Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: The Greens have made another mistake with their new tax policy

The Greens’ tax policy is only a day old and there is already a big maths problem with it. They counted $100 million a year as income when it was really an expense. It was money they had set aside to run the new tax system.

So, instead of $100 million over four years coming in, it is now going out, creating an $800 million hole in their budget.

Kate Hawkesby: If this election is going to be about middle swing voters, the left’s tactics will lose them

So the Nat’s tax plan – is good – and we know it’s good for two reasons, one, because of all the positive feedback it’s had, and two, because of how ropeable the Government are about it. 

 They are dark on it because they know they’ve been badly exposed here, by a sensible party doing sensible things, which reeks of common sense.  

It reminds us just what common sense feels like - a distant memory for most of us politically these days let’s be honest.  

Point of Order: The Maori Party proposes a “Robin Hood-style” tax policy

Is it the shape of NZ’s future?

The Maori Party has announced a tax policy which – by appealing to low-income groups – could give it a stronger voice in the next Parliament.

The party promises to be “staunch” in coalition negotiations to achieve its tax plan, raising the question: is this the shape of our future tax system?

Heather du Plessis-Allan: Labour haven't denied plans to drop GST on fruit and vegetables

It’s hard to believe it’s possible, but Labour’s week just got even worse- because their tax policy just got leaked.

National's Nicola Willis says she’s got a source who told her Labour is planning to announce it’ll take the GST off fresh fruit and veges, which immediately got headlines because her sources have proved pretty solid.

Remember, she got the tip-off that Labour was working on a wealth tax-tax switch, and it turned out they were.

Point of Order: Buzz from the Beehive - 12/7/23

Verrall reckons she is delivering a fair deal in new health vision – but blokes (the non-Maori ones) have cause to quibble

The only new statement on the government’s official website, when Point of Order checked this afternoon, came from the office of Health Minister Ayesha Verrall and three ministerial colleagues.

They were announcing the release of the government’s long-term vision for health “where all New Zealanders can live long, healthy lives and unfair differences in outcomes are a thing of the past”.

Unfair differences in outcomes a thing of the past?

Let’s see.

The statement says:

Point of Order: Simplistic solutions to NZ’s taxation headache might be easier said than done

News source Stuff has reported almost 100 wealthy New Zealanders have signed an open letter to the government to say they want to pay more tax.

Said to be inspired by global initiative Millionaires for Humanity, 96 wealthy individuals have told the government they recognise the current tax system is unfair, allowing wealthy people to pay less tax, while other New Zealanders who struggle day-to-day pay more.

Gerry Eckhoff: Tax

When politicians call for reform of the tax system, they are really saying there needs to be more taxation in order to meet their expenditure. The perpetually aggrieved present an implausible argument that is deficient in equity and logic, which is - the more you distribute other people’s income, the wealthier the nation becomes.  

It should come as no surprise as the election looms closer that political parties attempt to outdo each other by promising to spend more and more of voters' money.

Dr Oliver Hartwich: A Green Path to the Fringe

The Green Party has declared its wealth tax will be a red line in any coalition negotiations.

And because Labour knows this, the larger party left the door wide open. Rather than ruling out the Greens’ plans, both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance did not rule them out.

In separate interviews, both Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson said these plans were not Labour’s. No wonder, because Labour does not want another election campaign under the cloud of tax policy. Labour perhaps has sympathy for the plan but presently finds it convenient to blame its eventual introduction on a future coalition partner.

NZCPR Weekly: A Tax Sham

Dear NZCPR Reader,

This week we question the integrity of the Government’s new tax review, our NZCPR Guest Commentator, Frank Newman outlines his concerns about the political nature of the review and shares his analysis of the issues, and our poll asks whether you support Labour’s plan to introduce a capital gains tax.

*To read the newsletter click HERE.
*To register for the NZCPR Weekly mailing list, click HERE.  

Richard Epstein: The Income Inequality Obsession

One of the great political divides in the United States concerns the role of the state in redressing income inequality across individuals and groups. 

Recently, the outspoken conservative commentator Dennis Prager noted that in one representative debate during the 2016 presidential campaign, the words, “Wall Street”, “tax,” “inequality,” and “wealthy” were used 59 times by Democratic candidates. In contrast, “ISIS,” “terrorism,” “free,” “debt,” “liberty,” and kindred terms gathered a scant 10 mentions.

Richard Epstein: Trump's Tax Plan

The Trump administration has revealed a one-page tax plan that, if implemented, could have vast consequences for the economy of the United States. The high points of that plan are simplification and repeal. 

The brackets go down from seven to three—10%, 15%, 35%. Corporate tax rates are slashed from 35% to 15%. The standard deduction is doubled to about $24,000, removing large numbers of low-income people from the rolls. The alternative minimum tax and the special Obamacare capital gains tax of 3.8% are eliminated, along with the estate tax. Deductions for home mortgages and charitable donations are preserved, but those for state and local taxes are eliminated. The plan has drawn enthusiastic support from conservative commentators and withering criticism from Democrats. Where does the truth lie?

Brian Gaynor: Trump’s tax cuts will have worldwide impact

One of Donald Trump’s main election promises was to slash taxes, including the corporate tax rate. 

His election manifesto – under the bold heading “Tax reform will make America great again” – declared that he would reduce the corporate rate from 35 per cent to 15 per cent because companies were deserting America because of its high taxes.

Daniel Mitchell: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Donald Trump’s Economic Plan

With a big speech to the Detroit Economic Club, Donald Trump has tried to establish his bona fides as a “growth” candidate. There are many desirable features of his new plan, but some of the provisions should be junked, and others can’t be properly assessed given a lack of details.

Here’s what’s good in the plan:

Reducing the overall tax burden: Trump’s original tax plan reduced the tax burden by about $12 trillion over 10 years ($10 trillion after factoring in the impact of faster growth).

Richard Rahn: Using Tax Money to Raise Taxes

If a member of Congress told you that he was going to use some of your hard-earned tax dollars to support an international organization that demands that you pay higher taxes, what would you say? 

Unfortunately, the question is not hypothetical, because that is exactly what is now happening. Congress is giving more than $70 million a year to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which has morphed over the last two decades from an organization that promoted trade and growth policies to an organization that pushes for higher taxes, which will reduce economic growth.

Frank Newman: Budget 2013

This years Budget has good news, but not for those who are expecting a handout. The good news is the government’s books are on track to return to surplus. That’s a remarkable achievement given the dire state of many of our trading partners, and the billions of dollars the government has contributed towards the rebuild of Christchurch.

Lindsay Mitchell: Who's 'beneficiary bashing'?

It seems to me the phrase 'beneficiary bashing' was coined in the 1990s and originally used to describe Ruth Richardson's benefit cuts. For some time I've been reflecting that the Left are now very quick to cry beneficiary bashing whenever  government attempts to reform welfare IN ANY WAY. But this National government has never cut benefit payments. In fact they've introduced more protection for benefit levels through indexing.  National hasn't reduced the incomes of beneficiaries.

Simon Cowan: Will taxes on the super-rich solve budget woes?

Governments around the world are being dragged, in some cases kicking and screaming, into doing something about their budget deficits. The difficulty is that the public will neither pay more tax nor countenance any cuts to entitlements and services. Hence, recent state budgets have been using euphemisms such as ‘efficiency dividends’ and ‘trimming the fat,’ while senior politicians rush to reassure electorates that public service job losses will not affect frontline services.

However, such cloak-and-dagger methods can take you only so far, especially if (like the United States) you’ve got a trillion-dollar hole to fill. Perhaps, the thinking goes, where dissembling fails envy might succeed. After all, everyone knows that the super-rich are rorting the tax system; all we need to do is raise their taxes so they pay ‘their fair share’ and everything will be OK, right?