Budget 2007
I’m in the Budget lockup today, from 11 am to 2 pm. So I plan to start blogging details of the budget once we are released. However as people will have noticed, the front page can take hours or longer to rebuild, even though there are new posts, or changes to existing posts.
So what I am going to do is add on to this entry, any details of the budget. So after 2 pm clicking on the permalink for this entry and hitting refresh/reload should bring up the latest for you to comment on.
As predicted (thanks to Winston) Kiwisaver has significant changes to it. They are:
• Employer contributions become compulsory
• Both employer and employee contributions eligible for tax credit of up to $1,040 a year.
• This will make the scheme almost de facto compulsory as a employee on the average wage of $40,000 will for their $1,600 contribution effectively get $2,248 from the Government and $392 from their employer meaning total contributions of $4,240 for their $1,600.
• The more expensive an employee is, the more the employer has to pay, as the employer tax credit is capped.
• Overall it is a significant contribution by Government with $1.2 billion a year in 2010/11 going towards it
• The tax credits are not inflation indexed so over time as people earn more, the employers will end up with more and more of the bill.
• The table below shows how the scheme will work for three wage levels, once it is fully implemented in 2011:
The Orwell Award goes to the press release which says– “The employer tax credit makes it much easier for employers to provide matching contributions” – the employer has no choice anymore as to whether it will provide them – they will now be compulsory!!!
As expected the company tax rate drops to 30%, which will costs around $500 million a year. Also a 15% tax credit for research and development which means those activities (which are narrowly defined) will be taxed at only 15%.
Talking of tax, 14% of taxpayers will now be paying the 39% tax rate, up from 5% in 2000. And those 14% will pay 53% of all income tax.
TAX CUTS CANCELLED
The previous announcement to move the tax thresholds next year has been cancelled on the grounds they would be inflationary (yet somehow all the extra spending will not be). So people will continue to pay more and more tax as these thresholds are not indexed, with us not even getting the chewing gum tax cuts. Definitely a case of eating cake.
Dr Cullen has adopted wholesale National’s policy for all charitable donations to be tax deductible.
Provision is made for regional petrol taxes in every region up to 10 cents per litre. No more than 5c can go on roading so the rest must go on public transport.
The surplus for this year is projected to be $6.3 billion and over the next four years after that a total of $22.7 billion. And not one cent of it coming back to those who pay it. Tax revenue is projected to increase from $52.2 billion this year to $62.0 billion in 2010/11.
Also of key note is Dr Cullen has done his usual job of increasing the contingencies – they were $1.9 billion a year cumulative, but now are much higher. $1 billion of them is tagged for the business tax reform but what it means is when Dr Cullen say the 2010/11 forecast surplus is for $5.4 billion, that is including a contingency of $10.3 billion for new expenditure.
Overall the good are the business tax cuts and the tax credits for Kiwisaver.
The bad are the compulsion on employers to subsidise Kiwisaver, and most of all not only refusing to give personal tax cuts but cancelling the tax cuts already announced.
….
May 17th, 2007 at 9:26 am
A little worry about grandma and eggs, but….have you considered moving across to dynamic page builds rather than static pages? In theory that should give you a faster refresh, at the cost of higher CPU every time someone requests a page…
May 17th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Yes – a database (preferably mySQL) in the backend would work better than having each entry create a static HTML file. Of course I’m only guessing how you have it working now as it would be fairly easy to make one look like the other.
May 17th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Yes – a database (preferably mySQL) in the backend would work better than having each entry create a static HTML file. Of course I’m only guessing how you have it working now as it would be fairly easy to make one look like the other.
May 17th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
But what is the concern with speed? Cullen has telegraphed his latest hospital pass to the NZ economy for the last 7 years. What a big yawn.
Let’s check out the job ads in Australia folks.
May 17th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Australia! you will be lucky! Off to Lebanon with you we have the technology.
May 17th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
I’m fairly excited about it…
I’m 20 years old, earning $45,000, so will save around $5,000 per year only having to contribute about $2,000 myself.
So assuming I work till I’m 65 that would be savings of about $225,000 over my working lifetime (not including principle paid off on the mortgage on my apartment, or capital gains… also not including salary increases etc)
That’s also without even taking into account money made from investing in Kiwi Saver.
May 17th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
“Dr Cullen has adopted wholesale National’s policy for all charitable donations to be tax deductible.”
Or Gordon Copeland’s:
“Tax cuts for Christians”
(a major benefit will accrue to those who tithe)
May 17th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Before everybody starts complaining about the surplus, can I please point out that it’s not really Cullen’s surplus – it’s not Duck Tales and he’s not going home tonight to jump into a massive swimming pool of money.
And also, agree with Cullen or not, you have to say that he’s not giving personal tax cuts because HE believes it wouldn’t be good for the country.
Because what’s his motivation otherwise? He’d be better off with tax cuts both personally (financially) and politically.
May 17th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Interesting.
There are some good things about the savings scheme.
However, I don’t think it will be a big vote winner.
People like Clueless that want to save & are able to affort the $2000 contributions p.a. will benefit.
Those on incomes where the margins are tight will find themseleves feeling a lot worse off in the short term. They will also probably have to kiss any direct pay rises goodbye for the next few years- and prices are continuing to rise. The 10c regional petrol tax will really bite some (if any regions have the temerity to introduce it).
I think people will take up the kiwisaver, but will vote other than Labour. I’ll be surprised if the budget arrests the poll decline, and in a week people will be talking about the investigate allegations, Copeland’s defection and S59 not the budget.
May 17th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
Graeme,
Lets take a moment to ponder the irony that some of those that will benefit the most from this particular change are……
The EBs and Destiny.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
“The bad are the compulsion on employers to subsidise Kiwisaver, and most of all not only refusing to give personal tax cuts but cancelling the tax cuts already announced.”
The right seems to want both tax cuts and lower inflation. Sorry to say fellas, it’s one or the other. And before someone says, “but tax cuts are less inflationary than government spending because some of them are saved – well this is may be so but surpluses are less inflationary tax cuts because all of it is either saved or used to pay of our government debt – and lets face it – tax cuts will either mean, no surplus or a significantly decreased surplus, or indeed government borrowing.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Peter S said
“Graeme,
Lets take a moment to ponder the irony that some of those that will benefit the most from this particular change are……
The EBs and Destiny.”
Aha – it’s a cunning plot – Dear Leader is ALREADY on the lookout for potential coalition partners for next year, so she’s buttering up TFP (who has ALL the character atrributes she admires!) and Destiny! The woman’s cunning knows no bounds!!!
May 17th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
This budget can be sumarised in two words: “More taxes”. It can also be sumarised as “more reasons to vote Labour out”.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Peter S
What do mean “if” they introduce it? When has a council turned down the chance for free money?
May 17th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
OMG – I just heard Chris Trotter ( TVNZ panel) describe John Key as the next Prime Minister… and praise the best reply to a budget debate in 15 years !!
May 17th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
“OMG – I just heard Chris Trotter ( TVNZ panel) describe John Key as the next Prime Minister… ”
hee hee bet you never thought you’d hear that.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Insider,
OK, when. I tried but could not think of any instances where a council had turned down the offer of money.
Nicholas O’Kane, certainly it would appear that living is going to become more expensive without much prospect of increase in income to cover it.
Too little, too late.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
I wonder how the KiwiSaver with the new tax incentives will affect someone (like me) who’s already saving through a workplace super scheme at 6% gross with an employer net contribution of 2% of gross salary. Will I have to forgo my current scheme and join the KiwiSaver in order to enjoy the new tax benefit? Hmmmm…
Btw, in case you ask, I work for a large US company in Wellington.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Chris Trotter has been saying that he thinks Key will be next Prime Minister for a while now.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
I think it is a very good budget, Dr Cullen looks long term not at his navel like most of you right wing wankers
May 17th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
The right seems to want both tax cuts and lower inflation. Sorry to say fellas, it’s one or the other.
No, it’s all quite possible. What is keeping the exchange and interest rates up now is government spending and union influence. Reduce or remove both the government spend and the unions, and there is immense scope for both tax cuts, lower inflation, and lower interest rates!
May 17th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
“I’m fairly excited about it…
I’m 20 years old, earning $45,000, so will save around $5,000 per year only having to contribute about $2,000 myself.
So assuming I work till I’m 65 that would be savings of about $225,000 over my working lifetime (not including principle paid off on the mortgage on my apartment, or capital gains… also not including salary increases etc)
That’s also without even taking into account money made from investing in Kiwi Saver.”
You should be excited, I mean seeing as other people are being forced to pay for it…
May 17th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Sinner omits to say that by “union influence” he means higher wages.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
“Chris Trotter has been saying that he thinks Key will be next Prime Minister for a while now.”
Well, unless you think Helen will stay PM for ever, or Key will be replaced before Labour next lose power, then that is a pretty safe prediction.
Hell, surely even those on the left would accept that National are likely to win power next election or the one after – simple probabilities must tell us that.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Chris Trotter said after John Keys speech “Wow I have just seen the next Prime Minister” Can someone get the video clip please and post it
May 17th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
You should be excited, I mean seeing as other people are being forced to pay for it…
I believe this is a tax break – therefore all it is is the government putting some of MY tax back into MY kiwi saver account. Nothing to do with other people paying for it.
As for my employers contribution – well I would guess they will just be more reluctant to give me a pay rise as this will no doubt be seen as one.
May 17th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
“Also a 15% tax credit for research and development which means those activities (which are narrowly defined) will be taxed at only 15%.”
Why are they taxed at all? Aren’t they expenses?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Is this Mr Trotter or his evil right wing twin?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
John’s speech was brilliant – highlight of the debate. Even Trotter said as much.
Not good in the house eh Phil U, eh eh eh..?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Sonic – I’ve earned much more as a non union member than a union one. What am I doing wrong?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
> As expected the company tax rate drops to
> 30%, which will costs around $500 million a
> year
No it fucking won’t – reducing taxes doesn’t cost a cent. Stealing less from me isn’t a cost to a thief, it just means he’s stealing less.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Oh well, now my company will save more. So one way or another this budget gives me a tax cut.
What about you plebs who work for a salary – yes you – the ones Labour represents – Do you get a tax cut as well ?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Yes rich bastard,
its called kiwisaver and you’re going to contribute towards it
May 17th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
“the front page can take hours or longer to rebuild”
WordPress doesn’t have that problem….also easy to migrate….
May 17th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Ah, but I get the last laugh. I don’t put your salary up !
You Govt of choice has punished you again and I bet you are too stupid to vote them out. You are too stupid to set up in business on your own, you probably belong to a union and… I have the gold (more gold now as well) so I make the rules.
I’m starting to like Labour – they treat us big earners better than Aussie. You poor scum.. but hey it wasn’t me who voted for them – bet you did !
May 17th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Cullen has also canceled the “Chewing Gum tax break” he promised before the last election.
A 5 cent per litre increase in wholesale petrol price for Wellington and Auckland which will make the increased 5 cent Tax subject to GST.
There is no end to this Governments theft
May 17th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
rich_bastard
You don’t put my salary up and I wont stay for long. Laugh all you want. I won’t hear.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:35 pm
I’d bet that “Rich Bastard” is in fact some pennyless libertarian student who thinks, and you’ll laugh, that he is funny!
It’s sad but lets all go along with it for now chaps.
Ha, ha, ha, what a funny guy your are RB!
Tell us again how wealthy you are?
May 17th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
A 5c/litre increase won’t stop me driving my V8, bet it stops a few low income earners driving their cars. I love Labour, taxing low income workers so hard that they can afford to tax high income earners less than Aussie.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
I am over sixty five.
But I have not retired and earn a high income so I pay high taxes.
But because I am over sixty five I cannot avail myself of the tax breaks from investing in Kiwi Saver.
Why does he discriminate against me because of my age.
WIth all the oldies coming through I would have thought govt would encourage us to keep working and saving for when we finally do have to retire.
But that is a long way away for me and many of my friends.
I am shocked by this discrimination and attack on my human rights. Give him a smack immediately.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Whats the problem Owen, you earn a high income, why begrudge a bit of it going to poorer pensioners so they can enjoy their retirement?
Oh look another post from RB, he is clearly the funniest person alive, I cannot wait for his next bon mot!
May 17th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Cullen has just given his thieving Labour mates on local councils a licence to print money with the uncapped regional tax of 10c/litre. That rate is for starters and can be guaranteed to be lifted as the future ‘need’ requires!
Not one council in the country will resist this free money – the bylaws will be before council before you can say Kiwi Sucker!
May 17th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
yes nx..i live-blogged it…
and noted it was keys’ best performance in the house..
but did you miss the bit where clark then got up and deconstructed key/his speech..?
that was also a good performance..especially where/when she painted a picture of the health cuts we would now be facing..and the inflation..
had national won last year..and enacted their policies..
it sorta took the gloss of keys’ ‘performance’..eh..?
and as for trotter..
no surprises there..
by a combination of osmosis..(from/with those he hangs/works/socialises with..)
and the effects of ageing..
he is marching down the michael-bassett path of political devolution..
and becoming more rightwing/reactionary/colonel blimpish..by the day..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
May 17th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Cullen is still a thieveing socialist although I give him credit for the Kiwisaver.Bet there is a significant tax cut for the low and middle income groups next Budget yet again the blind will be bought off with their own money.Likw my Grand daddy used to say Only white men who have passed an IQ test should have the vote.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Yes, we do need more tax in petrol don’t we:
For every litre of petrol purchased, motorists pay taxes, duties and levies totalling 48.989 cents:
23.8 cents—National Land Transport Fund
18.7 cents—General Crown Account
5.78 cents—ACC Motor Vehicle Account
0.66 cents—Local Authority Petroleum Tax
0.025 cents—Petroleum Fuels Monitoring Tax
Current Regional Tax not included here.
And oh, yes add the GST will you Michael
So lets add another 10c, and bring back those signs, last pump at CITY PRICES…Rural folk will sure be filling up the vehicles on their way through Auckland.
While we are at it, lets introduce CARLESS DAYS too.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
“Whats the problem Owen, you earn a high income, why begrudge a bit of it going to poorer pensioners so they can enjoy their retirement?”
Massage your social conscience with your own money sonic.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
the 9% difference between the company and top personal rate is a great incentive for even more tax avoidance. the Socialists havent figured out that 99% of the 230K companies are small Mom and Pop outfits who can arrange their affairs to take advantage of the rates. Meanwhile “their” people on wages cant. How blind arrogant can you be.
May 17th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
I only saw John for 15 minutes or so before I had a VRWC meeting to attend, but he looked very relaxed, very incisive and well very impressive. He had only a few bullet points to cover and basically ad libbed it.
Wordpress is the platform I am moving to.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
One area that hasn’t seen much coverage is the $14m given to IRD to help them chase property traders and ensure they are paying tax on their capital gains. That’s perhaps the brightest point I can find in the budget…
May 17th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I have figured it out.
My wife is not yet sixty five. Our company currenty splits our income (drawings evenly) but now my income will be reduced and my wife’s increased so she gets a tax break from her savings in KiwiSaver.
The accountants will all be pouring over their calculators figuring how to rort the system so we can keep our money rather than let Cullen waste it on toy trains and the like.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Owen. As you say you are so old, your memory should be good enough to know that if you where still under National/Muldoon at your present income, you would have been paying 60c in the dollar in tax, so whats the bleat about.
And as for Kiwisaver, what overall is the difference to a number of years back when super was compulsory and employers also contributed. Not a hell of a lot different but stopped by National or Labour/Douglas.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Philu
Health Cuts?Are we missing something here
Treasury has produced a recent report that shows no increase in Operations or efficiency for the extra 6 billion dollars that labour has bragged about in increase health spend.No surprises There
Pretty smart economics don’t you think.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
And we wonder why we can’t save anything:
1. Income tax increased from 33% to 39% for those earning more than $60,000.
2. Fringe benefit tax up from 49% to 64%.
3. Trust income tax up from 19.5% to 33%.
4. Resident withholding tax – deduction rate on interest from either 19.5% or 33% to 39%.
5. Tobacco tax – increase in the average cost of a packet of cigarettes from $7.20 to $8.20.
6. Petrol tax up 4.7c plus GST.
7. Import fee – $18 on all imported commercial goods for goods with a GST liability of more than $50.
8. Petrol – ACC levy increased from 2.3c to 5.08c per litre.
9. Alcohol – so-called ‘sherry tax’ – increasing cost from $21 to $38 a litre for beverages with 14-23% alcohol content.
10. ACC levies – farmers have faced a 74% hike in their ACC levies in the past three years.
11. ACC motor vehicle levies – motorbike levy up by 57%.
12. Birth, death and marriage certificate fees increased by 42.9%.
13. Driver licence renewal fees increased from $29.50 to $44.30.
14. Fire service levy, household levy increased by 17.70% and increase in motorists’ levy of 17.7% collected by insurance companies.
15. Fishing licence fee increase of 10%.
16. Cattle slaughtering levy increased up to 50% per head of slaughtered cattle.
17. Export education levy – a $185 charge to institutions per foreign fee-paying student plus 0.45% of their tuition and course fees.
18. Fund withdrawal tax – 5% tax on withdrawals of employer contributions to superannuation schemes for those earning above $60,000.
19. Border Security Bill – $20 million on importers and exporters for a service deemed public good.
20. Car ownership rego increased 14%.
21. Fuel excise and road user charges pegged to inflation, but no reduction on amount of taxes siphoned into the consolidated fund.
22. New levies on non-petrol driven vehicles increased from $176.10 to $221.31.
23. Increase in fuel excise levy of 5c per litre, and an equivalent rise in road user charges for light diesel vehicles.
24. Kyoto fund – extra 1c per unit on electricity.
25. Kyoto fund – extra 4c per litre on fuel.
26. 41% increase in road-user charges for diesel vehicles on cluding 2007 increases.
This is your money. You are being robbed.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Since when has Chris Trotter NOT being spouting propaganda paid for Catherine Judd and Awaroa Partners, the ACT pr firm
Simo the highest rate from 33 to 39 was an election promise which labour won . Oh yes the party which lost gave tax cuts , and lost 2 times after that.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Selma
I think that election promise was Only the top 5% of earners and there was another one Nobody earning under $60K will pay a cent more in income tax which because of the distribution rate change for trusts was also broken.
Wharrrrrp: Thanks for playing.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
I wonder what the unintended consequences of the kiwisaver changes will be (as there are always! unintended consequences). I suspect it will result in an increase in the use of contract staff instead of full time. It has suddenly become a much cheaper option
May 17th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
David,
John Key’s speech was very impressive. If I was a centre swing voter he would probably have my vote.
But the “ab lib” comment you made doesnt seem right. At one point he had so much screw up paper in his hands he almost didn’t have room for the last piece.
May 17th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
SM, yes you are right. The most impressive thing about Cullen’s budget was John Key’s speech in reply. I heard some of it. Clark has met her match in the house and it shows.
You’ve gotta larrrff at the idiots at The Herald. They had a little headline “Key Points in Budget.”
Where do they dredge these idiots up?
May 17th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
“Simo the highest rate from 33 to 39 was an election promise which labour won . Oh yes the party which lost gave tax cuts , and lost 2 times after that”.
And oh yes, after Clark stated “there will be no new taxes” Selma, someone zapped your memory chip again!!!!! Labour politicians are liars, proven and substantiated.
May 17th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAQlNtHLbWk
May 17th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Great comment Simo. I’ve put a copy of it as a post on my blog.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
simo
“Labour politicians are liars, proven and substantiated.”
What is more is that in the 2002 election campaign Helen Clark stated that she had kept all of the 1999 election promises.
So it’s doubly proven and substantiated.
May 17th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
How do we sum this buggered up budget?”
1: If your a Mum and Dad in the 15% sucker bracket – you lose
2: Self employed and own company and pay profit as salary to shareholders- you lose
3: Auckland commuter – you lose
4: An employer taking into account self employed salary structure with Kiwi Saver – you lose
5: IRD given $35m to chase rental property buyers and flickers – you lose.
The see-saw has now got a real fat bastard sitting on the other end.
There are more if people would like to add,
I can smell the rain falling in Aussie already!
May 17th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
I was very disappointed in Key selling out to Dear Leader and bradford but after watching him on close up tonight it’s obvious he’s to clever for Cullen. Cullen looked like a possum caught in a spotlight, unsure which way to jump. If I was in the Liarbour party I would start packing.
May 17th, 2007 at 8:28 pm
SSB , Key not answering the questions being asked is not ‘clever’, its called ‘devious’
May 17th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Just posted some figures on WFF – Cullen has played us all for fools.
May 17th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Selma
Labour stealing Funds for the pledge card is called devious
May 17th, 2007 at 8:45 pm
Simo you must have been asleep during 1999.
But here is a NZ Herald story from Nov 25 1999
BEFORE THE ELECTION which is 2 days after this storey
12:00AM Thursday November 25, 1999
Election 1999
By VERNON SMALL and ANDREW lAXON
Imagine it is Sunday and Jim Anderton is winging his way to Wellington for the first crucial meeting with the incoming Prime Minister, Helen Clark.
As expected, Labour has scored three to four times the vote of the Alliance and can be expected to dominate the numbers in the cabinet and the policy agenda for the next three years.
Apart from a short list of Alliance ministers and portfolios, what parts of its agenda can the Alliance hope to promote?
There is broad agreement between the parties in many areas – anti-defection legislation for MPs; raising tax to 39 per cent on personal income above $60,000; returning to a state monopoly on ACC; and reducing the interest burden on students.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=543&objectid=103824
raising tax to 39 per cent on personal income above $60,000
No wonder you follow the National party, its where you get to make things up
ps its all to easy, make it harder for me next time
May 17th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Don’t know what you’re on about, Owen. At least you’re eligible for Winston’s Super Doubleplusgood Gold card. Why aren’t you happy?
Simo, tobacco tax has gone up more than that. It went up about a buck overnight back in 2000 alone. I remember it quite clearly, as my girlfriend at the time stopped voting Labour because of it.
May 17th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Selma you are just a labour party toadie
Who said this
“Ninety-five percent of people will not be asked to pay more tax. Instead, only the top 5 percent of income earners will pay more. The increase is expected to bring in $465 million in extra revenue in the next fiscal year.”
Go to http://www.beehive.govt.nz/Print/PrintDocument.aspx?DocumentID=6703
And how many people are now paying 39% tax????
Try posting something that is relevant
May 17th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
I cant find railway tracks on the North Shore that I am being taxed for!!!
May 17th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
Selma
Nov 25th 1999. Was the legislation even passed then? I thought it passed in the first sitting of the house in 2000. You are also quoting a Journalists ’skinny’ on the situation.
I’ll take this interpretation. My reference is from an MP so I’ll claim it’s more accurate than yours.
Labour’s Pledge Card (20/07/2005)
“one promised pledge was that no more than 5 percent of taxpayers would pay the highest tax rate of 39 cents..”
Count me out as a National party supporter, although I did like their policy for removing the threshold on charitable donations. I’m glad Labour had that fresh idea for the budget, for the future.
May 17th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Terry , that was exactly right in 1999.
Check your calendar is now 2007.
So now tyou do remember Labour promised BEFORE the election to create a new tax bracket
There has been no change in Labours policy. There was no promise that it would be indexed then or since probbaly because they won each of the following elections
But Labour has pinched nationals charitable donations policy !
Thanks John, you do have some ideas.
But Look at National and Kyoto
Jenny: Signs the Treaty
Bill: Do nothing
Don: What warming
John: In 50 years from now… but dont believe anything I said before
May 17th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
“Since when has Chris Trotter NOT being spouting propaganda paid for Catherine Judd and Awaroa Partners, the ACT pr firm”
Hilarious watching the Labour shills here trying to disown Chris Trotter, in classic irony-free Orwellian style. Eurasia has always been the enemy…
May 17th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
TerryJ
From that link: “The Government’s view is that people on high incomes can — and indeed should — make a greater contribution to paying for improving New Zealand’s social fabric.”
The problem is TerryJ, the socialists can’t understand that even with a flat tax rate a person earning $140,000 pays ten times more tax than someone earning $14,000. IE They already “make a greater contribution to paying for improving New Zealand’s social fabric.”
They just can’t get that concept.
May 17th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Selma spews ” So now tyou do remember Labour promised BEFORE the election to create a new …”
level for the word CORRUPTION !!!
May 17th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Go and take the flight Selma, your way too intelligent for this dumbed down lot, you also have symptoms of a sense of humour, and we can’t have that in this gulag
May 17th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Im not a toady !!
I only have one wart
May 18th, 2007 at 6:48 am
Selma
Stop using your wart and engage your brain
“Instead, only the top 5 percent of income earners will pay more.”
Did Cullen mislead the house again????
Face facts Labour cannot be trusted
May 18th, 2007 at 10:13 am
I do remember clearly before the 1999 election Labour had promised to raise personal tax bracket to 39%. So they did keep that one promise.
And created a nightmare, since there was introduced a disparity between the company rate and the top personal rate, so they had to plug a lot of holes to stop people opting to become a company. Now people have even more incentive to do that, since the difference is a full 9% of gross.
The tax breaks for employers only end up being of any value if the company is making a profit. If the company is break-even, then kiwisaver contributions will push it into a loss. There are a lot of small companies in this boat.
I spoke with some of my employees as well about it, one said he couldn’t afford to enter the kiwisaver scheme because he didn’t have the spare 4% – problem of having a mortgage on an Auckland home. Actually since it’s 4% of gross salary, that’s about 6.5% of take-home pay.
This will definitely put downward pressure on salaries, so in the end, the cost will be passed on to the people. Meanwhile, the government gets another large fund to play with. I hope they don’t spend it.