Just to ram a point home there iceman.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/who-are...y-surprise-you
Printable View
Just to ram a point home there iceman.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/who-are...y-surprise-you
Tax is the price you pay for civilization, but there is also no requirement to structure your affairs so that you pay the most tax possible.
As your income rises, there is a tendency for your wealth to rise also. Once your income/wealth combination reaches or passes a certain point, it becomes an option to structure your affairs so that you minimize your tax obligations.
If, for example, the top tax rate kicks in at $70,000pa income, I would expect there to be a lot of people who can control their taxable income who turn out to have an income of $65-69,999pa.
Personally, as an honest man, I always try to pay the right amount of tax.
Tax is the price you pay for civilization, but there is also no requirement to structure your affairs so that you pay the most tax possible.
As your income rises, there is a tendency for your wealth to rise also. Once your income/wealth combination reaches or passes a certain point, it becomes an option to structure your affairs so that you minimize your tax obligations.
If, for example, the top tax rate kicks in at $70,000pa income, I would expect there to be a lot of people who can control their taxable income who turn out to have an income of $65-69,999pa.
Personally, as an honest man, I always try to pay the right amount of tax.
You misunderstand me GTM 3442 all I am saying is that an income equality survey isn't especially helpful in establishing the need/benefit of a capital gains tax and says absolutely nothing about the distribution of wealth in NZ. I have no problem people capping their income, the company still pays tax at 28% or the Trust at 33%.
Deciding how much tax to raise, and what form of economic activity to tax are both political decisions.
An income (in)equality survey is one tool for the people making those decisions - if they decide to use it
But once those decisions are made, patterns of economic activity will change to take account of the cost of the (new) tax(es). The history of taxation is liberally bestrewn with unintended and unforseen consequences.
As an aside, companies have more scope than many (most?) individuals to control their taxable income.
I like this guy's view on capital gains tax. Maybe I should switch to BNZ.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/mon...ital-gains-tax
No point in bringing in a capital gains tax at what might be the height of the "everything bubble" though. Although everything is probably fairly valued in today's interest rate environment. As I have said before if we get to negative interest rates there is no limit to asset prices anymore. Why with all the talk of populism, increasing wealth inequality etc are people not discussing the whole monetary system and whether 2% rising prices is the perfect solution to all our problems.
Back in May he was talking about joined up solutions. "…. but point is we have a housing affordability crisis so debate on baby boomers vs gen Y doesn't help," Healy wrote on Twitter. "We need joined-up solutions from council, govt, private sector and NFP's”
No mention of CGT then.
I would have said global central bank policy(low interest rates & easy money & inflation to clear debt) and immigration were the main causes at a guess. Banks seem to be getting a bit tougher re lending.
The expansion of the Chinese banking system from what I read is quite spectacular maybe some of this funny money is buying Auckland property.