Labour / NZ First Government

[minimoke]

FP's income tax obligation is the same as when National were in power.

No. Under National FP's tax obligations reduced, taking him a bit further out of poverdy and perhaps able to afford his winter heating bill. Under Labour Jacinda put his tax obligation back up so he has to pay more thus increasing his risk of death due to dire winter conditions but then she generously gave him a hand out being an old person. Young people, and those with families in poverdy remain poor.

[fungus pudding]

FP's income tax obligation is the same as when National were in power. National only offered that lower tax bribe to try and stay in power, and it wouldn't happen until 1st April 2018. Considering they'd already dropped the tax rate when they were in, and that had scuttled the tax take for a few years, it was a badly conceived idea anyway. National managed to post small budget surpluses in their last quarters, but judging from the capital spend catchup now needed for Crown infrastructure everywhere, they weren't real surpluses.

MM is correct. My tax obligations will rise on 1-4-18

[BlackPeter]

FP's income tax obligation is the same as when National were in power. National only offered that lower tax bribe to try and stay in power, and it wouldn't happen until 1st April 2018. Considering they'd already dropped the tax rate when they were in, and that had scuttled the tax take for a few years, it was a badly conceived idea anyway. National managed to post small budget surpluses in their last quarters, but judging from the capital spend catchup now needed for Crown infrastructure everywhere, they weren't real surpluses.

Maybe the current crown-nanny should not have wasted all the dollars they steal from the taxpayer on election bribes? Free university year for everybody, more money for student allowance, free fag and booze money in winter for anybody receiving a benefit. Huge cost, little return. If your lot would have kept this money for essential spending it would be now so much easier to pay for infrastructure - wouldn't it?

[elZorro]

MM is correct. My tax obligations will rise on 1-4-18

Compared with what they are now, or the fictional or unfulfilled National promise? Be clear.

[elZorro]

Maybe the current crown-nanny should not have wasted all the dollars they steal from the taxpayer on election bribes? Free university year for everybody, more money for student allowance, free fag and booze money in winter for anybody receiving a benefit. Huge cost, little return. If your lot would have kept this money for essential spending it would be now so much easier to pay for infrastructure - wouldn't it?

There are obvious reasons for these subsidies. Go back a generation and we all had free tertiary education pretty much. There have been lots of stories about pensioners having to turn off heaters because they couldn't afford their power bills in winter. That would be because rent costs have gone up, and they can't move from (possibly legally uninsulated) flats. Baby boomers like me have had it good for the last 10 years, now it's time for a bit of redress.

I'm sure the tax base will improve under Labour, I don't mind if I'm part of it.

[777]

FP's income tax obligation is the same as when National were in power. National only offered that lower tax bribe to try and stay in power, and it wouldn't happen until 1st April 2018. Considering they'd already dropped the tax rate when they were in, and that had scuttled the tax take for a few years, it was a badly conceived idea anyway. National managed to post small budget surpluses in their last quarters, but judging from the capital spend catchup now needed for Crown infrastructure everywhere, they weren't real surpluses.

Get it right eZ.

The tax reductions by National were the balance for the GST increase. The lower paid were not worse off as the tax reduction more than covered the increase in GST.

The proposed drop in income tax from this Sunday would have benefitted all the the lower income workers. To call it a bribe is rubbish.

[fungus pudding]

Compared with what they are now, or the fictional or unfulfilled National promise? Be clear.

Compared with now.

[elZorro]

Get it right eZ.

The tax reductions by National were the balance for the GST increase. The lower paid were not worse off as the tax reduction more than covered the increase in GST.

The proposed drop in income tax from this Sunday would have benefitted all the the lower income workers. To call it a bribe is rubbish.

The GST increase affected those who spend all their income, the most. Higher income people would save a bigger portion and so not pay proportionately as much. The income tax reductions also favoured the well off, more weighted to big incomes. National deliberately shifted income tax back towards the lower income areas, regressively.

[fungus pudding]

The GST increase affected those who spend all their income, the most. Higher income people would save a bigger portion and so not pay proportionately as much. The income tax reductions also favoured the well off, more weighted to big incomes. National deliberately shifted income tax back towards the lower income areas, regressively.

You are suffering from self-inflicted brain washing eZ.

[artemis]

The GST increase affected those who spend all their income, the most. Higher income people would save a bigger portion and so not pay proportionately as much. The income tax reductions also favoured the well off, more weighted to big incomes. National deliberately shifted income tax back towards the lower income areas, regressively.

No GST on rent or mortgage payments. Which benefits lower income households disproportionately.