sharetrader
Page 36 of 61 FirstFirst ... 2632333435363738394046 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 610
  1. #351
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    210

    Default

    Discourages land banking and speculation and encourages intensification.
    Makes it a less attractive "investment".

  2. #352
    ****
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    5,004

    Default

    I don't agree with TOPs land tax however you are never going to agree with every policy a party puts forward.
    I hope they return to a CGT over time.

  3. #353
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dln View Post
    Discourages land banking and speculation and encourages intensification.
    Makes it a less attractive "investment".
    Bad luck to those renters who face higher rent payments, right?

    Seriously the solution is to encourage private developers to build as many homes as quick as possible by stripping down the RMA, consent laws, allowing denser housing in residential areas ect. It's a supply side issue. Labour/National have focused on demand side solutions and have failed at getting housing to an affordable price.

  4. #354
    Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daytr View Post
    I don't agree with TOPs land tax however you are never going to agree with every policy a party puts forward.
    I hope they return to a CGT over time.
    So you like the ‘Christchurch Plan’, ‘the Teal Card’, and the tougher laws on vaping? Transformative policies no doubt. I can’t see a major party coming up with this type of ‘out of the box’ thinking.

    https://www.top.org.nz/vaping

  5. #355
    Membaa
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    5,500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dln View Post
    Look closer.
    It calculates on the land value, not the capital value.
    Which is confounding in itself. If others situation is similar, the land value of my place is way less than the 'improvements' value [buildings on the property] (that the council rates combine to determine the 'capital value', ergo how much local tax you pay [rates] on what you apparently own) - even if you don't actually own it - just control it while actually the bank owns it until you pay it off, unless you can't or don't pay, then the bank who owns it takes over.

    'Real Estate', translated, is the estate of the royals. They gave us access (the law) the rights to occupy land and property for the mere sum of capital acquisition(which most borrow from banks to achieve), PLUS taxes [rates] in perpetuity for what we occupy, and pay those rates [taxes] in perpetuity, even when we pay off all our mortgages and actually own it. Nice rort.

    Too complicated and imprecise (perpetuating the norm, like rates calculations). Basically it's saying some minion in the local council, that is not standardised nationwide, has a spreadsheet that decides what the land value of your property is, whether you actually own it or not, should be taxed on that land, in addition to the rates you already pay.

    What? None of it makes sense when you break it down to current practice, which doesn't make much sense already. Sounds like another Robin Hood tax on top of what we already pay in rates.

  6. #356
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ValueNZ View Post
    Bad luck to those renters who face higher rent payments, right?
    Indeed.
    I can't see any plan that will fix that overnight (unless you think the Greens rent controls are are sane approach).
    The asset structure needs to change, not just have more sticking plasters applied.
    Seriously the solution is to encourage private developers to build as many homes as quick as possible by stripping down the RMA, consent laws, allowing denser housing in residential areas ect. It's a supply side issue. Labour/National have focused on demand side solutions and have failed at getting housing to an affordable price.
    Agree, and a land tax is another incentive to get as many rentable dwellings on a given bit of dirt as quickly as possible.

  7. #357
    ****
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    5,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logen Ninefingers View Post
    So you like the ‘Christchurch Plan’, ‘the Teal Card’, and the tougher laws on vaping? Transformative policies no doubt. I can’t see a major party coming up with this type of ‘out of the box’ thinking.

    https://www.top.org.nz/vaping
    I think that is what TOP is about.
    Challenging the status quo and their progressive policies / ideas is exactly what NZ needs.

  8. #358
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dln View Post
    Indeed.
    I can't see any plan that will fix that overnight (unless you think the Greens rent controls are are sane approach).
    The asset structure needs to change, not just have more sticking plasters applied.
    Agree, and a land tax is another incentive to get as many rentable dwellings on a given bit of dirt as quickly as possible.
    You and I have very different ideas of what incentive structures are.

  9. #359
    Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daytr View Post
    I think that is what TOP is about.
    Challenging the status quo and their progressive policies / ideas is exactly what NZ needs.
    A plan to shower $1 Billion on Christchurch & tougher vaping laws? ‘Exactly what NZ needs.’ Righto, if you say so.

  10. #360
    Guru
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,012

    Default

    First came the Gold Card, next came the Teal Card, we will know we are making real progress when the Mauve Card is unveiled.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •