

Given National is not indexing the 39% rate, they effectively are. That rate should be over $200K if you merely index for inflation that has occured since it was introduced.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3122456 1-Sep-2023 07:52

GV27:

gzt:

It was exactly over the horizon - exactly as the National Party of the day specifically planned and announced in 2014 as part of a re-election strategy.

You are really stretching the definition of 'over the horizon' if you think legislation that is already in place doesn't count as having been enacted. That's what delivery looks like, so I understand if there is now some confusion about that, given the paucity of it that we have been exposed to over the last six years.

Labour undoing it actively took tax relief away from Kiwis that had already been passed into law.

The National Party says if re-elected, it would begin to reduce income taxes from April 2017.

National was re elected. What happened 1 April 2017 when they were Government? 1 April 2017 occurs before the September 2017 election.

Labour didnt really undo it, it has to be done before it can be undone.

On2or3wheels

184 posts

Master Geek

#3122457 1-Sep-2023 07:53

GV27:

Given National is not indexing the 39% rate, they effectively are. That rate should be over $200K if you merely index for inflation that has occured since it was introduced.

You could move to Australia
$180,001 and over 45%

gzt

15223 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3122460 1-Sep-2023 08:03

GV27: You are really stretching the definition of 'over the horizon'

Definition of over the horizon is post-election. I'm not stretching that at all.

if you think legislation that is already in place doesn't count as having been enacted. That's what delivery looks like,

Nope, delivery is anything that is effective within a term of government. Apologies for the short response at this time.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3122466 1-Sep-2023 08:13

Worth a read

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/national-announces-tax-cuts-for-2017/RFLLJ6SU722AQAWP5GUPOMSFJY/

Not dissimilar to the latest tax cut announcement.

"Finance Minister Bill English says tax cuts will begin taking effect from 2017 - conditions allowing

Income taxes would begin to fall from April 2017 "providing economic and fiscal conditions allow

Mr English again emphasized those cuts would be modest and targeted at low to middle income earners.

Details of tax cuts would be considered closer to that date, he said."

Mr Key said whatever the level of tax cuts a National Government settled on, whether it amounted to $500 or $1000 a year for low to middle income earners, ''most would say that would make a difference''.

It seems little has changed.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122468 1-Sep-2023 08:18

On2or3wheels:

GV27:

Given National is not indexing the 39% rate, they effectively are. That rate should be over $200K if you merely index for inflation that has occured since it was introduced.

You could move to Australia
$180,001 and over 45%

You mean Australia, the country that regularly reviews and adjusts their tax brackets?

Not the best example to use here. Plus you're also discounting things like salary sacrificing and personal deductions on offer there that we don't get here.

As usual, picking the top tax rate and going "it's higher than ours so you're better off here" is conveniently leaving out half the story.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122480 1-Sep-2023 08:34

tdgeek:

It seems little has changed.

Again. The tax cuts were legislated. They made it into law.

See Section 12 of the Budget Measures + Family Incomes Package Act 2017. They're right there in the legislation.

The only that has changed is Labour got away with repealing this Act and reversing the indexing. So they got to increase taxes and people will still use wordplay to defend it.

Meanwhile, minimum wage earners will soon have to pay 30 cents in the dollar on part of their income. Minimum wage earners.

I don't know how some people sleep at night, tbh.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3122489 1-Sep-2023 08:42

GV27:

Again. The tax cuts were legislated. They made it into law.

See Section 12 of the Budget Measures + Family Incomes Package Act 2017. They're right there in the legislation.

The only that has changed is Labour got away with repealing this Act and reversing the indexing. So they got to increase taxes and people will still use wordplay to defend it.

Meanwhile, minimum wage earners will soon have to pay 30 cents in the dollar on part of their income. Minimum wage earners.

I don't know how some people sleep at night, tbh.

Again, proposed in 2014 to be in place 1 April 2017, were they in place 1 April 2017? Yes or no?

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122490 1-Sep-2023 08:42

gzt:

Definition of over the horizon is post-election. I'm not stretching that at all.

Yes, you are. The most logical place to adjust tax rates is the start of a new financial year, and the Budget is passed in May of the prior year.

Dying in a ditch over a parliamentary term as an overriding timeline when it comes to practical implementation of legislation that's in the books is stretching.

GV27

5429 posts

Uber Geek

#3122491 1-Sep-2023 08:45

tdgeek:

Again, proposed in 2014 to be in place 1 April 2017, were they in place 1 April 2017? Yes or no?

No. They were legislated to come into force 1 April 2018. A year's difference.

I'll take tax adjustments delayed by a year over a tax increase and then nine years of not adjusting despite massively high inflation numbers and a cost of living crisis.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3122496 1-Sep-2023 08:57

GV27:

I don't know how some people sleep at night, tbh.

I have no issue with tax cuts. Like you I prefer they are indexed annually

Taxation is where we get our revenue, if a Govt bleeds that to our back pockets then everything else will suffer. Now if a party stated we will give you great tax cuts, but infrastructure, health, education, etc will suffer, but thats ok we will chip away as best we can. But no whinging from now on please. Thats the reality.

As for defending, this is a 2023 Election thread, not a bag Labour thread. There are two parties in this election, a bit of balance is needed. Nationals tax plan is all in the news, and a wide raft of brickbats, but also some bouquets. This thread doesnt seem interested. I will give Luxon his due, his tax plan takes effect in April and July 2024. Some credibility there. Although the indexation is a maybe. As was John Keys April 2017 tax cuts. Sorta like the GST increase to 15% that was a no, but it became a yes. Much comment about Labour delivering. Well, that clearly is an issue for National as well.

tdgeek

28622 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3122498 1-Sep-2023 09:00

GV27:

No. They were legislated to come into force 1 April 2018. A year's difference.

I'll take tax adjustments delayed by a year over a tax increase and then nine years of not adjusting despite massively high inflation numbers and a cost of living crisis.

From gzt's link

The National Party says if re-elected, it would begin to reduce income taxes from April 2017.

Plus it was a maybe, if conditions allowed it. so the 1 April 2018 is just a number that may or may not happen. Much like the latest 3 yearly indexation, if conditions allow.

1 | ... | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | ... | 102