Financial Statements Of The Government Of New Zealand For The Nine Months Ended 31 March 2025
The interim Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the nine months ended 31 March 2025 were released by the Treasury today. The March results are reported against forecasts based on the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update 2024 (HYEFU 2024), published on 17 December 2024, and the results for the same period for the previous year.
The majority of the key fiscal indicators for the nine months ended 31 March 2025 were better than forecast. The Government's main operating indicator, the operating balance before gains and losses excluding ACC (OBEGALx), showed a deficit of $6.6 billion. This was $0.5 billion smaller than forecast largely due to lower than forecast core Crown expenditure. Net core Crown debt was $2.1 billion lower than forecast at $182.0 billion, or 42.6% of GDP.
Core Crown tax revenue, at $89.5 billion, was $0.2 billion (0.2%) higher than forecast. While GST and other individuals' tax were both above forecast by $0.5 billion each, this was broadly offset by source deductions and corporate tax which were below forecast by $0.5 billion and $0.3 billion, respectively.
Core Crown expenses, at $104.1 billion, were $0.6 billion (0.5%) below forecast. This variance included some significant offsetting variances and was mostly timing in nature. In particular, core government services expenses were $0.6 billion above forecast, while transport and housing expenses were $0.6 billion and $0.3 billion below forecast, respectively. The remaining variance was spread across a range of agencies.
The OBEGALx was a deficit of $6.6 billion, $0.5 billion less than the forecast deficit. When including the revenue and expenses of ACC, the OBEGAL deficit was $8.4 billion, $0.4 billion less than the forecast deficit.
The operating balance deficit of $4.5 billion was $0.8 billion higher than the forecast deficit. This reflected net unfavourable valuation movements along with the favourable OBEGAL result. Net gains on financial instruments were $4.0 billion lower than forecast, driven by the performance of the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (NZS Fund) and ACC's investment portfolios. This unfavourable variance was partly offset by net losses on non-financial instruments being $2.6 billion less than forecast. This was largely owing to a $0.7 billion net actuarial gain on ACC's outstanding claims liability compared to a forecast net loss of $1.0 billion, and the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme with net losses being $0.9 billion lower than forecast.
The core Crown residual cash deficit of $5.3 billion was $1.7 billion lower than forecast. While net operating cash flows were broadly in line with forecast, net core Crown capital cash outflows were $1.5 billion lower than forecast. This variance is expected to be timing in nature, mainly owing to net purchases of investments and net increases in advances which were both below forecast by $0.6 billion and $0.7 billion, respectively.
Net core Crown debt at $182.0 billion (42.6% of GDP) was $2.1 billion lower than forecast. This variance was largely due to the variance in core Crown residual cash deficit and the factors not impacting residual cash which improved net core Crown debt. Of these factors, the most significant was foreign exchange movements since the HYEFU 2024 forecast which have resulted in $0.5 billion of net gains improving net core Crown debt without impacting the core Crown residual cash indicator.
Gross debt at $206.0 billion (48.3% of GDP) was $0.5 billion higher than forecast, largely owing to higher than forecast government stock, partially offset by lower than forecast Treasury bills.
Net worth at $183.8 billion (43.1% of GDP) was $0.3 billion lower than forecast. The variance to forecast reflects a higher operating balance deficit discussed above, partially offset by net actuarial gains on retirement plan schemes ($0.5 billion). Net worth consisted of total Crown assets of $594.7 billion (in line with forecast) and total Crown liabilities of $410.9 billion ($0.3 billion higher than forecast).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Ruth Richardson calls for super age hike, warns of fiscal 'crisis'
Former finance minister Ruth Richardson has called for an increase in the retirement age, warning New Zealand faces a balance sheet crisis without urgent action. The newly appointed chairperson of the Taxpayers' Union, a right-wing political lobby group, told Q+A that government debt needed addressing. "We need to control our spending appetite, we need to bring debt under control, and we need to restore New Zealand's books to a state of fiscal responsibility," Richardson said. "From a central government perspective, it's clear that we have a crisis, and the crisis is looming — as it is in many other countries in the West, we're not alone." The architect of the 1991 "Mother Of All Budgets" said the Government should follow her previous reforms that raised the superannuation eligibility age from 60 to 65. ADVERTISEMENT "On my watch, we increased the age of eligibility from 60 to 65, with near a mutter. It was done as part of a broader package of reforms to put New Zealand on a sounder footing, and we need to do the same again," she said. "We should have a superannuation age of eligibility, just like the electoral boundaries. You just adjust it for — in this case — the data that tells you about the age of longevity." Richardson, who became aligned with ACT after retiring from politics, criticised the coalition government for ultimately committing billions more in spending at Budget 2025. She said: "We're starting to swamp education spending, we're starting to swamp defence spending — that is not defensible. We need a credible deficit track. "At the moment, we've got fiction. What we want is fact, and fact is going to require some pretty hard decisions taken about the issues... starting with superannuation." Ruth Richardson (Source: Supplied) She also rejected the characterisation that the country had a lack of funding for infrastructure, saying instead that too much money was being spent on "vanity projects" at the local government level. ADVERTISEMENT Finance Minister Nicola Willis has previously rejected suggestions she had broken an election promise to return to surplus by 2027. It was despite Treasury forecasts now showing a return to surplus wouldn't occur until 2029 under the Government's preferred accounting measure known as OBEGALx. By the traditional measure, known as OBEGAL, New Zealand wasn't expected to return to surplus until the 2030s at the earliest. OBEGALx excluded the costs of ACC. Richardson also advocated for asset sales, suggesting the Government should sell state-owned enterprises, including power companies, Landcorp and commercial broadcaster TVNZ — which she said was "probably worth a dollar". Richardson steadfast on views nearly 35 years on Speaking on Q+A, Richardson, who was recently made a companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit in the King's Birthday Honours, defended her 1990s reforms after being presented with poverty statistics showing persistent increases following her Budget cuts. When presented with data showing child poverty rates grown significantly after her reforms and never ultimately corrected, Richardson defended herself, saying doing nothing in her time would have been "the most immoral option". ADVERTISEMENT "We took our courage in our hands and did the right thing, and the economy prospered. You're not putting up the stats that showed the rise in growth, the rise in employment, the halving of the debt and putting the books back into balance," she said. "If you were balanced, you'd be showing those statistics." She added: "The real poverty was New Zealand's if we had done nothing. If we had done nothing, then New Zealand would have most certainly faced the crisis that the Labour government did in the mid-'80s. And in a crisis, the people who are hurt most are the poorest people, the people on the bottom of the rung." For the full interview, watch the video above Q+A with Jack Tame is made with the support of New Zealand On Air
Kiwiblog
3 days ago
- Kiwiblog
Was anyone held accountable?
Radio NZ reports: After spending $23m but failing to modernise the births, deaths and marriages registry, officials are having another go. The Department of Internal Affairs has written off $22.9m on the project abandoned last year, returned an unspent $58m to the Crown and remains locked in a dispute with the Australian company DWS over the contract it terminated in late 2023. 'Although some of the work completed will be able to be used for a future civil registration system replacement project, from an accounting standards perspective, it [decided] should impair (write off) all capital costs incurred to date,' DIA told RNZ. So $23 million wasted. Has anyone been held accountable for the failed project?
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
A Bold Dream Gets A Cut As Predator Free 2050 Ltd Is Disestablished
Article – RNZ Predator Free 2050 was hit by a budget blow, and now the 'moonshot' goal is under threat, for The Detail The environmental sector worries that the future of a predator-free Aotearoa is in jeopardy after the Government swung the axe in the latest budget. It was billed as a 'moonshot' for New Zealand's environment – a bold, world-leading goal launched by Sir John Key in 2016, aimed at eradicating rats, possums and stoats from our islands by 2050. The vision has been clear – bring back birdsong to every valley, protect the flightless kiwi, and restore what once thrived. But today, the future of Predator Free 2050 looks uncertain. Predator Free 2050 Ltd, the Crown-owned company established to drive and fund large-scale eradication and breakthrough science, is now being disestablished, as announced as part of Budget 2025. Funding for the company will cease by the end of the year, with its responsibilities shifted to the Department of Conservation (DOC), which the government says will reduce duplication, increase efficiency and save about $12 million. 'People are now worried for this programme,' Newsroom environment editor David Williams tells The Detail. 'They say without ongoing funding, we will not only not go forward, but we will go backwards. This programme needs funding, and that's up to the government.' The government insists the broader goal of predator eradication remains. But Dr Kayla Kingdon-Bebb, chief executive of WWF New Zealand, is not entirely convinced. 'New Zealanders believe in the Predator Free 2050 dream, and we want the government to get behind them too. But I'm not sure this will happen. 'I've not been seeing a lot of enthusiasm for environmental outcomes from this government, full stop. We describe the government's policy agenda as a war on nature, and I think it is disappointing that a previous National government got so strongly behind this moonshot objective, and this government does not seem to care so much.' Both Williams and Kingdon-Bebb say the country has 'overwhelmingly' backed the Predator Free 2050 initiative, allowing it to 'come a long way, in a relatively short time'. Already, predator-elimination projects cover more than 800,000 hectares. 'This is a big amount of land,' says Williams. 'And the goal is big … but they have done well. 'They also said they wanted to fund scientific research, and 15 or 20 projects have already had money to try and sort this problem out. 'A lot of community groups have latched on to this – someone said to me that this is the one conservation project that has captured the imagination of New Zealanders more than any other.' Kingdon-Bebb agrees. 'It has certainly captured the hearts and minds like nothing else,' she says. 'We have seen an explosion of community trapping groups and landscape-scale projects over the last nine years, which has been amazing … now I feel the government is taking its foot off the pedal. 'What is apparent is that the government has had a look at the delivery model of the programme as a whole, which is complex. 'So, if it is the case that the government has reviewed it and determined that a crown-owned corporation is not the best delivery methodology, I can accept that. 'DOC has a lot of capability … and perhaps it is appropriate for DOC to be coordinating this work, perhaps there was duplication of roles and functions and costs. 'But where I would be concerned is that in the wider scale of what has happened in the last two budgets, the Department of Conservation will see, in total, about 300 million dollars in savings exacted from it. 'So, it does beg the question whether a very stretched department can pick up the leadership of this initiative in a way we would want to see it done.' Critics say that move will slow momentum, bury innovation under bureaucracy and confuse local projects already stretched thin. They also argue that across the country, hundreds of predator-free community groups, many driven by volunteers, will be left wondering what support will look like without the company's funding, research backing and strategic oversight. But the government insists the predator-free projects and contracts funded by the company are not affected and it is committed to the predator-free 2050 goal.
