View Poll Results: Should there be a Capital Gains Tax on Property
- Voters
- 133. You may not vote on this poll
-
No
-
Yes
-
Goff is just an idiot
-
Epic fail for Labour
-
25-02-2019, 07:42 PM
#361
Originally Posted by blackcap
I'm not sure I follow. Just watch the video and tell me what is wrong with it. What does neo con even mean?
You are right, neo con https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism is not the policy of the one man university more likely "neo liberalism" is more correct.
Found the comments amusing. The video is questionable in its asumptions.
westerly
-
25-02-2019, 08:23 PM
#362
Originally Posted by westerly
You are right, neo con https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism is not the policy of the one man university more likely "neo liberalism" is more correct.
Found the comments amusing. The video is questionable in its asumptions.
westerly
I'm still confused why you would think the video is questionable? What the video tells me is a clear example of basic economics of "Paretal Optimal" (or Paretal Efficiency) where 1 person's benefit can NOT be achieved without the other person (or persons) losing. The person in the video that did the least work appeared to benefit from the loss of the harder working person of the much higher income.
-
26-02-2019, 08:13 AM
#363
Originally Posted by SBQ
As for how CGT would constrain growth and deter investment, yes I agree with that. Fortunately i'm able to keep my options open on the impact of CGT in the next 5 or 10 years and when I can see the effects (ie. my children having little chance of employment / lower standard of living / etc) we would be quick to move abroad.
Interesting statement in the context of your post. I take it as a vote of confidence into this proposal.
Just remember - many of Labour's core clientele would not have this option - and while they might enjoy in the short term seeing their "rich" neighbours taxed over the hilt - they might less enjoy when their welfare benefits are cut because the state is running out of money if the larger taxpayers are leaving the country in droves.
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
-
26-02-2019, 08:31 AM
#364
Originally Posted by BlackPeter
Interesting statement in the context of your post. I take it as a vote of confidence into this proposal.
Just remember - many of Labour's core clientele would not have this option - and while they might enjoy in the short term seeing their "rich" neighbours taxed over the hilt - they might less enjoy when their welfare benefits are cut because the state is running out of money if the larger taxpayers are leaving the country in droves.
Interesting isn't it. My partner and I have recently had the discussion about moving our capital out of NZ if a CGT is imposed by this government. She has Australian and UK passports and I have a European passport so plenty of opportunities to go and put our money and capital in other jurisdictions that are more friendly to investment. Labour need to be careful what they wish for.
-
26-02-2019, 08:42 AM
#365
Originally Posted by blackcap
Interesting isn't it. My partner and I have recently had the disceven this motly lot wiussion about moving our capital out of NZ if a CGT is imposed by this government. She has Australian and UK passports and I have a European passport so plenty of opportunities to go and put our money and capital in other jurisdictions that are more friendly to investment. Labour need to be careful what they wish for.
Good luck, but I doubt that we will end up with anything more harsh than other countries. Even this motley lot know better.
-
26-02-2019, 08:45 AM
#366
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
Good luck, but I doubt that we will end up with anything more harsh than other countries. Even this motley lot know better.
And Jacinda will be a hero saving farmers, business owners and many others from what Cullen suggested
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
-
26-02-2019, 08:59 AM
#367
Originally Posted by winner69
And Jacinda will be a hero saving farmers, business owners and many others from what Cullen suggested
How can it be "fair" if it excludes certain parts of the community?
Seems t me it is now an attack on high income earners, and about re-distributing the wealth to non-earners.
-
26-02-2019, 10:42 AM
#368
GCT may apply to the family home - as it stands at present
if you use a room(s) as an "office" and claim the expenses for it, you have a choice, don't claim the expenses and no GCT or claim them and you pay GCT - albeit based on the % of your home used say 1 room = 20% so you would pay GCT on 20% of the gain I presume - something like that
More detail here https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12207150 ... if they have it right!
-
26-02-2019, 10:51 AM
#369
Originally Posted by Jay
GCT may apply to the family home - as it stands at present
if you use a room(s) as an "office" and claim the expenses for it, you have a choice, don't claim the expenses and no GCT or claim them and you pay GCT - albeit based on the % of your home used say 1 room = 20% so you would pay GCT on 20% of the gain I presume - something like that
More detail here https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12207150 ... if they have it right!
Also if you take in flatmates. Which is an ideal way for getting people onto the property ladder - they can get others in to help with costs.
Labour clearly dont want people to own their own homes
-
26-02-2019, 11:00 AM
#370
Originally Posted by minimoke
Also if you take in flatmates. Which is an ideal way for getting people onto the property ladder - they can get others in to help with costs.
Labour clearly dont want people to own their own homes
What is or is not a family home makes the family home exclusion a nightmare. Near where I live there are plenty of lifestyle blocks bigger than the 4500m threshold. Many have panted their sections with native bush - and to have smaller sections would spoil the environment. Many are newly reitired and would not want the hassle of having to value and apportion costs between exempt and non-exempt areas of their property.
it would be better to have no exemption and then to give a generous threshold to taxpayers.
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
|
|
Bookmarks