-
18-10-2021, 01:59 PM
#2451
-
18-10-2021, 03:18 PM
#2452
 Originally Posted by arekaywhy
Miss-read your post it seems, my bad.
I do however think that the state should be a small entity, enforcing property rights, sure, but not infiltrating every facet of life.
For tax, I think you are right, it should be far simpler, with a flat tax, no exception, and some form of income exemption to a limit.
Not possible to fulfill that order. An income exemption, whether a dollar limit or a percentage limit, immediately stops it being a flat tax.
But keep thinking along those lines.
Last edited by fungus pudding; 18-10-2021 at 03:21 PM.
-
18-10-2021, 04:13 PM
#2453
Originally Posted by dobby41
If I read that chart correctly it looks a lot like intergenerational theft. Not only that but the next generation will pick up the tab for their national super and increased health costs.
-
18-10-2021, 04:33 PM
#2454
Originally Posted by Aaron
If I read that chart correctly it looks a lot like intergenerational theft. Not only that but the next generation will pick up the tab for their national super and increased health costs.
It looks that way, doesn't it.
As they say - the gap is probably a lot bigger now.
-
18-10-2021, 05:06 PM
#2455
Originally Posted by arekaywhy
Miss-read your post it seems, my bad.
I do however think that the state should be a small entity, enforcing property rights, sure, but not infiltrating every facet of life.
For tax, I think you are right, it should be far simpler, with a flat tax, no exception, and some form of income exemption to a limit.
I support a flat tax too. A flat tax on all gains, whether income or capital gains, with an annual tax free allowance.
I also think that NZ should have a pension scheme, which is tax deductible (up to a certain amount of contribution each year) and does not incur annual tax until distributions are made from it after retirement.
With respect to the state. It should enforce property rights, but it should also ensure that the property which has been afforded protection by the state (or society)be accumulated fairly or in a manner acceptable to society or“the state”. So product and environmental regulation is needed, along with marketing and employment standards.
Last edited by Bjauck; 18-10-2021 at 05:33 PM.
-
18-10-2021, 05:18 PM
#2456
Originally Posted by dobby41
It looks that way, doesn't it.
As they say - the gap is probably a lot bigger now.
It is interesting how in 2018 wealth continues to increase until the age of about 75. Whereas in 2001 it started to decrease from the age of about 58 onwards.
So there will be more wealthier deceased estates or family trusts.
I guess back in the day earning income was relatively more important so that when someone retired, and had less income, their wealth would drop too. Whereas today wealth creation (and wealth maintenance in retirement) is much more reliant on the capital gains from exisiting assets (which to a great extent means residential property ownership in NZ).
Last edited by Bjauck; 18-10-2021 at 05:20 PM.
-
18-10-2021, 06:03 PM
#2457
Originally Posted by Bjauck
I support a flat tax too. A flat tax on all gains, whether income or capital gains, with an annual tax free allowance.
As pointed out earlier, an annual tax free allowance prevents a flat tax. You cannot have both - impossible.
-
19-10-2021, 08:35 AM
#2458
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
As pointed out earlier, an annual tax free allowance prevents a flat tax. You cannot have both - impossible.
No, every amount over the threshold would be taxed at a flat rate.
Especially important if you have no tax free threshold with respect to income/gains, we would need to look at GST as well. A continued flat tax regime on outgoings would need to be extended. So GST should be extended to asset purchases such as real estate and share purchases ( a stamp duty). To determine if you have an assessable capital gain, you could deduct the flat rate Stamp duty on the outlay in determining any gain.
Last edited by Bjauck; 19-10-2021 at 09:03 AM.
-
19-10-2021, 08:49 AM
#2459
Originally Posted by Bjauck
No, every amount over the threshold is taxed at a flat rate.
Otherwise if you had no tax free threshold, you would need either to do away with GST, or keep GST and introduce stamp duty at the same rate as GST on asset purchases such as real estate and share purchases.
Yes, but that produces a progressive tax. Compare someone on 200k a year with the first 10k exempt with someone on 15k a year with the first 10k exempt - you work it out, but you will find they pay vastly different percentages. IOW progressive - not flat, but you knew that. You just forgot.
I think a tax free threshold is possibly the best solution for the problems that any tax proposal has. I'm not necessarily against it. I am simply against using the misnomer 'flat-tax' when it is no-such-thing.
-
19-10-2021, 09:26 AM
#2460
Banned
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
Yes, but that produces a progressive tax. Compare someone on 200k a year with the first 10k exempt with someone on 15k a year with the first 10k exempt - you work it out, but you will find they pay vastly different percentages. IOW progressive - not flat, but you knew that. You just forgot.
I think a tax free threshold is possibly the best solution for the problems that any tax proposal has. I'm not necessarily against it. I am simply against using the misnomer 'flat-tax' when it is no-such-thing.
Ok, I'll change it to single tax rate then, with tax free threshold, that is essentially what I think will be best for society, and the most fair way of robbing people at gunpoint
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks