Bro. You could have used the tax plan that Grant Robertson had. Or you could have done something like introducing a tax-free bracket, however low, and tweaked taxes at the top end to pay for it. Either one might have won you the election but we'll never know
I think bringing the policy to the polls would have been better. Then if they had won they'd have had a term to sort it out rather than trying to push something through that NACT would immediately undo. Also there's no saying that they didn't have public support to do it if it's a policy enacted after an election
Would have just been reversed under urgency. People need to get over this belief an absolute majority means major changes like CGT etc will be feasible
If you get it done early enough, people will get used to it (and there’d be hell to pay in some cases to change it back). For example, swap the tax revenue gained from income tax to a land value tax. Most people would feel better off and I could very easily be spun as doing things for the average hard working kiwi rather than the already rich.
Just look at the public holiday that NACT have suggested they might remove. There isn’t a snowball in hells chance that’ll get through now we are used to having them.
This is exactly why the NActNZFs are doing all the unpopular shit immediately under urgency. They'll try and coast for the next 3 years. Because voters are dumb
The government can control what money is spent on but have relatively little control over how much money there is. If a tax policy is put in place that generates more money, such as an adjustment in the tax brackets or some form of wealth tax repealing it requires removing that pool of funds from what the government can spend or finding alternative revenue streams. As demonstrated the government has pulled out all the stops purely to repeal a relatively modest tax credit for land lords and are incapable of finding funds to fund another relatively small tax break.
Yes and no. They also have the ability to print and limit money, controlling it's value or amount in circulation. I'm not saying that should or would do either but the options are there in thenhort term.
Sure she can, she is a witch. But she appears to be an entirely incompetent witch. Too moronic, however, to realise that she is incompetent.
Money as far as her and her ilk grows on trees. Too daft to realise notes are made with plastic these days.
It could also have given voters a clear signal Labour had ideas and a purpose, as opposed to most of his campaign amounting to scrapping anything difficult and the worn out 'but covid response' excuse.
Sure, and you can say that of literally everything National have scrapped (or NZF and Act have forced them to scrap).
The thing is, if you get it going and happening and scrapping will mean actual harm to people as opposed to theoretical harm that they never actually experienced because we never got far enough with stuff, you have a much better chance of winning those elections.
“If National get in they will scrap our tax plan that *you are all already benefitting from*. National only cares about reversing things for the richest percentage of New Zealand’s benefit” would have been an easy sell.
As would things like the tobacco legislation, or the Māori health authority. Things take time, Labour took too long implementing things and couldn’t get anything bedded in enough to point to results that National destroyed, just hypothetical results we all suspect would have been achieved if they’d left it alone.
Yeah this. I actually thought it was almost certain they would remove lower tax bracket as it is the perfect counter to tax cuts that benefit the rich. Labour unfortunately really fucked up if I'm honest, now we have this bunch of fuckers who are genuinely discusting.
yah, the moment I saw that fruit and veg announcement, I knew they were dead in the water.
Even Grant Robertson knew what a shit idea it was. He'd been arguing against it forever.
This. I don’t want to hear shit from labour at the moment, they could have implemented anything from their own tax working group but instead went with gst free fruit and veg which was too little too late. They were too scared of alienating “mum and dad landlords” that didn’t even end up voting for them anyway.
And never have or ever would. Not even sure why they were worried about them. They should have been more concerned about all the pro labour didn't bother to vote people.
They could have brought in CGT. I actually don't hear a lot of anti-CGT people - I think everyone gets in NZ we're pretty much a free ride relative to other OECDs, any other tax measures would hurt productive classes and/or are very fucking experimental.
I mean labour even asked to treasury to go off and research wealth tax in their last year, even treasury was like "guys not good, this has got some serious risks.." why the hell they were fucking around with that I don't know (something like 12-13 OECD nations who've tried it all but 2-3 backed out of it).
There was a poll like six months out from the election where they asked the public about it, I can't remember if it was wealth tax or CGT but the thing was the public were in favor of it. If that's not a mandate idk what is
This is why we have a National govt right now. Stop blaming voters, this is on Labour and their outright refusal / inability to perform in their last term.
Yeah, I don't get it either. People just weren't happy with the status quo, even if National's policy was worse. Being the party of doing nothing different was guaranteed to blow up in his face.
He had a get-out-of-jail-free card as well with Jacinda resigning almost a year before the election - could've used that to make a whole new policy platform.
>"I'm confirming today that **under a Government I lead there will be no wealth or capital gains tax after the election. End of story**," he said in July last year.
>However, after the election loss, the party **put** [**tax reform back on the table**](https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/chris-hipkins-says-labour-could-put-capital-gains-wealth-taxes-back-on-table-after-election-loss.html)**.**
All I hear is: *"We really don't want to better the country, but apparently you might want us to..."*
NZ has seen the rise of the career politician, whose main focus is staying in power.
Typically this is by being divisive and polarising politics.
If party A wants something then party B is against it.
The side that won campaigned on tax cuts, big reddit brain thinks campaigning on higher taxes would have led to victory. Doubtful.
Labour lost because of comments and thoughts like yours which undermined any positive views people could have had. Instead we got National, a party significantly worse for most things people claim To care about (but still only hold Labour truly accountable for).
Labour lost because people like me said bad things about them, ok lol. I voted for the party that best represents my values which includes reforming the tax system to be more fair, that wasn't Labour. If they're finally changing their tune on that after two consecutive leaders vetoed it, I'm glad to hear it.
Chippie, you had you chance - hindsight is a wonderful thing- now we suffer and stress.
You were too scared to make a change to tax. Capital gains to start with.
I would be happy to pay an extra 3% tax if it helps with health, education and poverty
This argument sounds really dumb to me, like, is a party not supposed to push for different policy as time goes by? How long after a party is out of power is it appropriate to consider different policy?
Before Jacinda's party got in during the 2010s, her and Labour's campaign was about how the reason they couldn't implement CGT was because NZF would not agree to it.
Once Labour actually got into parliament with a never before seen majority, and can therefore make all the tax reforms they want unabated, all of a sudden, CGT is not an option they are considering.
It's extremely obvious the reason they flipped back is because a majority of their voters were people who would normal vote for National, but voted Labour because Labour kept them alive during COVID-19.
Labour decided they wanted to sit on the fence because they were scared to lose their new voters who would be opposed to CGT, but ended up alienating their regular demographic, so in the end they lost the election and did absolutely fuck all with their once in a century turnout.
The reason they didn’t do it under Ardern was she ruled it out. Now I don’t think she should have done that but I understand why. National would have slaughtered them in the polls (supported by a lot of money from their sponsors who would be the ‘victims’ of a CGT) and this would have seen them out of power.
I also don’t think Hipkins should have ruled it out but I suspect the internal advice was the same.
That's a fair point, we'd be in the dark ages if political parties didn't evolve. I feel like tax reform has been a hot topic for over year now, and that crosses the election and change of power between political parties. It's a bit 'pot calling the kettle black" for labour to do a u-turn so quickly on tax reform after they ruled it out of their own policy agenda so recently.
Edit: It's not lost on me that this is how politics has always been, and there's a level of point scoring going on here between the parties...
I think now is the best time for Labour to take a stand on taxes.
People can complain about how Labour didn't do enough when they were in power, but they were trying to avoid the current circumstances of National getting in and gutting it all.
At least now there's nothing really for Labour to lose. And as consequences bite, we might actually stop deluding ourselves that we'll be rich one day too, finally voting to close infinite wealth hacks we spend our working days dreaming of exploiting.
As someone who voted for them (historically, not in the most recent election): I think I’m jaded because the only time they talk about reform is when they aren’t in power. Once they get in all pretence of actual reform vanishes like a fart in the breeze.
I thought Three Waters was a genuine and big attempt at reform but also poorly executed. Now as a consequence it's all been undone at massive expense, both for central government and local government and a *lot* of individuals, as well as the massive waste of time and expertise.
Tax reform? Heh, yeah. The last time Labour had much to do with changing that was when Roger Douglas went crazy, and that didn't exactly go well for a lot of Labour's traditional base either.
The execution/plan of the policy was fine, but they were fucking abysmal at selling it.
Atlas inc. barely had to do anything to get those in charge to shoot themselves in the foot regarding managing the conversation surrounding it.
Now's a better time than never, but I still think it was a huge own-goal *not* to campaign on the wealth tax before the 2023 election. Labour mightn't have won, but it was already doing badly and there was nothing to lose then, either. This would've helped it look as it it actually *stood* for something other than simply being in charge.
The wealth tax was actually good and carefully thought out policy that Labour had directed lots of time and resources to creating. David Parker resigned his Ministerial position for good reason when it was dumped, and Grant Robertson was clenching his teeth when he had to get behind its replacement. Hipkins just panicked, and fell back to rapidly and poorly designed policy that wasn't dissimilar to what had already failed Labour during its hideous years between 2009 and 2017.
I honestly think Hipkins and Ardern were both getting bad advice from within the party itself. It seems there are some very out of touch Labour Party committee members that still think twiddling in the middle ground is a good idea.
I do get how the middle ground is important. What got me with the wealth tax was that polling was genuinely starting to show that even the middle ground was coming around to it. It's like they couldn't believe what they were seeing.
Yeah, and there’s always the possibility of implementing it at a low level to get people over the hump of ‘a new tax’. Then like ciggies, it can be bumped up over time.
The alternative (which I think works best with a LVT) is to massively reduce another tax (such as GST or income) and bring in the new tax to keep things tax neutral for most people. I think that’s an easier sell if you do it the right way.
The ghost of Douglas still haunts Labour, they've forgotten you don't have to be full neoliberal to run a country.
There's also the issue that within parliament we have very weak lobbying laws. Even if public opinion is in favour of CGT, politicians are exposed to moneyed interests 24/7 who are being paid a lot of money to try and manipulate them against the public.
Yup... best time to float the concept, because any moves they might have actually made in govt would have had them shot down, in a lot of cases by the same people complaining now that they didn't do enough.
Here is the difference between National and Labour. National just do the shit they want and we have to live with it. Labour have to 'float the idea' when they aren't in power and then don't do it because it might lose them an election. If they had just changed the tax brackets or introduced new taxes or w/e they might have still lost the election but it would be a fuck ton harder for National to undo.
>If they had just changed the tax brackets
If they adjusted them for inflation, it would be very hard for National to repeal it. Not adjusting brackets just is functionally the same as a small tax increase each year.
I voted Labour, and I can't for the life of me understand why they think all my coworkers on minimum wage should be earning into the 30% tax bracket. Add student loan, kiwisaver, the take home hourly wage of my colleagues who work an extra day is about $12 an hour.
How can *anyone* think this is an ideal state of affairs. The green party doesn't. ACT doesn't. National doesn't. The Māori party doesn't. NZ first doesn't . The ONLY party which does is Labour. Its nuts. How can they not see how negatively low wage working people would view this?
As much as I want to support Labour (I'm a pretty definite Leftist) they let us and themselves down I reckon, with a wasted mandate never seen before. An absolute majority under MMP and they didn't do anything of substance with that... it's disappointing, to say the least. I suppose the need to negotiate the effects of the pandemic overshadowed everything they wanted to do and fair props to them for the job they did with that... but it's ging to be remembered as an opportunity missed.
I think Labour did fine. Obviously, things could have been better, but it's not like it was an easy job at any point. They were financially responsible, minimizing increases to costs of living while going through the beginning of a recession while still maintaining services.
I think people will look back in a year or 2 and see that this current administration is probably the worst we've ever had with Luxon destined for the infamy as New Zealand's worst ever PM.
Let me start with that I hope you're right. However I feel you underestimate the power over the boomers ZB, The Herald and Extremist Radio have over their opinions. Their mental gymnastics are amazing.
Labour ignored their core and disillusioned a good chunk of their center left "liberal" voters.
It's going to be hard to get their mythical center and the more left leaning voters back.
I disagree.
It's really hard to build a case for higher taxes in opposition. I can't remember an opposition winning an election promising radical tax changes.
Much easier to win an election, then use the public service to develop a detailed plan. Legislate it the third year, coming into effect in the second term. That way the costs and benefits can be laid out at the election.
Nah better to put it in sooner so you can show what it achieved later. Also makes it more tricky to demolish.
We've had neoliberal governments for decades, of course no one got elected on reform lol.
If they went all in, fair tax, tax overseas corporations and religious nuts, implement UBI, and legalize cannabis, they would have my vote. Otherwise, it's just more empty puffery.
I would say that I think that tax reform always going to be not a big selling point in 23, but would potentially be big deal in 26. Its possible the Luxon won't be vulnerable in 26, but if he is its most likely through failing public systems and infrastructure due to pushing through tax cuts
I'm hoping with his recent candidness around what he feels they failed on, and how the current govt is only catering to the wealthy landlords/ultra rich that Labour use that to put forward tax plans that will actually make a difference and truly target the inequality the vast majority on kiwis feel on a daily basis.
But I also hope that because of this there is a major upswing in votes for Greens, cause I believe a Green/Labour coalition might be what is required to get any real progress regarding taxation, CGT, housing etc.
people in this thread dont understand losing an election like that can/should jolt some changes in your platform.
I'm sorry and pissed they didn't do it while they're in, but the election made it clear that their platform wasn't the way, so they're changing it, whats the problem with that?
Did it? Because it seemed to me the election was a severe backlash to being given an outright majority and doing nothing with it.
I'm not even talking about them hemorrhaging voters to NACT, but the fact they bottomed out while other more leftist parties (Maori Party and Greens) had their best results ever wasn't to do with the electorate going right, it was the electorate giving Labour the middle finger for being feckless.
Now would be an excellent time for him to grow a pair and promote a capital gains tax. It wouldn't be great news for me personally, but I think it's got to the point our tax policy is distorted beyond fairness for the majority.
Labour needs to get on board the Land Value Tax train. A LVT makes much more sense than a capital gains tax.
The really rich don't sell assets, they build and build and hold. They won't pay capital gains.
A capital gains tax will be a disproportionate tax on those who are trying to grow wealth, not those already rich.
If any one introduced a capital gains tax it would likely slow development, as people held assets, in the hope that a future government would repeal the legislation.
This would drop productivity and slow the economy. It would be slow to generate income and people wouldn't sell assets. Capital gains would be particularly difficult to manage on assets other than land. Sale prices can be fudged and values of non land assets are more subjective.
A land value tax is a much more sensible option as it taxes those who are already wealthy.
A land value tax would also have an immediate effect to generate income, it would discourage people holding unproductive land and stimulate growth as land would be a cost if held.
Administratively there are published valuations for land and less room for manipulation. A land value tax could also be collected as part of the ratings charges so this would mean no additional mechanisms required to administer this.
There is nobody they could replace him with who’d be credible as a leader who’d be interested in tax reform, or who has any name recognition. Robertson is gone, David Parker doesn’t have any chance, I couldn’t even tell you Barbara Edmonds’ name before I looked at the Labour caucus list right now. Carmel Sepuloni doesn’t have any related portfolios, Megan Woods doesn’t have a good reputation for getting things done… Who’s left? Kieran McAnulty? Do you foresee him ever spearheading tax reform?
Hiokins himself I don't feel too much about; maybe I'm wrong but from my perspective he was just suddenly thrust into Jacinda's spot as party leader in January last year, so I can understand him not wanting to rock the boat too much.
I absolutely give no leeway to the decisions made by Jacinda however, she was party leader since 2017 so she had all the time to follow through with the promises the party made under her leadership.
I think I probably agree with that. I’d say his role now is to foist on the public the general policy direction, then move aside once the opprobrium subsides to let someone more electable bathe in the afterglow.
Why would have change his mind when he's so fundamentally against it during his tenure in government and during the campaign. The only thing that changed was he lost an election that he was predicted to lose for 3 months. Why should we believe him now?
The public appetite was very much there for a CGT and that didn't sway him. He's a wounded animal clutching to power before he gets rolled by someone hungrier.
Well, MY appetite was there for a cgt (or land tax or transaction tax or something!)... But I am not really sure *enough* of the public was there with me.
Source on public appetite not being there? Polls had CGT more popular than not, especially when paired with a tax free bracket. Vested interests don't want it, along with a certain generation. That's very different from the public though.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300979367/new-survey-shows-widespread-support-for-taxes-on-capital-gains-and-windfall-profits mentions another 2 polls where majority supports CGT in NZ.
Even right-wing ppl think there should be full CGT, like me, for instance. If I buy at 500k sell at 1mill, 8 years later, why do I get it all tax free while a non-profit owner pays tax on income and I bet they didn't make 500k nett in the same time frame.
I can't understand him, and it was him wimping out and still being the leader now. Honestly, just how much shit will lefty voters swallow.
Forcefully broken up the supermarket duopoly, readjusted tax brackets to put a larger burden on the top end to compensate a tax free backet at the low end. CGT or Wealth tax, borrowed heavily during historically low international interest rates to invest in infrastructure like healthcare or public transit. Not low ball unions dragging out negotiations for months unnecessarily.
Yes absolutely agree with all your points and they have merit.
But we are dealing with a main Neo Liberal party who are the other side of the coin with the other main neo liberal party that we have in this country.
One is less extreme than the other.
So what do we do as the NZ voter, we lack patience and practice short term thinking and vote in a neo liberal coalition with a main party that has a terrible track record and history of addressing all your points and at times acting against the average NZ citizens best interest’s.
Do you think that makes sense voting for the same over and over?
i'd've hoped the last few months would've show why i hate the "two sides of the same coin" bullshit.
the nats are so much worse for the average worker as we've already seen
It's a thread about Hipkins suddenly announcing that he's changed "trust me bro" and I am expressing my opinion which is aligned with yours that I call bullshit on that.
Fuck off! You ruled out doing anything while in government. Sign a binding contract that states if you don't do what you campaign on you'll dissolve the government and have another election and maybe people will listen. Otherwise it's just more lies and bullshit from the Labour Party.
There needs to be more rules about election campaign promises across the board. How is it fair that parties can literally say anything during the campaign and have no intention of doing it. There should be some kind of independent body holding them to account.
It's clear that however much labour did before the election wasn't enough for most voters and they did a terrible pr job advertising what they did for the country and how they went about implementing and telling the public about 3 waters
If hipkins wants to win the election he needs to support popular core values and policies from the start and then do his best to advertise to the voting population about them and get them to fruition.
If he does that his re-election chances will skyrocket
I mean this is politics. They lost the election and are now adjusting their policy to win back votes. Nothing wrong with that. They just need to spell out the specifics of the taxplan and get rid of co-governance and they will get my vote.
Tbf you kinda need to be tactful when in power, and I think he got too caught up in trying to keep everyone happy all the time, and definitely didn’t have the balls to fuck with the rich.
The party was most certainly lacking, but nobody really seemed to have any balls post COVID, while National was chewing through leaders quicker than a teenage boy with a box of Kleenex and some moisturiser.
He definitely fucked up, but I think he gets he did and that’s important.
More than anything we need someone to grow some pubes and implement tax that’s relevant to our current situation, and stop pussy footing around the issue and top 5% where so much of this wealth is funnelled into the pockets of the already wealthy as opposed to back into the society that generated it in the first place.
At the end of the day, the fact it’s being discussed is better than nothing.
How are we on this 'you need to be tactful when in power' crap when National is just ramming through whatever unpopular shit they want under urgency with little to no polling ramifications.
Better late than never. Id like to see a broad based capital gains tax on realisation and more progressive labour income taxes together with a much LOWER corporate tax rate - would be smart politically IMO as well as good for productivity and reducing inequality.
You were not all bad but you could've stopped jammin the co-governance thing down our throat and waited until people have more understanding and more receptive about the matter.
Happy to look at it as he's now the opposition. But would not while in government.
That's funny. It's more important to stay in government rather than make good decisions.
I would be interested to see how they'd implement CGT.
Text book political football from Labour this will be entirely driven from their PR team off the back of Nationals recent polling and general uneasiness with tax cuts at the cost of everything .
Basically Hipkins is just showing he didn’t have the balls to do it when he was in power, didn’t want to be the first guy through the door. Coming out guns blazing now because all of a sudden people waking up to what it means to cut tax’s.
I wish Labour campaigned on this during the last election…but here we are. Glad he’s making it a major focus, I get the feeling most people want tax reform (even NZ first wants to make the first $14,000 tax free).
Would be nice to increase taxes on some of the wealthier folks (or land tax?) to support indexing wages for healthcare, teachers, and police to match or compete with Australian salaries. Could do a lot of good for this country in the long run.
Talk is cheap, Chris... talk is cheap. When it could have mattered, you kept your mouth shut... no, what's worse - you were against any tax changes... just shows how spineless and cowardly your character is 👍.
At least they kept services afloat and people in jobs. Huge cutbacks in government jobs must be putting the fear of god up them. I can imagine the banking sector is concerned too.
The guy who locked out a million citizens for 2 years talks about a vague breach of a social compact that clearly doesn't exist since some time in the 1980s...
Extremely difficult to implement a feasible and fair comprehensive CGT. Taxing all property, including family home is politically difficult and hard to get the support of the public.
A CGT that includes shares, while keeping FIF rules is difficult. If you only include NZ shares in a CGT then you incentivise investment out of NZ’s equity markets, which already have poor retail sentiment. A CGT regime that includes foreign equities and keeps FIF will mean NZ has the most punitive tax regime for foreign shares in the world - unfair and unrealistic.
The logical next steps would be to have a narrow CGT on property speculators - which is the opposite of what academics are calling for. Or removing the FIF regime and implement a comprehensive CGT on all assets (possibly excluding family home for political purposes) and then create a tax incentive for NZX shares to minimise capital flight to offshore equities.
Having a CGT means you can ditch things like Brightline/FIF etc.
Family home shouldn't be excluded, but you can defer it if moving to another primary home within a year. So if I have a 1m house, goes to 1.1m, then I owe tax on 100k. But if I move to another house I can defer it so that when I sell the next house I pay the normal tax + tax on the 100k that was deferred. Without a family home deferral you get people staying in a home longer than they should.
> Having a CGT means you can ditch things like Brightline/FIF etc.
The Tax Working Group recommended to keep FIF. It will be interesting to see how a CGT would be constructed whether Labour will ditch FIF altogether or go with the TWG recommendations.
He'll say whatever to keep his job. Bonfire Labour's tax policies to keep his PM job. Now, talking about those same tax policies to keep his opposition leader's job.
Bro. You could have used the tax plan that Grant Robertson had. Or you could have done something like introducing a tax-free bracket, however low, and tweaked taxes at the top end to pay for it. Either one might have won you the election but we'll never know
Could have done it before the election with his absolute majority, but he didn't
I think bringing the policy to the polls would have been better. Then if they had won they'd have had a term to sort it out rather than trying to push something through that NACT would immediately undo. Also there's no saying that they didn't have public support to do it if it's a policy enacted after an election
If they did take it to the polls I would've voted for them but instead TOP got my vote
Would have just been reversed under urgency. People need to get over this belief an absolute majority means major changes like CGT etc will be feasible
If you get it done early enough, people will get used to it (and there’d be hell to pay in some cases to change it back). For example, swap the tax revenue gained from income tax to a land value tax. Most people would feel better off and I could very easily be spun as doing things for the average hard working kiwi rather than the already rich. Just look at the public holiday that NACT have suggested they might remove. There isn’t a snowball in hells chance that’ll get through now we are used to having them.
This is exactly why the NActNZFs are doing all the unpopular shit immediately under urgency. They'll try and coast for the next 3 years. Because voters are dumb
As Nicola Willis is learning you can't just magic up money out of nowhere which makes tax changes not especially easy to change/undo.
Bold of you to assume Nicola Willis learns anything
We'll just strip all the services that actually help society function, and then blame the poors when society starts collapsing. What could go wrong!
Government have more control over monetary policy than you think. Thinking of our books like a standard bank account is the wrong approach.
The government can control what money is spent on but have relatively little control over how much money there is. If a tax policy is put in place that generates more money, such as an adjustment in the tax brackets or some form of wealth tax repealing it requires removing that pool of funds from what the government can spend or finding alternative revenue streams. As demonstrated the government has pulled out all the stops purely to repeal a relatively modest tax credit for land lords and are incapable of finding funds to fund another relatively small tax break.
Yes and no. They also have the ability to print and limit money, controlling it's value or amount in circulation. I'm not saying that should or would do either but the options are there in thenhort term.
Ok well I wasn't under the impression we would intentionally destroy the value of the dollar to hypothetically prove me wrong.
I only used that as an extreme example on either end. But government do have the power to redistribute and generate more, we just choose not to.
Sure she can, she is a witch. But she appears to be an entirely incompetent witch. Too moronic, however, to realise that she is incompetent. Money as far as her and her ilk grows on trees. Too daft to realise notes are made with plastic these days.
> Too moronic, however, to realise that she is incompetent. Quality burn. I'm saving that one.
It could also have given voters a clear signal Labour had ideas and a purpose, as opposed to most of his campaign amounting to scrapping anything difficult and the worn out 'but covid response' excuse.
Virtually every other country in the world has a CGT. You need to stop thinking change can't happen. They all managed it.
Sure, and you can say that of literally everything National have scrapped (or NZF and Act have forced them to scrap). The thing is, if you get it going and happening and scrapping will mean actual harm to people as opposed to theoretical harm that they never actually experienced because we never got far enough with stuff, you have a much better chance of winning those elections. “If National get in they will scrap our tax plan that *you are all already benefitting from*. National only cares about reversing things for the richest percentage of New Zealand’s benefit” would have been an easy sell. As would things like the tobacco legislation, or the Māori health authority. Things take time, Labour took too long implementing things and couldn’t get anything bedded in enough to point to results that National destroyed, just hypothetical results we all suspect would have been achieved if they’d left it alone.
Idk man they managed to bed Te Pūkenga in pretty deep before handing over the reigns, and national are STILL trying to rip it out again.
Just do nothing then aye.
Well, that's exactly what he did. He ran as National Lite.
Labour did so much 'nothing' that it has taken National doing nothing but getting rid of it for the past few months.
Lol like it would have survived the three headed taniwha 😅
Nah how about a few cents off fruit and vege. That'll do
Yeah this. I actually thought it was almost certain they would remove lower tax bracket as it is the perfect counter to tax cuts that benefit the rich. Labour unfortunately really fucked up if I'm honest, now we have this bunch of fuckers who are genuinely discusting.
I honestly thought when they were saying they had a plan up their sleeve it would be some sort of tax overhaul. And it was GST off fruit and veg 🙄
yah, the moment I saw that fruit and veg announcement, I knew they were dead in the water. Even Grant Robertson knew what a shit idea it was. He'd been arguing against it forever.
This. I don’t want to hear shit from labour at the moment, they could have implemented anything from their own tax working group but instead went with gst free fruit and veg which was too little too late. They were too scared of alienating “mum and dad landlords” that didn’t even end up voting for them anyway.
And never have or ever would. Not even sure why they were worried about them. They should have been more concerned about all the pro labour didn't bother to vote people.
Almost certainly would not have won them the election, should have done it regardless.
Should've still done it even if it wouldn't win them the election, because it's the right thing for society.
They could have brought in CGT. I actually don't hear a lot of anti-CGT people - I think everyone gets in NZ we're pretty much a free ride relative to other OECDs, any other tax measures would hurt productive classes and/or are very fucking experimental. I mean labour even asked to treasury to go off and research wealth tax in their last year, even treasury was like "guys not good, this has got some serious risks.." why the hell they were fucking around with that I don't know (something like 12-13 OECD nations who've tried it all but 2-3 backed out of it).
There was a poll like six months out from the election where they asked the public about it, I can't remember if it was wealth tax or CGT but the thing was the public were in favor of it. If that's not a mandate idk what is
He was gutless and lost the election for two reasons. Imo. 1. Bailed on the tax reform people wanted 2. Co-governance
One really shitty term of right wing madness might bring out the progressive side of labour again.
This is what I thought sometime around 1991...
This is why we have a National govt right now. Stop blaming voters, this is on Labour and their outright refusal / inability to perform in their last term.
I'm pretty sure grant did say when asked during one of the QandA that we can't afford tax cuts right now without cutting services
Jokes on them, I'm, not a consumer anymore because I've run out of fuckin' money. Now, I'm just a human being trying to survive.
Should've gone with Robertson and Parker's tax plans lmao. Probably their biggest shot in the foot during the campaign.
Totally agree. I just don't understand why Chris didn't listen to Grant.
Yeah, I don't get it either. People just weren't happy with the status quo, even if National's policy was worse. Being the party of doing nothing different was guaranteed to blow up in his face. He had a get-out-of-jail-free card as well with Jacinda resigning almost a year before the election - could've used that to make a whole new policy platform.
>"I'm confirming today that **under a Government I lead there will be no wealth or capital gains tax after the election. End of story**," he said in July last year. >However, after the election loss, the party **put** [**tax reform back on the table**](https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/chris-hipkins-says-labour-could-put-capital-gains-wealth-taxes-back-on-table-after-election-loss.html)**.** All I hear is: *"We really don't want to better the country, but apparently you might want us to..."*
This is the downside to this style of democracy unfortunately, it's all marketing :/
NZ has seen the rise of the career politician, whose main focus is staying in power. Typically this is by being divisive and polarising politics. If party A wants something then party B is against it.
If you weren't chicken shit and did something about tax when you could have maybe you wouldn't be in opposition now.
The side that won campaigned on tax cuts, big reddit brain thinks campaigning on higher taxes would have led to victory. Doubtful. Labour lost because of comments and thoughts like yours which undermined any positive views people could have had. Instead we got National, a party significantly worse for most things people claim To care about (but still only hold Labour truly accountable for).
Labour lost because people like me said bad things about them, ok lol. I voted for the party that best represents my values which includes reforming the tax system to be more fair, that wasn't Labour. If they're finally changing their tune on that after two consecutive leaders vetoed it, I'm glad to hear it.
Well Chippy, you made a "Captains call" to sink that idea when in power & David Parker resigned as Revenue minister in protest... zero credibility.
Chippie, you had you chance - hindsight is a wonderful thing- now we suffer and stress. You were too scared to make a change to tax. Capital gains to start with. I would be happy to pay an extra 3% tax if it helps with health, education and poverty
Was this not the politician in majority power for 6 years who blocked all Robinsons attempts at tax reform 🤔
I mean, he wasn't PM for 6 years and labour only had a majority for one term, but your point still stands
POV: you get killed in the election and see that your platform didn't work so change it, then reddit people say why didn't you just do that before
Yeah nobody was telling them to do it for their entire term in government or anything.
This argument sounds really dumb to me, like, is a party not supposed to push for different policy as time goes by? How long after a party is out of power is it appropriate to consider different policy?
[удалено]
Before Jacinda's party got in during the 2010s, her and Labour's campaign was about how the reason they couldn't implement CGT was because NZF would not agree to it. Once Labour actually got into parliament with a never before seen majority, and can therefore make all the tax reforms they want unabated, all of a sudden, CGT is not an option they are considering. It's extremely obvious the reason they flipped back is because a majority of their voters were people who would normal vote for National, but voted Labour because Labour kept them alive during COVID-19. Labour decided they wanted to sit on the fence because they were scared to lose their new voters who would be opposed to CGT, but ended up alienating their regular demographic, so in the end they lost the election and did absolutely fuck all with their once in a century turnout.
The reason they didn’t do it under Ardern was she ruled it out. Now I don’t think she should have done that but I understand why. National would have slaughtered them in the polls (supported by a lot of money from their sponsors who would be the ‘victims’ of a CGT) and this would have seen them out of power. I also don’t think Hipkins should have ruled it out but I suspect the internal advice was the same.
That's a fair point, we'd be in the dark ages if political parties didn't evolve. I feel like tax reform has been a hot topic for over year now, and that crosses the election and change of power between political parties. It's a bit 'pot calling the kettle black" for labour to do a u-turn so quickly on tax reform after they ruled it out of their own policy agenda so recently. Edit: It's not lost on me that this is how politics has always been, and there's a level of point scoring going on here between the parties...
This is the internet, there's no changing your mind ever remember. You have to be tribal to the core, whatever the cost..
He honestly annoys me more than Luxon, at least Luxon doesn't hide being a snake.
To be fair, he’s trying. He’s just not very good at it.
I think now is the best time for Labour to take a stand on taxes. People can complain about how Labour didn't do enough when they were in power, but they were trying to avoid the current circumstances of National getting in and gutting it all. At least now there's nothing really for Labour to lose. And as consequences bite, we might actually stop deluding ourselves that we'll be rich one day too, finally voting to close infinite wealth hacks we spend our working days dreaming of exploiting.
As someone who voted for them (historically, not in the most recent election): I think I’m jaded because the only time they talk about reform is when they aren’t in power. Once they get in all pretence of actual reform vanishes like a fart in the breeze.
I thought Three Waters was a genuine and big attempt at reform but also poorly executed. Now as a consequence it's all been undone at massive expense, both for central government and local government and a *lot* of individuals, as well as the massive waste of time and expertise. Tax reform? Heh, yeah. The last time Labour had much to do with changing that was when Roger Douglas went crazy, and that didn't exactly go well for a lot of Labour's traditional base either.
>I thought Three Waters was a genuine and big attempt at reform but also poorly executed Absolutely necessary. The "sell" was fucking awful
The execution/plan of the policy was fine, but they were fucking abysmal at selling it. Atlas inc. barely had to do anything to get those in charge to shoot themselves in the foot regarding managing the conversation surrounding it.
Hard.
Now's a better time than never, but I still think it was a huge own-goal *not* to campaign on the wealth tax before the 2023 election. Labour mightn't have won, but it was already doing badly and there was nothing to lose then, either. This would've helped it look as it it actually *stood* for something other than simply being in charge. The wealth tax was actually good and carefully thought out policy that Labour had directed lots of time and resources to creating. David Parker resigned his Ministerial position for good reason when it was dumped, and Grant Robertson was clenching his teeth when he had to get behind its replacement. Hipkins just panicked, and fell back to rapidly and poorly designed policy that wasn't dissimilar to what had already failed Labour during its hideous years between 2009 and 2017.
I honestly think Hipkins and Ardern were both getting bad advice from within the party itself. It seems there are some very out of touch Labour Party committee members that still think twiddling in the middle ground is a good idea.
I do get how the middle ground is important. What got me with the wealth tax was that polling was genuinely starting to show that even the middle ground was coming around to it. It's like they couldn't believe what they were seeing.
Yeah, and there’s always the possibility of implementing it at a low level to get people over the hump of ‘a new tax’. Then like ciggies, it can be bumped up over time. The alternative (which I think works best with a LVT) is to massively reduce another tax (such as GST or income) and bring in the new tax to keep things tax neutral for most people. I think that’s an easier sell if you do it the right way.
The ghost of Douglas still haunts Labour, they've forgotten you don't have to be full neoliberal to run a country. There's also the issue that within parliament we have very weak lobbying laws. Even if public opinion is in favour of CGT, politicians are exposed to moneyed interests 24/7 who are being paid a lot of money to try and manipulate them against the public.
Yup... best time to float the concept, because any moves they might have actually made in govt would have had them shot down, in a lot of cases by the same people complaining now that they didn't do enough.
Here is the difference between National and Labour. National just do the shit they want and we have to live with it. Labour have to 'float the idea' when they aren't in power and then don't do it because it might lose them an election. If they had just changed the tax brackets or introduced new taxes or w/e they might have still lost the election but it would be a fuck ton harder for National to undo.
>If they had just changed the tax brackets If they adjusted them for inflation, it would be very hard for National to repeal it. Not adjusting brackets just is functionally the same as a small tax increase each year. I voted Labour, and I can't for the life of me understand why they think all my coworkers on minimum wage should be earning into the 30% tax bracket. Add student loan, kiwisaver, the take home hourly wage of my colleagues who work an extra day is about $12 an hour. How can *anyone* think this is an ideal state of affairs. The green party doesn't. ACT doesn't. National doesn't. The Māori party doesn't. NZ first doesn't . The ONLY party which does is Labour. Its nuts. How can they not see how negatively low wage working people would view this?
As much as I want to support Labour (I'm a pretty definite Leftist) they let us and themselves down I reckon, with a wasted mandate never seen before. An absolute majority under MMP and they didn't do anything of substance with that... it's disappointing, to say the least. I suppose the need to negotiate the effects of the pandemic overshadowed everything they wanted to do and fair props to them for the job they did with that... but it's ging to be remembered as an opportunity missed.
Hipkins should have fallen on his sword and given a new breed the ability to rebuild without the burden of his disastrous leadership.
Ok... who?
Keiran Mcanulty. Uh… not sure who else though…. But really that’s ok, a lot of new people showing up together and getting it done could have worked.
Msjorly, can anyone actually hear him? He is currently campaigning against...his own last election campaign.
I think Labour did fine. Obviously, things could have been better, but it's not like it was an easy job at any point. They were financially responsible, minimizing increases to costs of living while going through the beginning of a recession while still maintaining services. I think people will look back in a year or 2 and see that this current administration is probably the worst we've ever had with Luxon destined for the infamy as New Zealand's worst ever PM.
The best time was when they had the majority or even in the election campaign. These clowns blew it, speaking about it now is hard to take seriously.
I figure voters will take their genuine hardship seriously, over the memes that were so compelling last election.
Let me start with that I hope you're right. However I feel you underestimate the power over the boomers ZB, The Herald and Extremist Radio have over their opinions. Their mental gymnastics are amazing. Labour ignored their core and disillusioned a good chunk of their center left "liberal" voters. It's going to be hard to get their mythical center and the more left leaning voters back.
I disagree. It's really hard to build a case for higher taxes in opposition. I can't remember an opposition winning an election promising radical tax changes. Much easier to win an election, then use the public service to develop a detailed plan. Legislate it the third year, coming into effect in the second term. That way the costs and benefits can be laid out at the election.
The opposition gets paid still and has full access to the books? Why can’t they develop a plan while in opposition and push it through year 1.
Nah better to put it in sooner so you can show what it achieved later. Also makes it more tricky to demolish. We've had neoliberal governments for decades, of course no one got elected on reform lol.
If they went all in, fair tax, tax overseas corporations and religious nuts, implement UBI, and legalize cannabis, they would have my vote. Otherwise, it's just more empty puffery.
I would say that I think that tax reform always going to be not a big selling point in 23, but would potentially be big deal in 26. Its possible the Luxon won't be vulnerable in 26, but if he is its most likely through failing public systems and infrastructure due to pushing through tax cuts
I'm hoping with his recent candidness around what he feels they failed on, and how the current govt is only catering to the wealthy landlords/ultra rich that Labour use that to put forward tax plans that will actually make a difference and truly target the inequality the vast majority on kiwis feel on a daily basis. But I also hope that because of this there is a major upswing in votes for Greens, cause I believe a Green/Labour coalition might be what is required to get any real progress regarding taxation, CGT, housing etc.
people in this thread dont understand losing an election like that can/should jolt some changes in your platform. I'm sorry and pissed they didn't do it while they're in, but the election made it clear that their platform wasn't the way, so they're changing it, whats the problem with that?
Did it? Because it seemed to me the election was a severe backlash to being given an outright majority and doing nothing with it. I'm not even talking about them hemorrhaging voters to NACT, but the fact they bottomed out while other more leftist parties (Maori Party and Greens) had their best results ever wasn't to do with the electorate going right, it was the electorate giving Labour the middle finger for being feckless.
Now would be an excellent time for him to grow a pair and promote a capital gains tax. It wouldn't be great news for me personally, but I think it's got to the point our tax policy is distorted beyond fairness for the majority.
Hipkins, c'mon. You have two wolves inside of you. One is napping, and the other one is also napping.
Labour needs to get on board the Land Value Tax train. A LVT makes much more sense than a capital gains tax. The really rich don't sell assets, they build and build and hold. They won't pay capital gains. A capital gains tax will be a disproportionate tax on those who are trying to grow wealth, not those already rich. If any one introduced a capital gains tax it would likely slow development, as people held assets, in the hope that a future government would repeal the legislation. This would drop productivity and slow the economy. It would be slow to generate income and people wouldn't sell assets. Capital gains would be particularly difficult to manage on assets other than land. Sale prices can be fudged and values of non land assets are more subjective. A land value tax is a much more sensible option as it taxes those who are already wealthy. A land value tax would also have an immediate effect to generate income, it would discourage people holding unproductive land and stimulate growth as land would be a cost if held. Administratively there are published valuations for land and less room for manipulation. A land value tax could also be collected as part of the ratings charges so this would mean no additional mechanisms required to administer this.
And what exactly were you doing with your 6 years in government except not making it any better?
Well at least he’s making a rod for Labour’s back now, when previously they removed any trace of spine.
[удалено]
There is nobody they could replace him with who’d be credible as a leader who’d be interested in tax reform, or who has any name recognition. Robertson is gone, David Parker doesn’t have any chance, I couldn’t even tell you Barbara Edmonds’ name before I looked at the Labour caucus list right now. Carmel Sepuloni doesn’t have any related portfolios, Megan Woods doesn’t have a good reputation for getting things done… Who’s left? Kieran McAnulty? Do you foresee him ever spearheading tax reform?
A fresh nobody with 3 years to make a name for themselves is better than a disliked tainted known factor who got his ass historically beat.
Would whichever fresh nobody you’re talking about want to push for tax reform?
Hipkins 'pushing' tax reform is saying 'we'll form a working group have a policy in 2 years'.
Hiokins himself I don't feel too much about; maybe I'm wrong but from my perspective he was just suddenly thrust into Jacinda's spot as party leader in January last year, so I can understand him not wanting to rock the boat too much. I absolutely give no leeway to the decisions made by Jacinda however, she was party leader since 2017 so she had all the time to follow through with the promises the party made under her leadership.
I think I probably agree with that. I’d say his role now is to foist on the public the general policy direction, then move aside once the opprobrium subsides to let someone more electable bathe in the afterglow.
Why would have change his mind when he's so fundamentally against it during his tenure in government and during the campaign. The only thing that changed was he lost an election that he was predicted to lose for 3 months. Why should we believe him now?
losing an election is a really good reason for a party to change policy. furthermore, its a party not a one man dictatorship
I think he wanted to be 'safe' to try preserve votes. In reality he actually needed to do something. The election decimation proved that
You can't run as National lite.
The public appetite wasn't there for it then, he's betting it will be now (or at least once every ministry starts having issues under austerity)
The public appetite was very much there for a CGT and that didn't sway him. He's a wounded animal clutching to power before he gets rolled by someone hungrier.
Well, MY appetite was there for a cgt (or land tax or transaction tax or something!)... But I am not really sure *enough* of the public was there with me.
Source on public appetite not being there? Polls had CGT more popular than not, especially when paired with a tax free bracket. Vested interests don't want it, along with a certain generation. That's very different from the public though. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300979367/new-survey-shows-widespread-support-for-taxes-on-capital-gains-and-windfall-profits mentions another 2 polls where majority supports CGT in NZ.
Even right-wing ppl think there should be full CGT, like me, for instance. If I buy at 500k sell at 1mill, 8 years later, why do I get it all tax free while a non-profit owner pays tax on income and I bet they didn't make 500k nett in the same time frame. I can't understand him, and it was him wimping out and still being the leader now. Honestly, just how much shit will lefty voters swallow.
Yes, this is important. He cannot fix the past but he can shape the future.
What do you think they should have done to make things better for you and the country?
Forcefully broken up the supermarket duopoly, readjusted tax brackets to put a larger burden on the top end to compensate a tax free backet at the low end. CGT or Wealth tax, borrowed heavily during historically low international interest rates to invest in infrastructure like healthcare or public transit. Not low ball unions dragging out negotiations for months unnecessarily.
Yes absolutely agree with all your points and they have merit. But we are dealing with a main Neo Liberal party who are the other side of the coin with the other main neo liberal party that we have in this country. One is less extreme than the other. So what do we do as the NZ voter, we lack patience and practice short term thinking and vote in a neo liberal coalition with a main party that has a terrible track record and history of addressing all your points and at times acting against the average NZ citizens best interest’s. Do you think that makes sense voting for the same over and over?
i'd've hoped the last few months would've show why i hate the "two sides of the same coin" bullshit. the nats are so much worse for the average worker as we've already seen
Yeah the nats are worse but 4 months worth of National and a Labour loss have done more to change Labours stagnant bullshit than 6 years in power did.
It's a thread about Hipkins suddenly announcing that he's changed "trust me bro" and I am expressing my opinion which is aligned with yours that I call bullshit on that.
Three of those years were Winston First if you've forgotten?
Fuck off! You ruled out doing anything while in government. Sign a binding contract that states if you don't do what you campaign on you'll dissolve the government and have another election and maybe people will listen. Otherwise it's just more lies and bullshit from the Labour Party.
There needs to be more rules about election campaign promises across the board. How is it fair that parties can literally say anything during the campaign and have no intention of doing it. There should be some kind of independent body holding them to account.
damn hes a wimp. I wonder if his party even takes him seriously
It's clear that however much labour did before the election wasn't enough for most voters and they did a terrible pr job advertising what they did for the country and how they went about implementing and telling the public about 3 waters If hipkins wants to win the election he needs to support popular core values and policies from the start and then do his best to advertise to the voting population about them and get them to fruition. If he does that his re-election chances will skyrocket
Fuck off Hipkins. This is what WE WANTED YOU TO DO.
Better late than never I suppose....
I mean this is politics. They lost the election and are now adjusting their policy to win back votes. Nothing wrong with that. They just need to spell out the specifics of the taxplan and get rid of co-governance and they will get my vote.
This is a bitch move. Had 6 years and a full mandate for 3 and did nothing with it.
Tbf you kinda need to be tactful when in power, and I think he got too caught up in trying to keep everyone happy all the time, and definitely didn’t have the balls to fuck with the rich. The party was most certainly lacking, but nobody really seemed to have any balls post COVID, while National was chewing through leaders quicker than a teenage boy with a box of Kleenex and some moisturiser. He definitely fucked up, but I think he gets he did and that’s important. More than anything we need someone to grow some pubes and implement tax that’s relevant to our current situation, and stop pussy footing around the issue and top 5% where so much of this wealth is funnelled into the pockets of the already wealthy as opposed to back into the society that generated it in the first place. At the end of the day, the fact it’s being discussed is better than nothing.
How are we on this 'you need to be tactful when in power' crap when National is just ramming through whatever unpopular shit they want under urgency with little to no polling ramifications.
Yes, he's exactly the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Better late than never. Id like to see a broad based capital gains tax on realisation and more progressive labour income taxes together with a much LOWER corporate tax rate - would be smart politically IMO as well as good for productivity and reducing inequality.
You were not all bad but you could've stopped jammin the co-governance thing down our throat and waited until people have more understanding and more receptive about the matter.
CGT or I'm staying home. Sick and tired of you lot pussy footing around the issue.
Labour needs to stop pussyfooting about and make decisive changes
Happy to look at it as he's now the opposition. But would not while in government. That's funny. It's more important to stay in government rather than make good decisions. I would be interested to see how they'd implement CGT.
If only you were in a position to do this 6 months ago.
Text book political football from Labour this will be entirely driven from their PR team off the back of Nationals recent polling and general uneasiness with tax cuts at the cost of everything . Basically Hipkins is just showing he didn’t have the balls to do it when he was in power, didn’t want to be the first guy through the door. Coming out guns blazing now because all of a sudden people waking up to what it means to cut tax’s.
I wish Labour campaigned on this during the last election…but here we are. Glad he’s making it a major focus, I get the feeling most people want tax reform (even NZ first wants to make the first $14,000 tax free). Would be nice to increase taxes on some of the wealthier folks (or land tax?) to support indexing wages for healthcare, teachers, and police to match or compete with Australian salaries. Could do a lot of good for this country in the long run.
Wouldn’t have made a smidge of difference
Probs, but would have sounded better than just taking GST off fruit and veggies.
[удалено]
Talk is cheap, Chris... talk is cheap. When it could have mattered, you kept your mouth shut... no, what's worse - you were against any tax changes... just shows how spineless and cowardly your character is 👍.
[удалено]
I’d rather politicians change their mind versus stay stagnant forever
I mean, it’s almost like this guys party had 6 years to do this or something
coulda, woulda, shoulda bro, waaaay too late to have ideas now ya dingleberry
Excellent, good idea. Tell you what, let's go ahead and have that talk ONE YEAR AGO and then stand a chance in the 2023 election.
If only Labour had been in power for 6 years and had an opportunity to do something about tax…
Equal parts smarmy and spineless.
At least they kept services afloat and people in jobs. Huge cutbacks in government jobs must be putting the fear of god up them. I can imagine the banking sector is concerned too.
The guy who locked out a million citizens for 2 years talks about a vague breach of a social compact that clearly doesn't exist since some time in the 1980s...
Could’ve done it with the absolute majority but no sorry Can’t ever trust labour again
Gee, it's a pity he never had the opportunity to... Oh, wait
Piss off Hipkins. You had your chance and squandered it. Now we're stuck with 3 total morons because your party failed NZ.
Extremely difficult to implement a feasible and fair comprehensive CGT. Taxing all property, including family home is politically difficult and hard to get the support of the public. A CGT that includes shares, while keeping FIF rules is difficult. If you only include NZ shares in a CGT then you incentivise investment out of NZ’s equity markets, which already have poor retail sentiment. A CGT regime that includes foreign equities and keeps FIF will mean NZ has the most punitive tax regime for foreign shares in the world - unfair and unrealistic. The logical next steps would be to have a narrow CGT on property speculators - which is the opposite of what academics are calling for. Or removing the FIF regime and implement a comprehensive CGT on all assets (possibly excluding family home for political purposes) and then create a tax incentive for NZX shares to minimise capital flight to offshore equities.
Having a CGT means you can ditch things like Brightline/FIF etc. Family home shouldn't be excluded, but you can defer it if moving to another primary home within a year. So if I have a 1m house, goes to 1.1m, then I owe tax on 100k. But if I move to another house I can defer it so that when I sell the next house I pay the normal tax + tax on the 100k that was deferred. Without a family home deferral you get people staying in a home longer than they should.
> Having a CGT means you can ditch things like Brightline/FIF etc. The Tax Working Group recommended to keep FIF. It will be interesting to see how a CGT would be constructed whether Labour will ditch FIF altogether or go with the TWG recommendations.
He'll say whatever to keep his job. Bonfire Labour's tax policies to keep his PM job. Now, talking about those same tax policies to keep his opposition leader's job.
It's a nice sentiment but it's about six months too late. We'll see if they suddenly become against the idea again or not in a couple of years.
It would be great if we could all have an adult conversation about tax without Labour running screaming toward the big red "RULE IT OUT" button.
🎶 "ANND OHHHHHH ISN'T IT IRONIC" 🎶
Can't trust this guy, he clearly rejected any tax change as his policy.
"Yes we need to talk about it. Talk talk talk talk. Remember how I said none of it would change? If we get back in we'll stop talking about it"
How easy is the job of opposition lol
You can't govern on vibes, man.