Chloe Swarbrick - I like her style

[dibble]

Re: wealth tax, and because the greens are too up-themselves (or stoned) to ever explain the detail, anyone have any (eg overseas) experience of how these things might work in practice?
Obvious ones arent problematic but eg how would Iwi wealth and other communal groups with considerable wealth get taxed?

Are individuals expected to value everything inside the house every year? Cash? Trusts?

Can you include your granny to make your allowance $6m if she lives with you?
Etc etc

[FTG]

Re: wealth tax, and because the greens are too up-themselves (or stoned) to ever explain the detail, anyone have any (eg overseas) experience of how these things might work in practice?
Obvious ones arent problematic but eg how would Iwi wealth and other communal groups with considerable wealth get taxed?

Are individuals expected to value everything inside the house every year? Cash? Trusts?

Can you include your granny to make your allowance $6m if she lives with you?
Etc etc

The devil is certainly in the detail and Chloe's bunch seem to have NO appreciation of any of the detail. Hence such a daft policy.

You ask some pertinent questions dibble, for which we can guess that they have no succinct answers for.

Following is an excerpt from an oped by Dr Eric Crampton - Chief Economist at The Initiative. He too poses some questions that have Chloe & co running back into the Hills!


Just consider some of the numbers on what it would do for hurdle rates for wealthy investors in the top income tax bracket. Their next million in investment is hit by the wealth tax. What does that look like?

If inflation is 2%, then an investment must earn at least 2% in nominal returns just to stand still.

Income tax is due on the nominal returns, including inflation. So the investment has to earn at least 3.3% nominal interest, just to stand still and not lose value due to tax, inflation, and the tax on inflation.

Now add a wealth tax of 2.5% that applies to the starting investment, to earnings on it, and to inflation.

That investment must now earn a 7.6% return, just to stand still.

We can put it more concretely. Invest one million dollars (above the tax-exempt threshold) at a 7.6% return and you have $76,000 in nominal earnings. Income tax, at 39%, takes just under $30,000, leaving you with just over $46,000. A 2.5% wealth tax on the investment at the end of the year takes just over $26,000, leaving you with $20,000. And you needed that $20,000 just to keep up with inflation.

Those numbers get worse under the Green Party’s proposed 45% top income tax rate.

If you cannot find investments yielding at least 7.6%, you will be stuck watching the value of your assets slowly decline until you no longer have wealth above the threshold to be taxed.

Or, more likely, you will have fled the country along with your moveable assets before it could happen. Investing in New Zealand would be a lot safer if done from Australia or elsewhere.

It is hardly the only problem with the policy. Valuation across any comprehensive asset base gets very tricky, especially for unlisted companies and small businesses. Trusts would not have the same exclusion thresholds as other wealth holdings, but trusts can be complicated to unwind. New Zealand startups would have a harder time finding investors.

But requiring an investment to hit a 7.6% hurdle rate just to stand still seems sufficiently damning, all on its own.

[dibble]

The devil is certainly in the detail and Chloe's bunch seem to have NO appreciation of any of the detail. Hence such a daft policy.

You ask some pertinent questions dibble, for which we can guess that they have no succinct answers for.

Following is an excerpt from an oped by Dr Eric Crampton - Chief Economist at The Initiative. He too poses some questions that have Chloe & co running back into the Hills!


Just consider some of the numbers on what it would do for hurdle rates for wealthy investors in the top income tax bracket. Their next million in investment is hit by the wealth tax. What does that look like?

If inflation is 2%, then an investment must earn at least 2% in nominal returns just to stand still.

Income tax is due on the nominal returns, including inflation. So the investment has to earn at least 3.3% nominal interest, just to stand still and not lose value due to tax, inflation, and the tax on inflation.

Now add a wealth tax of 2.5% that applies to the starting investment, to earnings on it, and to inflation.

That investment must now earn a 7.6% return, just to stand still.

We can put it more concretely. Invest one million dollars (above the tax-exempt threshold) at a 7.6% return and you have $76,000 in nominal earnings. Income tax, at 39%, takes just under $30,000, leaving you with just over $46,000. A 2.5% wealth tax on the investment at the end of the year takes just over $26,000, leaving you with $20,000. And you needed that $20,000 just to keep up with inflation.

Those numbers get worse under the Green Party’s proposed 45% top income tax rate.

If you cannot find investments yielding at least 7.6%, you will be stuck watching the value of your assets slowly decline until you no longer have wealth above the threshold to be taxed.

Or, more likely, you will have fled the country along with your moveable assets before it could happen. Investing in New Zealand would be a lot safer if done from Australia or elsewhere.

It is hardly the only problem with the policy. Valuation across any comprehensive asset base gets very tricky, especially for unlisted companies and small businesses. Trusts would not have the same exclusion thresholds as other wealth holdings, but trusts can be complicated to unwind. New Zealand startups would have a harder time finding investors.

But requiring an investment to hit a 7.6% hurdle rate just to stand still seems sufficiently damning, all on its own.

Thanks.

Interesting angle, nothing like a bit of maths to illustrate a point.

Wish they would stick to the environment, where they might do a bit of good.
If memory serves correctly they even had a view on money printing in about 2008.

[Blue Skies]

Re: wealth tax, and because the greens are too up-themselves (or stoned) to ever explain the detail, anyone have any (eg overseas) experience of how these things might work in practice?
Obvious ones arent problematic but eg how would Iwi wealth and other communal groups with considerable wealth get taxed?

Are individuals expected to value everything inside the house every year? Cash? Trusts?

Can you include your granny to make your allowance $6m if she lives with you?
Etc etc

Not going to happen, govt's tax working group advised against it as too difficult to implement plus has economically damaging consequences.
e.g., a lot of NZ'ers wealth is tied up in small businesses which are extremely difficult to accurately value until sold. Too many variables.
secondly, business owners may be forced to sell off parts of their business at inopportune times to pay the wealth tax, which is economically damaging for the country.

[Getty]

Not going to happen, govt's tax working group advised against it as too difficult to implement plus has economically damaging consequences.
e.g., a lot of NZ'ers wealth is tied up in small businesses which are extremely difficult to accurately value until sold. Too many variables.
secondly, business owners may be forced to sell off parts of their business at inopportune times to pay the wealth tax, which is economically damaging for the country.

Do you think the Envy Greens give a shirt about that BS?

As long as they are taking money off the productive sector to hand out to the parasites to squander, they feel justified.

Just like slave Labour really!

[Bill Smith]

Do you think the Envy Greens give a shirt about that BS?

As long as they are taking money off the productive sector to hand out to the parasites to squander, they feel justified.

Just like slave Labour really!

Vote labour. Get greens and maori party for free. Sounds like a Suzanne Paul ad!

[Getty]

Vote labour. Get greens and maori party for free. Sounds like a Suzanne Paul ad!

Second prize would be 2 for 1!

[nztx]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...O7RJZAD6JVVXQ/

Election 2023: Green Party wants rent increases limited to 3pc a year


Auckland Rates increase 11% like most everywhere else not far behind .. where have these dumb green pixies been hiding ?

[Balance]

What happens when a Green politician tastes power.

Notice how she cannot help but lie (as usual with the Greens) when confronted with her misdeeds?

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-z...ut-paying.html

Lomas didn't serve the pair but said the server who did told him at one point Whanau asked them "Do you know who I am?"

"The server recognised her but wasn't entirely sure so he was just kinda like, 'ah nah I'm not too sure who you are', and she was like 'I'm the mayor of Wellington,'" Lomas said.

"She just kept saying stuff like that."

[Balance]

Made the news too across the Tasman and note that she cannot be in the wrong as she is the freaking mayor of Wellington?

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fo...1e43e66d708531

“She concluded that she had “no regrets” about anything but she would be conscious about people recording her in the future.”