Capital Gains Tax finally on a major party's agenda

[yachtie10]

True but everyone else pretends they pay and then need to include mark up to cover administrating it.
Back the Mashman's point, when Macas buy the spuds they are fresh therefore Macas wont have to pay the suppliers pretend GST and should be able to pass on the 'savings'.
Contra; I can't remember Macas putting the price up to include GST in the first place. With 'raising costs' and other excuses I wont be expecting to see many price reductions outside the green grocers.

Maccas charge what they think you will pay (different in different stores)
The only thing that will make them cheaper is competition or a more sales at lower margin approach

Same with most fruit and vege. Do you think all the apples at packnsave are 3.99 a kilo because they cost exactly the same from suppliers. I dont believe the price would come down if GST is removed (In fact I can hear the argument that taking away the simplicity of the current GST calculation may add admin costs)

[Oscar]

True but everyone else pretends they pay and then need to include mark up to cover administrating it.
Back the Mashman's point, when Macas buy the spuds they are fresh therefore Macas wont have to pay the suppliers pretend GST and should be able to pass on the 'savings'.
Contra; I can't remember Macas putting the price up to include GST in the first place. With 'raising costs' and other excuses I wont be expecting to see many price reductions outside the green grocers.

Most of the people that this policy is aimed at wouldn't each veges if the price was zero.

[Winston001]

We've finally managed to contrive to have a relatively simple tax system, which sort of limits opportunities for shuffling income around for the purpose of avoiding tax. The wildly differing taxation offered by labour's scheme will re-open many doors for that sort of creative pea and shell game again.

Totally agree.

One of the reasons I don't like the CGT is the complexity it creates.

I'm not an accountant but I've learned and dealt with tax law as part of my career. Essentially since the Rodger Douglas era our system has become simpler and better, under both styles of government. Its far from perfect but better than elsewhere.

From a purely selfish perspective CGT is a winner. Lots and lots of work for lawyers and accountants. More civil servants jobs too. People will move their money from income - to avoid 39% - to capital at only 15%. Or sell the exempt family home, move into the rental for a couple of years = now that becomes the exempt family home, buy another rental, repeat...

Technically this won't be lawful but I bet it happens quite legitimately if the rental has always been intended as the retirement home. Alternatively the crib (bach) becomes the family home at retirement. Common enough.

[Winston001]

Another reason I don't like CGT is that it is driven by envy. Tax the rich pricks. In reality its middle NZ who have benefited from house value rises. And that is gone - too late. There won't actually be much tax gathered if the family home is exempt.

If Labour want to do the job properly they should propose an annual flat tax on all assets. Houses, farms, shares, bank accounts, bullion etc. Say 0.5%pa. No exclusions. Drop GST to 10% at the same time.

Simple and effective. That way the "wealthy" who have a small income are forced to contribute a small portion of capital, or sell it for someone else to make use of.

[The Stranger:Me]

What do you think?

Personally i reckon that if we are going to have to pay tax it should be fair. And this means that some members of society shouldn't have an avenue of making money where they don't contribute especially when it's usually the more well-off. It also means that tax breaks shouldn't encourage people to invest in non-productive assets.

I've never given a party vote to labour before (gave them a electorate one once) but if they make this fair, and reduce the paye and company tax a bit to compensate then Labour will definitely be a choice for me for the first time ever come this election.

I expect a lot of opposition from farmers and investment property owners, but that sounds like to me a bunch of people who are having a good run and don't want their toys taken away In the famous words of Bill Clinton, this could be an interesting erection after all.

Hmm, not likely to read the whole lot to see if these points have been covered off or not, so please excuse me for any that have been covered off.

1) We get what we deserve. If this goes ahead it will in time be extended to include everything and everyone. I know what they are saying now, but as always with these types of things it is the thin edge of the wedge. So look forward to tax on your family home and at a rate of 20%. It will come. One govt with "tweak it" then the next then the next. There is NO capital gain on a house. If you buy a house for 100k and sell it say 5yrs later for 200k you made nothing as you then need to go buy another house, and you know what it will cost to buy one the same? That's right 200k. You gained no value - and lets face it, that's what money is a store of value. IT WILL COME in time.

2) How do we save for retirement? Who gives a fuck, let's just tax em now and we'll figure it out later. Look, I really don't mind if you guys want to pay my super for me. Just don't fucken moan about eh.

3) One of the reasons mooted for the CGT is the buying and selling of properties. This is taxable now and at a higher rate than 15%. Why not simply enforce this as it will yield a better return than the CGT (in it's present proposed form). If it does replace the current regime speculation over the next few years at least just became a whole lot more attractive than risking getting landed with say 33% tax AND being labelled a speculator by the IRD.

4) I understood taxation was about redistribution of wealth to those whom need it most. Recent articles in the harold have pointed out that owning a rental is a very marginal return. By providing various tax incentives to landlords the govt is assisting those at the bottom of the food chain - the tenants - as the landlord then doesn't need to recover a "commercial" rate of return from them. Failing this either one of a couple of conditions will occur. Rents will rise or there will be a shortage of rental properties - which will lead to rents rising. Sure the landlord is being assisted too (see point 2).

5) So investing my money in shares purchased on the share market is somehow productive? Please explain this one, because as far as I can see it only aides someone else sell their shares - they hope for a capital gain. It doesn't even provide a roof over someone's head.

6) Assuming shares purchased on the stock market are in fact productive AND we actually have any company directors that are not in prison to run such companies is it for the government to actually say what risk profile you are to accept. Sure people can loose money on property as they can with say shares etc, but at least with property you are in control of your destiny - not someone/s whom you really do not know. My meagre experience is that NO ONE looks after your money as well as you do. Just ask Mr Versalko. But hey doesn't matter - see point 2.

7) Perhaps it's more productive to invest in say finance companies? Or maybe mom and pop should be in the business of providing venture capital - of which we are all well versed in the intricacies there of. - see point 2.

8) Perhaps mom and pop should stick to something safe instead - like gold maybe. Again, is this really productive?

Meh, there will still be national super when I retire anyway so enjoy your new tax - I know I will.

[SPman]

Another reason I don't like CGT is that it is driven by envy. Tax the rich pricks.

As opposed to policies that are driven by greed. Drop the top tax rate and slash all the policies that help the lower earners.

[Hitcher]

As opposed to policies that are driven by greed. Drop the top tax rate and slash all the policies that help the lower earners.

Policies that are driven by an obsessive focus on the wrong stuff. If CGT is the answer, then what's the question?

What on earth is CGT going to do to grow New Zealand's economy? That's the most important question that New Zealand policy makers have to stare down.

Rather than being obsessively picky about how to slice up the economic cake, why not focus on growing a bigger cake? That way everybody gets a bigger slice.

But that could be fun when the same people who support CGT are also opposed to carbon emissions, mining, farming, meat, immigration, foreign ownership...

[short-circuit]

Policies that are driven by an obsessive focus on the wrong stuff. If CGT is the answer, then what's the question?

What on earth is CGT going to do to grow New Zealand's economy? That's the most important question that New Zealand policy makers have to stare down.

Rather than being obsessively picky about how to slice up the economic cake, why not focus on growing a bigger cake? That way everybody gets a bigger slice.

But that could be fun when the same people who support CGT are also opposed to carbon emissions, mining, farming, meat, immigration, foreign ownership...

http://novovirtu.com/2010/11/22/the-...own-economics/

[Hitcher]

http://novovirtu.com/2010/11/22/the-...own-economics/

What I'm suggesting has nothing to do with "trickle down" economics. Making a bigger economic cake should directly benefit all members of that economy.

Anybody who believes that a tax system that hammers "rich" people and people who own property and other assets that appreciate in value just so that people who contribute nothing can be looked after (in very simplistic terms), are the ones who need a reality check. Or they could consider moving to a country that offers the measures they think will work. Good luck with that.

[neels]

Anybody who believes that a tax system that hammers "rich" people and people who own property and other assets that appreciate in value just so that people who contribute nothing can be looked after (in very simplistic terms), are the ones who need a reality check. Or they could consider moving to a country that offers the measures they think will work. Good luck with that.

Zimbabwe maybe? Seems to be working over there....

[Ocean1]

If Labour want to do the job properly they should propose an annual flat tax on all assets. Houses, farms, shares, bank accounts, bullion etc. Say 0.5%pa.

Great.

So, if, in spite of all of the manifold disincentives applied to the actual generation of wealth one nonetheless finds oneself still in possession of a small part of the fruits of one’s labour then Er Majesty’s revenue collectors will be into that as well.

Answer me this: Why should one aspire to be anything other than one of the majority who contribute less than they take?

[trustme]

2) How do we save for retirement? Who gives a fuck, let's just tax em now and we'll figure it out later. Look, I really don't mind if you guys want to pay my super for me. Just don't fucken moan about eh.

5) So investing my money in shares purchased on the share market is somehow productive? Please explain this one, because as far as I can see it only aides someone else sell their shares - they hope for a capital gain. It doesn't even provide a roof over someone's head.



Meh, there will still be national super when I retire anyway so enjoy your new tax - I know I will.

2/ You must be a lot older than me [early 50's] If not it will be you that moans like a stuck pig when your super gets carved to pieces because we can no longer afford it.

5/ Companies list on the share market to raise capital to assist them to grow. you are in effect backing the company to grow & give an increased return that results in a dividend paid to shareholders. Company grows = more jobs = more profits = more tax = growing economy. Michael Hill , Warehouse have looked to privatise because like Famers they have worked out that growth is cyclical & the shareholders demand for a return can stunt long term growth, but that is another story.

Meh, I'd actually like to leave this mortal coil with it still in some sort of shape for my kids, apparently you don't give a shit

the rest is tripe.

[Spearfish]

I guess all this uses the assumption that only Labour will get in.
The greens need to expand CGT into everything and everyone.
Labour are still short a few billion for this seasons voter purchase.
Like the biker motto over the ACC gouge WHO'S NEXT?

[Winston001]

Great.

So, if, in spite of all of the manifold disincentives applied to the actual generation of wealth one nonetheless finds oneself still in possession of a small part of the fruits of one’s labour then Er Majesty’s revenue collectors will be into that as well.

Answer me this: Why should one aspire to be anything other than one of the majority who contribute less than they take?

Actually we already have a quasi-wealth tax - local body rates. These are calculated on the capital value of your property. So its no big leap to have a national form of annual wealth tax.

[BMWST?]

whatever he does with that 6mil he will pay tax on, so 6 people sell shares or whatever make a killing and the rest of us that have assets get penalised because of them?? fuck the CGT i say, typical labour wanting more of OUR money to give to THOSE who wont look after themselves, its a small step to include the family home once its been introduced as well, a vast majority of people who rent wouldnt be able to buy a house even if prices did drop

to put a cgt tax on the family house would be the end of that government(any government) for ever..