If National wins ...

[iceman]

Wherever CGT has been implemented you have always been able to account for costs. So in this situation you would only pay tax on the $300k. I think there are just a lot of people throwing up scare tactics around CGT.

Here is an article from a few years ago that went through some of the myths:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10699125

Not according to a "tax expert" (Sorry didn;t catch her name) I listened to on Newstalk ZB this morning who had been looking at the Labour policy. She was scathing in the lack of detail and glaring gaps in the policy

[Banksie]

Not according to a "tax expert" (Sorry didn;t catch her name) I listened to on Newstalk ZB this morning who had been looking at the Labour policy. She was scathing in the lack of detail and glaring gaps in the policy

This is lifted straight from the policy

Calculating the Gain
The tax will be applied to net capital gains.

The CGT is a net tax. It is calculated on the net gain, which is the gross gain after the costs associated with buying and selling the asset are deducted. Such costs include: stockbrokers’ fees, legal fees, valuation fees, advertising costs to find a buyer or costs associated with improving the value of the asset.

I am suggesting she hasn't read it if she is saying costs associated with improving the assets will not be taking into account.

Edit: If she really did go on the radio and say this someone should be holding her to account, as it is blatant misrepresentation.

[Banksie]

And capital loss as non traders would also be entitled to claim all their losses against other income.

Not against other income, only against other shares.

[iceman]

This is lifted straight from the policy

Calculating the Gain
The tax will be applied to net capital gains.

The CGT is a net tax. It is calculated on the net gain, which is the gross gain after the costs associated with buying and selling the asset are deducted. Such costs include: stockbrokers’ fees, legal fees, valuation fees, advertising costs to find a buyer or costs associated with improving the value of the asset.

I am suggesting she hasn't read it if she is saying costs associated with improving the assets will not be taking into account.

Edit: If she really did go on the radio and say this someone should be holding her to account, as it is blatant misrepresentation.

I read the policy on their website and you are right about this point Banksie. However, the policy as posted on Labour's website, is full of holes and exemptions and will not work.

[Banksie]

I read the policy on their website and you are right about this point Banksie. However, the policy as posted on Labour's website, is full of holes and exemptions and will not work.

Our current tax policy is full of exemptions. Does it work?

From the article I linked earlier:

MYTH 3: THEY BECOME A SWISS CHEESE OF EXEMPTIONS
It has been suggested - for example, in the 2001 review of New Zealand's tax system - that benefits of a capital gains tax inevitably erode over time because they are amended more often.

South Africa's experience shows that its capital gains tax has been amended no more often than other types of tax in South Africa.

The amendments have not been of the type (significant new exemptions and preferences, for example) that critics of capital gains tax are concerned about.

New Zealand's experience is that because of the constant need to clarify and protect the boundary between capital gains and ordinary income, a system without capital gains tax is subject to frequent ad hoc amendment.

Regarding the holes, these still need to be thrashed out. The policy is peppered with clauses such as the following:

The Expert Panel will be asked to provide advice on outstanding issues in relation to trusts, in cooperation with the Law Commission. This will include whether CGT is applied to distribution to a beneficiary or unit holder or upon realisation even if that occurs within a trust structure. There may also be technical issues relating to Trans-Tasman treatment of assets.

In other words, as belg said, "Exactly how it will work, i.e. the detail, will be worked out by experts through the established democratic process which we can all participate in."

I put it to you that NZ will get CGT, if not this term it will be the next, as I cannot imagine National will be in power for the next 30 years.

[fungus pudding]

FP. What do you think of National's latest policy of granting $10,000 or $20,000 to new home buyers? How does it compare to interest free student loans, R&D tax credits etc? It's notable that the money will be promptly paid across to those selling houses, in many cases they'll be rental property investors looking to get out at the high end of the market. Is this the sort of policy National has at its core?

Based on your comments in the past, surely this policy will simply add $10,000 or $20,000 to all house prices? You, Sir, should not vote for them, in principle.

It's bad policy. There is some merit in 20k for a new house, which is less than govt. will gain in GST and will mean some houses built that otherwise wouldn't be; but it's nonsense. However I will vote for them. I do not expect to ever find a party whose policies are 100% in line with my thinking, so vote against the party I think will do most harm. I don't like Labour's housing policy either and don't believe it would ever achieve what they say (100,000 houses in ten years with 10,000 in the first 3 year term )- unless they slam into mass produced ghettos like state housing of the 40s.

[winner69]

Latest
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11319024

Key should tell Crusher to take a runner once and for all and withdraw her nomination from wherever she standing

But then maybe Crusher knows a lot more than all this

[Jay]

Originally Posted by couta1 And capital loss as non traders would also be entitled to claim all their losses against other income.

Not against other income, only against other shares.

I heard DC say (and others) that it against future Capitals gains
For example year 1 you had a loss of $1000 on assets that qualified you sold, year 2 you had a gain of $2000 on qualifying assets sold, the tax would be calculated on $1000 only

Share traders would continue to taxed at their marginal rate

[fungus pudding]

FP, here is the link to my question. http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthr...l=1#post502113

Many thanks for posting the link to an article by Dene "I'll always vote National" Mackenzie of the ODT. You know, and I know, that Labour would charge CGT or standard income tax on an asset sale, but not both. And you also must realise that there is no sense in having a repatriation clause, if the policy is to do any good. May as well scrap it now, if it has to have a clause like that.

As I've said before, I strongly disagree with you and Belgarion on whether the family home should be included in a CGT regime. We overspend on our houses, put our own labour in, they are generally poorer investments if you add up all the real costs. Plus we have to pay all the interest costs from our tax-paid income, and not claim any of it back.

Farms, commercial and domestic rentals, business premises, different story. 15% of realised future gains after expenses are taken out, is a very fair cop.

Not having a repatriation clause has a downside for businesses wanting to expand, and what you say about overspending on our houses, putting labour in, and being poor investments applies equally to residential rentals. And no investor can claim interest back. Where did you get that idea? Furthermore the biggest cost in housing, depreciation, is no longer considered an expense; possibly the silliest move of the current government.

[Joshuatree]

"Just smile and wave" lol thats about it; all the way to the knackers yard.
Looks more and more like this election is Nationals to lose ; awaiting what else is going to spill out onto the sidewalk.