Capital Gains Tax

[Bjauck]

Im not suggesting a business ought be subject to CGT but for a start there are all sorts of tax breaks for a business (deductables, R&D credits when they are in vogue etc) that houses dont get during the lifetime and the whole point of a business is to make money so if CGT tax were implemented it seems a very different beast to a home which is, in the first instance, a place to live. One of the key elements of thingy's hierarchy of needs. Quite why you want to tax an owner occupied house for the sake of being a house, what it is you're trying to achieve, I cant see.

Al investments classes are for sustenance.

The point of owning a home is to provide a benefit (shelter) for which you would to pay rent out of taxed income if you did not own it.
The point of earning income is to enable you to pay for shelter.
The point of owning a business is to enable you to pay for shelter.
The point of owning shares is to enable you to pay for shelter.

For consistency, all or none should have their annual net benefit assessed for tax, and be included in any CGT.

[SBQ]

For the last 2 pages i've read so far... the problems are easily solved. Just LOOK at how Australia, Canada, US, & UK treat taxes? Excesses of income should have more taxes levied. The wealthy holding excessive assets such as 3 or 20 houses need to pay more out of capital gain (not zero).

One of the most moronic excuses i've heard from an accountant was, he was in support of raising GST as to add more taxes. Of course he was a rich & wealthy accountant and had no regard on the working poor in how a consumption tax hits this group the hardest.

[fungus pudding]

For the last 2 pages i've read so far... the problems are easily solved. Just LOOK at how Australia, Canada, US, & UK treat taxes? Excesses of income should have more taxes levied. The wealthy holding excessive assets such as 3 or 20 houses need to pay more out of capital gain (not zero).

One of the most moronic excuses i've heard from an accountant was, he was in support of raising GST as to add more taxes. Of course he was a rich & wealthy accountant and had no regard on the working poor in how a consumption tax hits this group the hardest.

Of course. All taxes do. Everything does.

[moka]

Al investments classes are for sustenance.

The point of owning a home is to provide a benefit (shelter) for which you would to pay rent out of taxed income if you did not own it.
The point of earning income is to enable you to pay for shelter.
The point of owning a business is to enable you to pay for shelter.
The point of owning shares is to enable you to pay for shelter.

For consistency, all or none should have their annual net benefit assessed for tax, and be included in any CGT.

I disagree that all investment classes are for sustenance. Sustenance is about basic needs or subsistence living and providing the necessities of life. Having a home is a basic need but owning a house is a luxury that many people cannot afford. For most people owning shares is to provide you with the luxuries of life, with wealth and savings. When people have enough money for a nice house they do not stop investing in shares or running their business so there are other reasons and motivations for investments.

[Bjauck]

I disagree that all investment classes are for sustenance. Sustenance is about basic needs or subsistence living and providing the necessities of life. Having a home is a basic need but owning a house is a luxury that many people cannot afford. For most people owning shares is to provide you with the luxuries of life, with wealth and savings. When people have enough money for a nice house they do not stop investing in shares or running their business so there are other reasons and motivations for investments.

There is more to sustenance than owner-occupied shelter. You still need food, clothing and medical care to sustain yourself and keep alive. For that you need a business, income, or income earning capital.

For the retired or for those that cannot work, share investments and fixed interest provide their income for sustenance. They are just as essential yet they would be treated differently for a CGT. There is no logic to that.

There are lots of palatial homes. The NZ tax and financial system with leveraged capital gains (and tax-free benefit of occupation) encourages over-capitalisation of the family home and property after all. They have moved far beyond providing the basic need for sustenance or shelter. I see no justification to treat them or any other owner-occupied housing differently from share investments/business investments for any CGT.

An increasing number of people cannot afford home ownership. Home ownership may also be inappropriate for some, whose businesses may mean they need to move around the country and World. They need their businesses to provide returns for all sustenance, shelter included. There is no economic or financial logic behind treating business or other investments differently from the equity in owner-occupied homeownership when it comes to any CGT. The reason is political.

[Aaron]

Of course. All taxes do. Everything does.

Oh FP still haven't worked out that GST is a regressive tax. One day you might get it, but as they say no point banging my head against a brick wall.

Just coming on to post this article. I liked Stephen Tindall because after he became successful he has carried on investing and trying to make NZ a better place. Now he is signing a letter asking to be taxed to help out the country. here is a person deserving of the title sir.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/122...or-the-wealthy

83 millionaires, globally I wonder what sort of percentage this is. I would guess relatively small.

[blackcap]

Oh FP still haven't worked out that GST is a regressive tax. One day you might get it, but as they say no point banging my head against a brick wall.

Just coming on to post this article. I liked Stephen Tindall because after he became successful he has carried on investing and trying to make NZ a better place. Now he is signing a letter asking to be taxed to help out the country. here is a person deserving of the title sir.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/122...or-the-wealthy

83 millionaires, globally I wonder what sort of percentage this is. I would guess relatively small.

What a virtue signalling idiot. If he wanted to contribute more to the tax take, there is nothing stopping him donating said amount. Just go ahead and do it Stephen, don't pontificate.

[Panda-NZ-]

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

Sir stephen is being fair and reasonable I think given this unprecendented situaton and the need to raise tax revenue.

[fungus pudding]

Oh FP still haven't worked out that GST is a regressive tax. One day you might get it, but as they say no point banging my head against a brick wall.

Just coming on to post this article. I liked Stephen Tindall because after he became successful he has carried on investing and trying to make NZ a better place. Now he is signing a letter asking to be taxed to help out the country. here is a person deserving of the title sir.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/122...or-the-wealthy

83 millionaires, globally I wonder what sort of percentage this is. I would guess relatively small.

Of course it is. There are far more than that in the small city where I live.

[Aaron]

What a virtue signalling idiot. If he wanted to contribute more to the tax take, there is nothing stopping him donating said amount. Just go ahead and do it Stephen, don't pontificate.

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)