Capital Gains Tax - I wonder if they'll rebate any tax if negative growth?

[James Deuce]

15% GST would be easier to administer and raise more revenue.............

Yes it would, and if you see other posts I've made in regard to this, I think it should be done, provided there are significant personal and company tax reductions made in tandem.

[The Stranger:Me]

Yes it would, and if you see other posts I've made in regard to this, I think it should be done, provided there are significant personal and company tax reductions made in tandem.

You drink Tui do you?

[Winston001]

This isn't true. You are not "entitled to arrange your affairs to reduce your tax liability". You are entitled to arrange your affairs to protect your assets etc and any tax advantage you receive is incidental. You are not allowed to do anything with the aim of reducing your tax - tax avoidance

Oh and Trusts are still taxed at 33% while companies are "only" paying 30%. Not sure how long this will be for

Apples and oranges. I'm no tax expert and this isn't the place for comprehensive advice.

You are correct to the extent that tax avoidance must not be the objective of a structure. If there are other reasons, and tax is reduced as a sideline effect, then it isn't avoidance.

But you are certainly allowed to reduce your tax liability - its called tax efficiency. A Loss Attributing Qualifying Company (LAQC) does that. Distributing Trust income to adult beneficiaries at their marginal rate is lawful - and can avoid the 33% trust tax.

[James Deuce]

You drink Tui do you?

Not by choice. It seems to have become the drink du jour however.

[The Stranger:Me]

Apples and oranges. I'm no tax expert and this isn't the place for comprehensive advice.

You are correct to the extent that tax avoidance must not be the objective of a structure. If there are other reasons, and tax is reduced as a sideline effect, then it isn't avoidance.

But you are certainly allowed to reduce your tax liability - its called tax efficiency. A Loss Attributing Qualifying Company (LAQC) does that. Distributing Trust income to adult beneficiaries at their marginal rate is lawful - and can avoid the 33% trust tax.

An LAQC for example (and there are other examples) is explicitly allowed and therefore does NOT fall foul of section 99, which is general in nature.
A specific law will take precidence over a general law - as the IRD thankfully found out at the Privy Council.
As an aside, given the then highest 2 courts in the land couldn't work out that rather simple concept it would be interesting to see if the current one would have done any better. I dare say not.