Capital Gains Tax

[moka]

Green Party candidate Ali Hale Tilley says middle salary and wage earners carry more than their fair share of the tax burden and that if we want the country to prosper as a whole, the wealthy need to embrace paying tax instead of finding ways to hide it.
"It's the nation's mindset that needs changing," she said. "It's a privilege to pay taxes. When it gets reinvested, everybody is lifted up."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...XFKMRF53WWG44/

[lissica]

Green Party candidate Ali Hale Tilley says middle salary and wage earners carry more than their fair share of the tax burden and that if we want the country to prosper as a whole, the wealthy need to embrace paying tax instead of finding ways to hide it.
"It's the nation's mindset that needs changing," she said. "It's a privilege to pay taxes. When it gets reinvested, everybody is lifted up."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...XFKMRF53WWG44/

Treasury states that the top 3% pay 24% of income tax. I'm paying more than my fair share.

https://www.treasury.govt.nz/informa...ays-income-tax

[couta1]

Green Party candidate Ali Hale Tilley says middle salary and wage earners carry more than their fair share of the tax burden and that if we want the country to prosper as a whole, the wealthy need to embrace paying tax instead of finding ways to hide it.
"It's the nation's mindset that needs changing," she said. "It's a privilege to pay taxes. When it gets reinvested, everybody is lifted up."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...XFKMRF53WWG44/

I don't give a toss what any Green Party candidate says about taxes, they are all economically inept so why should I trust them?

[artemis]

With the increase in top tax rates will there be a shift to growth stocks away from those that pay divvies?

[moka]

In the debate, Chloe Swarbrick from the Greens argued for the wealth tax, pointing out that wealth in property is created by taxes spent on infrastructure.
I heard from a man this week who objected to the way a wealth tax would penalise people who bought a bach in Coromandel back when the road trip took six hours, and now owned valuable property but were not rich.
But Swarbrick is right. Those baches are now worth a fortune in part because the roads, paid for by taxes, now make the journey so much quicker.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...3U4PAG56BF4UY/

Shia Navot from Top, however, argued against the Greens' wealth tax, but not because wealth shouldn't be taxed. Top thinks there are better ways to do it.
Perhaps they're right. Greens co-leader James Shaw has said many times, if other parties don't like their proposal, he would welcome them coming up with something better.
Labour's David Parker, the trade minister, told an OECD conference this week there is a growing gap between the wealthy who can leverage their assets at very low interest rates, and the young and others without assets. "There is a problem with this status quo around the world," he said, "and we need a conversation about what the remedy might be."

[moka]

Treasury states that the top 3% pay 24% of income tax. I'm paying more than my fair share.

https://www.treasury.govt.nz/informa...ays-income-tax

You are not paying more than your fair share.
Your fair share takes into account your ability to pay, not what you pay in relation to anyone else.
A fair tax system means that the costs of contributing to tax revenues are shared in a way that takes into account the ability to pay.

From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" Karl Marx
The phrase 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs' means, that ideally, each person should contribute to society according to his or her best efforts to do so, and should nonetheless receive from society what he or she requires to survive in relative health and safety.

[fungus pudding]

You are not paying more than your fair share.
Your fair share takes into account your ability to pay, not what you pay in relation to anyone else.
A fair tax system means that the costs of contributing to tax revenues are shared in a way that takes into account the ability to pay.

From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" Karl Marx
The phrase 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs' means, that ideally, each person should contribute to society according to his or her best efforts to do so, and should nonetheless receive from society what he or she requires to survive in relative health and safety.

A flat tax, where everyone pays the same percentage on their earnings is the fairest way in my view, Big earners pay a lot - low earners pay little. Yet the socialists scream that that is unfair, because the high earners can afford more, so argue for a progressive system. And that sums up the problem in a nutshell. 'Fair' is impossible to define, making it a pointless and senseless word in relation to tax given there is no acceptable agreement.

[couta1]

A flat tax, where everyone pays the same percentage on their earnings is the fairest way in my view, Big earners pay a lot - low earners pay little. Yet the socialists scream that that is unfair, because the high earners can afford more, so argue for a progressive system. And that sums up the problem in a nutshell. 'Fair' is impossible to define, making it a pointless and senseless word in relation to tax given there is no acceptable agreement.

Absolutely a flat tax is the fairest by a country mile but will never happen under a Socialist/Communist Govt, their agenda will always be to take from those that have and redistribute to those that have not, the fact that many of the have not's don't want to get ahead if it takes self effort is of no consequence.

[Zaphod]

But Swarbrick is right. Those baches are now worth a fortune in part because the roads, paid for by taxes, now make the journey so much quicker.

That is one rabbit hole I would avoid going down. It will result in never-ending arguments.

I do recall Twyford suggesting that land owners near major transport projects would be required to fund their development as they were viewed as disproportionately benefiting from them, so perhaps we will have no choice but to address this argument in the longer term.

[dibble]

I do recall Twyford suggesting that land owners near major transport projects would be required to fund their development as they were viewed as disproportionately benefiting from them, so perhaps we will have no choice but to address this argument in the longer term.

That should definitely apply to the nice new 6 lane motorway carved through one's back yard.