Budget rates relief ‘necessary'
Oamaru. PHOTO: PETER MCINTOSH
Rates relief for potentially hundreds of Waitaki senior citizens through Budget 2025, is "timely and necessary", Age Concern Otago says.
The Budget last week announced a rise in the income abatement threshold for SuperGold Cardholders and their households to be eligible for the maximum rebate from $31,510 to $45,000, about the same rate as a couple receiving superannuation.
"In the Waitaki District alone, over 5700 people receive NZ Super, many of whom will benefit directly from this support," Age Concern Otago chief executive Mike Williams said.
"While we don't have exact figures on how many will qualify, we do know that around 40% of New Zealanders aged 65 and over have virtually no other income beyond NZ Super. With nearly a quarter of Waitaki's population aged 65 or older, and rates set to rise by an average of around 10% across the district, this support is both timely and necessary."
The maximum rebate for the scheme will also increase from $790 to $805, while those SuperGold cardholders with income higher than $45,000 will be eligible for a smaller rebate.
Ratepayers can apply for the new maximum rebate under the new abatement thresholds after July 1.
Application forms will be available from councils and will also be able to be downloaded from the New Zealand Government website (www.govt.nz) and then submitted to local councils.
Waitaki district mayor Gary Kircher is positive in his support for the move.
"It's a tough budget for many, though I see some benefits in the budget for our community," he told the Oamaru Mail.
"It is good to see that more of our Super Gold Card holders will be eligible for rates relief, as the government recognises the pressures on local government and their ratepayers.
"This is welcome news for many of our Waitaki ratepayers, especially those on fixed incomes who own their own homes."
Any over-65s with questions about eligibility can contact Waitaki District Council on 03 433 0300 or by contacting service@waitaki.govt.nz
Mr Kircher said there were other good news items in the Budget.
"An increase of $2.7b for roads schools and hospitals will help, though at least some of those increases had already been announced.
"From a council perspective, it will be extremely helpful if the government increases the ability of NZTA to match more of our funding to help councils make progress on the overall underinvestment in roading.
"There will be general benefits for our community with the sensible changes to prescriptions, and improvements to our after-hours healthcare, along with an extra $1b for new health infrastructure.
"However, the zero increase to many budgets and the decrease in others will be difficult for most government agencies.
"I doubt that it has been an easy task for the government, and there is some good logic behind a number of changes.
"Unfortunately, many people are doing it bloody hard right now and there will some who are going to be slightly better off, but not all of those most affected."
Waitaki MP Miles Anderson said the district would also benefit from Budget 2025's new Investment Boost initiative, which would provide "a major new tax incentive to encourage businesses to invest, grow the economy, and lift wages".
"This is great news for farms and businesses in the Waitaki and the initiative is already seeing a strong positive response from the sector.
"With our region's strong rural and supporting industries we need businesses to invest in productive assets — like machinery, tools, equipment, vehicles and technology. Investment drives productivity improvements, makes firms more competitive and supports employers to improve workers' wages.
"Investment Boost allows a business to immediately deduct 20% of the cost of a new asset, on top of depreciation, meaning a much lower tax bill in the year of purchase."
That meant better cashflows, which in turn, makes potential investments "stack up financially", he said.
On top of a $164m investment in rural health, including expanded and improved after-hours health services in Oamaru, the Budget also strengthened education provision with $1.5billion to improve student achievement, including $646m of initiatives to ensure earlier identification of, and better help for, children with additional physical, learning and behavioural needs, he said.
Another $700m would deliver new schools and classrooms.
"We are making smart improvements in education that will make a real difference for young people here," Mr Anderson said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Budget rates relief ‘necessary'
Oamaru. PHOTO: PETER MCINTOSH Rates relief for potentially hundreds of Waitaki senior citizens through Budget 2025, is "timely and necessary", Age Concern Otago says. The Budget last week announced a rise in the income abatement threshold for SuperGold Cardholders and their households to be eligible for the maximum rebate from $31,510 to $45,000, about the same rate as a couple receiving superannuation. "In the Waitaki District alone, over 5700 people receive NZ Super, many of whom will benefit directly from this support," Age Concern Otago chief executive Mike Williams said. "While we don't have exact figures on how many will qualify, we do know that around 40% of New Zealanders aged 65 and over have virtually no other income beyond NZ Super. With nearly a quarter of Waitaki's population aged 65 or older, and rates set to rise by an average of around 10% across the district, this support is both timely and necessary." The maximum rebate for the scheme will also increase from $790 to $805, while those SuperGold cardholders with income higher than $45,000 will be eligible for a smaller rebate. Ratepayers can apply for the new maximum rebate under the new abatement thresholds after July 1. Application forms will be available from councils and will also be able to be downloaded from the New Zealand Government website ( and then submitted to local councils. Waitaki district mayor Gary Kircher is positive in his support for the move. "It's a tough budget for many, though I see some benefits in the budget for our community," he told the Oamaru Mail. "It is good to see that more of our Super Gold Card holders will be eligible for rates relief, as the government recognises the pressures on local government and their ratepayers. "This is welcome news for many of our Waitaki ratepayers, especially those on fixed incomes who own their own homes." Any over-65s with questions about eligibility can contact Waitaki District Council on 03 433 0300 or by contacting service@ Mr Kircher said there were other good news items in the Budget. "An increase of $2.7b for roads schools and hospitals will help, though at least some of those increases had already been announced. "From a council perspective, it will be extremely helpful if the government increases the ability of NZTA to match more of our funding to help councils make progress on the overall underinvestment in roading. "There will be general benefits for our community with the sensible changes to prescriptions, and improvements to our after-hours healthcare, along with an extra $1b for new health infrastructure. "However, the zero increase to many budgets and the decrease in others will be difficult for most government agencies. "I doubt that it has been an easy task for the government, and there is some good logic behind a number of changes. "Unfortunately, many people are doing it bloody hard right now and there will some who are going to be slightly better off, but not all of those most affected." Waitaki MP Miles Anderson said the district would also benefit from Budget 2025's new Investment Boost initiative, which would provide "a major new tax incentive to encourage businesses to invest, grow the economy, and lift wages". "This is great news for farms and businesses in the Waitaki and the initiative is already seeing a strong positive response from the sector. "With our region's strong rural and supporting industries we need businesses to invest in productive assets — like machinery, tools, equipment, vehicles and technology. Investment drives productivity improvements, makes firms more competitive and supports employers to improve workers' wages. "Investment Boost allows a business to immediately deduct 20% of the cost of a new asset, on top of depreciation, meaning a much lower tax bill in the year of purchase." That meant better cashflows, which in turn, makes potential investments "stack up financially", he said. On top of a $164m investment in rural health, including expanded and improved after-hours health services in Oamaru, the Budget also strengthened education provision with $1.5billion to improve student achievement, including $646m of initiatives to ensure earlier identification of, and better help for, children with additional physical, learning and behavioural needs, he said. Another $700m would deliver new schools and classrooms. "We are making smart improvements in education that will make a real difference for young people here," Mr Anderson said.
NZ Herald
3 days ago
- NZ Herald
The biggest winners and losers from the Government's KiwiSaver changes
Young people are the only clear winners in the Budget announcements about KiwiSaver. True, every employee's KiwiSaver balance will grow faster when they and their employers increase their contributions – from the current 3% for most people to 3.5% next April and 4% from April 2028. But Treasury has said many employers will get that money back by giving employees smaller wage rises, so in the end employees will really pay all the extra themselves. The same goes for employees on total remuneration – a practice that should be banned – in which employees effectively pay their employers' contributions. Meanwhile, the Government's contribution will halve, to a maximum of almost $261 if you contribute $1042.86 or more during every July-to-June year, starting this coming July 1. And people earning $180,000 or more will get no Government contributions. The biggest losers are probably the self-employed and those not employed. Their only KiwiSaver incentive is the Government contribution, and the halving makes it considerably less attractive. Still, it's worth getting. If you save $20 a week and your savings outside KiwiSaver would have been $100,000, in the scheme they will be $125,000. Back to the young ones. At the moment, under-18s receive no KiwiSaver Government contribution. And their employers don't have to contribute either, although some do. But from July 1 next year, 16- and 17-year-olds will get the Government money, and from April 1 next year, employers will also be obliged to put in their 3.5%. Young people, like everyone else, don't have to join KiwiSaver. While they will be automatically enrolled in the scheme when they get their first job, they can opt out if they wish. But I've always encouraged teenagers not already signed up by their parents to join and start the savings habit – with their eye on perhaps withdrawing soonish to buy a first home. The introduction of Government contributions from age 16 gives that idea even more appeal. Even though we're talking small amounts here, it adds up. What's more, once a child is 16, you and other grandparents, parents or friends could make a point of together depositing enough – a total of $20 a week – so that at least $1042 a year goes into the teenager's account. Then they'll receive the maximum $261 from the Government. Try to continue to do this until the young person starts fulltime work. I heard somebody on the radio the other day suggest that every newborn should be enrolled in KiwiSaver. Great idea. In the meantime, let's get as many young ones in there as we can. Only parents and guardians can sign up their children for KiwiSaver, but presumably you could encourage this to happen. And you could suggest the parents choose from low-fee aggressive KiwiSaver funds that make similar investments to the fund your grandchildren are in now. While these share funds are volatile, they usually have the highest long-term growth. Ideally, though, the parents will pick a global fund rather than a US one. While American shares make up about 70% of the value of all world shares – and they have performed particularly well in recent decades – in the long run, the widest possible diversification works best. The parents can find suitable aggressive KiwiSaver funds in the Smart Investor tool on by sorting by 'Fees (lowest first)'. We should note, though, one downside of saving for children in KiwiSaver as opposed to elsewhere. The money can't be withdrawn for, say, uni fees or starting a business. And not everyone wants to buy their own home. So their KiwiSaver money might sit there until they reach New Zealand Superannuation age. The upside is that the money will grow hugely over such a long time. Join KiwiSaver after 65? Q: I'm 66, still working and intending to work for a few more years yet. I have cashed up my KiwiSaver to pay off my mortgage. Is it worth my while to start another KiwiSaver account, or should I just set up a regular savings regime with a fund manager instead? A: When KiwiSaver started in 2007, you couldn't join if you were over 65, although once you were in, you could keep an account running into retirement. But since 2019, every New Zealand resident of any age can join. Unfortunately, though, some over-65s don't realise that, which is a pity, as KiwiSaver can work well during retirement. Generally there are no inducements for over-65s to join. The Government stops its contributions at 65 and employers don't have to contribute, although many still do, so you might want to check that out with your boss. But even without 'the extras', I still think it's worth being in the scheme. Fees tend to be a bit lower than on non-KiwiSaver funds. And providers are regularly surveyed by Te Ara Ahunga Ora, the Retirement Commission, on the services they offer, which puts pressure on them to treat members well. Also, while there are no Government guarantees, it seems that the Government watches KiwiSaver providers' behaviour more closely than other investment providers. In retirement, you can use your KiwiSaver money in whatever way works best. Your first withdrawal will involve a bit of form-filling, but after that you can take out lump sums whenever you want to – bearing in mind it might take a couple of days to receive the money. And many people set up regular transfers to their bank account to add to their NZ Super payments. Continue ex's life insurance? Q: When my husband and I divorced, I kept up the payments on his life insurance premiums. I took quite a hit financially as a result of the divorce and now any modicum of comfort in my retirement depends on him dying before me. It's not a great mindset to be in, to wish someone a happy life but not a particularly long one! And yet financially doesn't it make more sense for me to keep paying the premiums in anticipation of a lump-sum payment that I wouldn't otherwise be able to save? A: If this were crime fiction, your ex would be looking behind every tree for the hitman you hired! Back in the real world, I want to suggest you cancel the policy and invest the premium money elsewhere – because if your ex stays alive for many years, you will have little for your retirement. And he might outlive you – and you'll get nothing. But first I asked Peter Leitch, a financial adviser and insurance expert with Share NZ, if you're likely to get a surrender value or some other compensation if you stop the policy now. 'Some older life policies, called whole of life, or endowment, may have a cash surrender value,' Leitch says. 'If the policy is cancelled, she could get this value now. Or she may be able to stop paying the premium but retain the policy in place (called 'paid up'). And it may be possible to do both – get some cash value out and keep a lower level of insurance coverage in place. So, advice matters.' Leitch adds: 'Your correspondent has a dilemma. Often retirement income is reasonably fixed, but the cost of life insurance premiums will usually increase each year.' He suggests she should check several things: Is the premium fixed to a specified age (level premium), or does the premium change annually (stepped premium)? Premiums increase reflecting the chance of claiming. And it can get (very) expensive as you age. Life insurance is not an investment. You are paying for peace of mind and security. It seems like neither of these apply. Is the policy ownership in her name? There is no point paying for a policy which is owned by him, as proceeds will go to the policy owner (or their estate). 'Retirement should be enjoyable and rewarding. Paying for life insurance for a person where the relationship has changed may not bring you joy, or a reward! 'I'll finish by saying if you insure a car, you are not going to keep insuring that car after you have sold it. The insurance did the job while you had the car, but after the need has gone, the insurance has done its job. 'I have seen people keep insurance far too long on the basis that they believe they should get a return on the premiums paid. That is not how insurance works.' Time to talk to a life insurance expert. Gold not so shiny Q: Last week's correspondent, Richard Coleman of NZ Gold Merchants, is talking his books. Compared with income-generating investments like shares and property, gold is a poor relation. It has its moments, but following the 1980 gold crash, it took 27 years to reach the same level. Then there's the buy/sell margins, cost of storage, security and insurance. Gold bugs often regurgitate the 'hard to find' nonsense, or 'we're running out', but new technology ensures more gold is being mined each year. Ask those who purchased in 1980 if it's 'inflation-resistant'. A: Of course Coleman was presenting the positive side of investing in gold last week. In response, I pointed out the almost halving of the gold price from 2011 to 2015, and you have pointed out the earlier big drop, when the price more than halved in the early 1980s and took decades to recover. So yes, it's a pretty volatile investment. But a little gold does bring some diversification, as Coleman pointed out. Okay, we've had both sides now. As the old-time editors used to say, 'no further correspondence on this topic will be entered into'. A dollar is a dollar Q: I find myself in a similar situation to the 55-year-old two weeks ago with investments in growth funds. You suggested that she gradually moves some of her savings to medium-risk and low-risk funds as she nears retirement. However, my approach is to leave the KiwiSaver and non-KiwiSaver investments in growth funds, and for the next five years focus on saving into a balanced fund, and then for the following five years focus on saving into term deposits. That way I get maximum growth over the next 10 and five years. Also, I can top up the balanced and term deposit buckets in the future if required. I would be grateful to hear your thoughts on this approach. A: Your approach and mine should have similar results. The aim is to have, at retirement: Money for the next three years or so in a cash fund or bank term deposits. Money to spend roughly three to 10 years away in a bond fund or balanced fund. Longer-term money in growth funds or similar – for spending later in retirement. As you near retirement, if it seems you will have too much or too little in any of those categories, you can always move some money then. In the meantime, both you and the earlier correspondent will have a portion of your savings in growth funds and a portion in medium-risk funds for the next few years. After that, you'll also have some at lower risk. It won't make any difference whether the particular dollars in each of those categories was saved recently or years ago. A dollar is a dollar. But if you find it easier to allocate your savings your way, go for it! It does have a certain simplicity. * Mary Holm, ONZM, is a freelance journalist, a seminar presenter and a bestselling author on personal finance. She is a director of Financial Services Complaints Ltd (FSCL) and a former director of the Financial Markets Authority. Her opinions do not reflect the position of any organisation in which she holds office. Mary's advice is of a general nature, and she is not responsible for any loss that any reader may suffer from following it. Send questions to mary@ Letters should not exceed 200 words. We won't publish your name. Please provide a (preferably daytime) phone number. Unfortunately, Mary cannot answer all questions, correspond directly with readers, or give financial advice.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
Tasman Debates Fairness Of Dog And Waste Fees
Dog fees in Tasman are going up after almost two thirds of submitters opposed the increases, and ratepayers will pick up the bill for other people's waste disposal. Those are just two of many changes to the district council's fees and charges for next financial year, most of which are increasing by 10%. But on Tuesday, the Tasman District Council grappled with the principles of fairness when trying to determine how dog and waste disposal fees were split. Elected members confirmed that its annual dog registration fees would jump by $25, bringing urban dogs up to $90 and rural dogs to $70 – increases of 38 and 56% respectively. A new working dog fee of $50 will also be introduced. The council went ahead with the hikes despite 39 of 64 submitters on the entire suite of fee changes specifically opposing the increases. Increasing the fee would ensure that the cost of delivering dog services – including enforcement, responding to complaints, managing public safety, operating the animal shelter, rehoming dogs, and educating the public – met the council's budget. The closed dog services account has previously run at a deficit, which then impacts either council debt or rates. Increasing the dog fees would also ensure the council continues its current approach that dog owners pay 95% of the costs of local dog services, in keeping with user pays principles. But the scale of the increases concerned some elected members. Mayor Tim King's proposal to stage the increase over two years lapsed due to a lack of support, as did councillor Glen Daikee's suggestion that SuperGold cardholders get reduced fees for urban dogs. 'Targeted relief for these residents would be worth it. 60% of people on a Super card over 65 are living on a fixed income essentially, and they don't have the ability to absorb these things as easily as others,' Daikee said. His proposal would have had to be processed as a rebate, which would come with additional administrative costs. However, members were interested in transitioning to a different dog fee framework in the future with 'much higher' base fees, but with rebates offered for responsible dog owners. 'At the moment there really isn't a significant incentive or disincentive between a good dog owner and a bad dog owner,' King said. Resource recovery centres across the district are also receiving less waste, which might be an otherwise positive result for the council if it didn't complicate budget-setting. Waste volumes have fallen by 28%, or 7500 tonnes, across Tasman over the last two years, with the Richmond centre bearing the brunt of the drop at 6000 tonnes. The fall is attributed to a combination of a slower economy, waste minimisation initiatives, diversion to York Valley Landfill in Nelson, and increased illegal dumping. Similar to dogs, the council has been seeking to recover most of its waste processing costs through those who use the service and drop off waste. But many of the costs of running the resource recovery centres are static and don't decrease as the amount of waste decreases, meaning that dumping costs need to go up as waste shrinks. The council's initial proposal was to increase the weight-based charge for mixed refuse by 28%, from $360.60 to $425.50 per tonne, to ensure that resource recovery was fully funded. However, feedback from industry has indicated that jumps of that scale would increase the amount of waste being sent straight to the York Valley Landfill, reducing the council's revenue. Elected members agreed to increase the rate by a smaller 15%, to about $414.70 per tonne, to try and reduce the amount of waste diversion. That choice still leaves a deficit for next financial year and will mean another 0.215% added onto rates – already proposed to go up 8.8% – to cover the shortfall. Council staff suggested a lesser increase might reduce illegal dumping, thus providing a community-wide benefit, but some councillors were wary of using rates to subsidise waste disposal. 'It's completely inconsistent with people taking personal responsibility … it sends all the wrong messages,' said Christeen Mackenzie. The waste disposal charges will be reviewed in November 2025. The new fees will be implemented on 1 July.
