National - FFS!

[BlackPeter]

GST needs it's own special tax return it's so complicated. I imagine a CGT would be included in a standard income tax return, very simple which is why every country has it.

Though maybe inflation needs to be accounted for in some way.

Inflation is just the beginning. Imagine you own a house which you bought 10 years ago for $500k and is now worth $1 million.

You change jobs and need to move, sell your house, pay say $100k CGT (for the 500k you made) and have now only $900k to replace your $1 million house. You have to downgrade for your next house. How is this fair compared to e.g. your neighbour who can live in his $1 m house without paying taxes who prefers e.g. to collect the doll instead of moving and paying CGT?

You buy shares and the company you bought crashes. Can you deduct this loss from your capital gains in your house? Over which time? What if you don't want to sell your house but have this capital loss in shares? How would it be fair that you have to pay taxes for capital gains but any losses are all yours?

You sell the house below market value to a relative or friend or your trust or your company ... can you deduct your losses from your tax obligation?

You sell your house to a company you own ... and sell then shares in this company. How is CGT calculated? Do you see a potential for a loophole?

You buy the house above market value ... and make a loss when you sell - s. above. What if you received an undocumented kick back when buying the house?

The administration of any CGT would be an expensive nightmare, it always would be unfair to some and you could drive trucks through the loopholes. Official property values might even drop (have a look e.g. at Italy), but it would be pretty difficult to buy any property at he official price.

[Balance]

Would that be the Red Zone - that act from Brownlee that the court finally ruled illegal (paying only half the value).
Much like you felt that the Govt had an obligation to business because they forced them to close (with the lockdowns) if you force someone from their land you have an obligation to them - insured or not. Or maybe that only applies to Labour govts?

They chose to be UNINSURED - whose fault is that? The taxpayer?

[dobby41]

They chose to be UNINSURED - whose fault is that? The taxpayer?

They didn't choose to have the land that their house was on (irrespective of its individual merits) declared a no go.
The Appeals court agreed with them - you know, the law. (And in this case the court didn't say there was justification for the Govt to get the law wrong because they were in a hurry on a very important matter - they had truck loads of time to get it right.)
Try thinking a bit rather than be blinded by devotion of one side and hate for the other.

[Bjauck]

Inflation is just the beginning. Imagine you own a house which you bought 10 years ago for $500k and is now worth $1 million.

You change jobs and need to move, sell your house, pay say $100k CGT (for the 500k you made) and have now only $900k to replace your $1 million house. You have to downgrade for your next house. How is this fair compared to e.g. your neighbour who can live in his $1 m house without paying taxes who prefers e.g. to collect the doll instead of moving and paying CGT?

You buy shares and the company you bought crashes. Can you deduct this loss from your capital gains in your house? Over which time?....

Yes a complex area. No doubt there would schemes to reduce exposure to a CGT just as there are to reduce exposure to the current taxes.

Perhaps there could be a deferred exposure to a CGT so that there would be a running net amount carried forward from one year to the next, and which would only become payable when an asset was disposed of and not replaced. Ultimately the balance would solidify and become payable on death or death of the spouse. This would then become a quasi death tax levied on the estate. This would taken into account capital losses provided they did not exceed gains over the lifetime.

[fungus pudding]

Yes a complex area. No doubt there would schemes to reduce exposure to a CGT just as there are to reduce exposure to the current taxes.

Perhaps there could be a deferred exposure to a CGT so that there would be a running net amount carried forward from one year to the next, and which would only become payable when an asset was disposed of and not replaced. Ultimately the balance would solidify and become payable on death or death of the spouse. This would then become a quasi death tax levied on the estate. This would taken into account capital losses provided they did not exceed gains over the lifetime.

Yes. A fair scheme would definitely have a repatriation clause with a fair time limit, say two years, so that the CGT becomes an exit tax.

[fungus pudding]

Does this seem simple:

GST guide (48 pages) +
GST adjustments (20 pages)

https://www.classic.ird.govt.nz/reso...ir375-2019.pdf
https://www.ird.govt.nz/gst/gst-adjustments

GST needs it's own special tax return it's so complicated. I imagine a CGT would be included in a standard income tax return, very simple which is why every country has it.

Though maybe inflation needs to be accounted for in some way.

Nonsense. GST, especially NZ style, is simple. Any two year old could file a GST return. CGT on the other hand, is complex, particularly when sorting capital work from maintenance.

[blackcap]

Nonsense. GST, especially NZ style, is simple. Any two year old could file a GST return. CGT on the other hand, is complex, particularly when sorting capital work from maintenance.

I second that. Have just been reading the GST provisions in the Master Tax Guide. About 100 pages. But for 99% of tax payers, GST is very simple. Add up receipts, take away expenses and do the GST adjustment. The form is very simple to fill out.
CGT will Just help the lawyers and accountants. Not required.

[Panda-NZ-]

I second that. Have just been reading the GST provisions in the Master Tax Guide. About 100 pages. But for 99% of tax payers, GST is very simple. Add up receipts, take away expenses and do the GST adjustment. The form is very simple to fill out.
CGT will Just help the lawyers and accountants. Not required.

Plus all the receipts you often have to keep, gst numbers on an invoice, then having to file your "GST return" every two months (sometimes with IR372 attached plus spare "workings" papers) rather than once annually. It's a minefield. ^^

[fungus pudding]

Plus all the receipts you often have to keep, gst numbers on an invoice, then having to file your "GST return" every two months (sometimes with IR372 attached plus spare "workings" papers) rather than once annually. It's a minefield.

Only if you are thick. It's a simple matter of keeping a piece of paper with + and - columns; adding up every 2 or 6 months, and entering totals online. Chuck all your receipts in an envelope - write the period dates on it and throw it under your bed for safe keeping. (or scan them if there's no room under your bed) Easily done in minutes. If you find that hard then any other tax would be impossible for you to comprehend. Obviously you have never filed a GST return or you wouldn't have such an abysmal understanding of the process.

[Blue Skies]

Just to add a few important differences which immediately come to mind, from the govt's perspective between CGT & GST.

The govt could be waiting many years for any significant gain in tax revenue from a CGT when it needs it now, and with loop holes and capital loss write offs, not much more than a wild guess at exactly how much revenue it will produce & when. It would also add substantial costs (to the IRD) to calculate & collect a CGT esp as complicated calculations covering many years were regularly bogged down in disputes, they might lose as much as 20% of the revenue in costs.

On the other hand, an increase in GST produces an immediate increase in tax revenue from day 1, has virtually no cost to the govt to collect & administer so they gain 100% of the tax revenue, is easily adjustable and is difficult to escape.