dpex
1st December 2009, 22:02
Sorry folks. It goes on a bit. And it is but One angle. But here it is. My letter to Cam Calder, Melissa Lee, and Kanwaljit Singh. Take from it what you will.
Dear National MP,
That the current methods used to levy ACC are iniquitous goes without saying.
Please consider the structure of the levies.
1. Employee levies are based upon assumed risk of an employee but only while that employee is at work
2. Thus the risk analysis does not consider the employee risk when he is elsewhere.
3. There is no targeted levy on any activity outside the work-place other than the specific levy set against only registered road-users.
4. Non-earners of all sorts pay no direct ‘employee type’ levy, yet constitute over 50% of the population.
5. Tourists pay no levies.
6. Risk-based levies are, of themselves, singularly focused (work-place and registered road-users). Yet claims from these two groups comprise less than 30% of all ACC claims. In other words, 30% of ACC payers are subsidising the other 70%.
Now allow me to bring your attention to current and proposed increases in road-user levies.
To begin, we know that the average individual income (gross) in New Zealand is, according to the NZ Income Survey, 2009 June Quarter, $27976 gross.
So let’s deal with the proposed increase in this levy, set at an average of 16 cents. Thus the average income-earner will lose a further $447 per annum.
You’ll appreciate that that $447 is effectively withdrawn from the engine-room of our economy; ergo the spenders.
Now add the current $287 of ACC levy included in a vehicle registration and let’s for the moment, presume this doesn’t increase. Now the low income, one-car-owning earner must pay $734.
Which brings me to a question. Could you live on $27967 per annum (let’s forget about the tax deduction)?
Now come back to the low-income-earner’s position. These folk cannot avoid the employee levy, but they can avoid the road-user levy by simply not paying registration.
According to Ministry of Justice figures, in the 2009 June quarter, 7191, no-rego notices were issued. Extrapolate that to a year and we get 28,764, each attracting a fine (largely unpayable by those who attract such penalties…low income-earners) of $400.
So what happens to them? They get shunted through the court system and get tagged with say, 50 hours PD. That’s roughly 12 weekend days during which they are not with their families.
BTW: If you think this is a fiction, go spend a day in any Traffic court in the land.
But worse. They have become criminals with a record. They are low income-earners in any event, so their “Who gives a shit?” attitude is further supported. That will lead to an increase in crime by those who have so little left to lose.
Also, the health sector will suffer an increase in cost when those who simply can’t afford primary care, due to the extra Employee ACC levies, turn up at a hospital as either themselves or their children in last-gasp circumstances.
Increase ACC and you will increase this factor beyond comprehension.
All businesses who run vehicles are faced with the increase. Who will pay that extra cost? The consumer because business will simply lump the cost onto the end-product price.
Once again, the low income earner is penalised.
In this way, social degradation expands, slowly but surely.
There is one absolute upon which you can rely, and that is, “A man who has nothing left to lose has no reason to comply with any law.”
And so, by arbitrarily increasing ACC levies your government will be adding fuel to the growing lawlessness which already surrounds us.
Your nemesis is Phil Goff and his lot; whom will receive a copy of this letter, will see this a political advantage to be used against you.
Do you think they will miss the political capital to be made out of the foregoing?
However, there is an elegantly simple solution to the entire ACC debacle. That is; raise GST by an amount (I believe 15% is still easily calculable) and use the 2.5% increase to fund all ACC.
Meanwhile, remove all ACC levies of all types and put back into the pockets of the average man something to the order of $400 per year,just from the excess levies, which he will then spend in our economy, thus boosting it; meanwhile feeling National really are the good guys.
You see, the average income of $28764 is divided into GSTable and non-GSTable components. The greatest Non-GSTable component is either rent or mortgage.
To the average person rent/mortgage sucks $18,000 from their income. Thus they have $10,764 to spend of GSTable items. At 15% they would contribute $1614. The 2.5% proportion of that ($269) is, amazingly, what they would pay as a vehicle levy, but they wouldn't be paying the employee levy, nor the fuel tax.
Sadly, the MOJ would get $11 million less in ‘apparent’ revenue because no more ‘No rego’ tickets would be issued. But the fact is most who get such fines don’t pay them anyway because they are so hard up against it that they can’t.
But, remember the average ACC employee levy of $1.31 per $100? By removing this, such low-income earner would have a further $3767 to spend into our economy.
Be aware. Phil and the boys are looking at any and every avenue to make you go get a proper job come the next elections. And if he can promise the average household an increase of $3767 a year, (which would be the result of dropping all ACC direct levies) I’d suggest you start looking for new employment as you read this.
And he can by simply asserting the labour government will abolish all earner and vehicle ACC levies in favour of a uniform tax.
Your lot will try to draw him into the ‘exactly how’. He will stick with the digits.
‘Do you want a wage increase of $4,000 a year? Then vote Labour.’
‘Are you sick of your taxes being used to support those who don’t pay? Then vote Labour.’
If you lot are smart enough to see the obvious you’d beat him to the punch…..But I don’t hold out a lot of hope.
Frankly, I don’t give a toss for whom is in power. As far as I’m concerned you’re all in power to do nothing more than feather your own nests.
But I do have an active interest in seeing some good-old New Zealand ‘fair-play’ come into play.
I object to the fact that all non-earners (70% of our population) escape paying any ACC levy other than that attached to a motor vehicle.
Don’t for a minute think the other 70% of non-payers will come to your side, because fully 50% of them are non-voting children.
Do you want to be returned to parliament, next term? Then here’s your chance. Make your stupid leaders beat Phil to the punch.
Dear National MP,
That the current methods used to levy ACC are iniquitous goes without saying.
Please consider the structure of the levies.
1. Employee levies are based upon assumed risk of an employee but only while that employee is at work
2. Thus the risk analysis does not consider the employee risk when he is elsewhere.
3. There is no targeted levy on any activity outside the work-place other than the specific levy set against only registered road-users.
4. Non-earners of all sorts pay no direct ‘employee type’ levy, yet constitute over 50% of the population.
5. Tourists pay no levies.
6. Risk-based levies are, of themselves, singularly focused (work-place and registered road-users). Yet claims from these two groups comprise less than 30% of all ACC claims. In other words, 30% of ACC payers are subsidising the other 70%.
Now allow me to bring your attention to current and proposed increases in road-user levies.
To begin, we know that the average individual income (gross) in New Zealand is, according to the NZ Income Survey, 2009 June Quarter, $27976 gross.
So let’s deal with the proposed increase in this levy, set at an average of 16 cents. Thus the average income-earner will lose a further $447 per annum.
You’ll appreciate that that $447 is effectively withdrawn from the engine-room of our economy; ergo the spenders.
Now add the current $287 of ACC levy included in a vehicle registration and let’s for the moment, presume this doesn’t increase. Now the low income, one-car-owning earner must pay $734.
Which brings me to a question. Could you live on $27967 per annum (let’s forget about the tax deduction)?
Now come back to the low-income-earner’s position. These folk cannot avoid the employee levy, but they can avoid the road-user levy by simply not paying registration.
According to Ministry of Justice figures, in the 2009 June quarter, 7191, no-rego notices were issued. Extrapolate that to a year and we get 28,764, each attracting a fine (largely unpayable by those who attract such penalties…low income-earners) of $400.
So what happens to them? They get shunted through the court system and get tagged with say, 50 hours PD. That’s roughly 12 weekend days during which they are not with their families.
BTW: If you think this is a fiction, go spend a day in any Traffic court in the land.
But worse. They have become criminals with a record. They are low income-earners in any event, so their “Who gives a shit?” attitude is further supported. That will lead to an increase in crime by those who have so little left to lose.
Also, the health sector will suffer an increase in cost when those who simply can’t afford primary care, due to the extra Employee ACC levies, turn up at a hospital as either themselves or their children in last-gasp circumstances.
Increase ACC and you will increase this factor beyond comprehension.
All businesses who run vehicles are faced with the increase. Who will pay that extra cost? The consumer because business will simply lump the cost onto the end-product price.
Once again, the low income earner is penalised.
In this way, social degradation expands, slowly but surely.
There is one absolute upon which you can rely, and that is, “A man who has nothing left to lose has no reason to comply with any law.”
And so, by arbitrarily increasing ACC levies your government will be adding fuel to the growing lawlessness which already surrounds us.
Your nemesis is Phil Goff and his lot; whom will receive a copy of this letter, will see this a political advantage to be used against you.
Do you think they will miss the political capital to be made out of the foregoing?
However, there is an elegantly simple solution to the entire ACC debacle. That is; raise GST by an amount (I believe 15% is still easily calculable) and use the 2.5% increase to fund all ACC.
Meanwhile, remove all ACC levies of all types and put back into the pockets of the average man something to the order of $400 per year,just from the excess levies, which he will then spend in our economy, thus boosting it; meanwhile feeling National really are the good guys.
You see, the average income of $28764 is divided into GSTable and non-GSTable components. The greatest Non-GSTable component is either rent or mortgage.
To the average person rent/mortgage sucks $18,000 from their income. Thus they have $10,764 to spend of GSTable items. At 15% they would contribute $1614. The 2.5% proportion of that ($269) is, amazingly, what they would pay as a vehicle levy, but they wouldn't be paying the employee levy, nor the fuel tax.
Sadly, the MOJ would get $11 million less in ‘apparent’ revenue because no more ‘No rego’ tickets would be issued. But the fact is most who get such fines don’t pay them anyway because they are so hard up against it that they can’t.
But, remember the average ACC employee levy of $1.31 per $100? By removing this, such low-income earner would have a further $3767 to spend into our economy.
Be aware. Phil and the boys are looking at any and every avenue to make you go get a proper job come the next elections. And if he can promise the average household an increase of $3767 a year, (which would be the result of dropping all ACC direct levies) I’d suggest you start looking for new employment as you read this.
And he can by simply asserting the labour government will abolish all earner and vehicle ACC levies in favour of a uniform tax.
Your lot will try to draw him into the ‘exactly how’. He will stick with the digits.
‘Do you want a wage increase of $4,000 a year? Then vote Labour.’
‘Are you sick of your taxes being used to support those who don’t pay? Then vote Labour.’
If you lot are smart enough to see the obvious you’d beat him to the punch…..But I don’t hold out a lot of hope.
Frankly, I don’t give a toss for whom is in power. As far as I’m concerned you’re all in power to do nothing more than feather your own nests.
But I do have an active interest in seeing some good-old New Zealand ‘fair-play’ come into play.
I object to the fact that all non-earners (70% of our population) escape paying any ACC levy other than that attached to a motor vehicle.
Don’t for a minute think the other 70% of non-payers will come to your side, because fully 50% of them are non-voting children.
Do you want to be returned to parliament, next term? Then here’s your chance. Make your stupid leaders beat Phil to the punch.