If National wins ...

[iceman]

Not so. Most CGT models with a repat clause have a time limit of 1 year.

Ii would be mad not to have it in any CGT introduced in NZ. Would stifle growth and investment far too much.

[artemis]

Question. If Labour does not end up leading the next government, will they still set up an expert tax working group to firm up tax policy going into the 2020 election? If not, why not?

[minimoke]

Question. If Labour does not end up leading the next government, will they still set up an expert tax working group to firm up tax policy going into the 2020 election? If not, why not?

I don't know how they will find an expert tax working group. The evidence shows they struggle to find a decent leader.

[artemis]

Joyce is the original Rinse and repeat Cowboy......
... His motivation is as clear as crystal: feed the view Labour is incompetent and that National is the only trusted steward of the nation's books.

....
But it was wrong, as numerous commentators and economists across the spectrum have concluded.
Whether that will backfire on him, or simply be mud from the campaign trail that sticks to Labour, remains to be seen. But he is surprisingly short of champions, beyond his own party.
His principal "error" was to assume that the amount left over for new initiatives at the end of each year, portrayed in Labour's Fiscal Plan, was cumulative.

So you don't agree with Mr Roughan's opinion in the Herald this morning?

The hole Steven Joyce found in Labour's fiscal plan this week is important. The media were outraged that he calmly stood his ground against a consensus of their own commentators but he made a point. It seems to be accepted that Labour has made no provision for unforeseen costs outside its big items of education, health and welfare in two and three years time. It was not encouraging to hear Robertson taking refuge behind his Berl consultants.

[winner69]

I don't know how they will find an expert tax working group. The evidence shows they struggle to find a decent leader.

A tax reform by committee - ouch

It would be like ElZorro chairing a group of such illuminiaries like bjauck, Artemis, BlackPeter etc etc with fungus as an independent expert consultant.

[elZorro]

A tax reform by committee - ouch

It would be like ElZorro chairing a group of such illuminiaries like bjauck, Artemis, BlackPeter etc etc with fungus as an independent expert consultant.

I'm not sure it would be very enjoyable, W69. But I just had a look, the last time Labour was talking about a CGT, the rate was just 15% on the gain portion, it wasn't treated like straight income at all. And neither should it be.

I see the benefits of a CGT being a revision of the thought process in NZ. We could be more productive in NZ if we invested more in businesses, whether existing or startups. We shouldn't be putting most of our investment efforts into rental housing or commercial leasing, both of which don't contribute much to productivity or innovation.

Duncan Garner, usually pretty keen on National, has called the latest efforts by National, part of their death rattle.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...hole-to-lie-in

[fungus pudding]

I'm not sure it would be very enjoyable, W69. But I just had a look, the last time Labour was talking about a CGT, the rate was just 15% on the gain portion, it wasn't treated like straight income at all. And neither should it be.

Oh yes it should. If they are calling it income - then tax it as such. The main reason for applying marginal rates is to avoid the difficult argument present in our current system - differentiating between a developer, trader, and an investor. Just total the profit along with other earnings. Nothing wrong with cgt if properly designed - everything if it is not.
With your belief in a progressive tax system surely you won't see much wrong with someone on $300k per annum paying 33%, or with a recently made redundant workerpaying 10.5% when he flogs off his old pair of flats to survive. Of course a flat tax of 15% on all income would be ideal, but that's another story.

[Joshuatree]

elzorro "Duncan Garner, usually pretty keen on National, has called the latest efforts by National, part of their death rattle."

Simply , would you vote for a party that is prepared to lie to get back in.
Would you vote for a party of integrity that is not going to stoop or deceive.
Which action do you align your own moral compass with?

[winner69]

Suppose anything worth a try

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/electi...-in-h-riu.html

But voting starts Monday

[BlackPeter]

elzorro "Duncan Garner, usually pretty keen on National, has called the latest efforts by National, part of their death rattle."

Simply , would you vote for a party that is prepared to lie to get back in.
Would you vote for a party of integrity that is not going to stoop or deceive.
Which action do you align your own moral compass with?

Ouch ... it is dangerous to throw with stones if you are sitting in a glass house.

JT, I can't figure out whether you really have such a short memory, whether you think that voters have such a short memory, whether you are happy to lie at others or whether you intentionally want to damage Labour's case? Which one is it?

Labour and the Left are clearly not on moral high ground: Breaking NZ law and exploiting slave labour, committing (the Green appendix) and condoning benefit fraud, condoning to abuse human rights (guilty until proven innocent), abusing the other side (Kelvin), traitor to the indigenous case (foreshore and seabed), supporting arrogant and power hungry PM"s (Clark). Labour was harbouring various crooks - law breakers of the worst kind and some of them went for years behind bars. Who knows what's still lingering under the rocks? They are dirty politicians like anybody else. No difference, they just want more of our money to pay their election bribes and they are not even woman enough to admit that.