And of course National is way out in front in dollar terms. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...given-secretly
westerly
Printable View
And of course National is way out in front in dollar terms. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...given-secretly
westerly
It is reported here that Labour is legally white washing or money laundering donations: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/95891686
It seems the person who was unhappy was unhappy because he gave his art for free but when a donor paid an inflated price the artist was named as the Donor.
It appears to work like this.
- an artist donates a work that might be valued at say $2,400 - based on previous sales.
- art work sells for $14,999. Artists name and purchasers name stays secret. It doesn't go on Labour Annual return
- artwork sells for $29,999. Artists name appears in Labours Annual return but purchasers name stays secret.
- Artwork sells for $30,000. Artist names is given to Electoral Commission as a donor. Purchasers name stays secret and has an artwork worth $2,400. Labour are $30,000 richer and the artist gets nothing.
Good on Labour for supporting artists. It was after all Judith Tizard who introduced Pathways to Arts and Cultural Employment (PACE) scheme which was essentially the dole for art back in 2001.
Spoken like a true right-winger FP - I'm clueless, and tax accountants are fundamentally great people giving great service. I bet there are hardly any tax accountants who vote for progressive parties. They are the wedge striving to produce more inequality, more like.
Hardly anyone trades property within the 2 year timeline, they evade that area. And property traders also get to claim back the bank interest as a cost, plus any other expenses. Private homeowners do not. You know that, why try to be clever about it? We're not fooled.