Capital Gains Tax

[fungus pudding]

Speaking of idiotic statements. I wonder how much everyone on this site would donate to the govt coffers if it was optional.

It is optional now. Give it a go.

[Zaphod]

The same can be said for those self interested people who would like gst to rise because they dont pay it (property investors).

To clarify, property investors do pay GST. There are however a few situations where GST is zero rated on specific transactions for residential property. I get the point you're making though.

[blackcap]

Speaking of idiotic statements. I wonder how much everyone on this site would donate to the govt coffers if it was optional.

Out of interest does anyone add an additional 5%-10% when paying their tax? (other than possibly blackcap)

It's not idiotic at all. If you feel that you want to contribute more because you can afford it, or because you earn too much, there is nothing stopping you at all.

[Zaphod]

Speaking of idiotic statements. I wonder how much everyone on this site would donate to the govt coffers if it was optional.

Out of interest does anyone add an additional 5%-10% when paying their tax? (other than possibly blackcap)

We have given regular support to the local health board redevelopment project, donated infrastructure to the council parks division, etc. That's a much more efficient method than doing so via tax, but obviously Stephen prefers compulsion amongst his peers.

[fungus pudding]

The same can be said for those self interested people who would like gst to rise because they dont pay it (property investors).

Where did you get that idea? Residential property is subject to GST, as is rent, and only in rare circumstances will a landlord be gst registered for their residential property activity Everyone pays GST on any personal purchase of goods and/or services. Those few who are registered for their residential activity will pay gst on the eventual sale price, and of course lose out on the rent - so hard to see an advantage. GST catches everybody.

[moka]

An article about High Wealth Individuals and their associated entities which have increased 75% over five years, which is massively above inflation.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12252697&ref=art_readm ore

The number of super-rich earners on the New Zealand taxman's radar has skyrocketed in the past five years with 350 people now worth more than $50 million — some of whom are in a fight over more than $85 million in disputed tax.
The group - labelled High Wealth Individuals (HWI) by Inland Revenue - has soared 75 per cent since 2013, while the country's poorest residents continue to struggle.
Each HWI has, or controls, wealth in excess of $50 million. Their sources of income often include property development and investment.
Associated entities of the 350 super-rich individuals totalled 11,585.
Six years ago, in 2013, there were only 7009 HWIs and associated entities. In the 2014 tax year the disputed cost was $112.8m.
"You're seeing a real acceleration at the top end, whereas at the poorer end of New Zealand as best we can tell, the overall picture is either of growing debt or of stagnation."
To help resolve wealth inequality in New Zealand, Rashbrooke suggested implementing a wealth tax, which he acknowledged would ruffle feathers.

[moka]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-...f=art_readmore
Vaughan Gunson asks who could possibly see the merit in wealthy New Zealanders paying a little more tax to help their compatriots out in a time of crisis?
That's the path to a more equitable and harmonious society.

[Aaron]

We have given regular support to the local health board redevelopment project, donated infrastructure to the council parks division, etc. That's a much more efficient method than doing so via tax, but obviously Stephen prefers compulsion amongst his peers.

Point taken, I will vote for the party at the next election that proposes to scrap taxes and rely on individuals intelligence and generosity to donate to the most worthwhile things that affect them directly, indirectly and not at all.

Unfortunately though, I appreciate you are very generous and know how best to spend your money. I on the other hand hate paying tax and would be more inclined to keep what I earn rather than donating it, if I don't have to. Also I lack the intelligence or broad information required to know how best to donate my money to have the greatest impact/benefit to the country as a whole.

I also lack the time or inclination to put in the effort required to make your proposal feasible. Possibly I am alone in this regard but suspect there may be others like me and that you Zaphod are one of a very select few with the generosity and intelligence to make such a system work. Although from what I read on this thread there are a lot more people on here like you than I meet in everyday society.

[Panda-NZ-]

Point taken, I will vote for the party at the next election that proposes to scrap taxes and rely on individuals intelligence and generosity to donate to the most worthwhile things that affect them directly, indirectly and not at all.

Unfortunately though, I appreciate you are very generous and know how best to spend your money. I on the other hand hate paying tax and would be more inclined to keep what I earn rather than donating it, if I don't have to. Also I lack the intelligence or broad information required to know how best to donate my money to have the greatest impact/benefit to the country as a whole.

I also lack the time or inclination to put in the effort required to make your proposal feasible. Possibly I am alone in this regard but suspect there may be others like me and that you Zaphod are one of a very select few with the generosity and intelligence to make such a system work. Although from what I read on this thread there are a lot more people on here like you than I meet in everyday society.

So there should be no opportunity given to those who lost their jobs for the health benefits of others?
I can't believe the mindset of some. Not to worry though you only need to convince 51% and what they would like to see becomes settled law

[Aaron]

So there should be no opportunity given to those who lost their jobs for the health benefits of others?

I can't believe the mindset of some. Not to worry though you only need to convince 51% and what they would like to see becomes settled law

Perhaps sarcasm is not as easily picked up in the written form. But to spell it out I would suggest that taxation is not the destroyer of wealth and societies it is made out to be and I posted the article about Stephen Tindall because I thought it showed that there are some successful generous people out there who care for more than just themselves. This view was not shared by a couple of posters on this thread and blackcap suggested he is a "virtue signaling idiot" which I am not sure what it means but the idiot on the end would indicate it has a negative connotation.

Although I am pretty sure debt and/or printing money will be the preferred option for voters and their politicians over raising taxes on either side of the house.