NZ 1st homebuyers are ScReWeD...

[fungus pudding]

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

Flat tax with a starting threshold is known as 'marginal flat tax'.
Scroll down a bit on this page. (or see 1.2 in index)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax

[Bjauck]

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.

if you look at the threshold as the minimum current non-discretionary cost for a human to exist in current acceptable conditions, then if you tax that you are in effect taxing an expense (certainly with respect to income from personal effort). So it becomes regressive…or regressive double taxing when you take into account GST as well.

[fungus pudding]

if you look at the threshold as the minimum current non-discretionary cost for a human to exist in current acceptable conditions, then if you tax that you are in effect taxing an expense. So it becomes regressive…or double taxing when you take into account GST as well.

Precisely why it shouldn't be called a flat tax. However the 'marginal flat tax' is a fair description. GST is a consumption tax, unaffected by income tax so doesn't come into it. Fair enough to have two separate tax names and the two separate taxes. If you want to take a slice of your income and call it an expense, you're more than welcome - be my guest.

[TeslaGod]

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.

Yes but the problem with your socialist paradise of taxing everything that moves you invision, a straight forward answer, and it's happening in California and New York.

Those with the wealth and means myself included would simply move to Australia, Texas, Florida.

Leaving behind those to clean up the mess they wished for.

It's nothing for me to sell everything and park it in Australia's economy.

Yes Oz has taxes but like here there are ways around it.

Attached is an excellent scientific analysis of targeted tax group's and it's social outcomes.


Screenshot_2021-10-19-10-34-59-222_com.twitter.android.jpg

[dobby41]

Those with the wealth and means myself included would simply move to Australia, Texas, Florida.

Would that be a bad thing - if you left?
Just asking.
You pay no tax, you consume resources paid for by the taxpayer.
You seem to be of negative benefit to NZ as a whole.

[TeslaGod]

Would that be a bad thing - if you left?
Just asking.
You pay no tax, you consume resources paid for by the taxpayer.
You seem to be of negative benefit to NZ as a whole.

I house the homeless, welfare dependants, mentally disabled, drug addicts and donate more to charities than you likely earn a year.

So yes ..I would be missed.

[Bjauck]

Precisely why it shouldn't be called a flat tax. However the 'marginal flat tax' is a fair description. GST is a consumption tax, unaffected by income tax so doesn't come into it. Fair enough to have two separate tax names and the two separate taxes. If you want to take a slice of your income and call it an expense, you're more than welcome - be my guest.

It makes no sense to ignore the double taxing of the cost of obtaining that income - namely the cost involved in staying live by eating and providing shelter - to justify the absence of tax free threshold. It would be regressive so to ignore.

[LEMON]

Since this is 1st homebuyers, do people in the know here think that house prices will keep rising?

I read somewhere that one prediction is 2million for the average home in the coming years Auckland/Wellington. Is this even possible?

I will go look for the link

[fungus pudding]

Since this is 1st homebuyers, do people in the know here think that house prices will keep rising?

I read somewhere that one prediction is 2million for the average home in the coming years? Is this even possible?

I will go look for the link

Of course it's possible. Whether it's likely in our life times is a more interesting question.
i'd say it depends on what you mean by 'the coming years'. Given long enough it's all but guaranteed, but getting there will be a roller coaster ride.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUldGc06S3U

[artemis]

Since this is 1st homebuyers, do people in the know here think that house prices will keep rising?

I read somewhere that one prediction is 2million for the average home in the coming years Auckland/Wellington. Is this even possible?

I will go look for the link

Supply and Demand. A bit simplistic but true. A bit less simplistic would mean taking into account population changes, income changes, cost of supplies and money (interest), government intervention, fudge factors - and the interactions between them - for starters. The net of which is - it depends!

For fun, take a million dollars and add say 8% / year. Doesn't take long to double it.