- April 12, 2018 at 4:13 pm #1675882
For those interested in having input to the Tax Working Group here is the link.
We can also have a discussion here rather than on the Non Political threads.
CheersApril 16, 2018 at 10:31 pm #1676290
jensMemberMember since: May 3, 2006
From a Grey Power point of view standing for the economy to become productive and wealthy enough to keep good universal welfare and the NZ Super entitlement age at 65 sustainable despite the ageing population factor –
my submission to the Tax Working Group recommends not to reduce Govt. taxation revenue, but rather raise it to include components of higher rates of personal and national (retirement) wealth ownership creation than what has been achieved so far.
Grey Power has repeatedly defeated motions on reducing and complicating the collection of GST.
It has also passed motions of raising Govt. revenue by a capital transactions tax, as a possible alternative to the complications of capital gains taxes. At 0.1%, capital transactions tax would raise the cost of a $500,000.- house by only $500.-.
Without increasing savings for reserves, investments and debt repayments, the economic welfare future of our youth and their descendants is not promising at all.
April 19, 2018 at 1:48 pm #1676594
- This reply was modified 1 week ago by jens.
halcyonMemberMember since: May 4, 2014
Actually a Transaction tax would be a sound option. Those who transfer the largest sums would incur the greatest charges. And Transaction Tax would be harder to avoid. Under the current taxation options I can withdraw money and pay the person who paints my house cash. Whether she pays tax on that money is over to her. But it is difficult to detect. If the tax is paid on the cash withdrawal then problem solved.
Interesting enough this notion has been around since the time Vernon Cracknel won the Hobson Electorate for Social Credit. Interesting enough, some of the current proposed policies date back to that time and have their roots in Social Credit policy.April 19, 2018 at 4:18 pm #1676620
The transaction tax is a good idea and works best on banks and financial institutions that move millions of dollars around just to get a small percentage gain on the funds. Because it applies to huge sums of money the tax rate can be low and still gather revenue without impeding the general financial markets.
It does deter speculation though.
Cheers 🙂April 19, 2018 at 4:45 pm #1676629
TedEMemberMember since: May 6, 2006
The turnover of NZ currency to other currencies far exceeds our GDP or our import export transactions. How can this discrepancy be taxed so that those using our currency for speculation at least contribute a little toward it’s maintenance?
There is a certain amount of currency speculation where the currency rates are manipulated by large players so they can force currency values to change to their advantage. This needs to be taxed as well.
Then there is the Banking credit creation which increases their capital situation at no cost or effort to them using the assets of those who borrow from them. This is a great source of revenue for the Banks and should be subject to tax and should be readily identifiable.
TedE - Papakura -April 19, 2018 at 4:55 pm #1676638
All good ideas. Let the Tax Working Group know them.
Cheers 🙂April 20, 2018 at 8:24 pm #1676826
jensMemberMember since: May 3, 2006
Yes TedE and Hero42 – but if higher tax rates are only for more consumption and do not include a substantially increased universal national and personal (retirement) wealth ownership creative savings and investment rate, our basic socio-economic inequality of Haves and Have-Nots is not likely to be overcome.
In that case, the possible benefits of higher taxation could even become impoverishing, temporarily joy-making “hullabaloos”.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.