And in the meantime our neighbours are going to reopen a shuttered coal fired power station at Redbank so they can mine cryptocurrencies.
Printable View
And in the meantime our neighbours are going to reopen a shuttered coal fired power station at Redbank so they can mine cryptocurrencies.
The word inside the government is that they wanted to go much, much further, but it was Winston who held them up in cabinet. Labour and the Greens wanted all existing oil and gas exploration halted as well.
https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/04/h...-in-listening/
Not looking good comrades
There will be oohing and ahhing from the treasury benches about the exploration ban. When Kiwi's are forced to eat cold baked beans by candle light there will be running and screaming.
Boop boop de do
Marilyn
So despite all the screaming in opposition, Labour and its coalition partners (including sacked councillor Eugine Sage), have decided to follow the previous Government's time table for Canterbury regional council's return to full democracy at next year's local body election. Cindy Astern at work once more.
"The primary barrier is the upcoming representation review, which would set the electoral boundaries for the next election. It is likely to be completed part way through next year.
Because the existing boundaries were drawn under the current ECan Act, it is unclear how all 13 councillors would be elected until the review was completed.
Acting ECan chairman Steve Lowndes, who supports a return to democracy, said he hoped the Government would not force elections."
Waiting a year is nothing compared with Nationals flagrant abuse of democracy.
westerly
Oh jeez. Adern Meets the German Chancellor. And the best she can come up with is a stuffed kiwi. Classy, and oh so apt.
I see Helen lurking at CHOGM
Hope she is keeping an eye on Grant’s budget while on this little jaunt
From TIME
most influential 100 people of 2018
Be proud NZ:t_up:
[QUOTE=greater fool;711901]Working for all New Zealanders..........
Great stuff, need those reviews;)
Common sense though after 9 years of National , Labour need to come in and review everything as a new CEO would in a business.
Great that we have investigative watchdog in Nicky Hagar for Daphne Project: New Zealand still a haven for some? | Radio New ... an investigative journalist par excellence. And great that Geoffrey Palmer will be looking into the hit and run raids in afghanistan. 2 un corruptible men of the highest integrity in getting to the truth.
Nicky Who?
I'm no great fan of our Oddfellows government but have to say that Megan Woods acquitted herself well on Q and A this morning. Other views welcome.
Perhaps some technical people can explain this for me.
If I click on this weblink I can follow news articles https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand
But if I click on this link I get an error 404 message. Even though its pointing to TVNZ. https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-...er-labour-camp
Seems inconceivable our national news body would have broken links. Probably just as well there is a cacheing service.
A slight sidetrack but i think this interview with Adrian Orr our reserve bank Guv is really well worth listening, for investing, for the future and the changes coming fast.
Listenduration 35′ :04″
Perhaps someone could explain why Clarke Gayford needs a Diplomatic Passport to visit Australia, the Pacific Island and the UK. Surely in these visa free countries his NZ passport should be all that is required. I thought diplomatic passports got issued to diplomats, top ranking government officials and diplomatic couriers. When travelling do his bags get searched and sniffed like every other spouse or do government official spouses get special treatment?
Net migration still tracking around 70,000 odd per year
Labour and Winston seem very quiet on the subject these days ....hmm
I heard that Govt and Auckland Council have a grand ten year plan to improve Auckland's transport infrastructure. I thought I heard that it's to be part funded on a Public/Private partnership basis but must have got that wrong - Labour doesn't believe in PPP's.
;)
Its how the rich get richer. Credit where it is due though. It is consistent with poor people subsidising the wealthy through the proposed fuel tax as well as continuing the exemption from Road User charges. Ultimately what we will end up with is the Greens jumping from their EV's to their bikes and not contributing a cent towards the roads they travel on.
Hmm. No reduced GP visit costs. Another promise gone.
What a clusterfcuk this govt is. An email from BP gets leaked. Energiser Bunny calls BP to the Parliament to explain. Com com comes out and says no problem, nothing illegal going on here. Naive and inept spring to mind.
Well done Labour for levelling the playing field on GST by adding to all online purchases. Long overdue.
Agree this levels the playing field if applied to all goods, as it should be. But one has to wonder how long Labour will get away with introducing all these extra taxes when they've said they will not introduce any new taxes this term ! They are also flat out backtracking on clear election promises such as doctors fees reducing, scrambling to fill the fiscal hole Steven Joyce told them about
Im not sure what the anomaly is. GST has traditionally been applied for goods and services purchased and enjoyed locally. Now it seems it is being applied to goods purchased off shore and enjoyed locally. Should I now be paying GST on things I purchase overseas when I am on an overseas holiday or travel?
Lets wait until we see the details. I guess I don't mind paying GST on oversees purchases as long as
a) they don't hit me in addition with a huge collection fee (as they do these days with all purchases above the tax-free limit) and
b) I get at the same time a refund of overseas applied GST (otherwise I pay twice) and
c) The cost for collecting the additional taxes is less than the additional taxes they collect, otherwise the whole exercise is pretty pointless - isn't it?
Sort of doubt they manage to be fair and reasonable ... probably just another scheme to employ more useless and expensive bureaucrats and make life overall more expensive in New Zealand. Don't hold my breath.
Quite a coup for our boy Bill
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/8...r-politicshtml
"Goods mailed into NZ may be subject to import duty. Import duties are calculated on the Customs value of the goods in New Zealand dollars. The goods may also be subject to Goods and Services Tax (GST) of 15%, based on the Customs value of the goods, and including the duty (if any) and postal/courier charges.Aug 31, 2017 "
NZ retailers will be happy, Probably won't make a big difference to on line shopping.
westerly
There is no international jurisdiction that can compel a foreign online retailer to comply with NZ's GST 'law'. The whole scheme will be voluntary, and the scale and scope of online retailers worldwide (incomprehensibly vast) would suggest that there is no hope in hell that the GST net could be cast wide enough to make wit of difference to 'levelling the playing field'. What a joke, a waste of time and money, a compliance nightmare, and totally unenforceable.
When I buy it gets sent to a US address and shipped to NZ from there.
When I buy it usually gets shipped free of charge direct to my NZ address, all the way from China. Arrives in 7-10 days (on average) at massive discount to retail NZ, with complete transparency on the shipping/delivery process (as good as Apple tracking for those who have enjoyed that experience) - tracked online. Totally reliable so far in my experience.
Here's a recent example:
Windscreen wipers for my motor.
- $NZ127 each from my local mechanic. Screw that.
- $NZ44.99 each from Supercheap Auto. Screw that too!
- $US13 for both wipers from AliExpress, expertly packaged, arrives in 7-10 days, free shipping.
Wake up NZ. There's a whole world of online retail competition out there that makes us local yokels look like fools paying landed goods plus marked up prices from destination, or (sadly) even local online retail, when the source is supplying at massive discount, direct with no freight charges, with no restriction on volume orders (i.e. buy one or a few ,000 or a million if you want) , with reasonable delivery times and NO GST.
You think these online retailers are going to voluntarily collect NZ GST on every purchase and pay that back to the NZ IRD? Lol, good luck on that ... let alone the zillions of other online retailers worldwide who frankly don't give a sh1t about NZ tax laws and certainly won't voluntarily be a tax collector for the NZ government .. because they don't have to, don't want to and don't need to.
This online GST collection idea is the worst example or poorly thought out legislation that I'm aware of. Labour are clutching at straws trying to raise a few paltry millions of tax revenue while demonstrating their complete and utter ignorance of global ecommerce trade or cross-border legislative rights (they have none) to enforce them, let alone the local administrative cost of trying to impose and administer these non-enforceable compliance regulations.
Goodness gracious, this is such fallacious ignorance, it beggars belief that a millennium led government would even begin to consider it viable, workable or implementable ... let alone the ignorant proposition that international online retailers (worldwide) could be swept into the net of compliance, invest in making their systems accomodate NZ law, ... and pay that GST collection back to the NZ IRD. Good grief, what is Labour thinking! I don't care what government makes these stupid ill-informed decisions, it's just madness.
This is a globally embarrassing and ignorant episode from the Labour government, ill thought out, unimplementable, and totally unenforceable.
GREAT STUFF!
Retail NZ welcoming this
Unity Books"Today's announcement's absolutely outstanding news for the whole of the retail sector in New Zealand."
"Retail New Zealand public affairs manager Greg Harford told Morning Report the announcement would be "very good news indeed for the sector".
National not opposing this.
"Levelling the playing field is certainly not a silver bullet for the retail industry in New Zealand but it will of course take away a competitive disadvantage that had long been faced by Kiwi retailers" - Retail New Zealand public affairs manager Greg Harfordduration 4′ :16″
A former Labour MP's thoughts on the current Govt.
https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/pr...rn-government/
Then their packages get stopped at the border till the customer coughs up the GST and no doubt an extortionate processing fee. Can't see that being great for customer satisfaction. Or sent back if the importer (the customer) refuses to pay the GST as happened with the swedes when they put VAT on lower value packages.
It'll be up to these companies whether they decide to collect the GST and pass it on, or simply to stop sending stuff to NZ customers if the hassle of dealing with customs or customers becomes too great. If they send enough to NZ it might be worth their while to setup online GST.
So whats going to happen with Labours "Negative Gearing" policy. Seems to me there are quite a few Mom and Pop investors who are negatively geared (expenses exceed income) today so as to provide a income for the future. And you also have people with larger portfolios who are likely to be positively geared over their entire property portfolio.
Sp the mom and pops, loosing the tax calculation will have to cover the difference themselves. Or they will put rents up. Or they will have to sell up. In which case there will be a minor surge on the property supply side which may see property values decrease. Given the houses are likely not "affordable" the positively geared owners will buy up these properties, reducing competitions and driving up rents. Thats short term.
Medium term rents will go up faster than wages so govt will need to increase Working For Family, Accommodation Supplement or Minimum wage.
As government payments increase at a faster rate than the negative gearing offset taxes will have to rise or government services will need to increase. Increase in minimum wage will see employers mover more to automation which will see les employment amongst renteers.
Long term current negatively geared property owners wont have the retirement income they planned, leaving a shortfall which will see them voting for a Government that increase the pension.
But on the bright side. Proper investment wont be such an attractive option. So those with cash will look for alternative investments. The Share Market being an obvious choice. Increased demand will see an increase in share prices. Given I am out of rentals and more into stocks I think I will have to support this policy. My shares will increase in value and by the time I retire I'll get a bigger penison. Win / Win as far as I can see.
Your investment should stand on it's own merit. It should be able to show it is going to make a profit going forward. When that happens then you write off your losses against those profits and then start paying tax from that point on. If it doesn't then why should you get to be able to write off losses against your other income?
If investments were to stand on their own merit there would no innovation or development. Sometimes you just have to take an educated punt and put your money where you think its going to get the best overall return.
Because that's how business and accounting works. Income - expenses incurred = profit / loss. And tax gets paid on profit.
You dont write off losses, as such. You write off value of an asset when required. You incur expenses, and if they are greater than income then you have a loss. The loss isn't written off, it just is. No one likes a loss.
Its not hard. Salary plus rent (Income) less expences (rates / insurance/ interest etc) = profit or loss. As mentioned earlier you pay tax on profit. With an accountants help you can carry that loss through to future years so really isn't written off. It keeps living until finally accounted for.
(Best we get Beagle sniffing around here - he can be more precise on accounting treatment.)
Simply I do not accept that a loss incurred on an investment in property should be deducted from a salary to give you a tax refund.
You may not accept it. But I think you are confusing "expense" with "Loss"
Surely a person is entitled to do whatever they can to earn an income. If they have skills and time they can sell those to someone for a wage or salary. If they are prepared to take a risk to house some people in return for rent then surely good on them. Can you accept that sometimes expenses are incurred in generating an income? Why would you want people who earn less (income less expenses incurred in generating that income) to pay more tax than those who actually earn more.
Given the apparent housing crisis shouldn't we be doing all we can to encourage people into property that can be rented to people?
Rumours. What rumours? https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...jacinda-ardern
A loss is when expenses exceed revenue. I am not stupid.
If you buy a rental property and it makes a loss of $10,000 per year simply because the rent you get could not cover your expenses. That $10,000 loss if added to your salary gives you a tax refund of $3300 assuming your marginal rate is 33c/$. Five years down the road you decide to sell as you find that the rent will never exceed expenses, which you knew anyway because of the big mortgage you took out when you bought. You walk away with some sort of capital gain which hopefully will cover what your losses were but the tax you didn't pay, $16,500, is a gift to you at the expense of all other tax payers. That is not acceptable.
Capital Gains tax should not be confused with Negative Gearing Tax. Two very different conversations. But if Jacina wants to bring in a new tax when she said she wouldn't, so be it.
Edit. Is it acceptable for a person to keep the capital gain if they pay their Negative Gearing tax?
The big players already have systems set up to apply sales tax, charge the buyer and remit to IRD. Australia's requirement starts in a couple of months so NZ will be a doddle next year.
This government is beginning to add hassle, compliance and cost to vast swathes of the population. Most are small bites but after the first few people will be taking notice, even if the impact on their back pockets is not huge. Death by 10 or 12 cuts? Or should that be shower heads and light bulbs.
What about a sole trader's investment in a start up business alongside other income? Need not be salary, could just as well be dividends. The investment could be any sort of capital expenditure including commercial property. Should that be treated differently to someone with a residential rental? If so, why?
It won't be under the ring fencing proposal. It only applies to residential rental properties. Probable consequences -
- owners will sell up before ring fencing comes in
- the rental pool will shrink, maybe a lot, rents will go up, excellent tenants will be fine, others will swell the waiting list for emergency / state housing
- the much discussed first home buyers will be no more able to buy than they are now, even if prices drop a bit
- owners that stay in the market and run at a loss for the time being will minimise expenses, including deferring maintenance where they can
- owners carrying a tax loss will not sell until they have used up the tax losses
- the current government will get a windfall, future governments the liability.
What did I miss?
There are actually several rumours circulating at the moment. Last time I looked, rumours are just rumours but if they they are defamatory then that is a civil matter not a police matter. So now we have the police stepping into a civil matter involving a person tied to the labour party - that is simply wrong. (and all they have done is settle the criminal aspects of the rumours - not the other rumours. So not overly helpful).
Im sure political parties must have a manual on how to manage rumours and that it doesn't involving the police because that is a constitutional breach by mixing the separate powers of the Judiciary with the Executive. Its about time Labour caught up with the rules of being in government.
I'm not privy to the rumours, although I did see someone allude to them on this site at some stage.
If the rumours said he was under police investigation then I have no problem with the police making a statement to the contrary in the circumstances. If the rumours involved only civil matters then I agree fully with you Minimoke
All this is a very nice distraction from something that isn't a rumour - and that is the sexual assaults at the Labour Camp. Loads of rumours circulating about that event. Rumours the police are silent on and rumours that will be silenced once the Labour Party Investigation is published - its taking a while!
Now here's a conundrum. There are two main rumours. The person who did the Kiddy Fiddling (and that persons parent) and the person who supplied the alcohol. The police have not issued a statement saying these people are not involved in any investigation - so does that mean the rumours are true?
Makes a good story but from all accounts nothing new and still no indication of what they are atually going to do ....plenty of buzzwords and slogans and a bit of ra ra
Probably a winter or two of discontent coming up
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/ind...nt-in-the-room
Business will do what busines does. And that is get on with things in the environment it finds itself. It cant rely on government - eg Govt cant even get NZ on the exemption list for US steel tariffs. And they are supposed to be our mates. At some point Minimum wage will go up so high people will be laid off. As NZ is increasing unable to meet contractual obligations due to strike action then contracts will be lost. Getting rid of the 90 day trial will see less vulnerable people in work. Industry bargaining will put increased focus on non-productive activity. Taxes obviously have to go up to pay for over promised spending. And the Public Service will celebrate more jobs.
Would Labour supporters spread rumours to the detriment of Labour ? Or would it be as Winston implies the more "anything but the left " hardliners from further right of the political spectrum?
"Dirty Politics" exposed the extent some are prepared to go to achieve their political goals.
As you say in a later post - "I have no idea what any other rumours were - nor do I care. "
How ever, others on this site are quite happy to spread rumour and gossip.
westerly