Tax Justice Aotearoa Welcomes IRD Discussion Document On Tax Reform
The discussion document suggests a stable core structure of main bases that 'comprehensively taxes the factors that are sought to be taxed', coupled with the ability to 'change rates on main bases to change the level of revenue.'
'We welcome the release of the draft LTIB as a useful contribution to the debate about what kind of tax system we want for the future,' says Glenn Barclay, Chair of Tax Justice Aotearoa.
'Tax has become a hot topic and this document demonstrates some of the challenges we face.'
'We look forward to hearing more from the IR officials and giving the public the opportunity to question their thinking at our upcoming briefing event*,' says Glenn Barclay. 'This is part of the consultation process so everyone who would like to make a submission on the LTIB should come along.'
The LTIB notes the fiscal challenge we face as a country as expenditure increases, largely as a result of an ageing population.
'Tax Justice Aotearoa agrees with this observation but an ageing population is just one of the many problems we have stored up for ourselves by failing to invest in both social and physical infrastructure - the challenges of poverty and inequality, as well as climate change adaptation and mitigation also come to mind', says Glenn Barclay.
The LTIB also demonstrates that New Zealand is an outlier in the extent to which it relies on tax revenue from labour income and GST and that we under tax capital income.
'These are the taxes that impact most on working people and the poor,' says Glenn Barclay.
'We need to address this imbalance by ensuring those who can afford to pay more are required to do so, and also that the regressive nature of GST can be addressed. The permanent GST-offset credit suggested by the LTIB, is a proposal worth considering.'
"There are limitations to the document, for example it does not address the interface between the tax system and the Working For Families tax credit, which is a fraught issue for those who are dependent upon WFF, but we look forward to the debate that the document will provoke,' says Glenn Barclay.
Note:
* Tax Justice Aotearoa will be hosting speakers from Inland Revenue at one of its 'Tax on Tuesdays' events on Tuesday 1 July at 12.30pm* - members of the public are welcome to attend.
It will be a hybrid event with an in person session at Rutherford House in Wellington, which will be live-streamed.
Where: Rutherford House Lecture Theatre 2 (RHLT2), 33 Bunny Street, Wellington.
When: 12.30-1.30 pm Tuesday, 1 July 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
8 hours ago
- RNZ News
'High trust' Covid approach led to fraud cases, tax expert says
Nearly $37,000 was paid into bank accounts under an Auckland woman's control from the Covid schemes. File photo. Photo: 123RF A run of fraud cases involving money taken from Covid-19 support cases reflects the "high trust" nature of the schemes, one tax expert says. Inland Revenue said on Tuesday that an Auckland woman had been sentenced to two years' prison on tax fraud charges. Caitlin Briar Ashby faced 18 charges, some of them representative, of using documents with intent to obtain a pecuniary advantage from income tax returns, GST returns and applications to two Covid-19 support schemes. She was given leave to apply for home detention if a suitable address where she could live was found. Ashby set up three bank accounts using false identities and filed 64 false income tax returns for 14 different taxpayers. She made two false GST returns, two false Small Business Cashflow scheme loan (SBCS) applications, one of which was paid out to Ashby and the other of which was declined, and one false Resurgence Support Payment (RSP) application. The SBCS and RSP schemes were set up to help businesses through Covid-19. Nearly $37,000 was paid into bank accounts under her control from the Covid schemes. Inland Revenue and the Ministry of Social Development have been taking action against others who abused the schemes. Earlier this month, IR said it had prosecuted 14 people so far. It has been given more funding for audit and debt collection work. MSD said its action had led to 46 people being sentenced. Another 49 people were still before the courts. Earlier this month, an accountant was sentenced nearly six years jail for a $1.7 million Covid-19 fraud. Robyn Walker, a tax partner at Deloitte said this was the result of the schemes being designed as "high trust". "The priority at the time was to get money out to businesses which needed it quickly, which to some extent meant that the level of scrutiny on applications was not as high as they might ordinarily be. The priority was to get the support to those who were entitled rather than holding everything up with a slow approval process. "While many of the public cases we are seeing are examples of clear fraud, there were also some semi-subjective criteria, meaning that some issues are arising where there are differing views about whether the entitlement criteria were met - for example different views on whether turnover drop criteria were met based on choices around comparator periods." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Herald
4 days ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: You can't exempt GST from food; Ardern should stand at the podium of accountability
We don't have to borrow more money. The rich have plenty of opportunity to avoid GST and need to pay their fair share of income tax. There is no 'trickle down' of wealth. There is only a 'trickle up'. The problem when the wealth doesn't get shared around is the economy stagnates, which is what we are seeing now. Only a change in mindset can fix this – kind of like climate change. Bill Gates made billions from Microsoft, then created a foundation to find ways to give it all away. I wonder what the world would look like today if he and others like him had charged a little less for their product and paid the people who worked for them a little more. Paul Cheshire, Maraetai. Don't forget October 7 In view of all the fiery rhetoric surrounding this conflict we seem to have lost sight of some facts. Let us remember that it was Hamas who sent armed men to kill and kidnap participants in a family day out music festival. It is Hamas who is still holding 50 hostages in underground tunnels and subjecting them to mental and physical deprivation. It is Hamas who announced that they do not care how many of their people die so long as Israel is made to look guilty of genocide. It is Hamas who has continually refused to come to any agreement with Israel. I am neither Jewish nor Islamic but I do read the Herald and watch the news. Jill Kouremetis, Waitākere. Covid-19 inquiry Thomas Coughlan does us a favour in astutely weighing the pros and cons of requiring Ardern and members of her cabinet to attend an open session of the second stage of the Covid-19 inquiry. But he ends his piece on a pessimistic note – namely, that both parties are guilty of setting up inquiries to find fault with their political opponents' time in office. If this is so, then this practice can only undermine the integrity and trust for one of the few ways we have of looking seriously at issues of governance and how to improve performance in public policy. The UK's Institute of Government issued a report on public inquiries and found that the most respected are headed by a non-partisan chair and often have terms of reference set by a select committee. In recent times, a supposedly 'independent' inquiry was quickly conducted on the performance of Kainga Ora (state housing) and, predictably, found fault, with the disbandment of much of the public housing programme, and quite possibly consequences for our current levels of homelessness. There were undoubtedly issues of performance, but it would have been publicly more palatable and informative for such findings to be more nuanced and established by a truly independent source. If we fail to retain the integrity and public trust for public inquiries, then we will have lost one of the best options we have for ensuring good government. Emeritus Professor Peter Davis, Auckland. Politicising Royal Commissions A timely warning by Herald political editor Thomas Coughlan about the dangers of politicising Royal Commissions. The terms of reference of the current Covid-19 inquiry, keeping the timeline from February 2021 to October 2022 to spare Winston Peters being called, is a case in point. So is all the controversy over Jacinda Ardern and her fellow ex-ministers for not appearing in person and answering questions privately instead. If one government can use such an inquiry as a way of effectively putting former government ministers on public trial, then so can another. Labour administrations have not been shy about this either in the past. With each new government becoming more strident in blaming their predecessors for the country's woes, Royal Commissions are in danger of being weaponised. As Coughlan ponders, perhaps we should leave the judgement of a government's performance to voters and the ballot box. Jeff Hayward, Central Auckland. Road user charges 'Fairness' talk justifying RUCs is utter crap and farmers make and talk a lot of it. The new so-called independent science adviser emits so much methane vapour on his breath you can smell him before he even talks. Users are asked to pay forward for road maintenance with RUCs but 'agricultural' carbon emitters are excused their costs. The shift to RUCs disincentivises buying a light fuel-efficient hybrid vehicle and incentivises heavy gas guzzlers. Is this an Act voting base – 'big bold beautiful gas guzzler libertarians'? Simon Watts removing farmers from the ETS isn't fair and Chris Bishop's RUCs aren't that fair on low-damage-causing low-emitting vehicles. It's a flat tax, virtually indiscriminate by weight, an obvious example of ignoring the axle-weight damage evidence, let alone exonerating big carbon emitters. A Blue-Green party is not viable at present. Blue-Green voters have little viable alternative in this climate-change denial dominant coalition. Green policies: wealth taxes, a cleaner a more equitable society put them off. Why? Wealthy people need to exercise their spinal tendons. We only need one in 10 to stiffen their resolve. A sustainable future is actually worth paying forward. I'm thinking this will be given the 'gumboot kick' as provocative and offensive but at least could make a few think. Steve Russell, Hillcrest. Wildfires The NZ Herald does a great job placing photos of blazing countries on fire for all the world to see. It's within the World section noting many of those countries, America, Spain, Portugal, France, Greece, Italy and now Canada as they try to dampen down extraordinary fires raging uncontrolled from temperatures way above normal. Other countries suffer from the loss of fertile land, too dry for anything to grow, causing starvation. A few of these articles mention climate change and some even stress our need to stop burning fossil fuels. In winter, the news covers storms, floods and sea rises threatening life as we know it. The biggest threat of all to our world are the oil-producing companies. They are in control, refusing to face up to this horrendous disaster they are subjecting our planet to. Along with plastic, made also from oil, they dig on down, heads in the sand, ignoring statistics, ignoring the disasters, so their flow of money into already overloaded bank accounts can continue. But what do they gain on a planet that is dying? Emma Mackintosh, Birkenhead. A quick word The same degree of compulsion that locked down the team of five million from the 'podium of truth' should be applied to the squad of four – Ardern, Robertson, Hipkins and Verrall – to front up at the podium of accountability in person. Mike Wagg, Freemans Bay. Talk about third world, how absurd to read that a prison is to be air conditioned while a hospital nearby is not. Surely one would think that the likes of schools and hospitals would be at the top of the list for that? Prisons are getting better by the day it seems and soon won't be too far below a hotel standard if that continues. Paul Beck, West Harbour. All those that have not responded to an invitation to submit to Royal Commission on Covid. Why have a commission? You and I survived and we can thank the government for our closure. It is always good to look back in hindsight but at the time we were in the dark as was the rest of the world. How many invitations have you responded, 'sorry but no'? Dennis Manson, Unsworth Heights. Given the reputation many police forces across the globe for violence and corruption, I was rather hoping that, following the tragic death of an alleged offender in Christchurch, Mark Mitchell would rate our own as being somewhat above 'world class'. The phrase 'world class' itself in today's ever-changing world doesn't really fill one with a great deal of confidence. Our country should strive to be better than 'world class', because we can be when we want to be. Jeremy Coleman, Hillpark. This week there was another media report of angry adults making their way onto the grounds of a high school, causing a lockdown. Such incursions seem to be increasing, often sparked by feuding comments on social media. These actions are frightening for students and staff who are the focus of these people, and those who witness them. Schools are supposed to be safe places for children, and classrooms are the domain of teachers. Trespass notices can be meaningless if the person does not normally have any association with the school issuing it. As a deterrent, surely it is time such unlawful entry to a school is categorised as a crime with more serious consequences for the perpetrators. Matt Elliott, Birkdale.
NZ Herald
4 days ago
- NZ Herald
Covid-19 pandemic handling returns to headlines, with Labour under scrutiny
What truly put the wind at the Government's back this week was the unexpected exhumation of half-buried relics from the Covid era – a period Labour may prefer was left entombed in the sediment of public amnesia. The first, was last Thursday's Treasury Long Term Insights Briefing (LTIB). The report was actually into how best to manage economic shocks: should the Government spend up, or leave it to the Reserve Bank? Treasury reckoned managing shocks was mostly best left to the Reserve Bank – a conclusion it published in a draft report some months ago. What was new were details of Treasury's advice to the former Government of its advice during the pandemic. Two short sections in particular noted that Treasury advised the last Government to ease up on the stimulus in 2022, and another section detailed the consequences of this: a large structural deficit and risks of inflation. With Finance Minister Nicola Willis off in London, exchanging knowing grimaces with Chancellor Rachel Reeves over their mutually dreadful fiscal headaches – left-right ideological niceties be damned – it was Bishop's opportunity to don the acting finance minister cap and have lobbed at him volley after volley of low patsy questions on the report, giving him ample opportunity to sermonise on Labour's alleged fiscal sins. Bishop first cleared his blocked throat during the very first question of the week on Tuesday, Labour leader Chris Hipkins, pointedly interjecting that this was clearly 'audition number one' for Luxon's job. Hipkins wasn't wrong about it being 'number one'. Come Wednesday, it was Nancy Lu's turn to take to her feet and ask Bishop what economic reports he'd been reading, to which he replied he was not yet done with Treasury's gripping LTIB. On Thursday, the lucky backbencher was Catherine Wedd, who asked the same question: what reports had the minister (officially Willis, but in practice, Bishop) been reading on the state of the economy. Bishop replied, 'Oh, I haven't been able to stop reading Treasury's long-term insights briefing.' Another MP, Tom Rutherford piped up, 'What did it say?' Bishop replied, testing the limits of MPs' obligation to be truthful in the House, 'it's a great read'. It's not a bad parliamentary tactic: Grant Robertson often used it to highlight his successes and the Opposition's shortcomings. Bishop's effort this week worked wonders in cheering an otherwise gloomy backbench. In Question Time this week Chris Bishop revealed a passion for reading Treasury documents. Photo / Mark Mitchell Willis and Bishop have done a clever job in giving the impression Treasury's LTIB was mostly about slamming Labour for the Covid response – it's true, that's what's new in the final version vis-a-vis the earlier draft, but overall, the backward-looking part of the report is a small part of the whole. Labour's responses are as interesting as the report itself. Leader Chris Hipkins dismissed it as 'spin', former Robertson staffers Craig Renney and Toby Moore had more detailed critiques. Renney, posting to his Substack, quoted Michael Cullen to describe report as an 'ideological burp' and decided to skewer the conclusion that managing economic cycles was primarily the job of the Reserve Bank. In Renney's view, the whole government is responsible for managing the economic cycle. If this is left to just the Reserve Bank, its focus on inflation would mean that other, distributional impacts become neglected. Hammering inflation somewhere means hammering the economy everywhere. To be fair to Treasury, its report does briefly touch on fiscal policy's ability and obligation to smooth the bluntness of monetary policy. That's worth pursuing in more detail, particularly given the experience New Zealand had during the pandemic, in which the Reserve Bank's money-printing played arsonist to the housing market, before the bank guiltily and belatedly doused the inferno in a series of rate rises so blunt in their asphyxiating cruelty they cast thousands on to the dole queue, and shunted thousands more into the airport departure lounge. Moore's piece, published in the Herald, was more of a right of reply to Treasury. He resurfaced papers he first received as a staffer in Robertson's office and which were subsequently published in the Herald to note that as late as Budget 2023, Treasury was still advising Robertson to spend yet more money – not on Covid stimulus, but via his operating allowance, the pot of money to fund ongoing cost increases in departments and to pay for new things, like removing the $5 prescription charge in that Budget. In that Budget, Robertson actually spent slightly less than Treasury told him, not more. In that Budget, as for all of Robertson's Covid Budgets, the advice to spend more was consistent with the economic forecasts continually being revised in the right direction. This meant more money flowing in, allowing the Government to spend more money while returning to surplus in a creditable timeframe. The trouble with these forecasts is that they were wrong – and badly wrong. The economy did not grow nearly as much as hoped, tax revenue fell – and the effect was compounded, tax revenue as a share of the smaller economy was smaller than forecast too. The spending still happened, but we're still waiting on the money to pay for it. There were, then, two obvious flaws, given just passing detail in Treasury's report: the first is that Treasury's forecasts were badly wrong, the second was that Robertson did not show enough caution when he relied upon Treasury to put his Budgets together. That telling of the story is no less interesting to either side, but it has a different moral lesson: the solution to the fiscal problem really is, as Willis says, growth. If the economy had grown to where Treasury earlier forecast it would grow to, we'd be in surplus and reducing the debt ratio by now. A Treasury graph plotting which fiscal years have run counter- and pro-cyclically. Graph / Treasury Treasury quietly dropped another paper this week – this time by one of its economists, with the usual disclaimer that it does not necessarily represent the views of Treasury as an organisation. It pondered whether governments were running pro-cyclical or counter-cyclical fiscal policies, with the latter generally preferred because it allows the Government to moderate the economic cycle. Cullen gets the biscuit for running the most counter-cyclical budgets, Bill English and Steven Joyce get good marks too. Robertson's first term gets a pass, but not the second. The report only goes up to the fiscal year 2024, which was the year of a Labour Budget and National mini-Budget, but some back-of-the-envelope maths from the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update would suggest the Budgets for the last and the current fiscal years will be counter-cyclical – the first since 2019, a cautious vote of confidence in approval to Willis' economic management. The week ended on another blast from the past. The Covid-19 Royal Commission announced Labour ministers would not be appearing before the inquiry in person. Labour itself only found out the commission was going to announce this change a few minutes before it did so – the coalition seemed to have more warning, with each of the three parties putting out damning press releases shortly afterwards. Polling shows the public is clearly on the coalition's side and wants the ministers to appear, but they won't. The refusal led the news for 24 hours and is a good reminder to Labour the public haven't put the pandemic to bed quite as much as the party would like. Labour is proud of its Covid record but the fact the ministers won't appear in public allows the Opposition to argue, with some conviction, that perhaps Labour actually isn't – and its Covid record, particularly on economic matters, is really as embarrassing as the Opposition would like the public to believe. It's a dilemma for the Labour ministers, some of whom probably wouldn't mind appearing and defending themselves. One of the ex-ministers probably will be appearing in public in the near future – and, unlike Jacinda Ardern, will probably spend a lot of that time talking about Covid and money: Robertson's memoir Anything Could Happen is out later this month. There's a good chance some of these questions will get an airing in any promotional tour, and the book itself.
