whats your thoughts on the CGT [Archive]

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 08:27

johcar

27th February 2019, 08:46

National? Yes they did promise not to and yes they did introduce new taxes."How can you tell when a politician is lying?"

"Their lips move"

They're all as bad as each other, but the current one came in with a platform of "the most transparent government ever"...

Yeah, right.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

Ocean1

27th February 2019, 09:29

I'm not concerned too much how it will affect me. I've had around a decade of intense activity that would have attracted a CGT, that activity has now tapered off & will remain somewhere down around nil for the foreseeable future, so I'm not concerned how it is going to affect me.
My concern is for the change in kiwi behaviour & lifestyle.
I can see the arse dropping out of the beach settlements & maybe a shift to large boats instead.
I also worry for people currently renting.
Landlords can't just haul money out of their arses & won't be prepared to inject some cash to top up the mortgage of a rental property out of their wages to keep the rent reasonable, as many have done in the past, in the knowledge that there is a tax free carrot waiting for them at the end, because they will now be taxed on the profit of said property.
Rents will definitely rise & while I'm sure it will turn a few tenants into home owners in the short term, the long term will be a bit grim if you aren't a home owner.
Also, for landlords that have done a monthly top up from their income over the years, there had better be an accounting system in the CGT maths that takes their input off, as that needs to come off the taxable profit, as it was taxed income before it went to propping up a tenant & isint a gain, as it was a landlord contribution.
Yes, I have done that to make sure my tenants pay market rent for a property that had decent capital gain and a fairly hefty mortgage.

I don't know anyone with a residential investment that doesn't use their own wages to help pay it off. In my case it amounted to more than the rents, and that's pretty common.

Add all of the other costs involved in house ownership, (a lot of it bureaucratic compliance costs) and the annual costs are often tens of thousands a year more than the rent covers. That means extra work, lots of it, for fucking years. The "profit" is deferred until you either pay off the mortgage or sell it. And if you take inflation out of that profit on the sale it's not really much of an investment, for me just barely better than cash in the bank over the same time frame. Just.

Not that they'll allow depreciation based on inflation for a CGT, of course, for the same reason investors will get out of the business if and when they introduce it: take out the tax on inflation and it's not worth doing it.

But like you it doesn't worry me any more. I got sick of not only Working For Everyone Else's Family but then being blamed for the need to do so in the first place, so I sold the last residential investment last year. Funny you should mention boats, I blew the resulting funds on one. Best investment I ever made.

Nobody ever seems to learn about how badly governments screw the taxpayer, there isn't a savings nest egg or hard earned investment that isn't targeted, simply because it's there, and they can. Kiwisaver? I was hopeful it might work to encourage saving, reducing the need for subsidies in retirement, but as the quantity of savings has grown successive governments haven't been able to resist the temptation to raid it to buy votes. They raided EQC investments. Gone. Happens every time a savings scheme reached a useful size: it's plundered to buy votes. This time it's a coordinated attack on all of them, property, farms, kiwisaver, (again), business investment, anything anyone's worked to accumulate for any reason whatsoever is being stripped. Because, apparently, it's only fair.

Scuba_Steve

27th February 2019, 09:32

I also worry for people currently renting.
Landlords can't just haul money out of their arses & won't be prepared to inject some cash to top up the mortgage of a rental property out of their wages to keep the rent reasonable, as many have done in the past, in the knowledge that there is a tax free carrot waiting for them at the end, because they will now be taxed on the profit of said property.
Rents will definitely rise & while I'm sure it will turn a few tenants into home owners in the short term, the long term will be a bit grim if you aren't a home owner.
Also, for landlords that have done a monthly top up from their income over the years, there had better be an accounting system in the CGT maths that takes their input off, as that needs to come off the taxable profit, as it was taxed income before it went to propping up a tenant & isint a gain, as it was a landlord contribution.
Yes, I have done that to make sure my tenants pay market rent for a property that had decent capital gain and a fairly hefty mortgage.

See this is it, people keep ignoring the man behind the curtain.
If my costs for a rental increase the price of said rental will increase. This is the same with CGT & "rental WoF" they keep talking about, etc, anything that tries to take money from me will inevitably be taking it from the tenants. We try not to burden the [good] tenants with too much cost (in fact right now we're prob below "market rates") but end of day we're not gonna take a hit to make renting "affordable". Our costs go up, their costs go up.
If anything these systems only see to push out the "mum & dad investors" bringing about more corporate investors

Black Knight

27th February 2019, 10:39

Stay away from Kiwisaver. The point of it is to ... ah .... save for retirement because the state are spending too much on old people. And they propose taxing it more? :crazy:

Here is my prediction - so far it is nothing but a working party wish list suggestion paper. Featuring all types of horror taxes for the media to get so excited over I swear Duncan Garner on the AM show actually had a boner on screen the other morning.

So all the PM has to do is let the media run their mouths off about 30% tax etc and when she announces it will only be 10% the country will sigh a collective sign of relief and thank her for being so reasonable. The polls will love her more and Mr Bridges will be oust.

Asking for more(30%) than is really required then "dropping"the rate is the oldest trick in the book be it property developers asking for 6 stories but really only wanting 3,private marina developments asking for 4 when they only want 1,etc etc-I am sure this trick will be tried and will prolly get through,bastards.

TheDemonLord

27th February 2019, 10:40

I'm going to add that I did see a fairly good argument for a CGT (even though, as a principal, I'm not in favor of the Tax)

It goes something along the lines of:

As an area appreciates in value, one of the factors in this, is investment by the Govt/Council (think Roads, infrastructure etc.) and a CGT is a way of recovering a portion of that investment, for future investment.

That all said, I think that anytime a politician says or insinuates 'We should tax the rich more', they should be slapped by someone, who will then promptly read out exactly how much Tax the rich pay (something like 20% of NZers pay 80% of the income tax), followed with a brief historical lesson on every Socialist hell-hole that implemented very steep, progressive tax system.

merv

27th February 2019, 10:45

I'm not concerned too much how it will affect me. I've had around a decade of intense activity that would have attracted a CGT, that activity has now tapered off & will remain somewhere down around nil for the foreseeable future, so I'm not concerned how it is going to affect me.
My concern is for the change in kiwi behaviour & lifestyle.
I can see the arse dropping out of the beach settlements & maybe a shift to large boats instead.
I also worry for people currently renting.
Landlords can't just haul money out of their arses & won't be prepared to inject some cash to top up the mortgage of a rental property out of their wages to keep the rent reasonable, as many have done in the past, in the knowledge that there is a tax free carrot waiting for them at the end, because they will now be taxed on the profit of said property.
Rents will definitely rise & while I'm sure it will turn a few tenants into home owners in the short term, the long term will be a bit grim if you aren't a home owner.
Also, for landlords that have done a monthly top up from their income over the years, there had better be an accounting system in the CGT maths that takes their input off, as that needs to come off the taxable profit, as it was taxed income before it went to propping up a tenant & isint a gain, as it was a landlord contribution.
Yes, I have done that to make sure my tenants pay market rent for a property that had decent capital gain and a fairly hefty mortgage.

You're right on it there bob. The one thing that always amazes me is the whinging about negative gearing and people being said to get their tax back if they had shown enough losses on their properties to offset it against their other income like wages.

The actual real winners out of all this are the banks. Landlords can claim interest costs as an expense quite rightly and as you and Ocean are saying a lot of money has to be tipped in to pay the mortgage i.e. mainly the interest to the bank, which in the early days of rental ownership isn't covered fully by rents. So the landlord might get a maximum of 33% tax rebate, but still has to pay 67% of expenses, most of which goes to the bank as interest.

So people that whinge about negative gearing seem to have no understanding and never ever comment on the fact of just how high the landlords costs must be for them to be in that position and sure the light at the end of the tunnel is to have the mortgage paid off and finally be able to reap something off the rents and pay tax on that like any other income, or to be able to sell at a gain and that is where CGT will pull this down. Meanwhile the banks keep on winning.

As for bikers I am assuming bikes aren't in the category of boats or art mentioned in the working group's report so how do KBer's feel about having an old bike that starts to appreciate in value, or you did a bike up a few years ago, and when you get too old for it and you want to sell, you may have to front up with CGT out of the money you sell it for?

HEsch

27th February 2019, 11:34

See this is it, people keep ignoring the man behind the curtain.
If my costs for a rental increase the price of said rental will increase. This is the same with CGT & "rental WoF" they keep talking about, etc, anything that tries to take money from me will inevitably be taking it from the tenants. We try not to burden the [good] tenants with too much cost (in fact right now we're prob below "market rates") but end of day we're not gonna take a hit to make renting "affordable". Our costs go up, their costs go up.
If anything these systems only see to push out the "mum & dad investors" bringing about more corporate investors

This.

I'm a new landlord (bought the property 2 years ago and have had tenants for just over 1 year). I want to keep the rent low but I put it up by $20pw 6 months ago and the same now (6 months on ie as soon as I could do it again).
Factors in upping the rent include 1) unexpected renovation that cost nearly 20k (due to a leaking HWC) - bonus, the tenants now have a brand new kitchen and bathroom - but that 20k didn't come from nowhere, darrrrrrling, 2) market rent increasing (my brother rented a similar house in similar area and was paying $20pw more than I've just told my tenants they will need to pay shortly... Ie $40pw more than I currently get).
Ultimately, I don't want to subsidise someone else living in my home "just because." I own the financial risk and regardless of what they do (stay, leave, trash the place), I have to keep paying the mortgage...

neels

27th February 2019, 12:30

I can understand the principle, that being if someone is buying and selling something for a profit then it's generating income and can be taxed. However;

Ignoring inflation is bollocks, just because the value of money decreases and the number gets bigger, it doesn't mean something is really worth more. If the amount you sell something for can buy the same number of widgets as the amount you paid for the thing could when you bought it, then there has been no gain, so therefore there should be no tax.

I am struggling with the link between CGT and increased rents, unless the landlord is projecting their future sale price and the tax payable and trying to recover it now it doesn't make sense.

The main beneficiaries of this will be the accountants and lawyers finding the best way to structure ownership to minimise tax, as is their purpose in life. With the ability to offset losses against other income now gone, the previously favoured company structures are relatively pointless, so the net logical step to completely remove the linkage to personal income meaning any profit will be taxed within a company after any previous losses and expenses are deducted.

Of course the obvious way to avoid any of this is to sell your property to one of your kids for what you paid for it, then when they sell their CGT exempt own home for a huge profit, they can gift you a sum of money as a thank you.

HenryDorsetCase

27th February 2019, 13:06

If you are buying and flipping property you are also meant to pay tax on that also Nothing new There either.

Pretty Sure national created the Residential land withholding tax.

Fairer than upping GST

In 2015 it came in. Since then we have done in our firm literally hundreds of conveyances of property. We have a body of clients skewed to the Asian pursuasian but we get all flavours through the door. Since RLWT came in we have been forced to learn about it, add extra forms to the forms people sign, upskill the support staff, and generally get to grips with it. There are flowcharts and everything.

Ask me how much money we have returned to the gubblemunt from RLWT, go on.

No really, I want you to ask.

OK fine. Since you asked. It is ZERO. Nil, nada. Not one red cent. Not one pink dollar. Not a fucking razoo.

IMO it is the same as Gift Duty if anyone remembers that. It cost the gubblemunt $70M a year to administer, and they got in $2M in revenue in any given year.

The biggest thing is the change last year introduced by the newgov which classified all "residential" land as sensitive for the OIO.

I have a client currently who is in the throes of building an $8M project on a site that is "classified" residential under the local plan, but has an operative resource consent (with building consent issued and sitework about to start). They've had a punter approach them to buy the project on completion. The gotcha is that they have to get a fucking OIO consent because notwithstanding our RC the site is "classified" residential. Oh, and no one can tell us the process, who to contact, how much it will cost, or when we might have a decision. The buyer will almost certainly walk I reckon. Not the end of the world for our guys but fucking annoying because the onsale de-risks the project considerably.

Bah Humbug

I have a theory that it is important to be seen to be doing stuff from a pollies perspective, but what they achieve might be a bit hit and miss..

TheDemonLord

27th February 2019, 13:41

Ask me how much money we have returned to the gubblemunt from RLWT,

So Henry, Just how much Money have you returned to the Government from the RLWT?

husaberg

27th February 2019, 13:50

In 2015 it came in. Since then we have done in our firm literally hundreds of conveyances of property. We have a body of clients skewed to the Asian pursuasian but we get all flavours through the door. Since RLWT came in we have been forced to learn about it, add extra forms to the forms people sign, upskill the support staff, and generally get to grips with it. There are flowcharts and everything.

Ask me how much money we have returned to the gubblemunt from RLWT, go on.

No really, I want you to ask.

OK fine. Since you asked. It is ZERO. Nil, nada. Not one red cent. Not one pink dollar. Not a fucking razoo.

IMO it is the same as Gift Duty if anyone remembers that. It cost the gubblemunt $70M a year to administer, and they got in $2M in revenue in any given year.

The biggest thing is the change last year introduced by the newgov which classified all "residential" land as sensitive for the OIO.

I have a client currently who is in the throes of building an $8M project on a site that is "classified" residential under the local plan, but has an operative resource consent (with building consent issued and sitework about to start). They've had a punter approach them to buy the project on completion. The gotcha is that they have to get a fucking OIO consent because notwithstanding our RC the site is "classified" residential. Oh, and no one can tell us the process, who to contact, how much it will cost, or when we might have a decision. The buyer will almost certainly walk I reckon. Not the end of the world for our guys but fucking annoying because the onsale de-risks the project considerably.

Bah Humbug

I have a theory that it is important to be seen to be doing stuff from a pollies perspective, but what they achieve might be a bit hit and miss..

I am not surprised as even before then there were rules relating to flipping property that never resulted in any tax being paid.
Anyone rich has a half decent accountant anyway but you do what you can within the rules that you work.
But did you see the list of countries that ddnt have a CGT they were nearly all tax haven countries.
I remember when i brought my first house the lawyer doing the conveyancing was abe to somehow date the sale so i never paid the stamp duty, Still dont know how they done it, filed it late or something i was glad. It was a fair chunk of change in those days. If you are clever you can still buy as going concerns but selll as GST exclusive, Ramp down the Curtilage or up if it suits claim off the office areas hybrid GST 6 monthly and invest it in the bank when selling and keep ther interest etc etc etc.
You will never shut all the loop holes but we can try and make it fair as just increasing GST every few years is not fair.
What we need to do is get the speculators out of NZ and stop them manipultaing our economy Remember back in the early 80's one trader, Nearly killed our Dollar he made 100's of millions for doing nothing and we paid for it all.
Can remember his name but 300,000,000 million in one day i think it was. John Key later worked for him.

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 16:27

If you are buying and flipping property you are also meant to pay tax on that also Nothing new There either.

Pretty Sure national created the Residential land withholding tax.

Fairer than upping GST

This has nothing to do with "flipping property" , this has to do with long term, conciencious landlords getting their arse screwed.
I guess the real weekly cost of being one of my tenants just became absolutely all my outgoings on said property for the year, plus 20% (only fair to make a modest profit for my trouble) divided by 52.
Look forward to seeing my tenants faces when I dump that one on them come Monday.
They can write a letter of thanks to the tooth fairy.

husaberg

27th February 2019, 16:35

This has nothing to do with "flipping property" , this has to do with long term, conciencious landlords getting their arse screwed.
I guess the real weekly cost of being one of my tenants just became absolutely all my outgoings on said property for the year, plus 20% (only fair to make a modest profit for my trouble) divided by 52.
Look forward to seeing my tenants faces when I dump that one on them come Monday.
They can write a letter of thanks to the tooth fairy.

Really because CGT only apply when a property is sold so that Conscientious landlord is a crock of Katman. Not to mention it hasnt came in yet either or even got a bill drafted yet.
You remember the CGT that practically everyone else has but NZ has (https://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/04/06/top-5-expat-friendly-countries-with-no-capital-gains-taxes/) the CGT that National tried to implement on property a few years ago, that you never complained about then?
Maybe the reason you never complained then was because they did a total piss poor job of it.
Hike your rent up if you want but at least be honest about the reason why you want to do it. (https://i.imgur.com/k41V9sG.jpg)
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/2a/12/a0/2a12a07b400aac9e5f202b9c97eb0e07.jpg

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 17:10

Really because CGT only apply when a property is sold so that Conscientious landlord is a crock of Katman. Not to mention it hasnt came in yet either or even got a bill drafted yet.
You remember the CGT that practically everyone else has but NZ has (https://nomadcapitalist.com/2014/04/06/top-5-expat-friendly-countries-with-no-capital-gains-taxes/) the CGT that National tried to implement on property a few years ago, that you never complained about then?
Maybe the reason you never complained then was because they did a total piss poor job of it.
[URL="https://i.imgur.com/k41V9sG.jpg"]Hike your rent up if you want but at least be honest about the reason why you want to do it]

Well no, I have a beautiful family home & have no desire to occupy my rental property.
It's just that the last incentive I had to give my tenants a subsidised by me, sharp as deal using my tax paid disposable income (which I should have spent on a Porsche for me, rather than housing for a family I barely know) is about to disappear. I'm not in it to be Santa Claus, so it's user pays now I guess.
Don't try to tell me what my motives are.
If they're talking about screwing me over I'd rather be on the front foot when it happens. Game on.

husaberg

27th February 2019, 17:35

Well no, I have a beautiful family home & have no desire to occupy my rental property.
It's just that the last incentive I had to give my tenants a subsidised by me, sharp as deal using my tax paid disposable income is about to disappear. I'm not in it to be Santa Claus, so it's user pays now I guess.
Don't try to tell me what my motives are.
If they're talking about screwing me over I'd rather be on the front foot when it happens. Game on.

Its clear what your motives are BOB
If you are worried about a tax that not only is it not even been implemented it is only ever going to be implemented when a property is sold, and you are saying its costing you profit. the only logical conclusion is you intended selling the properties for a Profit.
There is nothing wrong with that,Selling stuff for a profit, but at least fess up to the reasons why you are pissed about it.
Why should you not have to pay tax on profit that is income when others pay tax on income, Just because you want make a living by selling property.
Its just a loop hole that should have been shut years ago.
Ps the only one around here that has mentioned screwing you is Katspam. Pretty sure he doesn't want to go around the front way.
The only reason you would have to be worried is if you put all your eggs in one basket, As long as you took the advice and spread your investments over a number of different things rather than just all in rental properties, you will be fine.

Madness

27th February 2019, 17:38

Fuck I hate agreeing with Husaberk!

russd7

27th February 2019, 17:49

pete376403

27th February 2019, 18:13

I am not surprised as even before then there were rules relating to flipping property that never resulted in any tax being paid.
Anyone rich has a half decent accountant anyway but you do what you can within the rules that you work.
But did you see the list of countries that ddnt have a CGT they were nearly all tax haven countries.
I remember when i brought my first house the lawyer doing the conveyancing was abe to somehow date the sale so i never paid the stamp duty, Still dont know how they done it, filed it late or something i was glad. It was a fair chunk of change in those days. If you are clever you can still buy as going concerns but selll as GST exclusive, Ramp down the Curtilage or up if it suits claim off the office areas hybrid GST 6 monthly and invest it in the bank when selling and keep ther interest etc etc etc.
You will never shut all the loop holes but we can try and make it fair as just increasing GST every few years is not fair.
What we need to do is get the speculators out of NZ and stop them manipultaing our economy Remember back in the early 80's one trader, Nearly killed our Dollar he made 100's of millions for doing nothing and we paid for it all.
Can remember his name but 300,000,000 million in one day i think it was. John Key later worked for him.

Andy Krieger
It is autumn 1987, and Andrew Krieger, a trader at Bankers Trust, is watching the New Zealand dollar (NZD) in the aftermath of the 1987 stock market crash. Currencies such as the NZD (also called the “Kiwi”) are being bid up by traders fearful of holding US dollars. This leads to a short-term overvaluation of many currencies relative to the USD, but Krieger focused on the Kiwi.

New Zealand has a fairly small economy, and using options Krieger is able to ultimately short the entire money supply of New Zealand (according his book The Money Bazaar). This would have been impossible if he only used the cash market.

Other traders, and even the New Zealand government, get involved. The government asks Krieger to stop the raid, but ultimately the market agrees with Krieger. The Kiwi sells-off 5% in a single day, with intra-day fluctuations up to 10% according to some sources. Much of the decline is pinned on Krieger selling massive amounts of Kiwi dollars, yet it is also other traders acting on the information which ultimately leads to Krieger being exit his positions with a profit.

The estimated profit to Bankers Trust was $300 million…of which Krieger got a $3 million bonus. This “tiny” bonus on such a well executed trade disgusted Krieger and ultimately he left Bankers Trust, going to work for George Soros in 1988.

In 1988 Bankers Trust admitted that profits from their options trading activity was overstated by $80 million in Q4 of 1987. Therefore the profits made specifically by Krieger are drawn into question, as the many of the options that were revalued involved Kiwi dollars. Such options were fairly new, and it is possible that Krieger was much of the market in such instruments at the time, making the options hard to value.

Either way, Krieger’s position is estimated to have been $700 million to $1 billion, with profits in the range of $220 to $300 million.

Kriger may have been right in the short-term, but ultimately the NZD went way higher in 1988. A great trade not only requires a good entry, but a timely exit as well.

husaberg

27th February 2019, 18:26

Andy Krieger
It is autumn 1987, and Andrew Krieger, a trader at Bankers Trust, is watching the New Zealand dollar (NZD) in the aftermath of the 1987 stock market crash. Currencies such as the NZD (also called the “Kiwi”) are being bid up by traders fearful of holding US dollars. This leads to a short-term overvaluation of many currencies relative to the USD, but Krieger focused on the Kiwi.

New Zealand has a fairly small economy, and using options Krieger is able to ultimately short the entire money supply of New Zealand (according his book The Money Bazaar). This would have been impossible if he only used the cash market.

Other traders, and even the New Zealand government, get involved. The government asks Krieger to stop the raid, but ultimately the market agrees with Krieger. The Kiwi sells-off 5% in a single day, with intra-day fluctuations up to 10% according to some sources. Much of the decline is pinned on Krieger selling massive amounts of Kiwi dollars, yet it is also other traders acting on the information which ultimately leads to Krieger being exit his positions with a profit.

The estimated profit to Bankers Trust was $300 million…of which Krieger got a $3 million bonus. This “tiny” bonus on such a well executed trade disgusted Krieger and ultimately he left Bankers Trust, going to work for George Soros in 1988.

In 1988 Bankers Trust admitted that profits from their options trading activity was overstated by $80 million in Q4 of 1987. Therefore the profits made specifically by Krieger are drawn into question, as the many of the options that were revalued involved Kiwi dollars. Such options were fairly new, and it is possible that Krieger was much of the market in such instruments at the time, making the options hard to value.

Either way, Krieger’s position is estimated to have been $700 million to $1 billion, with profits in the range of $220 to $300 million.

Kriger may have been right in the short-term, but ultimately the NZD went way higher in 1988. A great trade not only requires a good entry, but a timely exit as well.
Thats him Krieger but its also a bit on the nose that the reason it droped in value was he was holding pretty much all that was traded, also remember Forex traders effectually bet on the currency going up or down, In his case he made it go down.
It was genius, yes of course it was. it is also highly dubious in respect to ethics. As its effectively insider trading, As ypu said we were a tiny new market with effectively no controls he actually could have sunk us.
The story goes a very panicked Rodger Douglas in full "corporal wilson" mode rung his boss and said stop that bugger from fucking with our market.
He claims it never happens, but i suspect it did.

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 19:11

Its clear what your motives are BOB
If you are worried about a tax that not only is it not even been implemented it is only ever going to be implemented when a property is sold, and you are saying its costing you profit. the only logical conclusion is you intended selling the properties for a Profit.
There is nothing wrong with that,Selling stuff for a profit, but at least fess up to the reasons why you are pissed about it.
Why should you not have to pay tax on profit that is income when others pay tax on income, Just because you want make a living by selling property.
Its just a loop hole that should have been shut years ago.
Ps the only one around here that has mentioned screwing you is Katspam. Pretty sure he doesn't want to go around the front way.
The only reason you would have to be worried is if you put all your eggs in one basket, As long as you took the advice and spread your investments over a number of different things rather than just all in rental properties, you will be fine.

But I don't make a living off selling properties for a profit, another random guess by you telling me what my motives are & where my income comes from.
It is merely inflation proofing my money, which stuffing it under the bed doesn't do.
You also have no idea how & where I invest, so don't try to convince yourself or others that you have any idea about my finances.
I'm genuinely flummoxed why you love taxes so much. My best guess is you have fuck all of anything to tax & if anything and are a tax taker, rather than a taxpayer. That's just me making sweeping generalisations about you basesd solely on your opinions & views expressed via this forum.
Now how does that sit with you?

husaberg

27th February 2019, 19:24

But I don't make a living off selling properties for a profit, another random guess by you telling me what my motives are & where my income comes from.
It is merely inflation proofing my money, which stuffing it under the bed doesn't do.
You also have no idea how & where I invest, so don't try to convince yourself or others that you have any idea about my finances.
I'm genuinely flummoxed why you love taxes so much. My best guess is you have fuck all of anything to tax & if anything and are a tax taker, rather than a taxpayer. That's just me making sweeping generalisations about you basesd solely on your opinions & views expressed via this forum.
Now how does that sit with you?

Like i said why the worry if you dont intend on flipping them for a tax free profit then?
Bob you are the one who said they have multiple rentals on this forum not me.
You can try and justify my views on tax anyway you want but as we both know.
i have made pretty good some would say obsene tax free profits out of trading real estate and also at running business at a loss to minimise Tax.
As these were farms i also minimised my own off farm income tax to invest in the Business "runing at a loss and being developed " and had many of my living cost subsidized by the business.
These are all legal practices, likely many of the same used by you as well, These are not available to people who are not in business.
You and ocean go on about tax being for handouts to lazy bludgers but kick up a massive stink if you non taxed perks are put in jeopardy.

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 19:28

Like i said why the worry if you dont intend on flipping them for a tax free profit then.
Bob you are the one who said they have multiple rentals on this forum not me.
You can try and justify my views on tax anyway you want but as we both know.
i have made pretty good tax free money out of trading real estate and also at running business at a loss to minimise Tax.
"Flipping" is a bit over the top in my case, is five years plus & still no thought of selling your idea of flipping?
If you go back & read the first post I put in this thread you will see it doesn't bother me, but if the govt wants to take away my reward, I will have to get that reward from somewhere else, my tenants.
If the government move their goalposts, then it's only fair that I'm allowed to move mine too, and I will.
No problem, they do what they believe they need to, & I do what I need to do in return.

husaberg

27th February 2019, 19:37

"Flipping" is a bit over the top in my case, is five years plus & still no thought of selling your idea of flipping?
If you go back & read the first post I put in this thread you will see it doesn't bother me, but if the govt wants to take away my reward, I will have to get that reward from somewhere else, my tenants.

Bob you keep saying it doesnt worry you but your posts indicate it worries you a lot.
The goverment has not implemented any rules if they do in the future it will be to make sure income is taxed fairly what ever its source be it from wages, shares, interest or realized capital gains on assets.

Ocean1

27th February 2019, 19:46

it will be to make sure income is taxed fairly

And that, ladies is the biggest lie you'll ever hear, and the daily repetition from the Marxist branch of the Peters coalition doesn't make it any less of a lie.

By all means let's do fair. That would start with everyone contributing the same dollar amount and being eligible for the same benefits, that's fair.

HenryDorsetCase

27th February 2019, 19:47

Well no, I have a beautiful family home & have no desire to occupy my rental property.
It's just that the last incentive I had to give my tenants a subsidised by me, sharp as deal using my tax paid disposable income (which I should have spent on a Porsche for me, rather than housing for a family I barely know) is about to disappear. I'm not in it to be Santa Claus, so it's user pays now I guess.
Don't try to tell me what my motives are.
If they're talking about screwing me over I'd rather be on the front foot when it happens. Game on.

The important question I think is, What Porsche model?

Classic 911, Mentalist 911 Turbo, left field 356?

HenryDorsetCase

27th February 2019, 19:48

By all means let's do fair. That would start with everyone contributing the same dollar amount and being eligible for the same benefits, that's fair.

Wait, I thought you were against communism?

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 19:48

Bob you keep saying it doesnt worry you but your posts indicate it worries you a lot.
.
Yes, it worries me that the country I was born in is being run by idiots & is turning to shit.
If they hadn't prevented further oil exploration then further taxes wouldn't be required.
Have a read of this. Even if you only get to page two.
It was written ten years ago.
https://www.nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The_long_term_effects_of_capital_gains_taxes_in_Ne w_Zealand.pdf

sidecar bob

27th February 2019, 19:50

The important question I think is, What Porsche model?

Classic 911, Mentalist 911 Turbo, left field 356?

I'm thinking 997 Turbo:drool:

husaberg

27th February 2019, 19:58

And that, ladies is the biggest lie you'll ever hear, and the daily repetition from the Marxist branch of the Peters coalition doesn't make it any less of a lie.

By all means let's do fair. That would start with everyone contributing the same dollar amount and being eligible for the same benefits, that's fair.

Isnt it funny you always go socialist, maxist, Communist.
You go on about this crap when you have MMP and a center left and a center right party its just plain ludicrous.
You are not in the majority last election , likely not the next election either. Get over it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEuFtVf6oSw

Yes, it worries me that the country I was born in is being run by idiots & is turning to shit.
If they hadn't prevented further oil exploration then further taxes wouldn't be required.
Have a read of this. Even if you only get to page two.
It was written ten years ago.
https://www.nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/The_long_term_effects_of_capital_gains_taxes_in_Ne w_Zealand.pdf
If it worries you immigrate to the right wing republic of the USA run by a rather orange tub thumping right wing self made business man.:corn:

National tried to close the property loophole no issues from you them Labour talks about doing the same thing all of a sudden its war.
Like i said nearly every other country in the developed world has a CGT. Get over it or move to Panama or the caymen islands Jersey or Monaco.

Wait, I thought you were against communism?
He likes putin and i understand he likes old Elton John songs as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMsTEHH-SB8
Although we all know his red rolla is really a brown Triumph 2000

jasonu

28th February 2019, 04:42

I'm genuinely flummoxed why you love taxes so much. ?

That one has got me too. I've never seen a regular Joe like the prospect of new taxes and defend them as he does.

jasonu

28th February 2019, 04:55

it will be to make sure income is taxed fairly

That's a fucking good one!!!

HEsch

28th February 2019, 07:14

merv

28th February 2019, 07:58

sidecar bob

28th February 2019, 08:00

ok, now we have thrashed out the housing side of this debate & come up with rationale that we all agree on:lol: it's time to discuss the pink elephant in the room.
You buy a business that has been failing due to either ineptitude or laziness by the previous owner, or that they have been ripping all the cash out of it in order to run it at a loss, so as to gain tax benefits & ensure that they sell it for less than they paid for it, to avoid paying CGT.
You purchase said business & do everything correctly & honestly. You employ tax paying staff & run it as honestly as is possible & turn it into a very lucrative little earner for the tax man.
After a decade of seven day weeks, 14 hour days, your body & mind can take it no more & you sell it for what it's now worth. The govt pop their hand out & fine you a CGT for being sucessful & honest so they can waste it on on Whanau Ora racist healthcare service that you aren't able to access due to your skin colour.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 08:16

Wait, I thought you were against communism?

If you define communism in terms of state control over production: who gets paid what for it and who benefits from it then yes, I am against communism, it's an inherently unfair system by any definition. So seeing the local marxists using "fair" to describe policy designed to further remove the natural link between production and it's rewards is ridiculous.

I have no problem with the general concept of a collective economy, as long as it's costs and benefits are shared equally. All sorts of reasons it's a good idea, everyone uses some services or infrastructure more or less equally, there's huge economies of scale to be taken advantage of, and there's some costs that are best spread over an individual's lifetime. But when that collective economy becomes larger than the total earnings available to the individuals that generated it you're fucked, it's no longer a viable system.

As I said, a fair system is one where everyone contributes the same and everyone benefits the same. When successive governments have assumed control over the value of both production and the distribution of it's benefits and distorted them to the extent that over half of the population benefits more than they contribute, (at the direct expense of the most productive) then you're well down the same path as every other failed socialist state in history.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 08:53

Saw this as a point of view...

Most mortgages end up costing you double in interest, over the term. Ie, borrow 1 mil, pay back 1 mil principal and 1 (to 2) mil in interest. For simplicity's sake let's say it's the same as the principle (1+1).

Purchase property, 1 mil value. Repay mortgage over many years. Sell property, 2 mil value.
According to the govt, I've made a mil on the property.
Really, I've not made a mil in "profit" because I had to pay interest. I've made $0.
Result: Pay tax on 1 mil. Joy!

(FWIW, I'm not 100% opposed to a CGT, but I don't think the way it is being proposed is going to address the problems we have ie undersupply of overpriced houses).
Heres the thing the oceans and the Bobs never mention
Is you can claim the interests paid on the mortgage as a deduction on your taxable income when it run through a business.
No one has said a CGT will apply to a persons Dwelling.
As far as the original intention was it was to stop property speculators and investors getting away with not paying tax on income.
Auckland has an undersupply of houses as the market was distorted by speculators some overseas buying up houses as it was a tax free option.
this created an artificial undersupply of housing to buy which drove up the price further which in returned encouraged more to do the same until housing became unaffordable to the first home buyer.
If you get rid of the tax free incentives at the same time build more houses the price stabilizes, The Auckland houses price increases were unsustainable anyway. The Bubble would has burst eventually.
Remember how National spend years denying there was a Auckland housing crisis.

That's a fucking good one!!!

Really America has a CGT Trumps was trup pledging or mentioned getting rid of it in his campaign?
Seeing as he all about making america Great we can only assume its great with it? Or is he just going to sneak it through, like his alternative tax reform which was aimed at the mega rich avoiding more tax.
Odd we have still never seen his tax returns how many years now still no returns.

Either way, Tuesday’s partial disclosure will further pressure the White House to publish the president’s tax returns in full. As a candidate, Trump broke with a 40-year precedent by refusing to release his tax returns despite repeated calls from his opponents in both parties.

The last major-party nominee to withhold tax records was Gerald Ford, who assumed the presidency after Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. Ford released a summary of data from eight years of tax returns but did not disclose the full documents.

i found this from a leaked filing though.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/14/donald-trump-tax-return-leaked-alternative-minimum

Hey Jason isnt this the tax Trump reformed?

History AMT
Congress created a simplified version of the Alternative Minimum Tax in 1969. It was originally known as the millionaires' tax. It was designed to make sure the wealthy didn't get away tax free. In 1969, the Internal Revenue Service discovered that 155 millionaires paid no taxes because they used deductions not available to the average worker. Congress applied a higher tax rate on incomes that reached a certain level.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 10:35

Isnt it funny you always go socialist, maxist, Communist.
You go on about this crap when you have MMP and a center left and a center right party its just plain ludicrous.
You are not in the majority last election , likely not the next election either. Get over it.

You can't help yourself, can you? You get all wet at both ends at any perceived slight to your beloved labour party, and spend hours "researching" "facts" to attack the evel Tories in some bizarre attempt to validate your ideologically sensitive feelings. Which is fine. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

So you again conflate me with the national party, simply because I disapprove of their activities slightly less than the extreme socialist/marxist/communist alternatives. They're still thieving socialist cunts, just marginally less obnoxious thieving socialist cunts, slightly less likely to destroy the country, as socialists everywhere always do.

HenryDorsetCase

28th February 2019, 10:38

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 10:40

Look, I think we can all agree that the Tories are cunts.

All socialists are cunts. I might have mentioned it.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 11:27

You can't help yourself, can you? You get all wet at both ends at any perceived slight to your beloved labour party, and spend hours "researching" "facts" to attack the evel Tories in some bizarre attempt to validate your ideologically sensitive feelings. Which is fine. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

So you again conflate me with the national party, simply because I disapprove of their activities slightly less than the extreme socialist/marxist/communist alternatives. They're still thieving socialist cunts, just marginally less obnoxious thieving socialist cunts, slightly less likely to destroy the country, as socialists everywhere always do.

Yeah yeah whatever tories are great everyone else is evil.It was a massive co-incidence The whole time national was in power you constantly crowed about how great everything was and our rockstar economy and so forth and you now expect people to believe you dont have a right wing bias. Nice one.
You claimed NZ was the every of the world but failed to mention 1/3 of or children were living in provety you crowed about our raking and our ave age of death increasing but failed to aknlowdge they were once far higher ranked in the world.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/171833-Reasons-to-be-cheerful/page28
I have to laugh, I dont spend hours on anything, it take mere seconds to effectively disprove the made up crap you post FFS. Seconds.

neels

28th February 2019, 13:40

Heres the thing the oceans and the Bobs never mention
Is you can claim the interests paid on the mortgage as a deduction on your taxable income when it run through a business.

That's rather a simplistic view.

In actual fact, you have income and expenses, one of which is interest.

If your expenses exceed your income you make a loss, which previously you were allowed to subtract from other income, so assuming you were making over $70k you could get a tax refund of 33% of the amount of your loss.

This doesn't include mortgage principal, so you are actually paying the amount of the loss plus the amount of the mortgage principal payments out of your own pocket for the privilege of managing a rental property for the bank, and if you're lucky getting a couple of grand back as a tax refund.

Of course now that these losses can no longer be offset against other income, they will be accumulated against any future income, so will probably be a great means of reducing any CGT liability when a property is sold.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 14:19

That's rather a simplistic view.

In actual fact, you have income and expenses, one of which is interest.

If your expenses exceed your income you make a loss, which previously you were allowed to subtract from other income, so assuming you were making over $70k you could get a tax refund of 33% of the amount of your loss.

This doesn't include mortgage principal, so you are actually paying the amount of the loss plus the amount of the mortgage principal payments out of your own pocket for the privilege of managing a rental property for the bank, and if you're lucky getting a couple of grand back as a tax refund.

Of course now that these losses can no longer be offset against other income, they will be accumulated against any future income, so will probably be a great means of reducing any CGT liability when a property is sold.

Not not simplistic its it is a fact you can claim the the interest when its a rental as a legitimate operating cost. They are deducting the interest from their income. This is fine a a normally accepted business practice.
Yet when its you home its not a deductible cost. Nor should it be.
What the CGT is designed for is to close a loophole that lets someone profit from the capital gains of selling a property tax free when it been operating as a business rather than a residence.
The bobs and the Oceans can scare monger all they like but by not mentioning or acknowledging these basic fundamental differences you can tell they only wish to scare monger and not debate on the relative merits.
If it was interest in the bank or profit from shares or other income from a business this is all taxed as income.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 14:25

Yeah yeah whatever tories are great everyone else is evil.It was a massive co-incidence The whole time national was in power you constantly crowed about how great everything was and our rockstar economy and so forth and you now expect people to believe you dont have a right wing bias. Nice one.
You claimed NZ was the every of the world but failed to mention 1/3 of or children were living in provety you crowed about our raking and our ave age of death increasing but failed to aknlowdge they were once far higher ranked in the world.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/171833-Reasons-to-be-cheerful/page28
I have to laugh, I dont spend hours on anything, it take mere seconds to effectively disprove the made up crap you post FFS. Seconds.

Amazing, you see tories under every bed. Gotta hate dem evel tories. :laugh: What you read is more or less the opposite of what I wrote. Again. :laugh:

Again: I don't have a right wing bias, I have an abhorrence of money grubbing socialist behaviour from any government, national, labour or winston first. In some cases it's simple vote buying and in other's it's driven by ideology, but the outcomes are all the same.

And like I said, if you think your opinion holds more weight than the UN's multi-metric annual HDI survey results then your every bit as deluded as your incoherent ranting indicates. And if you're using labour's definition of "poverty", which requires that everyone over 14 years old owns a cellphone then you're as intellectually crippled as they are. Now fuck off, I'm sick of your rabid, infantile ravings.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 14:31

Not not simplistic its it is a fact you can claim the the interest when its a rental as a legitimate operating cost. THey are deducting the interest from their income. This is fine a a normally accepted business practice.
Yet when its you home its not a deductible cost. Nor should it be.
What the CGT is designed for is to close a loophole that lets someone profit from the capital gains of selling a property tax free when it been operating as a business rather than a residence.
The bobs and the Oceans can scare monger all they like but by not mentioning or acknowledging these basic fundamental differences you can tell they only wish to scare monger and not debate on the relative merits.

I think Bob and Ocean have already indicated several times that they don't give a fuck, you simply don't listen.

If the costs of investing in a residential property goes up then either the income from that source goes up accordingly or we'll put our money somewhere else. I already have.

mashman

28th February 2019, 15:09

Thoughts on the CGT.

An excellent tool................. for the entrenched to justify their entitlement. What's not to love about it.

JimO

28th February 2019, 15:16

Thoughts on the CGT.

An excellent tool................. for the entrenched to justify their entitlement. What's not to love about it. entitlement? reward for risk i say

sidecar bob

28th February 2019, 15:23

Thoughts on the CGT.

An excellent tool................. for the entrenched to justify their entitlement. What's not to love about it.

I'm not entitled, I'm providing houses for people to live in while at the same time making sure I'm not a burden to the taxpayer into my old age while also paying a pile of tax.
How do you think renters & the country would get on if people like me didn't do that?
I'm happy to drop it & run & then complain about cunts like me in the future though.
I'm due a bit of my tax back, but I fear means testing will put paid to that.
Oh to be a loser.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 15:24

Amazing, you see tories under every bed. Gotta hate dem evel tories. :laugh: What you read is more or less the opposite of what I wrote. Again. :laugh:

Again: I don't have a right wing bias, I have an abhorrence of money grubbing socialist behaviour from any government, national, labour or winston first. In some cases it's simple vote buying and in other's it's driven by ideology, but the outcomes are all the same.

And like I said, if you think your opinion holds more weight than the UN's multi-metric annual HDI survey results then your every bit as deluded as your incoherent ranting indicates. And if you're using labour's definition of "poverty", which requires that everyone over 14 years old owns a cellphone then you're as intellectually crippled as they are. Now fuck off, I'm sick of your rabid, infantile ravings.
Nearly every country in the UN has a CGT.
So no right wing bias... aye yeah sure ocean whatever you say dont let anyone think, i said you may have a right wing bias, Because i never would say you might have one.
I would say you clearly do have a blatantly obvious ring wing bias.

I think Bob and Ocean have already indicated several times that they don't give a fuck, you simply don't listen.

If the costs of investing in a residential property goes up then either the income from that source goes up accordingly or we'll put our money somewhere else. I already have.

Yeah yeah in post after post you have tried to say you dont care while ranting on about something that hasn't happened suggests you do care very very much. Which is sweet. You big softy.:whistle:

HenryDorsetCase

28th February 2019, 15:27

HenryDorsetCase

28th February 2019, 15:36

Heres the thing the oceans and the Bobs never mention
Is you can claim the interests paid on the mortgage as a deduction on your taxable income when it run through a business.
No one has said a CGT will apply to a persons Dwelling.
As far as the original intention was it was to stop property speculators and investors getting away with not paying tax on income.
Auckland has an undersupply of houses as the market was distorted by speculators some overseas buying up houses as it was a tax free option.
this created an artificial undersupply of housing to buy which drove up the price further which in returned encouraged more to do the same until housing became unaffordable to the first home buyer.
If you get rid of the tax free incentives at the same time build more houses the price stabilizes, The Auckland houses price increases were unsustainable anyway. The Bubble would has burst eventually.
Remember how National spend years denying there was a Auckland housing crisis.

Really America has a CGT Trumps was trup pledging or mentioned getting rid of it in his campaign?
Seeing as he all about making america Great we can only assume its great with it? Or is he just going to sneak it through, like his alternative tax reform which was aimed at the mega rich avoiding more tax.
Odd we have still never seen his tax returns how many years now still no returns.

i found this from a leaked filing though.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/14/donald-trump-tax-return-leaked-alternative-minimum

Hey Jason isnt this the tax Trump reformed?

The CGT specifically excludes your residential house. So yay.

Any commercial property is in a money making entity anyway so the tax impost of this remains to be seen.

RDJ

28th February 2019, 15:47

good, bad?..........

Asset theft by socialist pricks under color of 'law' = taking from hard-working savers to buy votes from lazy people to vote for the Coalition of the Lazy, Corrupt and Incompetent.

mashman

28th February 2019, 15:54

entitlement? reward for risk i say

Cool. When a CGT is considered theft by people who limit their tax liability and wonder why the government needs to create new taxes... it's entitlement. Some people have no honour.

mashman

28th February 2019, 16:02

I'm not entitled, I'm providing houses for people to live in while at the same time making sure I'm not a burden to the taxpayer into my old age while also paying a pile of tax.

I know a few people that do the same things... well, to their chosen extent. Society prodives the houses, you just own them :)

How do you think renters & the country would get on if people like me didn't do that?

The wouldn't invest in housing and houses would be affordable.

I'm happy to drop it & run & then complain about cunts like me in the future though.
I'm due a bit of my tax back, but I fear means testing will put paid to that.
Oh to be a loser.

The left will see ya right in yer old age :killingme

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 16:16

Cool. When a CGT is considered theft by people who limit their tax liability and wonder why the government needs to create new taxes... it's entitlement. Some people have no honour.

No, it's not.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/entitled Feeling that you have the right to do or have what you want without having to work for it or deserve it, just because of who you are.

You're thinking of that other lot: beneficiaries. Or politicians. Same thing.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 16:23

The CGT specifically excludes your residential house. So yay.

Any commercial property is in a money making entity anyway so the tax impost of this remains to be seen.

Er it hasnt got past the talking about it stage, and you are already saying its a Threesome?
The way the tax laws working regards to rentals is a real porcine Buttocks.
Not only that, Farms as well.
I sent Bob a few examples of a few deals that show how much capital gains can be made in short duration's on a rising market.
These deals were all above board but if they hadn't have been property they would have been subject to a fair wack of Tax.
If Bob Pms me back i will explain why one of them was and 1 dollar, As not many people can say they got one over the ASB.
One should never under estimate the inability of a banker to look beyond simple figures.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 16:30

So no right wing bias... aye yeah sure ocean whatever you say dont let anyone think you i said you may have a right wing bias, Because i never would say you might have one.
I would say you clearly do have a blatantly obvious ring wing bias.

Yeah yeah in post after post you have tried to say you dont care while ranting on about something that hasn't happened suggests you do care very very much. Which is sweet. You big softy.:whistle:

Believing that re-distrubution of wealth by force is wrong doesn't represent a right wing bias. Believing otherwise concisely and absolutely represents socialist ideology. Believing that everyone should contribute to and benefit from any government activity equally is about as centrist as you can get. If you would say I clearly have a right wing bias then I'd say that matches the rest of your heavily socialist narrative: Delusional.

You're really struggling with this, ain't ya? We can care that the government is progressing anti-productive and unfair policy, and be completely unconcerned that it'll affect us because we're not stupid enough to continue to provide subsidised housing if and when those policies remove any incentive to do so.

All clear?

husaberg

28th February 2019, 16:32

Believing that re-distrubution of wealth by force is wrong doesn't represent a right wing bias. Believing otherwise concisely and absolutely represents socialist ideology. Believing that everyone should contribute to and benefit from any government activity equally is about as centrist as you can get. If you would say I clearly have a right wing bias then I'd say that matches the rest of your heavily socialist narrative: Delusional.

You're really struggling with this, ain't ya? We can care that the government is progressing anti-productive and unfair policy, and be completely unconcerned that it'll affect us because we're not stupid enough to continue to provide subsidised housing if and when those policies remove any incentive to do so.

All clear?

Yeah yeah i really are buying you dont have a right wing bias, please tell me more how you are neither right wing biased to the right wing when you contatantly call everyone commies and socialists that doesn't hold your view why holding up everything right wing as being an ideal.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 16:41

Yeah yeah i really are buying you dont have a right wing bias, please tell me more how you are neither right wing biased to the right wing when you contatantly call everyone commies and socialists that doesn't hold your view why holding up everything right wing as being an ideal.

I call them exactly what they call themselves: socialists.

Nor have I ever held up everything right wing as any sort of ideal.

I just gave you my definition of centrism, if you don't think that's fair then tell me why instead of trying to label it "right wing" when it's intrinsically not.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 16:50

I call them exactly what they call themselves: socialists.

Nor have I ever held up everything right wing as any sort of ideal.

I just gave you my definition of centrism, if you don't think that's fair then tell me why instead of trying to label it "right wing" when it's intrinsically not.

Funny Your idea of centralist is just so happens to be to the right of Genghis Khan that all.:lol:

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 17:08

Funny Your idea of centralist is just so happens to be to the right of Genghis Khan that all.:lol:

So you agree, every political entity in this country is radically left leaning.

JimO

28th February 2019, 17:21

mashman

28th February 2019, 17:27

No, it's not.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/entitled Feeling that you have the right to do or have what you want without having to work for it or deserve it, just because of who you are.
[/B]
You're thinking of that other lot: beneficiaries. Or politicians. Same thing.

Oh heyez mista myopia. You're dumb.

I was thinking of you, duh.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 17:29

the government wouldn't need to create new taxes if it spent the current tax take with a bit of care, but hey easy come easy go

I once read a detailed analysis of the value returned by government spending compared to the value returned via private spending. I can't find it now, which is annoying, but it was somewhere around 15%.

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 17:30

Oh heyez mista myopia. You're dumb.

I was thinking of you, duh.

Well stop it, your metaphorical spittle gets all over my screen.

mashman

28th February 2019, 17:36

the government wouldn't need to create new taxes if it spent the current tax take with a bit of care, but hey easy come easy go

lol... yeah there's a lot that could be arsed, but hey, that'd see less money in the economy where it's needed as we would have to choose between people and stuff like roads and other infrastructure stuff that the private sector gouges on a regular basis.

The government wouldn't need to create more taxes if they weren't gouged. They would need more taxes if those doing the gouging actually paid their taxes instead of finding as many legal ways out of doing so as possible just to afford that new boat or holiday (many businesses, it all adds up). Also, if those businesses paid anywhere near a living wage, government wouldn't have to subsidise nearly half of the country financially, but hey, evade that tax mofo... and so the story continues. Blaming the government, outwith their usual lack of ideas regarding anything, is kind of pointless when the rort is virtually everyone who's in business. Ocean mentioned scale of economies. Scale it up v's a CGT and which do you think would end up better for the tax payer in general? It ain't even a competition... but hey, evade evade evade, complain when taxed, rinse, repeat :wari:

S'ok though, when the next govt gets in it'll create a new loophole for people to exploit that gets around the CGT.

mashman

28th February 2019, 17:38

Well stop it, the metaphorical spittle gets all over my screen.

Then stop projecting metaphorical spittle and deal with what's been said :killingme :crybaby: :killingme.

RDJ

28th February 2019, 18:05

Cool. When a CGT is considered theft by people who limit their tax liability and wonder why the government needs to create new taxes... it's entitlement. Some people have no honour.

What are you smoking. Those of us who all our working lives have had the tax taken out of your pay packet (PAYE) never had any damn chance to avoid any damn tax. Now the toothy commie and her prick henchwits are going to take 33% of the house we bought with tax-paid money. But hey, if you're an iwi, 17% - or more likely nothing*. And you talk about honour. Sheesh.

* "Two large iwi organisations have submitted to the Tax Working Group (TWG) that unless they receive an exemption from CGT, the new tax would breach the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi." Yeah, right.

mashman

28th February 2019, 18:50

What are you smoking. Those of us who all our working lives have had the tax taken out of your pay packet (PAYE) never had any damn chance to avoid any damn tax. Now the toothy commie and her prick henchwits are going to take 33% of the house we bought with tax-paid money. But hey, if you're an iwi, 17% - or more likely nothing*. And you talk about honour. Sheesh.

* "Two large iwi organisations have submitted to the Tax Working Group (TWG) that unless they receive an exemption from CGT, the new tax would breach the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi." Yeah, right.

Bummer eh... Shame we can't tax the poor more.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 18:51

So you agree, every political entity in this country is radically left leaning.

I dont agree with anything much you post at all, but dont worry its me you are just perfect and throughly reasonable in everyway,
Yet your views are do not represent the majority of voters, yet odly tose socialist ones like mine do, isn't that funny.:innocent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4lwhO8tuw4

sidecar bob

28th February 2019, 19:58

I know a few people that do the same things... well, to their chosen extent. Society prodives the houses, you just own them :)

The wouldn't invest in housing and houses would be affordable.

The left will see ya right in yer old age :killingme

But I bought property under the current regime and it was affordable.
Maybe it's got to do with priorities & has nothing to do with "affordability"

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 20:08

I dont agree with anything much you post at all, but dont worry its me you are just perfect and throughly reasonable in everyway,
Yet your views are do not represent the majority of voters, yet odly tose socialist ones like mine do, isn't that funny.:innocent:

Meh, you're a self confessed radical socialist, I'd be worried if you agreed with me on anything.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 20:19

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 20:42

Really where have i ever mentioned i was "radical or a radical socialist" are you sure that wasn't in your rather vivid imagination?

No, it's in your extremely socialist narrative. You continually espouse radical socialist ideologies and attempt to denigrate and belittle anything that highlights their repeated failure.

In attempting to present your opinions as something other than those of a radical socialist I've given you the benefit of the doubt in assuming that you're simply too ashamed to admit it outright.

As any honest, rational person would be.

husaberg

28th February 2019, 20:50

No, it's in your extremely socialist narrative. You continually espouse radical socialist ideologies and attempt to denigrate and belittle anything that highlights their repeated failure.

In attempting to present your opinions as something other than those of a radical socialist I've given you the benefit of the doubt in assuming that you're simply too ashamed to admit it outright.

As any honest, rational person would be.

Meh, you're a self confessed radical socialist, I'd be worried if you agreed with me on anything.
You said "self confessed" Radical socialist. do you know what those words mean.
It clearly means i would have had to say or state i was one, As i clearly haven't You again made up shit. polished it and trued to sell it as being Mahogany.
It seems you have a problem figuring out what is reality and what is just your opinion.

mashman

28th February 2019, 20:53

But I bought property under the current regime and it was affordable.
Maybe it's got to do with priorities & has nothing to do with "affordability"

Bloody markets eh... if only they were predictable ;)

Ocean1

28th February 2019, 21:14

You said "self confessed" Radical socialist. do you know what those words mean.
It clearly means i would have had to say or state i was one, As i clearly haven't You again made up shit. polished it and trued to sell it as being Mahogany.
It seems you have a problem figuring out what is reality and what is just your opinion.

Yeah your idea of "clear" is as dodgy as the rest of your logic.

It's entirely reasonable to consider someone parroting radical socialist dogma to be a radical socialist.

The fact that you deny that just demonstrates that you're short of the credibility to maintain that it's your opinion that's "real".

husaberg

28th February 2019, 21:37

Meh, you're a self confessed radical socialist, I'd be worried if you agreed with me on anything.

Really where have i ever mentioned i was "radical or a radical socialist" are you sure that wasn't in your rather vivid imagination?

Yeah your idea of "clear" is as dodgy as the rest of your logic.

It's entirely reasonable to consider someone parroting radical socialist dogma to be a radical socialist.

The fact that you deny that just demonstrates that you're short of the credibility to maintain that it's your opinion that's "real".

sell confessed does no mean your opinion of someone else, no mater how you try and justify it. You are full of crap.
Selling as cant even fess up to this untruth you posted,why would anyone ever believe anything you say, As you clearly have no credibility.
ps adding more false accusations that i have denied something isnt helping your case either, you seem to be becoming further detached from reality, with each post.

jasonu

1st March 2019, 03:17

Bummer eh... Shame we can't tax the poor more.

Shame a lot of the poor are that way because they can't be fucked working or live up norf where there are hardly any jobs. Sucking from the welfare teat while sitting on the couch playing spaceys and smoking dak is the chosen life style of way too many potential tax payers.

mashman

1st March 2019, 06:24

Shame a lot of the poor are that way because they can't be fucked working or live up norf where there are hardly any jobs. Sucking from the welfare teat while sitting on the couch playing spaceys and smoking dak is the chosen life style of way too many potential tax payers.

bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaa@too many potential potential taxpayers. If they receive welfare, they're taxed on it. You're dumb, you must be Oceans twin.

sidecar bob

1st March 2019, 06:54

Shame a lot of the poor are that way because they can't be fucked working or live up norf where there are hardly any jobs. Sucking from the welfare teat while sitting on the couch playing spaceys and smoking dak is the chosen life style of way too many potential tax payers.

Fuck me, sounds like the poor cunts are being punished enough already
If thats the alternative to paying tax im not a starter at all.

Madness

1st March 2019, 07:46

If thats the tax-avoidance alternative to residential property investment im not a starter at all.

Fixed it for you. I left the poor grammar and lack of capitals just to keep that earthy, working-class feel that I'm sure you'd appreciate.

TheDemonLord

1st March 2019, 07:51

bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaa@too many potential potential taxpayers. If they receive welfare, they're taxed on it. You're dumb, you must be Oceans twin.

Just pointing out - in order to be a net Tax Payer (as in, contributing more to the system than you consume) - in NZ, I believe it's around $60k a year.

Anyone earning less than that, is, by definition, bludging.

Here's the funny thing though - I don't begrudge my hard-earned money helping people.

What I DO begrudge is my hard-earned money being flitted away under the GUISE of helping people. Even moreso when the flittering is done on ideological grounds, based on ideas that have failed catastrophically Every. Single. Time. They. Were. Implemented. and based on premises that are fundamentally false (Mashy and his Tabula Rasa belief for example).

And for the record - you should do well to read 'The Great Leveller' - if you want to reduce inequality, there's been 4 methods and only 1 way to do it:

War.
Famine.
Plague.
Natural Disaster.

The way? Well - it's to reduce everyone to zero. Apart from that, by nature of the fact that humans are a diverse species, some people will be better than others, most people will be borderline useless and a few people will be unbelievably amazing.

Pareto is a bitch.

sidecar bob

1st March 2019, 07:57

Fixed it for you. I left the poor grammar and lack of capitals just to keep that earthy, working-class feel that I'm sure you'd appreciate.

Hey thanks for that.
Im at the track playing about with race bikes today & not posting from my usual device, I can hardly see the punctuation.
Dont forget commercial rentals:msn-wink:

Madness

1st March 2019, 08:20

Dont forget commercial rentals:msn-wink:

I actually wouldn't mind if commercial property was exempt from any CGT that we implement. For me it's all about fixing our problem with housing affordability and somehow restoring the kiwi dream of owning your own home that has been lost on such a huge chunk of our young people.

jasonu

1st March 2019, 08:24

bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaa@too many potential potential taxpayers. If they receive welfare, they're taxed on it. You're dumb, you must be Oceans twin.

Except the welfare cash they receive comes from the tax taken from those that can be bothered to actually work for their money.

mashman

1st March 2019, 09:12

Except the welfare cash they receive comes from the tax taken from those that can be bothered to actually work for their money.

OMG a tax on a tax.......... People need money to go out and buy stuff else business would "earn" less money coz they'd sell less stuff to less people. As is pretty well know, the poor spend everything they get and put it back into the economy so that they can pay themselves with the same money next time. It an't new money. We may as well write the names of the unemployed on their own personalised notes, coz next week they're getting the same money back from the same sources etc... But hey.........

Ocean1

1st March 2019, 10:23

Jeeper

1st March 2019, 12:29

Except the welfare cash they receive comes from the tax taken from those that can be bothered to actually work for their money.So does the pay for government employees. It's the tax money.....

Jeeper

1st March 2019, 12:36

I actually wouldn't mind if commercial property was exempt from any CGT that we implement. For me it's all about fixing our problem with housing affordability and somehow restoring the kiwi dream of owning your own home that has been lost on such a huge chunk of our young people.Owning a house is not a birth right for everyone. If circumstances don't allow it, it should just remain a dream till 'my' personal circumstances improve. Why charge the people who have managed to save something for the future? Besides, there is a difference between capital gain (realised or unrealised at a future date) versus current income. We already pay income tax on income generated by invested capital. Leave capital alone, it ain't broken.

jasonu

1st March 2019, 13:05

So does the pay for government employees. It's the tax money.....

Yes employees

HenryDorsetCase

1st March 2019, 13:12

Shame a lot of the poor are that way because they can't be fucked working or live up norf where there are hardly any jobs. Sucking from the welfare teat while sitting on the couch playing spaceys and smoking dak is the chosen life style of way too many potential tax payers.

Absolutely that is a subset of people receiving state benefits. I do believe it is hugely overstated as it serves a certain flavour of political rhetoric.

I also understand that we are currently experiencing a very low unemployment rate, and critical skills shortages in some areas.

HenryDorsetCase

1st March 2019, 13:16

So financial analysis suggesting a CGT will have either a neutral or inflationary effect on house prices is wrong?

Personally I think its far too early to make that call. And $5 says that whoever is pushing that barrow had a conclusion they wanted numbers to match.

I am interested in the TWG reasoning but unfortunately their report is like 200 pages long and I just dont have time to read it. Or motivation if I am honest - the new Classic Racer arrived yesterday and I bought the new Classic Bike mag on Tuesday. I'm going to a seminar later this month on it and will wait for that - it will be given by the guy who got the gold medal in law in my year - he's one of the pre-eminent tax lawyers in the country. His opinion I will pay for.

RDJ

1st March 2019, 14:19

bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaa@too many potential potential taxpayers. If they receive welfare, they're taxed on it. You're dumb, you must be Oceans twin.

Must be sad for you and your lot to be so tragically unable to make your own way in the world; to be dependent on others' productivity for your handouts - no matter how you try to call them reparations you know, down deep, that they are handouts; and that your only alibi for your envy and covetousness dates 150 years back...

Katman

1st March 2019, 14:54

Must be sad for you and your lot to be so tragically unable to make your own way in the world; to be dependent on others' productivity for your handouts - no matter how you try to call them reparations you know, down deep, that they are handouts; and that your only alibi for your envy and covetousness dates 150 years back...

There is so much that is wrong about that post - I'm sure mashman will get much laughter out of it.

(By the way, cover yourself up - your rampant racism is showing).

mashman

1st March 2019, 14:56

Must be sad for you and your lot to be so tragically unable to make your own way in the world; to be dependent on others' productivity for your handouts - no matter how you try to call them reparations you know, down deep, that they are handouts; and that your only alibi for your envy and covetousness dates 150 years back...

Ahhhh the politics of envy and fear. Simon Bridges was right. Enjoy your entitlement son.

jasonu

1st March 2019, 15:32

Enjoy your entitlement son.

Fuck me the irony is thick around here.

Swoop

1st March 2019, 16:05

Point #1: The form of the proposed CGT is the harshest in the world, outside of dictatorships.
Point #2: Liarbour LOVE TAXES!!!!! It gives them a soft-on and panties are made moist by the very thought of it.

Point #3: After all their other lies to get into government (10,000 houses, child "poverty", etc) this will be the one to terminate them.

Stay away from Kiwisaver. The point of it is to ...
Very wise advice.
Being part of a scam where the government keeps moving the retirement goalposts at their leisure is not worth touching.

I don't know anyone with a residential investment that doesn't use their own wages to help pay it off. In my case it amounted to more than the rents, and that's pretty common.

Add all of the other costs involved in house ownership, (a lot of it bureaucratic compliance costs) and the annual costs are often tens of thousands a year more than the rent covers. That means extra work, lots of it, for fucking years. The "profit" is deferred until you either pay off the mortgage or sell it. And if you take inflation out of that profit on the sale it's not really much of an investment, for me just barely better than cash in the bank over the same time frame. Just.

Not that they'll allow depreciation based on inflation for a CGT, of course, for the same reason investors will get out of the business if and when they introduce it: take out the tax on inflation and it's not worth doing it.

But like you it doesn't worry me any more. I got sick of not only Working For Everyone Else's Family but then being blamed for the need to do so in the first place, so I sold the last residential investment last year. Funny you should mention boats, I blew the resulting funds on one. Best investment I ever made.

Nobody ever seems to learn about how badly governments screw the taxpayer, there isn't a savings nest egg or hard earned investment that isn't targeted, simply because it's there, and they can. Kiwisaver? I was hopeful it might work to encourage saving, reducing the need for subsidies in retirement, but as the quantity of savings has grown successive governments haven't been able to resist the temptation to raid it to buy votes. They raided EQC investments. Gone. Happens every time a savings scheme reached a useful size: it's plundered to buy votes. This time it's a coordinated attack on all of them, property, farms, kiwisaver, (again), business investment, anything anyone's worked to accumulate for any reason whatsoever is being stripped. Because, apparently, it's only fair.
Quoted again because sensible posts in this thread are rare.

Shame a lot of the poor are that way because they can't be fucked working or live up norf where there are hardly any jobs. Sucking from the welfare teat while sitting on the couch playing spaceys and smoking dak is the chosen life style of way too many potential tax payers.
Yet there are fruit pickers required throughout the country at the moment... Honest work, but we have to inport migrant labour to do the jobs.

RDJ

1st March 2019, 16:07

Shane's nephs have integrated with the couch... no fruit-picking or seedling-planting possible for them.

mashman

1st March 2019, 16:19

Fuck me the irony is thick around here.

No... and what irony? coz the only thing that looks thick around here so far is your twindom with the right whingers.

RDJ

1st March 2019, 16:24

Working for a living is the center of civilization, not right-wing, you self-beclowner.

mashman

1st March 2019, 16:50

Working for a living is the center of civilization, not right-wing, you self-beclowner.

No, life is the center... it just happens to clash with your entitlement. As I said earlier, a CGT is great for bringing our the entitlement brigade, and all coz they believe that work, not life, is the center of civilisation and that if you aren't contributing to the destruction of the planet (Earth Overshoot is the evidence that proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt), I mean working, then you should have a very good reason for it or indeed should off yourself at the earliest opportunity. All done under the auspice of working being the center of life despite the evidence proving that that working is destroying more than it can replace from the host environment, that life, and ironically commerce, rely on.

You right whingers are rather sad entitled excuses for human beings arencha eh.

Ocean1

1st March 2019, 18:06

Absolutely that is a subset of people receiving state benefits. I do believe it is hugely overstated as it serves a certain flavour of political rhetoric.

I also understand that we are currently experiencing a very low unemployment rate, and critical skills shortages in some areas.

I don't think there's a definitive border where "X" beneficiaries can be said to be making all of the easy choices and straight up declining to earn their own money instead because a benefit is just easier, and "Y" beneficiaries who can be said to be be actually genuinely unable to earn their own money. There's obviously both sorts at either end of a spectrum and a bunch in the middle that could earn their own, but only at a level of effort they believe isn't acceptable.

The thing most of 'em conveniently forget it that it might be easier for them, but it's not for whoever had to work longer or harder without receiving what they earned to make that benefit available. For every dollar paid but not earned there's a dollar earned that isn't paid.

Ocean1

1st March 2019, 18:17

Personally I think its far too early to make that call. And $5 says that whoever is pushing that barrow had a conclusion they wanted numbers to match.

I am interested in the TWG reasoning but unfortunately their report is like 200 pages long and I just dont have time to read it. Or motivation if I am honest - the new Classic Racer arrived yesterday and I bought the new Classic Bike mag on Tuesday. I'm going to a seminar later this month on it and will wait for that - it will be given by the guy who got the gold medal in law in my year - he's one of the pre-eminent tax lawyers in the country. His opinion I will pay for.

Welcome to modern identity politics, where only you and me are completely innocent of selective interpretation. The point was that unless there's a significant price reduction likely, (which nobody agrees is the case) then "making housing cheaper" is a farcical excuse for implementing a CGT.

It's been a fucking long time since any government has implemented policy of any sort where the eventual results matched the stated reason for introducing it. So the very best advice for anyone who wants to understand how any particular policy will work is to utterly disregard anything the govt of the day has to say about their reasons for wanting it. Goes for dodgy, "disinterested" working groups also.

Voltaire

1st March 2019, 18:24

Fruit picking from memory is seasonal and not a lot of orchards in cities :rolleyes:

How would the Govt 'raid' Kiwisaver funds when they are not in Govt schemes?

husaberg

1st March 2019, 18:51

RDJ

1st March 2019, 19:25

No, life is the center... it just happens to clash with your entitlement. As I said earlier, a CGT is great for bringing our the entitlement brigade, and all coz they believe that work, not life, is the center of civilisation and that if you aren't contributing to the destruction of the planet (Earth Overshoot is the evidence that proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt), I mean working, then you should have a very good reason for it or indeed should off yourself at the earliest opportunity. All done under the auspice of working being the center of life despite the evidence proving that that working is destroying more than it can replace from the host environment, that life, and ironically commerce, rely on.

You right whingers are rather sad entitled excuses for human beings arencha eh.

Society-parasites like you just gotta parasitize. And yet feeling vaguely uncomfy about it, you then try to proselytize. And fail all over again. And finish by projecting what you see in your mirror.

Jeeper

1st March 2019, 21:23

Fruit picking from memory is seasonal and not a lot of orchards in cities :rolleyes:

How would the Govt 'raid' Kiwisaver funds when they are not in Govt schemes?Introduction of CGT on shares is a raid by stealth on the Kiwisaver gains. More interestingly, it's the Australian and NZ shares that are in scope, but not other markets. Which is a nice way to deplete investment in local markets as the capital will move to jurisdictions which are excluded.

sidecar bob

2nd March 2019, 05:39

Working for a living is the center of civilization, not right-wing, you self-beclowner.

Self beclowner:laugh:

Clockwork

2nd March 2019, 07:30

I'm not entitled, I'm providing houses for people to live in while at the same time making sure I'm not a burden to the taxpayer into my old age while also paying a pile of tax.
How do you think renters & the country would get on if people like me didn't do that?
I'm happy to drop it & run & then complain about cunts like me in the future though.
I'm due a bit of my tax back, but I fear means testing will put paid to that.
Oh to be a loser.

I suppose if you hadn't bought the property, the next lowest bidder may have also been an investor and if not them, the next lowest may have been too. But eventually one of the potential buyers would have been someone who just wanted to live there, the house would have still fulfilled its purpose of "providing houses for people to live in" and there would have been one less "people" that needed to rent a home.

Unless you built from new of course, in which case, thank you so much for you social service.

mashman

2nd March 2019, 08:28

Society-parasites like you just gotta parasitize. And yet feeling vaguely uncomfy about it, you then try to proselytize. And fail all over again. And finish by projecting what you see in your mirror.

A nurse that doesn't know that life is the center of civilisation, limits his tax liability so that life suffers and then throws around baseless accusations to try to shift the blame for issues that his behaviour creates by projecting his social parasitism on to someone else he knows nothing about. Go on, give us a laugh, how am I a societal-parasite?

I can see why you moved into health provision as a job to cover your inferiority complex for breeding a little entitlement for your mental well-being, coz quite clearly that state of "caring" isn't a natural state for you. You're a wee sad sack of shit.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 10:06

Introduction of CGT on shares is a raid by stealth on the Kiwisaver gains. More interestingly, it's the Australian and NZ shares that are in scope, but not other markets. Which is a nice way to deplete investment in local markets as the capital will move to jurisdictions which are excluded.

By stealth aye You mean it was not already done?

Your KiwiSaver investment income
Your investment earnings are taxed. This tax will be deducted by your KiwiSaver provider. Your provider then pays the tax to Inland Revenue on your behalf.

A scheme can be a:

widely-held superannuation fund, or a
portfolio investment entity (PIE).

https://www.kiwisaver.govt.nz/already/contributions/
https://www.interest.co.nz/kiwisaver/53740/kiwisaver-tax-credits-sneaky-tax-gouge-disguise-nationals-tinkering-tops-government
Also income from Shares in NZ is not exempted or excluded now other than your contributions or as the employer ones have been fixed sine national decided to dip into those in 2012 the employer ones.
you do for the first few years get a kiwisaver tax credit.

Jeeper

2nd March 2019, 11:34

I did say 'income' is already taxed. But the capital gains i.e. difference between buy and sell price is not taxed at present unless shares we're bought with the intent to sell for profit. If I buy shares, hold them long term, and then sell at retirement to fund my cash flow then the gain is not taxed as the income stream (dividends) through the life of the purchase has been taxed already.

What this is now suggesting is for the capital to be taxed for gains regardless of the intent of purchase. I then have two options, not invest in shares or become an active trader and build it into my margin.

Ocean1

2nd March 2019, 12:30

Fruit picking from memory is seasonal and not a lot of orchards in cities :rolleyes:

How would the Govt 'raid' Kiwisaver funds when they are not in Govt schemes?

Almost all kiwisaver funds are in financial units that would be affected by the proposed cgt.

Jeeper

2nd March 2019, 13:52

Almost all kiwisaver funds are in financial units that would be affected by the proposed cgt.Exactly. CGT as propsed goes much wider than housing stock and landlords.

Just a thought, assets split in divorces will be subject to CGT changes too. So now a homemaker who gets the assets as divorce settlement will have to think about it at the time of settlement.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 14:53

Exactly. CGT as propsed goes much wider than housing stock and landlords.

Just a thought, assets split in divorces will be subject to CGT changes too. So now a homemaker who gets the assets as divorce settlement will have to think about it at the time of settlement.

The working group has also proposed as an option axing Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax for KiwiSavers earning less than $48,000 a year, phased reductions for people earning between $48,000 to $70,000, and reducing the lowest rates of tax on KiwiSaver and other PIE (prescribed investor rate) funds.

...............................

But this is the bit you dont want to talk about.

The vast majority of the extra tax would come from the wealthiest 20 per cent of Kiwis, who own more than 80 per cent of the assets that would be newly taxed.

FJRider

2nd March 2019, 15:05

Almost all kiwisaver funds are in financial units that would be affected by the proposed cgt.

Bullshit. Capital gains are the profits from the sale of an asset ie: shares of stock ... like a piece of land or a business — and as such ... generally considered as taxable income.

You can't sell you Kiwisaver (therefore not an asset) ... and it only becomes taxable to you ... when it's in your bank account. And taxed at the usual bank charges.

Voltaire

2nd March 2019, 15:27

Almost all kiwisaver funds are in financial units that would be affected by the proposed cgt.

As in when the fund sells shares at a profit they will pay CGT and pass that on to the investors?

Jeeper

2nd March 2019, 15:44

...............................

But this is the bit you dont want to talk about.Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 15:54

Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.
Its also certain you want to misrepresent the CGT which isn't law by a long shot and yet you are complaining you see it doing all these things that already happen.

The working group has also proposed as an option axing Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax for KiwiSavers earning less than $48,000 a year, phased reductions for people earning between $48,000 to $70,000, and reducing the lowest rates of tax on KiwiSaver and other PIE (prescribed investor rate) funds.

Ocean1

2nd March 2019, 17:58

Bullshit. Capital gains are the profits from the sale of an asset ie: shares of stock ... like a piece of land or a business — and as such ... generally considered as taxable income.

You can't sell you Kiwisaver (therefore not an asset) ... and it only becomes taxable to you ... when it's in your bank account. And taxed at the usual bank charges.

If that's the case why are they talking about annual valuations to define the CGT payments due for businesses?

Ocean1

2nd March 2019, 18:07

...............................

But this is the bit you dont want to talk about.

"The vast majority of the extra tax would come from the wealthiest 20 per cent of Kiwis, who own more than 80 per cent of the assets that would be newly taxed."

I'm surprise you want to talk about to be honest, it's almost as if you approve of the dramatic ramping up of institutionalised theft from the most productive to buy votes from the less productive.

If you hadn't reassured me otherwise I'd think you were a radical socialist.

Jeeper

2nd March 2019, 18:19

but in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.
Its also certain you want to misrepresent the CGT which isn't law by a long shot and yet you are complaining you see it doing all these things that already happen.Just debating pros and cons of what is recommended by the think tank. None of it is binding. Not till the legislation is tabled and passed. In the meantime we can surely, and in a civil manner, debate all aspects. This allows the society to make informed decisions come election time next year. No harm in a good debate.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 18:49

Just debating pros and cons of what is recommended by the think tank. None of it is binding. Not till the legislation is tabled and passed. In the meantime we can surely, and in a civil manner, debate all aspects. This allows the society to make informed decisions come election time next year. No harm in a good debate.
Really why is it you ignore this submission from the TWG

The working group has also proposed as an option axing Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax for KiwiSavers earning less than $48,000 a year, phased reductions for people earning between $48,000 to $70,000, and reducing the lowest rates of tax on KiwiSaver and other PIE (prescribed investor rate) funds.

I can give few reasons why you ignore it as you already made out it wasnt taxed.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 18:53

"The vast majority of the extra tax would come from the wealthiest 20 per cent of Kiwis, who own more than 80 per cent of the assets that would be newly taxed."

I'm surprise you want to talk about to be honest, it's almost as if you approve of dramatic ramping up of institutionalised theft from the most productive to buy votes from the least productive.

If you hadn't reassured me otherwise I'd think you were a radical socialist.

Poor ocean dont worry we both know you are not in the top 20% anyway.
Majority rules and the top 20% individidual votes is worth the same as the botom 80% of the peasants votes are.
Only problem is there is many more more votes in the bottom 80%.
The Top 20% dont actually pay that much higher % of their income as you would like everyone to believe either.
341102

None of these figures, of course, includes capital gains (income made from selling assets such as houses and shares), because we don’t for the most part either tax or record those capital gains.
If we did, since those capital gains will go largely to the richest tenth, the truth about tax in New Zealand is that the rich almost certainly pay less of their income in tax than the poor do.

Odd that you two ignored this bit its almost like you are trying to misrepresent the current situation.

The working group has also proposed as an option axing Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax for KiwiSavers earning less than $48,000 a year, phased reductions for people earning between $48,000 to $70,000, and reducing the lowest rates of tax on KiwiSaver and other PIE (prescribed investor rate) funds.

But seeing as you feel so strongley about the right getting taxed to highly stand for the Act party in your local electrorate if you views are as popular and as well supported as you think you will become an MP.
Or stump up the $100,000 you need to become a National MP.

Ocean1

2nd March 2019, 19:30

The Top 20% dont actually pay that much higher % of their income as you would like everyone to believe either.
341102

You want to convert that to dollars paid in tax rather than % and then try to defend it?

Or are you too busy still working on the last question I asked?

Jeeper

2nd March 2019, 19:46

Really why is it you ignore this submission from the TWG

I can give few reasons why you ignore it as you already made out it wasnt taxed.So according to your analysis that is the only thing that is positive enough to outweigh all the negatives? To me that is not a material benefit as the negatives on the economy will be much more. Higher minimum wage with higher taxes and capital gains is not how economy is expanded.

Swoop

2nd March 2019, 20:06

Since the lunatic tooth monster has driven away overseas property investors (and also the tourists'... those numbers are waaaay down), the best approach is to simply instigate a "no foreign land purchases" policy. Just offer the ability to lease land for a specific timeframe (20, 50 99yrs?).

I note Winnie wants farms exempted from the CGT.
The maori are wanting exemptions, well... just because.
Presumably the imaginary-friend lot will not be included, because they don't pay taxes at all.
The "poor"? Nope, they ain't paying.

Which leaves the average kiwi, slogging his/her guts out, being arse-raped once again by the tax system. Remember that those "rich pricks" will hire the best accountants and will not be paying anything.
But, the leftists' dogma will be in place for eternity, fucking over the country.

husaberg

2nd March 2019, 20:09

So according to your analysis that is the only thing that is positive enough to outweigh all the negatives? To me that is not a material benefit as the negatives on the economy will be much more. Higher minimum wage with higher taxes and capital gains is not how economy is expanded.

Again i even highlighted the bits you already pay tax on Kiwisaver that why they use the words Axing and reduction

The working group has also proposed as an option axing Employer Superannuation Contribution Tax for KiwiSavers earning less than $48,000 a year, phased reductions for people earning between $48,000 to $70,000, and reducing the lowest rates of tax on KiwiSaver and other PIE (prescribed investor rate) funds.

You want to convert that to dollars paid in tax rather than % and then try to defend it?

No you want me too.Kiwis are taxed according to their income the more you earn the more tax you pay.
but is pretty simple maths the top 10% earn the most money and therefor pay more tax.
from memory its top 10% earn 34% of the total income.
The lower half pay a higher percentage of their income than you want people to know about ,which is why you want to talk in simple dollars.
They actually pay a far lower % of their income as tax when you take into account of their non taxed income.
Nearly every other country in the developed world has a CGT, They all seem to have not exploded.

Or are you too busy still working on the last question I asked?
Here is a hint your post contained no questions. As do the last 3 pages.

"The vast majority of the extra tax would come from the wealthiest 20 per cent of Kiwis, who own more than 80 per cent of the assets that would be newly taxed."

I'm surprise you want to talk about to be honest, it's almost as if you approve of the dramatic ramping up of institutionalised theft from the most productive to buy votes from the less productive.

If you hadn't reassured me otherwise I'd think you were a radical socialist.
Thats the third time or is it the fourth time in what two days, that you have made an accusation that is baseless.

HenryDorsetCase

2nd March 2019, 20:15

jasonu

3rd March 2019, 04:57

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12208681

I don't like the guy but unlike the tooth fairy and her hapless followers at least he is (appearing) to be honest and up front with his rates/taxes increases if he is elected.

Voltaire

3rd March 2019, 06:45

MarkH

3rd March 2019, 07:46

jasonu

3rd March 2019, 08:15

I guess what I'm saying is that the government are thieving cunts.

Tru dat Sista!!!

Ocean1

3rd March 2019, 17:31

No you want me too.
but is pretty simple maths the top 10% earn the most money and therefor pay more tax.
from memory its top 10% earn 34% of the total income.
The lower half pay a higher percentage of their income thatn you want people to know about ,which is why you want to talk in simple dollars.
They actually pay a far lower % of their income as tax when you take into account of their non taxed income.
Nearly every other country in the developed world has a CGT, They all seem to have not exploded.

Here is a hint your post contained no questions. As do the last 3 pages.

Thats the third time or is it the fourth time in what two days, that you have made an accusation that is baseless.

Aye, more evasions, doctored stat's and refusals to acknowledge the facts, fuck off with your bullshit, you radical socialist you. :laugh:

husaberg

3rd March 2019, 18:16

Aye, more evasions, doctored stat's and refusals to acknowledge the facts, fuck off with your bullshit, you radical socialist you. :laugh:

More of your baseless allegations. the stats are the stats not altered in anyway, Your problem is you just dont like what they say.
You can tell when either you or Katspam have lost an argument, as the abuse and accusations come out, as you have nothing else.

New Zealand's top tax "wedge" of 33 per cent on incomes above $70,000 is lower than all 27 other high-income nations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, after including social security and payroll taxes which do not exist in this country.

PMG calculated that New Zealand’s overall tax wedge on incomes of US$100,000 and US$300,000 are among the three lowest in the OECD.

On the other hand, New Zealand has the world's most comprehensive goods and services tax (GST), taxing 98 per cent of all potentially taxable consumer spending compared with a developed world average of 59 per cent.
New Zealand is one of only five high-income OECD nations that do not allow any exemptions for food - a key factor in our high food prices.

"We charge less tax than any comparable country on high incomes, dividends and capital gains," he says.
"Our GST, however, is bigger than most, both as a proportion of taxes and as a proportion of the economy as a whole."
A structural shift in the tax and welfare system has been a major driver of the widening gap between rich and poor in Auckland. Suburbs whose average incomes were bunched together, mostly within 10 per cent of each other in 1986, now have average incomes that vary up to three-fold.
The top income tax rate on the rich was halved in two steps between 1986 and 1988 from 66 per cent to 33 per cent.

The 10% of top income-earning families earn 30% of the income. (Estimate from Stats NZ’s Household Economic Survey 2010)
The wealthiest 10% of New Zealand families control roughly 50-60% of the wealth (Estimates from New Zealand Institute’s The Wealth of a Nation 2004)
This group earns 30% of the income, has 50% or more of the wealth, and pays 43% of the net tax. Is that an outrage?

FJRider

3rd March 2019, 18:38

If that's the case why are they talking about annual valuations to define the CGT payments due for businesses?

You mean Business's that buy property/items (and wait for it to increases in value ... or improve it) and then sell for a profit ... ???

Capital gain is a rise in the value of a capital asset (investment or real estate) that gives it a higher worth than the purchase price. The gain is not realized until the asset is sold. A capital gain may be short-term (one year or less) or long-term (more than one year) and must be claimed on income taxes.

Look up the definition of "Capital Gains" yourself if you doubt me ... :shifty:

FJRider

3rd March 2019, 19:14

I have no problem with the concept of CGT, but I don't like how inflation is ignored. If you own a rental property for ten years and then sell it, a significant amount of value increase is due to inflation which makes it not profit, therefore you shouldn't have to pay tax on that.

Rental properties are a cash cow. Until they start costing money. Note the NEW Rental property regulations that (coincidentally) have/are being introduced. With massive (in many cases) $$$$$ needed being spent to meet the new requirements ... the cheaper (only .. ??) option of many Landlord property owners will be sell up and let some other bugger (sucker .. ?? ) pay. The consensus will be ... it wont continue as a rental but more likely as a private dwelling (if anybody can afford to buy it). The new regulations would usually mean it then would be cost prohibitive to upgrade to legal rental property standard.

End result ... fewer rental properties available. ALL areas with Universities or Polytechnic's nearby will be affected. In other words ... can't live nearby ... wont attend there.

The poor and needy Beneficiaries for whom these regulations were actually/supposedly introduced to help ... will find themselves homeless ... as THEIR rental was/will be sold from under them. With ALL the appropriate legal notice given of course.

Similarly, you shouldn't have to pay tax on the part of the interest that makes up for inflation. i.e. if inflation is 2% and you earn 4% interest then you have only made a profit of 2%, but the government will tax you on the 4% and take twice as much as what is fair.

Bullshit. You make money and you will be taxed. Thank the Government that was voted in (OK ... the group that legally formed a Government) for these pearls of enlightenment and pleasure ... :whistle:

I guess what I'm saying is that the government are thieving cunts.

Nothing different about any Government policy. New requirements and situations require different policies.

Would you prefer an across the board Tax hike ... a 45% standard tax rate seems fair ... :shutup:

Ocean1

4th March 2019, 17:48

Aye, more evasions, doctored stat's and refusals to acknowledge the facts, fuck off with your bullshit, you radical socialist you. :laugh:

:cry::cry::cry::baby::baby:

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

is currently sulking in the Sin Bin

Now I know that socialists are right near the bottom of the list of social deviants, but it's generally accepted that truth is proof against censure. :rolleyes:

husaberg

4th March 2019, 19:18

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
but it's generally accepted that truth is proof against censure. :rolleyes:

Really, yet ironically you censored my post. Not the other way around.

Yet more of your baseless allegations. the stats are the stats not altered in anyway, Your problem is you just dont like what they say.
You can tell when either you or Katspam have lost an argument, as the abuse and accusations come out, as you have nothing else.
https://i0.wp.com/pundit.co.nz/sites/default/files/Fig%208-2-01.png

New Zealand's top tax "wedge" of 33 per cent on incomes above $70,000 is lower than all 27 other high-income nations in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, after including social security and payroll taxes which do not exist in this country.

PMG calculated that New Zealand’s overall tax wedge on incomes of US$100,000 and US$300,000 are among the three lowest in the OECD.

On the other hand, New Zealand has the world's most comprehensive goods and services tax (GST), taxing 98 per cent of all potentially taxable consumer spending compared with a developed world average of 59 per cent.
New Zealand is one of only five high-income OECD nations that do not allow any exemptions for food - a key factor in our high food prices.

"We charge less tax than any comparable country on high incomes, dividends and capital gains," he says.
"Our GST, however, is bigger than most, both as a proportion of taxes and as a proportion of the economy as a whole."
A structural shift in the tax and welfare system has been a major driver of the widening gap between rich and poor in Auckland. Suburbs whose average incomes were bunched together, mostly within 10 per cent of each other in 1986, now have average incomes that vary up to three-fold.
The top income tax rate on the rich was halved in two steps between 1986 and 1988 from 66 per cent to 33 per cent.

The 10% of top income-earning families earn 30% of the income. (Estimate from Stats NZ’s Household Economic Survey 2010)
The wealthiest 10% of New Zealand families control roughly 50-60% of the wealth (Estimates from New Zealand Institute’s The Wealth of a Nation 2004)
This group earns 30% of the income, has 50% or more of the wealth, and pays 43% of the net tax. Is that an outrage?

Ocean1

7th March 2019, 15:03

You mean Business's that buy property/items (and wait for it to increases in value ... or improve it) and then sell for a profit ... ???

Capital gain is a rise in the value of a capital asset (investment or real estate) that gives it a higher worth than the purchase price. The gain is not realized until the asset is sold. A capital gain may be short-term (one year or less) or long-term (more than one year) and must be claimed on income taxes.

Look up the definition of "Capital Gains" yourself if you doubt me ... :shifty:

Look up the recommendations of the fucking tax working group. It's an annual tax on annual increases in market value.

Speaking of which; how many clowns do you need on the payroll in this fucking circus?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111108500/grant-robertson-says-ongoing-payments-to-sir-michael-cullen-are-appropriate

Ocean1

10th March 2019, 17:39

No surprise really, from the outfit that campaigned on their right to defraud taxpayers. :laugh::laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/111168958/capital-gains-tax-should-be-just-the-start-says-green-coleader-marama-davidson

Grasping, deluded twats.

husaberg

11th March 2019, 10:35

[/url]

Grasping, deluded twats.
341211

Bridges marked the anniversary of the new administration by declaring it “a year of economic mismanagement” and claiming that “under this government the economy is slowing”. But it was hard to find the numbers to match his words.

GDP grew 1% in the September quarter. It’s the strongest growth in two years, nearly double the OECD average and rivalled only by the US.
It was broad based – 15 out of 16 industries expanded, with only mining dropping back. The RBNZ believes GDP growth will “pick up” over 2019.

At 3.9% unemployment is the lowest in 10 years.
Or in the words of the Reserve Bank “employment is around its maximum sustainable level”.

Cost of living pressures are real but the latest CPI increase of 1.9% recorded by Stats NZ is low by historic standards. Further blunting National’s grab for attention on hip pocket issues, petrol prices dropped 10 cents a litre in October.

In the housing sector rents have been rising, as have concerns about KiwiBuild, but the dangerously hot Auckland market has cooled safely so far. ASB said this week more Kiwis believed it was a good time to buy a house than at any point in the last five years.

Mortgage rates are almost subterranean. This week ANZ offered a one year rate of 3.95 percent, claiming it was the lowest since World War II. A time traveller with a mullet or shoulder pads might have thought a one had been mistakenly left off the front of the rate (mortgage rates were nudged 20 percent in the late 1980s).

A deep grave has been dug for National over claims of a fiscal hole.
A surplus of $5.5 billion is forecast and the government is on track to meet its Budget Responsibility Rules of spending at 30% of GDP and debt at 20%.

Considering Key liked to claim responsability for nzsinterst rates when they were higher than that Labour must be doing far far better.

https://d3nd7i493f0o21.cloudfront.net/assets/resized/img/nz_and_us_interest_rates-0-500-0-291.png

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: One of the reasons why interest rates are coming down in this country is that the Government has done a good job of getting the books back in order and of managing inflation expectations.

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 11:37

341211

GDP grew 1% in the September quarter. It’s the strongest growth in two years, nearly double the OECD average and rivalled only by the US.
It was broad based – 15 out of 16 industries expanded, with only mining dropping back. The RBNZ believes GDP growth will “pick up” over 2019.

At 3.9% unemployment is the lowest in 10 years.
Or in the words of the Reserve Bank “employment is around its maximum sustainable level”.

Cost of living pressures are real but the latest CPI increase of 1.9% recorded by Stats NZ is low by historic standards. Further blunting National’s grab for attention on hip pocket issues, petrol prices dropped 10 cents a litre in October.

In the housing sector rents have been rising, as have concerns about KiwiBuild, but the dangerously hot Auckland market has cooled safely so far. ASB said this week more Kiwis believed it was a good time to buy a house than at any point in the last five years.

Mortgage rates are almost subterranean. This week ANZ offered a one year rate of 3.95 percent, claiming it was the lowest since World War II. A time traveller with a mullet or shoulder pads might have thought a one had been mistakenly left off the front of the rate (mortgage rates were nudged 20 percent in the late 1980s).

A deep grave has been dug for National over claims of a fiscal hole.
A surplus of $5.5 billion is forecast and the government is on track to meet its Budget Responsibility Rules of spending at 30% of GDP and debt at 20%.

Meh, same hand picked irrelevant nat-phobic shit you always pull out of your arse in response to labour's tax and spend bullshit, it's nowhere near enough to defend labour's plans for a CGT.

husaberg

11th March 2019, 13:48

Meh, same hand picked irrelevant nat-phobic shit you always pull out of your arse in response to labour's tax and spend bullshit, it's nowhere near enough to defend labour's plans for a CGT.
I case you missed it. it was refuting the untruths the national party leader pulled out of his bottom.
As you can't refute them, which you clearly can't, So despite you doomsday predictions. It shows what a total lie the national party rhetoric you continue to spout is.
Note a tax working group has made submissions, that's all that has happened. Grow up.

Maybe you might like to critique the credentials of the members of the TWG then?

Sir Michael Cullen, Former finance minister attorney general PhD in social and economic history from the University of Edinburgh.

Professor Craig Elliffe, is a professor at the University of Auckland Law School. Before his career in education, he was a tax partner for nine years at Chapman Tripp and for 14 years at KPMG.

Joanne Hodge, a former tax partner at law firm Bell Gully, where she advised on all aspects of corporate tax including public and private company reorganisations, employee remuneration issues and investment into New Zealand. Joanne helped her clients adjust to constant and often complex tax reform for over 30 years.

Kirk Hope is Chief Executive of Business New Zealand and was previously CEO of the New Zealand Bankers Association and Executive Director of the Financial Services Federation. He is a qualified barrister and solicitor, and was previously a member of the Commercial and Business Law Committee of the New Zealand Law Society.

Nick Malarao a senior partner at Meredith Connell, where he has both advised and represented Inland Revenue for 17 years. He is an expert in tax, company and property law. Nick runs the country’s largest Insolvency, Recoveries and Enforcement practice and brings insights into why some companies and individuals fail to meet tax obligations, and how that can be remedied.

Geof Nightingale, a Partner at PwC New Zealand, where he has worked with clients across a range of sectors, including energy, services, retail, property, forestry and Māori business, providing consulting, compliance and transaction services. He was previously a member of the 2009 Tax Working Group and has an ability to communicate tax policy choices in an accessible way to a wide audience.

Robin Oliver, former Deputy Commissioner at Inland Revenue Robin brings to the Tax Working Group his long experience of tax practice and policy in both the public and private sectors. He has worked in varying capacities on tax Consultative Committees and working groups since 1987. As well as his public policy background Robin brings economic, legal and accountancy skills together with hand-on knowledge of how tax laws work in practice.

Hinerangi Raumati, has held several governance positions in both the commercial and not-for-profit sectors. She has a particular interest in iwi commercial activities, the fishing industry and Māori economic development. Hinerangi is Chair of Parininihi ki Waitotara, one of the country’s largest Māori incorporations and is on the board of Te Ohu Kaimoana, which works to advance Māori interests in the marine environment. She’s also a former Chief Financial Officer at Tainui Group Holdings.

Michelle Redington, works at Air New Zealand as Head of Group Taxation & Insurance and is a member of the Corporate Taxpayers Group. Michelle has a legal and accounting background, and prior to Air New Zealand was a partner at PwC specialising in corporate and international taxation. She has practical experience of applying tax rules in New Zealand, Australia and various other countries.

Bill Rosenberg, Bill Rosenberg was appointed Economist and Director of Policy at the CTU in May 2009 He holds a B.Com in Economics, a BSc in Mathematics and a PhD in Mathematical Psychology. Bill was previously Deputy Director, University Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University of Canterbury.

Marjan Van Den Belt, Assistant Vice Chancellor (Sustainability) at Victoria University of Wellington

merv

11th March 2019, 13:56

Look up the recommendations of the fucking tax working group. It's an annual tax on annual increases in market value.

Nup, read all about it here https://taxworkinggroup.govt.nz/resources/future-tax-final-report-vol-ii-html#section-3

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 15:18

I case you missed it. it was refuting the untruths the national party leader pulled out of his bottom.

Which, apart from being spun twice as fast as anything your despicable bogyman managed, (and smelling considerably worse), has exactly fuck all to do with what I posted.

I don't actually blame you for avoiding Marama Davidson's wee rant like the plague, it don't come much more politically untenable than that.

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 15:30

Nup, read all about it here https://taxworkinggroup.govt.nz/resources/future-tax-final-report-vol-ii-html#section-3

I read that one of the proposals involves "deemed value", annual valuations with attendant annual CGT demands. And far as I can briefly see they haven't ruled it out.

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 15:34

He's changed his mind?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111184195/cullen-on-cgt-on-balance-ive-changed-my-mind

So that's what the $1000/day bought them. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

merv

11th March 2019, 17:44

I read that one of the proposals involves "deemed value", annual valuations with attendant annual CGT demands. And far as I can briefly see they haven't ruled it out.

I think that was raised early on but dropped from the final report.

husaberg

11th March 2019, 18:39

Which, apart from being spun twice as fast as anything your despicable bogyman managed, (and smelling considerably worse), has exactly fuck all to do with what I posted.

I don't actually blame you for avoiding Marama Davidson's wee rant like the plague, it don't come much more politically untenable than that.

Funny, you write a lot of words but yet you are totally unable to come up with anything cohesive, if only you were Asian and had a 100K you could be a national list MP.

But i digress

This in case the Alzheimer's or the afternoon gin has got the best of you was what youi posted.

Meh, same hand picked irrelevant nat-phobic shit you always pull out of your arse in response to labour's tax and spend bullshit, it's nowhere near enough to defend labour's plans for a CGT.
This is what i posted so do try and keep up.

I case you missed it. it was refuting the untruths the national party leader pulled out of his bottom.
As you can't refute them, which you clearly can't, So despite you doomsday predictions. It shows what a total lie the national party rhetoric you continue to spout is.
Note a tax working group has made submissions, that's all that has happened. Grow up.

Maybe you might like to critique the credentials of the members of the TWG then?

Sir Michael Cullen, Former finance minister attorney general PhD in social and economic history from the University of Edinburgh.

Professor Craig Elliffe, is a professor at the University of Auckland Law School. Before his career in education, he was a tax partner for nine years at Chapman Tripp and for 14 years at KPMG.

Joanne Hodge, a former tax partner at law firm Bell Gully, where she advised on all aspects of corporate tax including public and private company reorganisations, employee remuneration issues and investment into New Zealand. Joanne helped her clients adjust to constant and often complex tax reform for over 30 years.

Kirk Hope is Chief Executive of Business New Zealand and was previously CEO of the New Zealand Bankers Association and Executive Director of the Financial Services Federation. He is a qualified barrister and solicitor, and was previously a member of the Commercial and Business Law Committee of the New Zealand Law Society.

Nick Malarao a senior partner at Meredith Connell, where he has both advised and represented Inland Revenue for 17 years. He is an expert in tax, company and property law. Nick runs the country’s largest Insolvency, Recoveries and Enforcement practice and brings insights into why some companies and individuals fail to meet tax obligations, and how that can be remedied.

Geof Nightingale, a Partner at PwC New Zealand, where he has worked with clients across a range of sectors, including energy, services, retail, property, forestry and Māori business, providing consulting, compliance and transaction services. He was previously a member of the 2009 Tax Working Group and has an ability to communicate tax policy choices in an accessible way to a wide audience.

Robin Oliver, former Deputy Commissioner at Inland Revenue Robin brings to the Tax Working Group his long experience of tax practice and policy in both the public and private sectors. He has worked in varying capacities on tax Consultative Committees and working groups since 1987. As well as his public policy background Robin brings economic, legal and accountancy skills together with hand-on knowledge of how tax laws work in practice.

Hinerangi Raumati, has held several governance positions in both the commercial and not-for-profit sectors. She has a particular interest in iwi commercial activities, the fishing industry and Māori economic development. Hinerangi is Chair of Parininihi ki Waitotara, one of the country’s largest Māori incorporations and is on the board of Te Ohu Kaimoana, which works to advance Māori interests in the marine environment. She’s also a former Chief Financial Officer at Tainui Group Holdings.

Michelle Redington, works at Air New Zealand as Head of Group Taxation & Insurance and is a member of the Corporate Taxpayers Group. Michelle has a legal and accounting background, and prior to Air New Zealand was a partner at PwC specialising in corporate and international taxation. She has practical experience of applying tax rules in New Zealand, Australia and various other countries.

Bill Rosenberg, Bill Rosenberg was appointed Economist and Director of Policy at the CTU in May 2009 He holds a B.Com in Economics, a BSc in Mathematics and a PhD in Mathematical Psychology. Bill was previously Deputy Director, University Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University of Canterbury.

Marjan Van Den Belt, Assistant Vice Chancellor (Sustainability) at Victoria University of Wellington

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 18:44

Funny, you write a lot of words but yet youcareb totally unable to come up with anything cohesive,

Said the liarbor fanboi who's reply to any comment whatsoever is "BUT NASHNIL". :tugger:

Tell us again how NZ's poor pay most of the tax. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

husaberg

11th March 2019, 19:03

Said the liarbor fanboi who's reply to any comment whatsoever is "BUT NASHNIL". :tugger:

Tell us again how NZ's poor pay most of the tax. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Yet I showed you that the lower incomes pay a higher percent of their income as tax, nice attempt to change the subject btw.
You should remember them that was when you accused me of dotoring the stats as they never matched your opinion.
Yet they were the stats as prepared by a world renowned econmist.

Poor ocean dont worry we both know you are not in the top 20% anyway.
Majority rules and the top 20% individual votes is worth the same as the botom 80% of the peasants votes are.
Only problem is there is many more more votes in the bottom 80%.
The Top 20% dont actually pay that much higher % of their income as you would like everyone to believe either.
341102

Odd that you two ignored this bit its almost like you are trying to misrepresent the current situation.

But seeing as you feel so strongley about the right getting taxed to highly stand for the Act party in your local electrorate if you views are as popular and as well supported as you think you will become an MP.
Or stump up the $100,000 you need to become a National MP.

You want to convert that to dollars paid in tax rather than % and then try to defend it?
Or are you too busy still working on the last question I asked?

No you want me too.Kiwis are taxed according to their income the more you earn the more tax you pay.
but is pretty simple maths the top 10% earn the most money and therefor pay more tax.
from memory its top 10% earn 34% of the total income.
The lower half pay a higher percentage of their income than you want people to know about ,which is why you want to talk in simple dollars.
They actually pay a far lower % of their income as tax when you take into account of their non taxed income.
Nearly every other country in the developed world has a CGT, They all seem to have not exploded.
Here is a hint your post contained no questions. As do the last 3 pages.
Thats the third time or is it the fourth time in what two days, that you have made an accusation that is baseless.

Aye, more evasions, doctored stat's and refusals to acknowledge the facts, fuck off with your bullshit, you radical socialist you. :laugh:

More of your baseless allegations. the stats are the stats not altered in anyway, Your problem is you just dont like what they say.
You can tell when either you or Katspam have lost an argument, as the abuse and accusations come out, as you have nothing else.

Lets have a look at some National party lies for real dotoring of the stats on Tax
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10645956
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/significant-income-redistribution-after-tax-reforms

Only thing is its total horseshit.
FOr instance the suggestion the top 1o per cent of households by income – will pay 49 per cent of income tax.
Well that's hardly surprising as the top 10% of earners earn 34% of the nations income.
Also national never ever mentions GST or income for currently exempt streams such as property.

ill English and David Farrar spent last week telling fibs about the tax burden high-income families assume. I want to set the record straight with some details about how much the top 10% really pay

In recent days, Bill English and David Farrar have been making a lot of inflammatory statements about how much tax is paid by high-income New Zealanders. For example:

“The top 10 percent of households contribute over 70 percent of income tax, net of transfers—over 70 percent of income tax, net of transfers.” - English, in Parliament
“If you take households over $120,000 then you have 17% of the households pay 97% of net income tax.” - Farrar, in the New Zealand Herald
These statements are blatantly false.

In this post, I demonstrate two errors that English and Farrar have made, provide corrected statistics, and comment on the substantive conclusion to be drawn from the correct figures. This post builds on excellent blogging over at The Dim-Post.

Error #1: Addition

In Bill English’s table, he calculates how much tax is paid by households in an income bracket, how much those same families receive in cash welfare transfers (but not any other form of private benefits), and adds them together to get a net figure.

Families earning over $150,000 paid net $7.8 billion. English and Farrar say that is 71% of the total. But when you use the same table and add up the amounts paid by families that earn above $80,000 but below $150,000, you find that those families also contribute a further net $7.6 billion, which is also around 70% of the total net tax.

What?! How the hell can two separate groups of families each pay 70% of the net tax?

The way English and Farrar put together this illusion is to assume that most of the “net tax paid” by middle-income families is not actually paid into “net tax.” Instead, it is put in a separate pool – “money for paying welfare transfers to net tax recipients.” Why use only middle class net taxes for this pool? Never mind why! Only when the “money for paying welfare transfers to net tax recipients” pool is full does “net tax paid” actually start paying towards “net tax.”

Everyone get that? Make sense?

No. It does not make any sense. There is no good reason to do it this way. This is a stupid, nonsensical way to figure out contribution burdens.

The list of silly conclusions that flow from their calculations is long. For example, under the English/Farrar counting rules, high-income families contribute absolutely nothing, not one cent, towards helping the needy with Working for Families payments, the DPB, or unemployment benefits. This is because their $7.8 billion goes into the “net tax” pool rather than the “paying for welfare transfers to net tax recipients” pool. That is, of course, an idiotic conclusion that is unfair to top-income earners, whose taxes do a great deal to support welfare programs.

But it flows straight out of the English/Farrar maths.

Consider also the chart below. The figures are directly from Bill English’s table. Each bar represents the net income tax position of New Zealand households in a $10,000 income band. Red bars represent net tax recipients; black bars represent net tax contributors. David Farrar’s claim that “If you take households over $120,000 then you have 17% of the households pay 97% of net income tax” amounts to a claim that the four bars on the right side of the chart constitute 97% of all the net tax represented by black bars.

That is obviously silly, just by looking at the chart.

Scubbo

11th March 2019, 19:25

definitely needed to crack down on house flipping, the brightline sorted that (too late mind..) but atleast its there now

further CGT is heading dangerously into socialist territory where government corruption will affect the masses in a lot bigger ways, it's already started with the shane-jones bribe to form the coalition --- greens have lost the plot (or rather marama has, and james shaw who is competent with the green agenda seems to be allowing it to continue at their peril, eh well...)

definitely opens up a blue/green party option and I bet someone perhaps even trademe dad's crew might push that way without the old man to get in.

I know that the electoral commission already has their tools for the job --- it will be a fun year next year in the political sphere

Ocean1

11th March 2019, 19:31

Yet I showed you that the lower incomes pay a higher percent of their income as tax, nice attempt to change the subject btw.
You shold remeber remember them that was when you accused me of dotoring the stats as they never matched your opinion.
Yet they were the stats as prepared by a world renowned econmist.

No, you did not. When you can present tax paid in dollar terms then you might be taken seriously. But at that point you would have proven your own argument complete bullshit, so you won't do it. Face it, dem rich pricks pay almost all income tax, the actual numbers aren't even difficult to find, the facts just don't fit with liarbor's proposals for new "fair" taxes, so you mangle the facts to suit your socialist narrative.

The subject, however, was Marama Davidson's anti-success spiel about "wealthy elites". But you go right ahead and ignore that and spew some more desperately twisted anti-bogyman crap, it's about all you're good for, screeds and screeds of pre-digested, incoherent and irrelevant quotes that nobody ever reads.

husaberg

11th March 2019, 19:44

No, you did not. When you can present tax paid in dollar terms then you might be taken seriously. But at that point you would have proven your own argument complete bullshit, so you won't do it. Face it, dem rich pricks pay almost all income tax, the actual numbers aren't even difficult to find, the facts just don't fit with liarbor's proposals for new "fair" taxes, so you mangle the facts to suit your socialist narrative.

The subject, however, was Marama Davidson's anti-success spiel about "wealthy elites". But you go right ahead and ignore that and spew some more desperately twisted anti-bogyman crap, it's about all you're good for, screeds and screeds of pre-digested, incoherent and irrelevant quotes that nobody ever reads.

You are becoming even more deluded by the post
The subject of none of the posts i made or that you made in reply to mine was never Marama Davidson
I posted my posts and yours its clear you have lost the ability to follow any rational conversation.

Good luck trying to convince 80% of the population that they should pay more tax because the top few percent that are already eanring 34% of the taxed income let alone the non taxed income are to poor to afford it.
There is a better chance of Simon bridges winning an election.
341218341219341220

Swoop

11th March 2019, 21:19

He's changed his mind?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111184195/cullen-on-cgt-on-balance-ive-changed-my-mind

So that's what the $1000/day bought them. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
He has no credibility whatsoever after his last stint as finance minister. Utterly retarded, so being paid a grand per (6hr) working day is bewildering.

He fits in well with the Lunatic Fringe's marama davidson. Now there is a cunt. A retarded one at that.

husaberg

11th March 2019, 21:31

He has no credibility whatsoever after his last stint as finance minister. Utterly retarded, so being paid a grand per (6hr) working day is bewildering.

He fits in well with the Lunatic Fringe's marama davidson. Now there is a cunt. A retarded one at that.

Yet thats less than the average charge out rate for a lawyer.
http://www.lawsociety.org.nz/lawtalk/lawtalk-archives/issue-893/charge-out-rates-information-released
Maybe we should compare Dr cullens credentials vs the National party finance ministers.
Ruth Richardson whose law degree must have qualified her for Minister of Finance.
Bill Birch a Surveyor, who never went past High School.
Bill English honours degree in English literature.
Rob Muldoon accountants Clerk.

So what was it Cullen has a doctorate in again and what did he do for a living prior to becoming an MP.
Oh thats right, he as a doctorate in Economics and was a university professor in economics.

As for the fees national set the policy for what they are renumeration https://dpmc.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2017-03/coc-12-06.pdf:whistle:
From memory the panel charged $162,000 for the flag referendum that no one asked for or wanted.
But fear not if you have complaints take them to Jim Bolger Chair of the fair pay working group.:clap:
https://www.mbie.govt.nz/business-and-employment/employment-and-skills/employment-legislation-reviews/fair-pay-agreements/

National borrowed to give tax cuts that we couldnt afford uped GST, and underfuneded hospitals roads etc etc etc
We owe 20% of GDP again because National cant balance the books without borrowing.
They spent nearly the whole 9 years in budget deficiet they couldnt even balance the books while chronically under funding practically everything and borrowing massively
341222341223341226341225341224

GDP grew 1% in the September quarter. It’s the strongest growth in two years, nearly double the OECD average and rivalled only by the US.
It was broad based – 15 out of 16 industries expanded, with only mining dropping back. The RBNZ believes GDP growth will “pick up” over 2019.

At 3.9% unemployment is the lowest in 10 years.
Or in the words of the Reserve Bank “employment is around its maximum sustainable level”.

Cost of living pressures are real but the latest CPI increase of 1.9% recorded by Stats NZ is low by historic standards. Further blunting National’s grab for attention on hip pocket issues, petrol prices dropped 10 cents a litre in October.

In the housing sector rents have been rising, as have concerns about KiwiBuild, but the dangerously hot Auckland market has cooled safely so far. ASB said this week more Kiwis believed it was a good time to buy a house than at any point in the last five years.

Mortgage rates are almost subterranean. This week ANZ offered a one year rate of 3.95 percent, claiming it was the lowest since World War II. A time traveller with a mullet or shoulder pads might have thought a one had been mistakenly left off the front of the rate (mortgage rates were nudged 20 percent in the late 1980s).

A deep grave has been dug for National over claims of a fiscal hole.
A surplus of $5.5 billion is forecast and the government is on track to meet its Budget Responsibility Rules of spending at 30% of GDP and debt at 20%.

Considering Key liked to claim responsibility for nz sinterst rates when they were higher than that Labour must be doing far far better.

Ocean1

12th March 2019, 06:37

You are becoming even more deluded by the post
The subject of none of the posts i made or that you made in reply to mine was never Marama Davidson
I posted my posts and yours its clear you have lost the ability to follow any rational conversation.

And yet the post you quoted, and replied to was ...

No surprise really, from the outfit that campaigned on their right to defraud taxpayers. :laugh::laugh:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/111168958/capital-gains-tax-should-be-just-the-start-says-green-coleader-marama-davidson

Grasping, deluded twats.

341211

GDP grew 1% in the September quarter. It’s the strongest growth in two years, nearly double the OECD average and rivalled only by the US.
It was broad based – 15 out of 16 industries expanded, with only mining dropping back. The RBNZ believes GDP growth will “pick up” over 2019.

At 3.9% unemployment is the lowest in 10 years.
Or in the words of the Reserve Bank “employment is around its maximum sustainable level”.

Cost of living pressures are real but the latest CPI increase of 1.9% recorded by Stats NZ is low by historic standards. Further blunting National’s grab for attention on hip pocket issues, petrol prices dropped 10 cents a litre in October.

In the housing sector rents have been rising, as have concerns about KiwiBuild, but the dangerously hot Auckland market has cooled safely so far. ASB said this week more Kiwis believed it was a good time to buy a house than at any point in the last five years.

Mortgage rates are almost subterranean. This week ANZ offered a one year rate of 3.95 percent, claiming it was the lowest since World War II. A time traveller with a mullet or shoulder pads might have thought a one had been mistakenly left off the front of the rate (mortgage rates were nudged 20 percent in the late 1980s).

A deep grave has been dug for National over claims of a fiscal hole.
A surplus of $5.5 billion is forecast and the government is on track to meet its Budget Responsibility Rules of spending at 30% of GDP and debt at 20%.

Considering Key liked to claim responsability for nzsinterst rates when they were higher than that Labour must be doing far far better.

https://d3nd7i493f0o21.cloudfront.net/assets/resized/img/nz_and_us_interest_rates-0-500-0-291.png

So who's deluded? "BUT NASHNIL". :laugh::laugh: You just can't help yourself, can you? Nobody needs dickheads spewing heavily spun partisan bullshit Every. Single. Post. On ignore you go.

husaberg

12th March 2019, 10:13

And yet the post you quoted, and replied to was ...

So who's deluded? "BUT NASHNIL". :laugh::laugh: You just can't help yourself, can you? Nobody needs dickheads spewing heavily spun partisan bullshit Every. Single. Post. On ignore you go.

I replied to gasping deluded twats by posting national part memorandums as that is what everyone thought you meant. there was never any link in my post, There was never nothing in my post was ever about, what your delusional mind is trying to connect.
341227341228
Really I am peddling spin by using facts and pointing out Nationals legacy of debt?
341229341230
I am peddling spin by pointing out Cullen is far more qualified than anyone national has had as finance minister using their actual qualifications?

Maybe we should compare Dr cullens credentials vs the National party finance ministers.
Ruth Richardson whose law degree must have qualified her for Minister of Finance.
Bill Birch a Surveyor, who never went past High School.
Bill English honours degree in English literature.
Rob Muldoon accountants Clerk.
So what was it Cullen has a doctorate in again and what did he do for a living prior to becoming an MP.
Oh thats right, he as a doctorate in Economics and was a university professor in economics.
Is it spin pointing out the actual government financials when someone with no evidence says they are in their opinion performing poorly?
What you are doing is trying to spin out a TWG and call it government policy when in reality you have no idea what it will be but are attempting to scaremonger up some support for your failing party and crippled leadership.
Another bad day for national if that's the best you can do.

Especially considering your party is under yet another investigation as police have passed some to the SFO.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/03/12/484157/sfo-to-investigate-national-donation-allegations
Its no wonder your lot is behind in the polls, you cant even keep up with a conversation;)

Swoop

12th March 2019, 18:24

So what was it Cullen has a doctorate in again and what did he do for a living prior to becoming an MP.
Oh thats right, he as a doctorate in Economics and was a university professor in economics.

He should have stayed there. His actions were deplorable, as who empties the bank account as they leave office?
He's still a retarded cunt.

husaberg

12th March 2019, 18:29

He should have stayed there. His actions were deplorable, as who empties the bank account as they leave office?
He's still a retarded cunt.

Really do you have some actual evidence or are you confusing him with what muldoon left Lange?
or when Following the 1984 general election a constitutional crisis occurred when Muldoon refused to act on instruction of the incoming government, causing a growing currency crisis to worsen. Eventually he relented, after his position as National Party leader was threatened by members of his caucus.
Or when they had to bail out Air NZ
Or are you confusing it with the billions of dollars they short funded the health boards by?
Where they didnt increase the health spending to match inflation that they underfuned the health system by each year to the extent to regain the spending power of the 2009 and pay for the initiatives and additional costs announced over that time, it would need to increase by $2.3 billion in the 2017 Budget to $17.6 billion."

JimO

12th March 2019, 18:37

Really do you have some actual evidence or are you confusing him with what muldoon left Lange?
pretty sure cullen said "i spent the lot" as his arse was kicked out

husaberg

12th March 2019, 18:46

pretty sure cullen said "i spent the lot" as his arse was kicked out

Pretty sure odd that nationala first step was to cut tax then.
Odd that Labour operated budget surpluses whilst paying off Nationals debt they incurred
Read the graphs and show some data that says otherwise.

Looking at recent governments, Clark's finance minister Sir Michael Cullen squirreled away savings, paying off debt and using the surplus for investment.
On the other hand, international conditions were much less benign under the Key-English Government, so National "cannibalised" a lot of the Cullen reserves to ease us though the GFC, Easton said.
The record showed their debt track was higher than Cullen's
Economist Brian Easton

Not only that the whole time National was in power they never contributed to New Zealsnd Super fund.
The Superannuation Fund was created by the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Act 2001[8] on 11 October 2001 by Michael Cullen, who was then Minister of Finance under the Fifth Labour Government, and is colloquially known as the "Cullen Fund".

In the 2009 New Zealand budget the National Government suspended payments to the fund. Contributions were proposed to resume in 2020/21 when the Government's net debt to GDP falls below 20% again
The New Zealand Government had contributed $14.88b to the fund by 2012.The sovereign fund posted a record 25.8% return in the twelve months till 30 June 2013. . The Labour-led government started payments into the superfund again in December 2017.
Labour were smart enough to make it impossible for National to raid this fund.

JimO

13th March 2019, 06:37

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/05/hes_spent_it_all.html

HenryDorsetCase

13th March 2019, 08:07

Said the liarbor fanboi who's reply to any comment whatsoever is "BUT NASHNIL". :tugger:

In fairness they are cunts.

Also: Jami-Lee + Soimun = Marama plus whatever other lunatics are on the good side. It all works out in the end.

husaberg

13th March 2019, 08:14

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/05/hes_spent_it_all.html

DId you read and understand it.
Like where it says a tax cut leaves Basically no fiscal margin for the next five to six years.
So even in the opinion of a National party blogger, the National tax cuts were unsustainable and unafordable.
No where does it say they he drained money out and left them nothing.
Which is why National borrowed to the hilt and put the country again into massive debt to splash out on tax cuts we couldn't afford that were funded out of borrowing and GST increases.
National raised Taxes 18 times.
Cullens figures were bang on.
Cullen was even right to protect the superannuation fund so that wasn't pissed away as well.
National never even contributed to it for your retirement, not only that they lowered the employer contributions for kiwisaver how it was taxed how it was incliuded in income packages.
Employer contributions were not taxed unless it was above 4% someone changed that to 2% guess who...

Read these NZ treasure figures and tell me what the Labour budget surplus was and what the Nations debtrs were.
Then tell me how much money National borrowed over their term and how much labour decreased our debt by.

husaberg

13th March 2019, 08:27

In fairness they are cunts.

None of the current crop are a patch on Dover Samuels pissing in the corridor as he was that trolleyed he couldn't find the toilet.
Or the two having a fist fight over one saying something about a marriage break up a couple of years ago (mallard and Henere)
Or the NZ first $100 tax payer funded undies
But who doent need to know Two Chinese MPs are more valuable than two Indian MPs especially when you can get $100,000 each for them.

Ocean1

13th March 2019, 09:13

He has no credibility whatsoever after his last stint as finance minister. Utterly retarded, so being paid a grand per (6hr) working day is bewildering.

He fits in well with the Lunatic Fringe's marama davidson. Now there is a cunt. A retarded one at that.

Yeah, nah Michael it's still "extreme, socially unacceptable and economically unnecessary" no matter what mind you're paid to change.

Seriously, it's a tax on inflation, you simply can't defend any policy based on taxing "profit" from a sale where you'd have to pay exactly the same price to replace the asset. It's a cash grab, pure and simple.

Ocean1

13th March 2019, 09:36

In fairness they are cunts.

Also: Jami-Lee + Soimun = Marama plus whatever other lunatics are on the good side. It all works out in the end.

Oh aye, in spite of prolific and usually barely intelligible attempts hereabouts to assume otherwise I'm not any sort of party apologist, they're all cunts.

I simply favour govt that doesn't represent enforced collectivism via the arbitrary redistribution of earnings over individual freedom and responsibility. In that regard the incumbents' socialist agenda usually represent a narrow net negative compared to most alternatives not positively glowing with fluorescent green marxist fervor.

In the absence of anything approaching political adequacy I'd just as soon have less of the lot of them.

Ocean1

13th March 2019, 11:18

Succinct.

https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/politics/capital-gains-tax-proposal-nz-government/

Swoop

13th March 2019, 14:04

Really do you have some actual evidence or are you confusing him with what muldoon left Lange?
Such short memories in NZ...

pretty sure cullen said "i spent the lot" as his arse was kicked out
Yup.

mashman

13th March 2019, 16:30

Oh aye, in spite of prolific and usually barely intelligible attempts hereabouts to assume otherwise I'm not any sort of party apologist, they're all cunts.

I simply favour govt that doesn't represent enforced collectivism via the arbitrary redistribution of earnings over individual freedom and responsibility. In that regard the incumbents' socialist agenda usually represent a narrow net negative compared to most alternatives not positively glowing with fluorescent green marxist fervor.

In the absence of anything approaching political adequacy I'd just as soon have less of the lot of them.

So lord business wants a rational corporatocracy, but without people receiving what they have earned if they exist within a monopoly. Utopia eh :killingme......

husaberg

13th March 2019, 17:30

Such short memories in NZ...

Yup.

Memory of the internet is longer ,post the facts the stats and the accounts then. If it happened it will be real easy to show.................unless of course it never did........

Oh aye, in spite of prolific and usually barely intelligible attempts hereabouts to assume otherwise I'm not any sort of party apologist, they're all cunts.
.

Of course if you were a passionate observer with no preference , then of course your posts on KB would show an equal amount of criticism for both the left and the right then aye.
Only they dont, Quite the contrary in fact.

Swoop

14th March 2019, 16:13

husaberg

14th March 2019, 17:28

It seems another economist disagrees with the cuntbrained cullen "economist".
http://morganfoundation.org.nz/capital-gains-tax-political-stunt-no-economics-rationale/?fbclid=IwAR3GZx56MPPktFHPaFlDw47OOusJKaP21JuoHyNs mQbX4ZFbsUwnHKgE21A

"post the facts the stats and the accounts then. If it happened it will be real easy to show.."
Just refer to when Liarbour got kicked out last time. Pretty simple really...

The morgan foundation aye I wonder what there cat policy is?
I am sure They must be totally apolitical considering he ran for parliament........:nya:
It would be real hard to imagine that he holds extreme right wing views at all.
So lets see i have asked you and the other Blueballers quite a few times to back up the statements you have made, As nyet none of you have one might suggest the reason is you cant.
I wonder why?

Swoop

15th March 2019, 15:42

So lets see i have asked you and the other Blueballers quite a few times to back up the statements you have made, As nyet none of you have one might suggest the reason is you cant.
I wonder why?
Is google broken? You have the ability.
We choose not to festoon posts with links and other detrius.

husaberg

15th March 2019, 15:58

Is google broken? You have the ability.
We choose not to festoon posts with links and other detrius.

Seeing as you are the ones making the claims and someone has asked you to provide evidence to substantiate said claims.
The generally accepted response is to provide the evidence that substantiates your bold claims or just slink off.:lol:

Swoop

18th March 2019, 17:59

Seeing as you are the ones making the claims and someone has asked you to provide evidence to substantiate said claims.
The generally accepted response is to provide the evidence that substantiates your bold claims or just slink off.:lol:

You probably suffer from the "kiwi short memory syndrome", but possibly may remember when Heilen Kerke and cullen were ceremoniusly booted out after 9yrs of socialist engineering?
What did they waste money on? Buying a broken trainset and emptying the bank account. When national took over, the shortfall prompted them to raise gst to 15% due to the mis-management by their ineptitude.

Guess what. No links here.
Google it.

JimO

18th March 2019, 19:00

husaberg

18th March 2019, 19:12

You probably suffer from the "kiwi short memory syndrome", but possibly may remember when Heilen Kerke and cullen were ceremoniusly booted out after 9yrs of socialist engineering?
What did they waste money on? Buying a broken trainset and emptying the bank account. When national took over, the shortfall prompted them to raise gst to 15% due to the mis-management by their ineptitude.

Guess what. No links here.
Google it.

Really So you will have no trouble showing the figures for this.
Including the budgets that show Labour produced a surplus each year and paid off debts.
While national you forgot to mention the first thing national did was dropped taxes then as a result of this they then upped GST and when this wasnt enough they borrowed billions from overseas to pay for it each year.
341322341323341324341325

Clark's fifth Labour Government reduced debt from 22.6 per cent of GDP in 2000 to 5.5 per cent in 2008.
That same Labour Government went from a $386 million deficit in 2001, to a $2.8b surplus in 2008.

During Key's National Government, debt as a percentage of GDP went from 9.1 per cent in 2009 to 24.6 per cent in 2016.
That same government only produced one year in Budget surplus in 9 years.

You sound like Stephen Joyce and his 17 billion dollar shortfall one one else can find or ever found.
Or Jerry Brownlees having to remove his fake data from the net.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/110902970/national-party-pulls-gerry-brownlee-facebook-ad-following-advertising-standards-authority-complaint

National Party pulls Gerry Brownlee Facebook ad following Advertising Standards Authority complaint
"Gerry's claim that bracket creep costs New Zealanders $17.7b over four years is massively exaggerated and inaccurate," Parry said.
The ASA code states that ads must not mislead or be likely to mislead, deceive or confuse consumers, abuse their trust or exploit their lack of knowledge. This includes by implication, inaccuracy, ambiguity, exaggeration, unrealistic claim, omission, false representation or otherwise.
"This basic maths error by a senior member of the National Party grossly misleads New Zealanders who see this advertisement," Parry said

Maybe you should argue it out with Brian Easton

Looking at recent governments, Clark's finance minister Sir Michael Cullen squirreled away savings, paying off debt and using the surplus for investment.
On the other hand, so National "cannibalised" a lot of the Cullen reserves to ease us though the GFC, Easton said.

The Key govermment period was the greatest transfer of wealth to the top 10% NZ has ever seen.

National is promising to slash tax on businesses and the highest paid 8 per cent of income earners next year as part of a long-term plan to lower taxes.
English said the measures, estimated to cost $815 million next year,
The cuts would give $46 a week to someone earning $100,000 a year and $117 a week to Mr English on his current salary of $162,200.
Those earning less than $60,000 would get nothing.
"We will look separately at supporting families and children and households on low and middle incomes," Mr English said.
National could afford the cuts because it did not back Finance Minister Michael Cullen's superannuation fund, which would take $2 billion a year.

Kiwirail was hundreds of millions Labour had a 2.8 billion surplus the year National took over.

On the other hand lets discuss
That since 2010, public health’s share of GDP has been systematically reduced – to the point where an extra $1.6 billion would be needed to return health to the same ratio of the nation’s GDP that it enjoyed seven years ago.

Ocean1

18th March 2019, 20:11

Swoop

20th March 2019, 11:54

Do me a favour and don't quote the landslide of twisted bullshit that will elicit.
Rodger, wilco!

husaberg

20th March 2019, 12:21

He should have stayed there. His actions were deplorable, as who empties the bank account as they leave office?
He's still a retarded cunt.

Memory of the internet is longer ,post the facts the stats and the accounts then. If it happened it will be real easy to show.................unless of course it never did........

Is google broken? You have the ability.
We choose not to festoon posts with links and other detrius.

Seeing as you are the ones making the claims and someone has asked you to provide evidence to substantiate said claims.
The generally accepted response is to provide the evidence that substantiates your bold claims or just slink off.:lol:

You probably suffer from the "kiwi short memory syndrome", but possibly may remember when Heilen Kerke and cullen were ceremoniusly booted out after 9yrs of socialist engineering?
What did they waste money on? Buying a broken trainset and emptying the bank account. When national took over, the shortfall prompted them to raise gst to 15% due to the mis-management by their ineptitude.

Guess what. No links here.
Google it.

How are you getting on there sport you said it was a easy google but you have not yet delivered any thing at all to back up what you stated as being a fact.

Really So you will have no trouble showing the figures for this.
Including the budgets that show Labour produced a surplus each year and paid off debts.
While national you forgot to mention the first thing national did was dropped taxes then as a result of this they then upped GST and when this wasnt enough they borrowed billions from overseas to pay for it each year.
341322341323341324341325

You sound like Stephen Joyce and his 17 billion dollar shortfall one one else can find or ever found.
Or Jerry Brownlees having to remove his fake data from the net.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/110902970/national-party-pulls-gerry-brownlee-facebook-ad-following-advertising-standards-authority-complaint

Maybe you should argue it out with Brian Easton
The Key government period was the greatest transfer of wealth to the top 10% NZ has ever seen.
Kiwirail was hundreds of millions Labour had a 2.8 billion surplus the year National took over.

On the other hand lets discuss
That since 2010, public health’s share of GDP has been systematically reduced – to the point where an extra $1.6 billion would be needed to return health to the same ratio of the nation’s GDP that it enjoyed seven years ago.
341360341361341362

JimO

20th March 2019, 18:12

How are you getting on there sport you said it was a easy google but you have not yet delivered any thing at all to back up what you stated as being a fact.
i take it you are a card carrying labour fanatic , and everything they do is ok with you? lets face it they are only going after the rich prices eh comrade

husaberg

20th March 2019, 18:28

i take it you are a card carrying labour fanatic , and everything they do is ok with you? lets face it they are only going after the rich prices eh comrade

Hell no, they do plenty of stuff that really pisses me off.
It just happens to be less that the other slimy pricks.
I am center left no one thats center left has any support for communism, Grasping at the they must be a commie is a act of right wing desperation.
i personally just feel that the Rich are far far under taxed and the poor are over taxed. As most of what they get gets sucked up in GST.
I feel the poor should have equal access to health care i feel every child has a right to 3 meals a day and decent schooling no mater how shit their parents are. So they have a chance to break the poverty cycle.
All i want is Swoop to post the evidence that supports his statements it shouldnt be hard if what he said was true.
Swoop and ocean like to make these grandiose statements i just ask them to back up what they say with figures that actually prove what they say.
Its not my fault they can't.
I posted plenty of actual evidence that shows him Key government was running a budget deficient nearly every year and paid for the tax cuts by was borrowing money every year sinking NZ into debt.
Yet The labour Government had successfully paid off debt and ran budget surpluses.

Jeeper

17th April 2019, 15:01

CGT gone. No more. Dead. Burried. Finished.

Voltaire

17th April 2019, 15:10

:lol:

So much time spent with quotes and counter quotes by Punch and Judy.

Jeeper

17th April 2019, 15:15

[emoji38]

So much time spent with quotes and counter quotes by Punch and Judy.Not to mention 2m actual dollars spent on the TWG trying to find a solution for a non-existent problem.

JimO

17th April 2019, 16:42

its only taxpayers money, easy come easy go

pete376403

17th April 2019, 18:07

its only taxpayers money, easy come easy go
Low to middle income taxpayers money at that. The wealthy always manage to get out of it

Jeeper

17th April 2019, 18:10

Low to middle income taxpayers money at that. The wealthy always manage to get out of itGovernment spending is from all tax payers, regardless of what their earning bracket is. Unless you are implying something else.

husaberg

17th April 2019, 18:42

Funny considering the whole idea of a CGT was to tax the few percent of people that own 70% of NZ assets.
It was never going to tax a persons personal dwelling.

sidecar bob

17th April 2019, 19:09

I could have told the dumb cunt it was never going to stick for nothing two years ago.

husaberg

17th April 2019, 19:18

I could have told the dumb cunt it was never going to stick for nothing two years ago.

So what happens next election then oracle?
Whose going to be leading National this time next year.

sidecar bob

17th April 2019, 20:38

So what happens next election then oracle?
Whose going to be leading National this time next year.

Who gives a fuck? Face it, Your dopey bint got it wrong again.

BMWST?

17th April 2019, 20:44

Who gives a fuck? Face it, Your dopey bint got it wrong again.
Successive governments have seen the need for a reform of the tax system.This was only one current attaempt.I think that most would agree we need a wider and shallower tax system.
I think your bitterness reveals that you have not yet accepeted the sort of result that PR will bring.I think coming years will see more abberations and the dominance of the old two parties will change.

Ocean1

17th April 2019, 21:12

I could have told the dumb cunt it was never going to stick for nothing two years ago.

Most of the fucking country has told them for the last several elections that most of the country don't want a cgt, and that continuing to push it would keep them in opposition. And they knew it, that's why two weeks out from the last election they belatedly hid their tax fetishes behind the "tax working group" trick. And make no mistake, this latest of many labour cgt backdowns has fuck all to do with "many NZers' don't want it" and a great deal to do with "Winston don't want it". I suspect that if Winston had blinked labour would have rolled out a cgt by monday week.

Ocean1

17th April 2019, 21:14

I think that most would agree we need a wider and shallower tax system.

Fucking right we do, full width and the same depth for everyone.

husaberg

17th April 2019, 22:26

Who gives a fuck? Face it, Your dopey bint got it wrong again.

Really, surely not introducing a tax will only increase her popularity further
Her popularity was increasing even when she was considering it..........
341551

neels

17th April 2019, 23:37

CGT already exists for speculating on property, anything more was pointless as the property market is floating face down now that the overseas money has stopped.

Taxing increase in value of a business because someone worked their arse off to improve it was never going to fly.

The rest is insignificant and would cost more to administer than it would earn.

Now they just need to put it on the back burner and wait for something bad enough to happen to push through the real agenda with public hysteria to support it, like with the changes to gun laws.

Voltaire

18th April 2019, 07:53

Be interesting to see what happens in Aussie with an election, Sydney, Melbourne housing down over 10% in 2 years and the banks tightening lending. They must be due a new PM by now.:rolleyes:

jasonu

18th April 2019, 10:12

Really, surely not introducing a tax will only increase her popularity further
Her popularity was increasing even when she was considering it..........
341551

The Chch shootings were the best thing to have happened to the tooth monster and her dim witted followers.

HenryDorsetCase

18th April 2019, 10:15

I see it mainly in terms of age, and a last gasp of entitled baby boomers fucking it up for the next generation(s). Like the environment really.

I will be dead so fuck alla y'all

HenryDorsetCase

18th April 2019, 10:18

The Chch shootings were the best thing to have happened to the tooth monster and her dim witted followers.

Well that's the Fox news in brief. The better view is probably "The Christchurch shootings were an appalling atrocity, conducted by a lunatic against a religious minority. and are rightfully condemned by all. New Zealand's duly elected Prime Minister, The Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, dealt with the tragedy with grace, compassion, and fortitude, and showed great qualities of leadership during the incident, which is continuing in its aftermath."

Perspective, no?

husaberg

18th April 2019, 11:18

The Chch shootings were the best thing to have happened to the tooth monster and her dim witted followers.

Sorry both she and her party has increased in every poll prior to that was well. Whether you like it or not that's how it is.
Out of interest as Trump is also right wing as is National, do you consider trump supporters to be smarter people?

Well that's the Fox news in brief. The better view is probably "The Christchurch shootings were an appalling atrocity, conducted by a lunatic against a religious minority. and are rightfully condemned by all. New Zealand's duly elected Prime Minister, The Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, dealt with the tragedy with grace, compassion, and fortitude, and showed great qualities of leadership during the incident, which is continuing in its aftermath."
Perspective, no?

I could see how Jason could think that considering trump thought it was a conspiracy against him and given how poorly National handled the Pike river situation with the knee jerk reaction that effectivy banned underground mining and resulted in none of the responsible people getting prosecuted that all these national voting gun supporters have forgotten about.

Voltaire

18th April 2019, 11:49

I see it mainly in terms of age, and a last gasp of entitled baby boomers fucking it up for the next generation(s). Like the environment really.

I will be dead so fuck alla y'all

Go you cycling vegan own coffee cup user you :love:

jasonu

18th April 2019, 12:02

Sorry both she and her party has increased in every poll prior to that was well. Whether you like it or not that's how it is.
Out of interest as Trump is also right wing as is National, do you consider trump supporters to be smarter people?

I could see how Jason could think that considering trump thought it was a conspiracy against him and given how poorly National handled the Pike river situation with the knee jerk reaction that effectivy banned underground mining and resulted in none of the responsible people getting prosecuted that all these national voting gun supporters have forgotten about.

You just can't fucking help yourself can you...

husaberg

18th April 2019, 12:09

You just can't fucking help yourself can you...

I could but its too funny not too, But sorry has any of that not happened? or you just dont like that it has happened? or could it be you don't like it being pointed out that it did happen?

So you never answered do you think Trump supporters or just nz right wing supporters that are smarter people or both?

sidecar bob

18th April 2019, 13:10

They gave it a technical term, but in laymans terms it seems she simply couldnt assemble enough supporters that were prepared to enable her to break yet another election promise.

husaberg

18th April 2019, 13:13

They gave it a technical term, but in laymans terms it seems she couldnt assemble enough supporters that that were prepared to enable her to break yet another election promise.

Whats the technical term for a opposition party leader than cant poll more than 5% in the preferred PM poll?
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5658b515e4b0f0c1a019454a/5803f11d20099e2af7714bde/5a04f23724a694dfd620f1a3/1510273592813/Cannon-1-Cover-Square.jpg

Is the the barrel of defeat that Simen Berridges is looking down

sidecar bob

18th April 2019, 15:51

Whats the technical term for a opposition party leader than cant poll more than 5% in the preferred PM poll?

Probably a fuckwit.
So I guess CGT is bad by you now that your babe isint into it anymore?
More chicanes than a bucket racing track bro.
Does her lying & promise breaking turn you on a bit?

Ocean1

18th April 2019, 16:07

Probably a fuckwit.
So I guess CGT is bad by you now that your babe isint into it anymore?
More chicanes than a bucket racing track bro.

They have bucket tracks where you bounce it off the limiter and then chuck it in reverse up your way do they?

JimO

18th April 2019, 16:09

Whats the technical term for a opposition party leader than cant poll more than 5% in the preferred PM poll?

Is the the barrel of defeat that Simen Berridges is looking down
be careful what you wish for......Bridges is just seat warming at the moment there will be a new glorious leader come the next election and by then all the thinking new zealanders will have seen old fluffy no substance for what she is, a headscarf wont save her, wouldnt surprise me if she popped out another sprog or marred the looser

husaberg

18th April 2019, 16:13

Probably a fuckwit.
So I guess CGT is bad by you now that your babe isint into it anymore?
More chicanes than a bucket racing track bro.
Does her lying & promise breaking turn you on a bit?

Lying about what exactly?
No i still feel a CGT is a fairest way of collecting tax. So does nearly every country in the world, thats why they have one afterall
Introducing it is never going to be an election winner.
Maybe you might like to explain why income generated from the sale of a rental property shouldn't be taxed.

husaberg

18th April 2019, 16:18

be careful what you wish for......Bridges is just seat warming at the moment there will be a new glorious leader come the next election and by then all the thinking new zealanders will have seen old fluffy no substance for what she is, a headscarf wont save her, wouldnt surprise me if she popped out another sprog or marred the looser

Hallelujah the glorious leader, Who will that be?
Seeing as The last two National have trotted out were sure damp squids, will the glorious new leader be announced on a Friday.

sidecar bob

18th April 2019, 16:19

Lying about what exactly?
No i still feel a CGT is a fairest way of collecting tax. So does nearly every country in the world introducing it is never going to be an election winner.
Maybe you might like to explain why income generated from the sale of a rental property shouldn't be taxed.

Your memory is fucked bro, she said "no new taxes"
Why? Because I have one for sale on trademe right now.
I stuck my balls on the line to put a risk averse family up for a few years, my risk paid off, should I be shafted for that?
Oh, the kiwi build debacle has another laugh left in it, 30 of the houses they were counting in their dismally underwhelming performance were already being built before the thing kicked off.

husaberg

18th April 2019, 16:27

Your memory is fucked bro, she said "no new taxes"
Why? Because I have one for sale on trademe right now.
I stuck my balls on the line to put a risk averse family up for a few years, my risk paid off, should I be shafted for that?
Oh, the kiwi build debacle has another laugh left in it, 30 of the houses they were counting in their dismally underwhelming performance were already being built before the thing kicked off.

What new taxes
As for your balls so what its income no different than anyone else's wages.
WHo gives a shit how many house they have built yet?
is it going that bad for national voters that this is all they can bring up.
I struggle to see how you feel wounded or somehow betrayed when you never voted for them in the first place.

National sold of tens of thousands of state houses and never replaced them.
Where is all the budgets that couldn't balance the economic meltdown and high unemployment that would occur if National wasn't in power.
8 years out of Nine the Tories could nt even balance the books FFS

Scubbo

18th April 2019, 16:46

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FavoriteTotalAmericanpainthorse-small.gif

annnddd time to start a business!

JimO

18th April 2019, 17:35

Hallelujah the glorious leader, Who will that be?
Seeing as The last two National have trotted out were sure damp squids, will the glorious new leader be announced on a Friday. i reckon Mark Mitchell would be ok

HenryDorsetCase

18th April 2019, 17:44

be careful what you wish for......Bridges is just seat warming at the moment there will be a new glorious leader come the next election and by then all the thinking new zealanders will have seen old fluffy no substance for what she is, a headscarf wont save her, wouldnt surprise me if she popped out another sprog or marred the looser

JuCol. It will be JuCol and that fascist Mark Mitchell most likely. Jacinda ascendant should still win the next election (we are a year out) but after that....

husaberg

18th April 2019, 18:19

i reckon Mark Mitchell would be ok
I didnt know MM married Possum bournes wife. yeah hes be a more likable pick than most of the other ones.
That said he isn't any sort of magic bullet otherwise he would have been promoted earlier.
After all the stink with Jamie lee Ross i would have thought the nats would have wanted to distance themselves from any other of Lusks people though.
He hardly rose to any sort of prime position in the last government? SO what sets him appart No bagage?

I had a look through and the most traditional back to roots leader there would be Nathan Guy

JuCol. It will be JuCol and that fascist Mark Mitchell most likely. Jacinda ascendant should still win the next election (we are a year out) but after that....

Paula Bennefit is on the front cover of the Womans Day this week, even with the oddball facials expressions she does shes 1000% more likable than JC will ever be.
If the nats panic and dump SB in the next few months i guess JuCol will be the pig they put lipstick on.

sidecar bob

18th April 2019, 19:46

What new taxes.
WHo gives a shit how many house they have built yet?

Wouldn't CGT have been a new tax?
I give a shit, because my govt lied to me & you should be upset about the same thing.

Swoop

18th April 2019, 20:05

Not to mention 2m actual dollars spent on the TWG trying to find a solution for a non-existent problem.
Only 2 mil?
To answer a question that had been put to bed by the previous government.

If one took the whiney-arsed view of the leftists' one could point out the flag-debate waste of time, looks rather similar to the liarbour cgt waste of time.
Just that the country (stupidly) asked for a flag referendum.

They gave it a technical term, but in laymans terms it seems she simply couldnt assemble enough supporters that were prepared to enable her to break yet another election promise.
I like how the housing crisis has been solved. Oh, and "child poverty" has disappeared too. Lol.

husaberg

18th April 2019, 20:29

Wouldn't CGT have been a new tax?
I give a shit, because my govt lied to me & you should be upset about the same thing.

Yes but was it introduced or did the die hard Nats just act like it was a done deal.
You do realise it hasn't been introduced?
So how exactly is that a lie

sidecar bob

18th April 2019, 20:39

Yes but was it introduced or did the die hard Nats just act like it was a done deal.
You do realise it hasn't been introduced?
So how exactly is that a lie

Yes thanks, I'm well abreast of the situation.
Have a wee think about that one for a bit & see if you can figure it out.

husaberg

18th April 2019, 20:40

Yes thanks, I'm well abreast of the situation.
Have a wee think about that one for a bit & see if you can figure it out.

Your memory is fucked bro, she said "no new taxes".

Wouldn't CGT have been a new tax?.

You very clearly aren't, you suggested she lied to you about a tax, only problem was that, it wasn't introduced.
Question bob.... did you ever vote for Simon Bridges?

Shame you dont apply the dont lie thing to selling state assets etc.
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/06/04/435-lies-by-john-key/
https://i1.wp.com/thestandard.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/key-resign.jpg

jasonu

19th April 2019, 02:23

What new taxes
As for your balls so what its income no different than anyone else's wages.
WHo gives a shit how many house they have built yet?
is it going that bad for national voters that this is all they can bring up.
I struggle to see how you feel wounded or somehow betrayed when you never voted for them in the first place.

National sold of tens of thousands of state houses and never replaced them.
Where is all the budgets that couldn't balance the economic meltdown and high unemployment that would occur if National wasn't in power.
8 years out of Nine the Tories could nt even balance the books FFS

You fucking HAVE to be either closely related to cassina or you actually are cassina.

husaberg

19th April 2019, 08:54

You fucking HAVE to be either closely related to cassina or you actually are cassina.

I called Bob on what he said, he never backed it up.
What new taxs.
You live in the USA. The USA like 99% of the first world have a CGT, You hero, trump never repealed the US oner, why is that?
PS cassina was clearly katmans alternate log in.

sidecar bob

19th April 2019, 08:58

I called Bob on what he said he never backed it up.
PS cassina was katmans alternate log in.

Fuck me dude, I have a social life & need sleep occasionally. I'm also a little busy at the moment because I don't hire estate agents to do a simple job that any muppet can do.
I can't be on here guarding threads constantly.

husaberg

19th April 2019, 09:03

Fuck me dude, I have a social life & need sleep occasionally. I'm also a little busy at the moment because I don't hire estate agents to do a simple job that any muppet can do.
I can't be on here guarding threads constantly.
F you really? you clearly dont have the sort of cash or the assets required for that to ever occur.
Sorry so lets get this straight (see what i did there)you have time to respond multiple times, Yet not enough to give an answer?
That is some funny arse shit, Are you planning on running as an independent for Tauranga next year? Because with that level of bluster with zero substance you are a shoe in in a safe National seat.
Provided of course you can stump up with the $200,000.

Jasons own record for claiming he can easily back up his statement with a fact or a simple example "only hes too busy " is over a page long spread over a week.
Maybe thats just the average trump supporters memory length.

jasonu

19th April 2019, 10:11

F you really? you clearly dont have the sort of cash or the assets required for that to ever occur.
Sorry so lets get this straight (see what i did there)you have time to respond multiple times, Yet not enough to give an answer?
That is some funny arse shit, Are you planning on running as an independent for Tauranga next year? Because with that level of bluster with zero substance you are a shoe in in a safe National seat.
Provided of course you can stump up with the $200,000.

Jasons own record for claiming he can easily back up his statement with a fact or a simple example "only hes too busy " is over a page long spread over a week.
Maybe thats just the average trump supporters memory length.

PS cassina was clearly katmans alternate log in.

I’m pretty sure it’s you.

sidecar bob

19th April 2019, 10:26

I called Bob on what he said, he never backed it up.
What new taxs.
You live in the USA. The USA like 99% of the first world have a CGT, You hero, trump never repealed the US oner, why is that?
PS cassina was clearly katmans alternate log in.

What did you call me on again?
I see you asked me if I voted Bridges, what else was there?
And it really does matter if they are counting houses in the kiwi build figures that were already there.
The technical term is lying or deception, but as long as it's your darling doing it then that's fine isint it?

husaberg

19th April 2019, 11:20

What did you call me on again?
I see you asked me if I voted Bridges, what else was there?
And it really does matter if they are counting houses in the kiwi build figures that were already there.
The technical term is lying or deception, but as long as it's your darling doing it then that's fine isint it?

Claiming that CGT was a breach of the no the new taxes.
I posted 400+ lies John key was caught out in,with no a peep from you......
now you are trying to get out of your tax claims it by calling deception on not enough houses that were built...........

So you voted for Bridges, a guy that only 5% of all voters rate as being up to being a PM, A guy that even only 12% of national voters rate him as being up to being PM
Yet you still somehow rate your opinion?

I’m pretty sure it’s you.
You were also Pretty Sure" Trump would make a decent president.

HenryDorsetCase

19th April 2019, 11:43

Wouldn't CGT have been a new tax?
I give a shit, because my govt lied to me & you should be upset about the same thing.

My understanding is that had the CGT been approved (fuck Winston Peters by the way) it would have been introduced after Labour/Coalition was re-elected. Specifically the campaign promise (again, as I recall it) was no new taxes this term - i.e. the term ending 2020, and so if they had introduced the CGT in the next term, there would have been no "lie".

Personally I think that done properly a CGT could have been OK. Just to take an example, residential landlords always go on about their "business" and if a business generates a profit then that is by definition a taxable profit. As long as the other principle of tax law is followed (i.e. allowing the costs that went into making that profit as deductions) then I'm comfortable.

But the realpolitik fact of the matter is that it is electoral poison so its been dropped. I've said before but not sure on here that in my view it is a last ditch kneejerk by the representative for entitled boomers personified by Winston Peters that has fucked it.

But, its off the table so we just get to move on now.

And honestly, Jacinda could crap on a church step and shoot a baby in the face and still be better than the current crop of Natzis.