ACT's David Seymour - i like his style.

[Baa_Baa]

As I understand it & confirmed here, & I've also remember hearing this from other sources, Estate duties or Death Duties as we used to call them were set to zero in 1993 while Gift Duty was abolished in 2011.
Now you or writers can say or argue setting the amount to zero is the same thing as abolishing them.
But the difference is a govt could decide to reset the figure without having to re-establish the legislation around Estate Duties, whereas there govt would need to re-write & pass the legislation to re-establish Gift Duties.

If you read they were 'abolished', check what the writer is really saying is set to zero so consequently Estate Duties don't exist in NZ (at the moment)

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.


https://theconversation.com/forget-a...-wealth-143604

That article, for some reason uses the expression 'reduced to zero', which could imply that the Act remains in force. Poor choice of words, as the Act was repealed by the Estate Duty Abolition Act 1993.

"However, the rate of estate duty was reduced to zero in 1993 and gift duty was scrapped in 2011. According to tax law specialist Michael Littlewood:"

Interesting that if you had actually read the paper by Michael Littlewood, not only does he not say estate duties 'reduced to zero', in his very first sentence of the Introduction, he says "This article traces the rise and fall of death duties and gift duty in New Zealand from 1866 (when death duties were first introduced) until 2011 (when gift duty, the last remnant of the death duties system, was abolished)"

Estate and Gift Duties Act 1968 - note Estate Duty repealed.

Estate Duty Abolition Act 1993

"Estate duty abolished in respect of deaths occurring on or after 17 December 1992

• No estate duty shall be payable under the Estate and Gift Duties Act 1968 in respect of the estate of any person who dies on or after 17 December 1992.
  

[FTG]

Just in case you have the capacity for understanding I will try one more time and you can point out where I am going wrong. In which case I will eat a big chunk of humble pie and apologies to you for all the mean things I just said.

The ACT income tax policy is a flatter system with a 17.5% rate to $70,000 and 28% over $70,000.

The Low and Middle Income Tax Offset (LMITO) which you so helpfully pasted in your post is an attempt to reduce the additional income tax burden ACT intends to impose on the unaspirational.

Anyone earning between $12,000 and $48,000 (includes pensioners and minimum wage workers) gets an $800.00 LMITO offset.

Under the current scheme they pay 10.5% on the first $14,000 that equals $1,470 tax to pay.

Under ACT the first $14,000 is at 17.5% or $2,450 but ACT will provide an LMITO of $800 to reduce the additional tax from $980.00 (2,450-1,470) to only $180.00 extra in tax.

So everyone earning between $12k to $48k will be paying $180.00 extra in income tax.

Read my earlier posts and get a better understanding of what you are talking about as it will help the discussion if you not talking a load of cr*p.

Perhaps you can also come back and explain how this is everyone paying less tax.

I would suggest you remain a quiet observer until you have something worthwhile to say.

Dear oh dear Aaron, you are behaving like a big bad Blowhard Bully-Boy. That's a lot of bluster for a self-confessed lazy ignoramus. Settle settle...please.

Believe it or not, I did elect to endure the pain of reading your previous ramblings/"workings". And that was despite you so clearly being well stuck in the weeds, thrashing around around like a baby throwing a tantrum in the bath.

Now that was a comedy!

Even though you continue to misunderstand (intentionally?.. or is it that ignoramus DNA rearing it's ugly head yet again?) I will give you ONE more chance to redeem at least SOME of your credibility
...And please don't eat that BIG chunk of Humble Pie, that you cruelly tease us with, on my account. Instead dedicate it to the many, many hard & smart working kiwi's, across multiple income & wealth tiers, to whom we should all be eternally grateful, for assisting holding this country together economically.

Yes, you have correctly pointed to the ACT party's policy of ustilising a LMITO to reduce the burden of a tax % increase to earner's income up to the current $14K income threshold.

However, that is not the full extent of their tax policy suite. There are other measures as well, and perhaps your 'Leftie confirmation biases' precluded you from seeing, learning & understanding those policies?

So, with respect, search around under things like "Carbon Tax Refund", Personal Carbon Tax Refund" (through the ETS - up to nearly $250), etc, etc.

Enjoy!

"First seek to understand, THEN be understood"

[Aaron]

Dear oh dear Aaron, you are behaving like a big bad Blowhard Bully-Boy. That's a lot of bluster for a self-confessed lazy ignoramus. Settle settle...please.

Believe it or not, I did elect to endure the pain of reading your previous ramblings/"workings". And that was despite you so clearly being well stuck in the weeds, thrashing around around like a baby throwing a tantrum in the bath.

Now that was a comedy!

Even though you continue to misunderstand (intentionally?.. or is it that ignoramus DNA rearing it's ugly head yet again?) I will give you ONE more chance to redeem at least SOME of your credibility
...And please don't eat that BIG chunk of Humble Pie, that you cruelly tease us with, on my account. Instead dedicate it to the many, many hard & smart working kiwi's, across multiple income & wealth tiers, to whom we should all be eternally grateful, for assisting holding this country together economically.

Yes, you have correctly pointed to the ACT party's policy of ustilising a LMITO to reduce the burden of a tax % increase to earner's income up to the current $14K income threshold.

However, that is not the full extent of their tax policy suite. There are other measures as well, and perhaps your 'Leftie confirmation biases' precluded you from seeing, learning & understanding those policies?

So, with respect, search around under things like "Carbon Tax Refund", Personal Carbon Tax Refund" (through the ETS - up to nearly $250), etc, etc.

Enjoy!

"First seek to understand, THEN be understood"

Plenty of Bluff and Bluster in your posts. I will wait for the actual figures though, if you can manage it.

Can't comment on the carbon credit hand out proposal, I don't like to discuss things I don't understand. But if I understand the carbon credit scheme correctly, the nz taxpayer(govt) creates and buys carbon credits off people planting forests so that they can sell them to manufacturers who put carbon into the atmosphere. Taxpayers paying people to plant forests to save the planet may have some merit except covering NZ in radiata pine so the northern hemisphere can keep consuming and pumping out the CO2, on the face of it does not seem to benefit NZ or the planet that much.

At least we can agree ACT will look to cut wasteful spending if in govt. Unbelievable that someone earning over $70,000 can still have their hand out for some welfare. Should be some low hanging fruit for David to cut wasteful spending.

Like you say demoralising for many very good people in our society. Enough is enough!

[Daytr]

Death Duties as they are commonly known, and worryingly we already do have them in legislation, its just that they are set at zero so would be very simple for any govt to change that figure. They wouldn't have to go through the process of establishing them in law.
The problem is at least twofold, the wealthy are able to protect that wealth for future generations via Trusts so they tend to unfairly hit the less wealthy, and secondly again they can have a damaging impact for the countries economy when assets like farms or businesses have to be split up & parts sold off to pay for the Death Duties or even force the sale of family homes.

A CGT seems much fairer & less damaging.


Aside from this other countries like Australia, UK, Sweden have a much higher top tax rate than we do.

Australia 45%
England 45%
Scotland 47%
Sweden 52%

NZ 35%

And ACT wants ours to drop to 28%
No wonder ACT is receiving massive election donations from High Wealth families & individuals !

The Trusts issue is easily solved.
Inheritance tax against a farm or business would need to be nuanced, probably inflation adjusted and the remaining capital gain if any to be taxed at a pro-rata rate of the life of the business.

[causecelebre]

Sorry if this is a repost. Seymour absolutely owns Simon Shepard on Nation, Newhub https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThE...hannel=Newshub

[fungus pudding]

Sorry if this is a repost. Seymour absolutely owns Simon Shepard on Nation, Newhub https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThE...hannel=Newshub

Every now and then parliament come up with a sharp cookie with a sharp brain. A'la - Seymour.

[Daytr]

Every now and then parliament come up with a sharp cookie with a sharp brain. A'la - Seymour.

Yep, shame he couldn't put it to good use and for the benefit of all NZ, not just the already wealthy or privileged.

[BDL]

Yep, shame he couldn't put it to good use and for the benefit of all NZ, not just the already wealthy or privileged.

He will, just wait and see, and it will be for ALL New Zealanders, not just a few woke with their hands out.

I think the wealthy and so called "privileged" (bit of envy there Daytr?) can look after themselves.

[Daytr]

He will, just wait and see, and it will be for ALL New Zealanders, not just a few woke with their hands out.

I think the wealthy and so called "privileged" (bit of envy there Daytr?) can look after themselves.

LOL! Why would I be envious?
I will benefit from the likes of Seymour, but as you said they / we can look after themselves so don't need support from ACT.
Unlike ACT supporters I also think minimum wage workers shouldn't have barriers to accessing health including dentistry and they should be able to have an affordable home.
These aspects are only going to get worse under NACT.

[BDL]

Unlike ACT supporters I also think minimum wage workers shouldn't have barriers to accessing health including dentistry and they should be able to have an affordable home.
These aspects are only going to get worse under NACT.

But I already have barriers to access healthcare as I am Pakeha, so get pushed down the list..... Thats happened under Labour.