What does that tell us!
Printable View
snippet from Jane Patterson RNZ agrees with me.
National rolled the dice with its claim of a $11.7 billion hole in Labour's pre-election budget and despite being widely discredited, Mr Joyce and Mr English clung on to that claim until the end.
That warning has been steadily downgraded to warnings the government's budget will be tight come May - that is in no doubt but is quite different from a multi-billion-dollar hole. It was a strategy that raised serious questions about Mr Joyce's credibility and that of Mr English who backed him to the hilt during the campaign.
EZ I think that’s an issue with all electorate MPs. They should stay for their full term unless they have a very good reason not to do so. I know Nick a little and know he takes the electorate seriously and always has. There are few more hardworking electorate MPs in the country and the vast majority of his work is for people that didn’t vote for him. You have gone silly with your theories about National wanting t keep him there for whatever reason. He wants to serve Nelson for the full term if I am not mistaken.
No but he should not walk away and create a by-election
Helen Clarke now coming out fighting for women’s rights saying she hit a “glass ceiling” at UN. Sorry Helen. You didn’t. You got voted out both in NZ and at the UN because people didn’t like you. Move on but unlike Sir John, she can’t get a job in the real World, just like SirMichael our de-facto Finance Minister
Infometrics agrees (and not wth Mr Eaqub).
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/1021...no-gamechanger
Tragic. But that economist can't have been at the meeting in Auckland. Otherwise he'd be a bit more informed.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/mon...r-report-finds
Fantastic article elZ. This would also do away with dodgy builders and leaky homes etc, there would be a continuity of quality, design ,and build, awesome:t_up:
"Prefabricated factory-built houses and apartments could deliver 7000 homes a year, KiwiBuild minister Phil Twyford has been told.
A report by PrefabNZ indicates its member companies could deliver around 7000 homes each year from 2020, but the number could be even higher.
"This would deliver 70 per cent of Kiwibuild's target of 10,000 homes per year over 10 years," said PrefabNZ chief executive Pamela Bell.
But there is a buzz in the prefab industry that New Zealand could also see some big overseas companies move in to capitalise from KiwiBuild. Fleetwood Homes, Australia's biggest homes prefabricator last month filed a certificate of incorporation with the Companies Office to create Fleetwood Limited.
The disruptors were three large companies that could produce around 6500 of the 7000 homes the prefab industry could deliver for KiwiBuild."
and thinking outside the box
"At the conference, PrefabNZ is also launching a competition seeking a design for a tiny one or two bedroom house that can be pre-consented so existing homeowners with big enough back gardens can have one installed. As many as 180,000 of them could be built, PrefabNZ estimated. The home will be called "The Snug"."
Was ask if this would be a good job? Some government dept got big bucks to spend ..on immigration policy?
Principal Policy Advisors x 6
Permanent.
· Be involved in a new high profile programme of work
· Own and drive strategic policy and lead complex policy programmes
· Bring your fresh perspective and challenge the status quo
The Challenge
We are looking for six Principal Policy Advisors that are keen to take part in a unique government initiative, across five different policy domains.
As thought leaders, your work here is set to impact the New Zealand economy, its labour market, and immigration policies.
This is an opportunity to challenge your selves to put forward new ideas and bring a fresh perspective on managing one of New Zealand’s biggest and most complex issues.
Old Labour trick to bring the unemployment numbers down: hire unemployed clowns and similar as senior policy advisers! Must have been hundreds hired by the last (HC) Labour Government ...
Holy sh*t - but now they hire the "principals" en mass: http://erec.thejohnsongroup.co.nz/Jo...xoCAhsQAvD_BwE
Must be Jacinda's mark - Senior not good enough anymore, though there are still some vacancies for them as well (maybe to support the unemployed youth?); Seriously - how many Principals (Latin - the First in order" can you have?
As well - wouldn't it be the job of our politicians to be the "thought-leaders"? What are we paying them for?
Quite funny to see history repeating itself. Only problem is - somebody will need to feed them all, and they won't be cheap :eek2:
I am all for this consistency new thinking, new ideas and fresh perspectives, adapt your own thinking or become a relic; an Aporia ;quite common in humans who cant acknowledge their own mortality.
"He's a knight of the realm, chairman of New Zealand's biggest bank and one of the country's most successful politicians, and now Sir John Key has laid claim to being a "performing artist".
Key seems to be broadening his post-politics horizons on a weekly basis, and most recently has set up a new company Thirty Eight JK to manage his public speaking engagements.
The company describes itself as a "performing artist operation" on the Companies Office. " Anything for money? Not sure he has a real job?
Helen Clark was achieving something of worth at the UN after leaving politics.
westerly
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...1MHon-9z7Bv6oA
For the sad sacks in this world.
BP, you must have missed this article the other day.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/102...als-final-days
This spells out how National increasingly hired spin-doctors in their last year of power, but also that that they exceeded their self-imposed true cap on public sector workers. They did this by continuing to increase the staff levels, but they reclassified some staff to "frontline" rather than "core", with new rules they just made up. They also spun some staff off into new entities and put them outside the count, even though they were still essentially doing the same work. They changed 6-month reporting on all this to 12-monthly. Labour now has to decide how they will handle the data from here on.
National reduces a 'bloated' public sector when in office? I think not.
A terribly sad indication of Labours paternalistic "I know best" approach" How is it possible that senior members of the Labour party would not inform the PM of these sexual assaults. And worse still is that they were not there to support the children in informing the parents. And now the coverup is being uncovered. Apparently all the facebook posts have disappeared off teh Labour page.
I get it that Labour camps are just ripe for sexual predators. But how this has been withheld from families leaves me beyond words.
It is a sad affair and one just hopes the victims are OK. Clearly this has been very poorly handled but worse, Andrew Kirton has come out defending his appalling handling of this saying it was "victim focused". I trust he will tell that directly to the faces of the parents of these KIDS.
I agree, there are some in Labour saying that Andrew Kirton might not stay in his job after this. Which would be a pity, he seems to have been well organised otherwise. Why didn't he think "If this leaks out, what questions will the press ask first, and how am I (or more likely how is Jacinda) going to reply?"
Putting aside the very poor handling of the situation after the event, it looks like the alcohol was not supplied by Labour, it was brought in by some of the Young Labour attendees. Some kind of a raging party went on over the second night, but one of the people in charge of looking after the attendees' behaviour went to bed at 9pm. The perpetrator allegedly assaulted two 16 year old males and two 16 year old females, and was not a Labour Party member. He was attending with a party member apparently (hearsay, The Standard). The perpetrator has been banned from attending any future Labour party events. I'm sure he would have been expelled from the party as well, if he'd been a member.
So this has been a pretty bad sabotage of Labour's efforts so far, maybe it has come from outside their camp, but it doesn't excuse the lack of control at the party, the alcohol supplied to minors, and certainly the poor followup and support afterwards, by senior people who should have known better and who will experience the consternation of all party members.
Wrong that the PM wasn't informed about this . Removing the drunk (?) groper of females and males was good, but allowing them to get drunk is unacceptable.Very dissapointing that the supervisor went to bed and left them to it. Were there other "responsible" adults left to supervise, if so why didn't they intervene?
Tricky one respecting the young peoples privacy and being transparent with parents. Media pressure is one thing most people would not want to experience let alone a teenager. Sounds like the teens were allowed to choose what action they wanted but maybe more detail to come out of this unacceptable event.
Sadly Binge drinking is still with us in NZ. When are we going to learn that having social drinks are fine but getting drunk and potentially losing ones safety and /or ones moral compass is not?
Sounds like a common sense win/win all-round to me
"In MARCH ast year, the Productivity Commission gave an example of how that might work.
If the land value of a property benefiting from a new rail link increased in value from $100,000 to $250,000 over five years – a 150 per cent increase compared with a rise of 120 per cent in land values in the wider area – a tax could be levied on the $30,000 gain attributable to the infrastructure improvements.
The tax could be levied alongside of rates, the commission suggested."
Interesting isn't it. The duplicity of the Labour Party. With the Chris Bishop nothing burger (check the timing too... so now we know why that was put out there) the Labour Party encourages the snapchat parents to come forward and tell the media and yet they believe when real sexual assault happens the parents are not to be told and they cover up what happened so that the media does not get wind of it. Great transparency and accountability here Labour and Miss Jacinda!.
A free from political interference police investigation into this sordid affair
Probably only a sick mischief maker starting that rumour the 20 year old involved was the son of a Labour Minister .....but makes you wonder
One should not wonder or speculate though ....the only thing for sure is that Jacinda must be furious as
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=12012492
I'm struggling to believe the PM was not aware before the other day. Andrew Kirton was at the camp. MP Tamait Coffey was there, MP Liz Craig was there. MP Angie Warrant Clark was there the day the guy got booted out. Other Labour MP's had been at the camp including Peeni Henara and Nathaniel Blomfield. Andrew Kirton was told on 13 February and Labour PArty President Nigel Howart on 14 Feb (along with the VP Beth Houston). And not one of these people apparently thought the PM would want to know about 4 sexual assaults occurring at an event she attended. I'm not that stupid!
Just imagine if this had been a National Party incident, we would have to be listening to the obvious group on this thread calling those in charge liars.
Minimoke is on the money in my opinion. They just hoped it would not get out. Their handling of it is as bad of the incident itself.
Former Act and National leader Don Brash has criticised the level of media coverage of the alleged indecent assaults at a Young Labour summer school, saying it was being overplayed in light of other world news.
"Any kind of sexual harassment is wrong and I don't want to diminish that. I was just irritated that literally every news bulletin I listened to between 9am and noon, the first item was about this particular issue. To make this the primary news item for days on end seems to me to be overplaying it." etc.
I am in agreement with Brash on this. A media frenzy over a relatively minor booze fuelled incident.
With virtually all media now in the hands of woman editors and reporters (no talk of equality in the media industry) any incident involving a man will receive more coverage than it deserves and because the Labour party is involved whoopee !
National would have employed public relations spin doctors and shut it down.
westerly
Having written court Reports on countless sex offences and sex offenders over a thirty year period in Probation, this event is well down the list on its level of seriousness or severity. A large bunch of young people, many half drunk, are likely to commit all manner of stupid behaviours and many will not even remember it the next day. That one was a twenty-year-old means nothing. He may have had the intellect of a fourteen-year-old or less and I'm sure other things went on that did not attract attention. The lack of responsible adult supervision is the main fault here.
Thank you craic for putting things in perspective.Somebody needs to take responsibility for not supervising correctly.
Lets not gloss over the inconvenient problem that the PM was not informed (so she says) and I'd have to say the somewhat questionable decision to refer the victims (eventually) to a unionist at the HELP centre. I'm not convinced sending two boys to a lesbian feminist is necessarily the best course to take.
Tim Wilson's take on it:
"We’re talking about a victim led process. Are you kidding me? This has been a political damage led process from the outset. The Labour party should be renamed with the Weinstein party, virtuous on the outside and rotten to the core on the inside. By the way your conversation with that so called expert, if I am the parent of a child who has been sexually attacked I want to know because I care more about that child than some cringing, gurning self appointed health counsellor ever would".
Not that simple. 16 year olds have a right to privacy . No mention of the 20 year old being prosecuted; he needs to learn that you cant get away with it and to be made accountable, the buck stops with him..
I reckon a parent's right to know their child has been sexually assaulted trumps the child's right to privacy. I'm getting a sense of whose privacy was trying to be protected here - and I don't think the children were front of mind.
As for the 20 year. old That's one person that needs help. To be rejected by one child is bad enough. But then to go trying it on with 3 others. Mind boggles.
This thread is starting to sound like the worst aspects of talkback radio , where people have their uninformed, biased, political even, opinions and little facts, muck raking , blowing things up, smearing etc etc.. But hey i forget it is a politics thread isn't it;)
https://www.kiwifamilies.co.nz/artic...ge-guidelines/
Seems to be a mixed bag. Note the age of consent
westerly
So Brash will be pissed by the PM keeping this issue in the headlines by having a press conference...that’ll make it on the 6 o’clock news I reckon.
Seemed the press conference was all about Labour anyway
Nope, but I did recognise one participant I think. Can I just say at this point that the Young Labour people were not immediately obvious when it was time to put up signs or to campaign door to door in our electorate. They did turn up in big numbers with placards attached to their arms if there were TV cameras or Jacinda in the vicinity. These Millennials are people who apparently are not just "Poor", but they are "Time Poor" when it comes to doing the hard yards. I'd like to hear an an opposing argument about this.
They will be interested in bending the party's ear about things like LGBT rights, about whether we should legalise cannabis. Stuff that will lose us votes when we are appealing to wider NZ.
This whole incident which has put Labour in the news in a very bad way, could have been generated by a drunken person going wayward for a few minutes before he was stopped. Whether it was clever sabotage or just underlying very nasty behaviour from an outsider that has emerged, Labour didn't have the systems in place to stop it from getting a lot worse. They'll have that in place from now on. Good to hear that Young Labour events are also being stopped for the meantime.
Labour needs younger members, but we also need them to step up when we need their energy. The participants at that camp were all given a copy of the expected behaviour rules to read, early on. The Party doesn't spend millions of dollars on advertising, paid for mostly by older members, for the marketing to be blown away by an underage booze-up that went wrong.
Bearing in mind that a free trade agreement with Russia is a priority for this Government and was mentioned in the "speech from the throne" and has since been reiterated by the FM on several occasions, I wonder where we stand with NZ-Europe relations today. Will Winnie side with Russia ?
Winnie's silence these days is deafening. Radio New Zealand put out a standing invitation for him to allow him to explain his stance on Russia after he was defending Putin and Russia over the weekend, but it appears he is now lost for words.
Typical Winnie - big mouth while in opposition and no clues when in government. He is probably too busy to enjoy the baubles of power ...
Isn't it funny that both Trump and Winnie seem to love evil Putin? Not sure we choose a good government to look after us ...
Edit: just in case anybody missed the wisdom dropping from Winnie's lips:
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/shows/...on-peters.html
I found the reason for Winnie’s absence and silence BP. He’s been to the Chathams with 6 other Ministers to celebrate the opening of the new wharf funded by National and they voted against !!!
Maybe a rogue wave got him:D. The wharf can handle bigger seas now but still has to shut down re 15 days year.
Yep ....one big piss up
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=12013540
Even EZ sounded pretty disappointed last night
He said that many of the young Labour Party liked being on TV and partying etc but didn’t much hard yakka like door knocking and his post with this — The Party doesn't spend millions of dollars on advertising,paid for mostly by older members,for the marketing to be blown away by an underage booze-up that went wrong.
That will turn current and prospective members away
[QUOTE=winner69;708056]
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=12013540[/
Anonymous huh what credibility? National stooge infiltrator? Was he drinking too? Hiding in the bushes? Walk in fridge huh. Novel use of a clothes line huh. party like its 1999 huh. Political huh?
Well I'm disappointed, because our meetings are in some nondescript shabby community house and we don't even get a cup of tea or coffee, let alone drinks! The Young Nats do it properly, they go to a pub where there would be a lot more control. The difference is they are prepared or able to spend a bit more, they'll meet in cafes, pubs etc.
Labour's always on a budget. How cheap can we do it.. so they go to a camp with a walk-in chiller, and copious free alcohol in there for everyone (OK not provided by Labour, that's because it would be illegal). It's a wonder more things didn't go wrong. I've helped bring up a couple of millennials, luckily one of them doesn't drink alcohol and the other one seems to keep it mostly under control. Neither of them are the least bit interested in getting involved in politics on the ground, maybe on the web they might be a bit more active.
What millennials probably don't understand or like about politics is that it involves dull old fundraising, marketing and signage, plus door-door work mostly. It's not all the exciting? policy stuff. The few younger people I saw helping out on the beat weren't Young Labour members. You tend to find more of the activists getting into the latter group, they'll have an axe to grind about something early on.
National has a lot more members than Labour, both are down on their historical numbers. But National are a lot more organised, and Labour has some catching up to do there, if they want to attract more members. This latest debacle won't help.
Drinking started at beginning of camp when Adern and Kirton were likely around. Kids puking their ring out during the night and so sick they didnt attend the indoctrination sessions the next day! How is it the MP's who were there have said nothing about this and worse yet did nothing at the time?
Apparently a sexual harassment complaint of a Young Labour person during the election.
Seems to me Aderns generation built the coop and since then enticed the chicks in. Only a matter of time the fox gets through
Edit: and it appears it is only a matter of time that word of drug use gets out.
Former MP Darren Hughes was of that generation http://brianedwardsmedia.co.nz/2011/...-and-be-there/
No doubt a lot of consensual stuff as well at this camp .... rather like what happens at lawyers piss ups
Having a great binge up here, go on have another one after all NZ has to be one of the Binge Capitals in the world or was that Whinge;)
Andrew Little has set teh bar at a Ministerial Enquiry for sexual antics between consenting adults in a law firm. What level enquiry will he be after for four alleged sexual assaults of non-consenting teenagers, the supply of alcohol to teenager and Minsters asleep on the job.
Anyhow, as an aside I wonder who the magical little fairy is who waved her magic wand and made Tamati Coffey disappear. He was there through it all but now seems to have vanished.
Someone has taken the lid off the memory hole again
"In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages, to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and in the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building"
Is bingeing learnt at home like charity?
"That sort of "boozy over-indulgence" culture applied to all youth wings and most youth organisations, including the New Zealand University Student Association (NZUSA) that he was also part of."
'Boozy functions' not just Labour
This "land value capture" tax that Cullen and Twyford are talking about seems like a CGT in disguise on residential property including ones home !!
Ironic that the idea comes originally from the Productivity Commission.
National created the Commision as part of it's agreement for support from that party consigned to history at the last election, apart from one odd character hanging in there thanks again to National.
westerly
I think its worse. While I sort of can appreciate the principle of the idea (of taxing value added to ones property through public actions) - I can't see how this can be levied on a fair and equitable basis.
So - if the government funds a road which happens to better connect my property with the next town, than my property value might rise. Labour proposed to tax this increase.
However - if this connection passes close to my property, the noise and pollution might reduce my property value. Would I get in this case a tax refund?
As well - if I don't sell my property - would I still need to pay the value capture tax? If yes - where would I take the money from? Would I need to sell my property to be able to pay Labour's tax?
If I only have to pay the tax when selling - how do they manage the process of tax assessment and collection? I might keep my "value added" property for a long time. What about inheritance - would this trigger a tax event forcing children to sell the family property because they can't afford to pay the value added tax?
What if I appreciate the remoteness of our place and don't want all the city dwellers to interfere with our life? Who would compensate us for the loss of tranquility?
As usual with Labour's proposals - lots of hot air and little thinking ...
Sir Michael is flying a few kites. That's what politicians do. I'm sure it helps the TWG to have people like BlackPeter raise questions that might not have penetrated the ivory towers. Then they can consider and ignore, but pop them in a footnote somewhere to show they have consulted.
It is a given that the TWG will recommend options that clip the ticket of rich pricks, which would have to include a vast swathe of middle income earners with property or other investments. Otherwise it would not bring in enough revenue to justify a major shift in policy and administration, including the massive expenditure in IRD's new IT systems which will be in place by the next election.
National have experience in running the country's finances and hopefuly will come up with a plan based on reducing goverment bloat rather than robbing the taxpayer. The social investment approach was heading in that direction, seems to be overtaken by spreading cash around based on feelz.
So, would rental properties need to be exempt from a wealth tax to avoid the tax being passed on to renters in the form of a higher rent?
A wealth tax will never happen. It would mean declaring your assets every year at their exact value and paying tax on it. The great masses would not be able to accurately do this. What value would you put on your house? qv can't be relied upon. It would be a can of worms checking the accuracy.
The amount of wealth that would leave the country would be huge. A lot of people could live offshore with the amount of tax they would not have to pay.
I assume you jest.
Come in Marama Davidson, your time starts now. Since she said on The Nation last week that renter rights and rent controls are her top priority. The current government might not need too much persuading and the Green votes will be top of mind in 2020 for tax reform if NZFirst remains below 5%.
So a wealth tax of some sort on the one hand and rent controls and reverse mortgages on the other.
As Artemis says, I think these ideas are only there to get people thinking, that a CGT would be the most pleasant option. Far better than a wealth tax, too. A CGT should only apply to those assets where upkeep costs, any interest paid, and other overheads have been claimed against income in tax returns.
So it would apply to businesses, domestic and industrial rentals, some baches, no private homes (unless perhaps they were over a value threshold), probably not to antiques or collectibles. It would have no effect on savings sitting in a bank account, but hopefully it would direct investments from relatively unproductive areas, into areas with more risk and higher probable return. It would also encourage ownership of private homes, while discouraging some property investors and freeing up their properties and land holdings.
The CGT would only apply at a low rate from the start date, and is only levied at the time an asset has sold, providing a clear capital gain, the rate allowing for some natural appreciation and possibly the extra capital expenses used to get there. Whether there should be different rates for different assets is another matter.
In tandem with that, Labour are considering reducing the rate of GST, a regressive tax.
elzorro, sounds like you are describing "income tax" to me, you earn an income whether that is buying selling houses for a profit (bright line test) , buying selling shares, widgets or whatever, if applicable allow for expenses and pay tax on what is left.
The IRD need to monitor better and/or the govt of the day needs to tighten the rules, e.g when are you a share trader when are you not for example.
I think you misunderstand me. Once a brightline test has been set, traders who sell assets within the brightline settings get taxed at the income tax rates, but longer term asset owners pay no tax on an eventual sale at the moment. A case in point is Trademe. From nothing to several hundred million, but no income tax to pay on the asset sale. Australia has all of these sort of taxes, including stamp duty on house purchases. Only a small proportion of NZers can participate in the tax rort we have in NZ at the moment, it isn't fair on normal taxpayers with far fewer assets, who pay their dues at every turn.
Maybe ez, however again as an example if there are "traders" on trademe not declaring there "income" (surely not;)) then the Govt of the day via IRD needs to monitor it better and catch them. Might be cheaper than trying implement a bunch of new taxes
As I said it comes down to making a line in the sand, if you sell an asset within X timeframe your deemed a "trader" and pay tax accordingly, if there is a capital gain, i.e. income, even your own home, I knew of someone during the last property boom(before this one) moving house 3-4 times inside 2 years, , - didn't like the area after all or didn't like the house after all etc -each time banking a large profit and moving up or sideways and keeping the cash.
Anyway not sure new taxes are needed , just close/tighten some of the loopholes - as has been discussed here previously, when are you deemed a trader (buying/selling shares) , there is no hard and fast answer, these are the types of rules that need attention not a bunch of new taxes, successive governments have talked about from time to time from memory
Yes, the loopholes are a mile wide on traders really. I have noticed that not many new (low cost) items bought on Trademe ever come with a tax invoice. Not to mention the traffic of goods sold through facebook. I just about fell over talking to an energetic older Labour Party member three years ago, he has bought and tidied up a cluster of rentals and had a lot of trouble getting a good tenant for one of them. So he sold it, well within the current brightline test interval. He had his solicitor write a letter to IRD, about how it was his intention to keep the property as an investment, that it didn't work out. He'd have received a capital gain, no tax to pay on it. Needless to say, he wasn't that keen on a CGT if it was going to apply to him, either.
So IRD are pretty powerless when an owner-occupier sells frequently, usually after doing up the house. A simple CGT levy at the point of each sale would stop that, but of course catch out all homeowners too, it's not politically acceptable. There is still a big difference in that sort of activity: to keep under the radar, frequent house/dwelling flippers can't claim their costs/interest against income, and in some cases I'm certain they spend more than they get back, even ignoring the value of their labour. So maybe they've done the country a service by upgrading housing stock at, or below, cost.
Even then, I know of a couple of enterprising brothers who started flipping properties a few years ago, that was going great guns until IRD spotted it, and their enthusiasm for the activity dropped away after that was resolved.
I think the real money in property is usually made by the smart investors holding onto rentals for a long period of time, ensuring upkeep costs are low and waiting for land values to go up while using the steadily rising rental income and inflation to pay off their investment for them. Like any business person that eventually has to sell, or decides to sell, that's when the real value of the enterprise starts to show, that's when the tax should be levied as a CGT.
IRD spends a lot of money and effort on compliance, including smart systems and access to a lot of data. IRD have also required purchase info from real estate agents in the past, not sure if they still do. Property has been a key compliance area for several years.
A few years ago IRD brought a court case against a family that bought, moved in, sold, repeated. Court agreed that the family were traders and liable for income tax.
Was giving Jacinda time to prove she was the real deal but now getting the feeling she isn’t.
I liked this comment I came across - Jacinda Ardern of course slogans all the pre election bribes as aspirational and not necessarily achievable. The term “White man speaks with forked tongue” would be an appropriate description of Jacinda Ardern’s ability to make quick slogans and communicate that to the general public as positive.
Texans call it all hat and no cattle
But that only reinforces the argument for a CGT, Artemis. If that family were levied income tax on their house flipping, then presumably a CGT wouldn't also apply. But to catch the untaxed income from longer-term property holdings and the like, the only practical way is to levy a low-rate CGT at the time of each sale.
Mind you she pretty clever at smiling her way through telling the petitioners that want to ban off shore drilling and telling them I’m committed but just give us a bit more time and then a few hours later subtly telling the oil industry that won’t happen for some time.
That Cindy is one of the most duplicitous people I have ever come across. Though she really is caught between a rock and a hard place with the COL agreement. On one side, Winston and the oil and mining (regional development) and fishing (Talleys) people, the other the Greens who are anti anything NZF is. Gotta be a tough gig.