Labour / NZ First Government

[artemis]

..... with private dwellings, the owner cannot offset property costs and interest against income while they own the asset, whereas the rentier can.....

Not so. If owners is receiving income from their owner occupied property they can offset related costs aginst that and other income (depending on the tax structure). Consider those who work from home and have a home office, for example.

Same as landlords, just the proportion that may differ.

[artemis]

I think out system of applying income tax based on intent is quite suffficient without having separate systems and tax rates.
If there is a fault, it is simply that IRD do not seem to enforce their own rules very often.
CGT can be a monster. Careful design is essential.

IRD have a large and increasing compliance team and budget, and take in a lot more tax than the programme costs. Last I saw about $8 for every $1 spent.

[fungus pudding]

IRD have a large and increasing compliance team and budget, and take in a lot more tax than the programme costs. Last I saw about $8 for every $1 spent.

True. They are giving property transactions much more attention than they used to.

[elZorro]

You are missing one of the fundamentals of being a land lord. What you should be aiming for is a rent that exceeds expenses (interest costs, maintenance depreciation etc) with a view to making a profit on with the tax man will grab a portion. So lets just say, for simplicity, that a landlord breaks even. He is still up for "capital gains" particularly if he falls under the bright line test. Thus he is at a disadvantage compared to the private home owner.

Incidentally I see both the land lord and home owner as productive users of capital in that they are both putting a roof over someones head.

The poor rentier breaks even and then can't understand why the taxman should have a portion of their profit on the sale of the asset? They only broke even because interest clobbered most of the income in that situation, but think about the homeowner who swapped rental costs for interest, but are paying all costs out of their normal tax-paid income. Their situation isn't that much different from renting, much riskier, except maybe they'll get a capital gain so it's not as painful in the end. But the rentier goes into the situation looking at the capital gain without risking too much, and certainly not having to pay for it. The tenant pays the interest and all costs generally.

While being a rentier could be viewed as a productive user of capital, it has to be at the low end of the scale. How many businesses that employ people could you buy with about $1mill of capital? One person could buy quite a few. The bank wouldn't lend on them at 4% though.

[elZorro]

Not so. If owners is receiving income from their owner occupied property they can offset related costs aginst that and other income (depending on the tax structure). Consider those who work from home and have a home office, for example.

Same as landlords, just the proportion that may differ.

Yes, probably not well known, but a good way to run a small business, or a tidy business, with low overheads. But I was talking about normal homeowners who don't think about what else they could be doing in their spare time, or are involved in a business operation.

[fungus pudding]

Yes, probably not well known, but a good way to run a small business, or a tidy business, with low overheads. But I was talking about normal homeowners who don't think about what else they could be doing in their spare time, or are involved in a business operation.

Landlords are quite normal homeowners. They pay the outgoings on their own dwelling out of taxable income.

[iceman]

Reading various articles on the big change coming to education policies, I am concerned. We are now going to move away from main focus on numeracy and literacy to whatever the Unions tell Hipkins to do. It is clear that the Unions are getting their dicvdend from supporting Labour with this backwards step to the 70s.
The Government has also announced terminating ALL Charter schools, contrarcy to assurances given by Arderm Hipkins and Davis before and after the election. I suspect there will be many people very upset about this and they may well fight back. One of the Ministers in the Government has been a firm supporter of Charter schools. It will be interesting if Willie Jackson, Kelvin Davis and NZ First support this mad legislation.

I suggest this will be a bigger fight than the Government expects !

[fungus pudding]

Reading various articles on the big change coming to education policies, I am concerned. We are now going to move away from main focus on numeracy and literacy to whatever the Unions tell Hipkins to do. It is clear that the Unions are getting their dicvdend from supporting Labour with this backwards step to the 70s.
The Government has also announced terminating ALL Charter schools, contrarcy to assurances given by Arderm Hipkins and Davis before and after the election. I suspect there will be many people very upset about this and they may well fight back. One of the Ministers in the Government has been a firm supporter of Charter schools. It will be interesting if Willie Jackson, Kelvin Davis and NZ First support this mad legislation.

I suggest this will be a bigger fight than the Government expects !

I certainly hope it is. Abandoning charter schools and dropping the 90 day work trial period show the silly side of socialism.

[minimoke]

I certainly hope it is. Abandoning charter schools and dropping the 90 day work trial period show the silly side of socialism.

add to that the Triangular Employment Relationship bill which make employers responsible for contractor workers.

Certainly doing all they can to use union definitions of worker protections, but every day giving employers new reasons not to employ. Better to out source off shore or buy equipment.

I suspect Willie Jackson is a tiger who cant change his stripes and hes a vile socialist from way back. That he is the best labour have for Employment Minster is a worry - even putting aside his guaranteed spot on the list to get him to shake off the dust of obsolescence that had settled on him over the past decade.

[artemis]

Reading various articles on the big change coming to education policies, I am concerned. We are now going to move away from main focus on numeracy and literacy to whatever the Unions tell Hipkins to do. It is clear that the Unions are getting their dicvdend from supporting Labour with this backwards step to the 70s.
The Government has also announced terminating ALL Charter schools, contrarcy to assurances given by Arderm Hipkins and Davis before and after the election. I suspect there will be many people very upset about this and they may well fight back. One of the Ministers in the Government has been a firm supporter of Charter schools. It will be interesting if Willie Jackson, Kelvin Davis and NZ First support this mad legislation.

I suggest this will be a bigger fight than the Government expects !

Every charter school interview I've heard in the past couple of weeks includes the term 'ideological' repeatedly. As if that's a bad thing, except for the ideology the government and unions agree with of course.

I also think this will be a bigger fight than the government expects but meantime Mr Hipkins is determined, and the wiggle room is decreasing. Though not gone quite yet.

The fight, I think, will not be pitchforks in the street but a quiet anger rising in those impacted. And their friends and relations. And given the demographic of charter schools it is probable that many of those families will be among the 'missing million' but will be turning out to vote next time. Potentially a lot of voters.

If the schools are permitted to become 'special character' then the transition back to the current model may not be too difficult under a different government. Of course by then the passionate folk who set them up in the first place will be long gone.