Saturday, January 23, 2010

The great tax debate

A few thoughts on the imposter that passes itself off as a fair tax system.

1. The top 10% of taxpayers paying 44% of the money is somehow called "progressive".

2. The bigger question should be asked firstly. Do we want a country that runs an expensive big government?
Or should we finally accept reality -that NZ is just a big Fiji - a few farms and some tourists. Cut our cloth to suit and be happier as a nannystateless country.

3. My bet is that GST will go to 15% with associated benefit rises and some leveling of top rates.
WFF will remain and property will be tinkered with around the edges.

4. My next bet is that sometime in the future when the other Labour gets back in, the top rates will be relevelled upwards again. We will be back to square one + 2.5%.

5. Which really makes the the upcoming debate about MMP far more relevant than this rearrangment of the deck chairs. Because one way or another under the current system we will always have a big, hungry government.

10 comments:

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

My bet is higher GST will be accompanied by a tax free threshold rather than benefit increases.

Also a major change to taxation benefits for residential property investors. No more lay offs of notional losses against PAYE.

Lou Taylor said...

A tax free threshold would be far too simple Adolf so can't see that happening

Lucy said...

Yep.

pdm said...

I posted the other day that in a cupboard somewhere in Wellington is a report on taxation from the early/mid 90's.

Known as the McLeod report this should be dusted off and most of its recommendations implemented.

ZenTiger said...

Agree with your summary. To continue to hammer the point:

We are bribed in 1986 to get a top tax rate of 33%, in exchange for accepting a GST of .

Now in 2010 we are bribed with the idea of a top tax rate of only 33% to accept a GST rate of ...

..15%.

Wow, what a great deal.

But what there's more...they'll throw in a land tax of .2%.

So I ask what is the .2% land tax rate in NSW since they've had that for a few years now.

Last year the .2% was sitting at 1.6% for typical homeowners and 1.8% for "very rich bastards".

ZenTiger said...

Oops, missed out the rate: in 1986 the GST rate was 10% (went to 12.5% in 1989)

Anonymous said...

Dumping MMP won't fix anything. At a minimum we need5 year terms. But really we need to fix the franchise.


Was the UK a democracy in 1930? The US? NZ?
So turning back to the franchise of 1930 or 1900 would go some way to fixing thing.

Ideally I'd put a flat tax of say 30% with a threshold of say 100k - above that zero tax. Zero corporate tax of course. Franchise restricted to those on the zero rate or assets > 1M

then you'll get real policies- the end of all welfare, health, and education for a start

Anonymous said...

Was the UK a democracy in 1930? The US? NZ?

Ummm yes, yes (technically anyway) and yes. 0-3 Sinner. You do find facts pesky wee things don't you? That's 'coz you're thick.

Judge Holden

Anonymous said...


Ummm yes, yes (technically anyway) and yes. 0-3 Sinner. You do find facts pesky wee things don't you? That's 'coz you're thick.


Ahh fucking "Judge" Holden - you're the thick one.
Of course they were. with no women votes, no bludger votes, appointed senates (like Canada today) and a property qualification

So: let's introduce a property qualification on the franchise (say 1M assets or 250K income) and have a senate appointed by the productivity commissioner.

All of NZ problems would then be solved

Anonymous said...

"with no women votes, no bludger votes, appointed senates (like Canada today) and a property qualification..:"

Wrong, wrong and mostly wrong Sinner. Such appalling ignorance for one with such strong views. Ask your mum to look it up for you. Idiot.

Judge Holden