No. Hell no. The tax accountant we use worked for the IRD for ten years then was the tax manager at a good sized accounting firm then another here. He now works for himself and his clients are accountants and lawyers. the tax lawyer I know was in my year at Uni and is super bright, got the gold medal. He also worked for IRD, then overseas then in Auckland and now here. These guys are like the A-Team. If you have a problem, and no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire them. Your BAS type accountant has a good working knowledge of that shit, no doubt, but if you are getting audited, or fucked over, or accused of adopting too aggressive a tax position then you need a specialist.
The problem with the revenue is this: it is staffed by people, and they are public servants. they have the deepest pockets, literally unlimited funds to fight with, and really long memories. Ask Dave Henderson.
I thought elections were decided by angry posts on social media. - F5 Dave
If push comes to shove I might just take you up on that.
There is, as you say a bunch of regulatory triggers assembled around the "less than half a year" thing, but that might change if they introduce direct wealth taxes. It's already relevant for pensions, for what little it's worth. Indonesia in particular is doing a great job of siphoning Aussie and to a lesser extent US pension spending by formally and officially making it easier for retirees to live there part time, at a much, much lower cost. A couple of older Aussie acquaintances live half their lives in what amounts to club med style enclaves, a far higher living standard at a fraction of the cost of the rest of their year spent in Aus.
And the tax is theft thing is philosophically far older than the Chicago school, it's just a somewhat forgotten but perfectly correct observation: if you have no choice in the giving then it ain't a gift, it's absolutely accurate to call it theft. I don't suggest that it necessarily should be voluntary, but as a default definition you really can't argue that the rightful owner of the fruits of his labour is the dude what earned it.
As for it being OK paying a bunch more tax based on the argument that the said afflicted have generally got plenty: you perhaps need to include in that consideration why they've got plenty. Unless they came by it dishonestly, (in which case it's unlikely they'll be paying any tax whatsoever) then the answer is invariably that they worked harder/smarter in order to achieve that distinction. If you're going to take not only more off them in tax because of that but disproportionately more then why would they bother? More to the point, there's a strong argument that almost all of the eventual recipients of that largess had every opportunity to work just as hard/smart for the same resulting plenty....... and didn't.
So while I agree that you're not going to supply the infrastructure everyone uses without hitting up the most productive 10% much harder than everyone else, and I absolutely support the use of rich prick's money to support genuine charitable causes, the "equity" gravy train has reached the point where you have to ask yourself if over half of all adult Kiwis really need to be beneficiaries, or is that simply the natural outcome of a system where everyone votes themselves everyone else's money?
And to top it all off is the currently fashionable belief that it's not only fair that this should be the case, but that it's inequitable that rich pricks, having paid far more tax than most in achieving their prickdom are now unfairly "advantaged" and restitution should be made by taxing not their income but their actual wealth. Said opinion delivered daily in the rag of your choice, in vaudevillian level righteous outrage Which, I'm afraid transcends arguments based supposedly on equality and highlights the reason for all tax in the first place: "Because fuck your work ethic, what we want is more important than what you want".
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
My first accountant said, at out first meeting: "Understand that you might be paying me, but I work for the IRD."
That, and the understanding that if I ever constructed a tax return that would fly (even badly) and provide a better result than his then he'd pay it for me earned him 25 years of my business.
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
Exactly this ! We were recommended a particular an accountant with high level knowledge of family trusts and he's been pure gold. We wouldn't have had a show of knowing trust law and all the angles. IRD like him too because of his meticulous preparation. Same goes for anyone providing any type of high level specialist service, no matter what what service they provide as many of them only operate by word of mouth or very discreet advertising. The trick is actually finding them.
When I was coming up for retirement, we wanted financial advice that wasn't allied to any of the banks or financial products. Truly independent advice in other words as I'm an engineer, not a financial mastermind. We were recommended someone by the guy who ran our company superannuation investment programme. He made the comment that there were only 3 people in the north island that he would trust with his money! We went with one of them and he's been fantastic. Peace of mind and lets me concentrate on playing with motorcycles!
Anyone know if Red Baron are doing a sale on gear yet, or just the bikes so far?
Appears to be the longest going out of business close down so far ......
Phone them up - I'm sure deals can be had for the asking.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks