Which utterances would they be? The ones to the party faithful incl the unions? Or the 'hedging the bets' ones afterwards. Or the ones to business audiences?
Printable View
Oh yes , I know what you mean about the Labour Party, golly gosh imagine if they ever attained the treasury benches again , tax rorts for property investment could be at risk. I recall that terrible thing they did years ago, remember how they recognised the Peoples Republic of China(National vehemently opposed), and before that they established this terrible system of free public health care. Next thing you know they will want to change the flag and become a republic. Sorry , changing the flag ,oh yes my mistake,thats John Keys hobby horse, Becoming a republic.?? now let me think... John Key told the London Financial Times in 2007 that he was " a little bit republican" and now since staying at Balmoral and the prospect of a Royal Visit he is now an" enthusiatic Monarchist"!!!!. John Key is very principled,( yeah right) and as Groucho Marx said " if you dont like those principles Ive got others".
You may be able to help me there. As a full time property investor for many years, I've never found these 'tax rorts' you speak of. I have suffered considerably under this govt. since they decided buildings don't depreciate, so tell me what the rorts are please. I want to up my profit.
FP, you know we're talking about the CGT. In the meantime, if you had to borrow money to purchase a commercial or rental property, the interest can be claimed as an expense. Plus any upkeep costs, some of which could prove to be increases in the asset value as a happy coincidence. If the property is not cashflow positive, it also defrays normal income tax. Not a great situation I know, but better than the situation many face trying to pay off their first home. All of the interest comes out of their tax-paid income. If it's not a tax rort, how do property investors appear to get ahead even though it's basically a non-productive investment for NZ INC?
Regarding the Digipoll, I reckon those results are OK since we are 6 months away from an election, the public are fickle, and the whole of the Crusher Collins incident wasn't in play when most voted.
Here is the detail, we're talking 750 people polled throughout NZ, margin of error +/- 3.6% and:Quote:
In the DigiPoll survey in the immediate after-glow of Mr Cunliffe's election, Labour polled 37.7 per cent and had enough support parties to form a government.
But Mr Cunliffe had a halting start to the political year with controversy over baby bonus details in his state of the nation speech and publicity over donations to his leadership campaign. (EZ: guess who picked away at these tiny issues to puff them up with help from the press)
Polling began on March 6, in the midst of the fallout over his use of trusts for donations.
But it continued through last week when Mr Key condemned minister Judith Collins for her failure to declare a dinner in Beijing with her husband's business associates. (EZ: But most will have voted long before this fairly big event, saving National some votes).
So the timing was very fortuitous for National. Maybe that's the whole reason for the nitpicking of Labour issues right through the polling period, they'd have known it was happening. We, the public, are being played. I'll wait and see what happens during the next digipoll period.Quote:
750 eligible voters were polled from Thursday March 6 to Sunday March 16. That was a period of major negative coverage of Cunliffe but only some of the Collins milk issue.
BB yes this middle aged, conservative, high income earning monarchist has been voting for a long,long time.
They polled 750 throughout NZ. It would be more relevant if the number who refused to take part was published Only the politically motivated would waste their time. As this thread shows the right to far right are far more enthused to rubbish the opposition
Labour only have to motivate their supporters to vote to romp in at the next election
Westerly
Of course interest can be claimed as an expense, simply because that's what it is. Claiming capital costs as expenses is not allowed by IRD. I daresay some get away with it as in all forms of taxation. Of course losses are offset against other income - that is standard accounting practise throughout the world. All businesses pay tax on the accumulated result. Most professional investors, builders and other property professionals and part-time traders do pay tax on gains. You know that. As far as your point goes on profitability .....one hell of a lot of investors burn their fingers. Residential would be types often have losses exceeding income. That is very very common. commercial investors can get completely wiped out by a vacancy or tenant bankruptcy. Those who win have often worked ard and long. It isn't an easy game to play, and in spite of all the waffle, the market goes through long periods where it is a buyers market - not much help to the landlord busting to get out of the game because some tenants have just wrecked his/her property.
Well at least please do try and put up well reasoned posts - like EZ for example. While I may not agree with some of his views I always admire that he posts some well thought out reasoning to support his veiws without ever stooping to "playing the man".
If you are who you say then you will have realised long ago that no government of whatever hue is ever perfect. You can cherry pick sh*t from the last ten years all you like but we can all point to inadequacies in the Clark years - so what?
At the end of the day the majority will have their say and polling trends for some time now indicate that the majority prefer a Key led government.
They simply do not find anything apealing enough in the Labour/Greens offering to change their minds.