sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Homeowners who sell their weather damaged properties to local councils will not be subject to the bright-line test, Revenue Minister Barbara Edmonds says

Public Policy / news
Homeowners who sell their weather damaged properties to local councils will not be subject to the bright-line test, Revenue Minister Barbara Edmonds says
The NZ Defence Force delivers essentials and does welfare checks in Hastings after Cyclone Gabrielle.
New Zealand Defence Force delivers essentials to flood affected homes in Hastings after Cyclone Gabrielle.

The Government will pass a law to exempt flood and cyclone-damaged homes from the bright-line test, which imposes a capital gains tax on investment properties.

Last month, Inland Revenue issued a guide to the bright-line property tax which outlined its interpretation of the law as introduced by National in 2015 and revised in 2021 by Labour. 

The bright-line rule was intended to act as a capital gains tax on property investors and it excludes the family home. It was first a two-year test but has been extended to 10-years. 

However, the IRD issued an interpretation document in May outlining its view on what could be considered a person’s “main home”. 

The tax commissioner ruled if someone was absent from their property for more than 12 months, that was a strong indication they were no longer using it as their dwelling. 

This would mean if a homeowner left their property for longer than one-year, it would be subject to the capital gains tax if it were sold. Even if the owner kept it as a ‘family home’. 

Homeowners who have been displaced by Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland Anniversary Weekend floods could plausibly be caught by these rules and have the tax imposed on their house. 

This could apply to those who have to leave their house to make repairs, or those in high-risk areas who are waiting to receive a voluntary buyout. 

On Wednesday, Revenue Minister Barbara Edmonds announced legislation would be passed to make sure the latter group would not be inadvertently caught by the tax rules when local authorities buy-out damaged properties in Auckland, Hawke’s Bay, Tairawhiti, and other regions hit by severe weather events.

The exemption will apply to all types of properties and owners, not just those who have been absent from their family homes. 

For example, a person who owns a rental property in a high risk area will not be subject to the bright-line test, even if they have owned it for less than 10 years. 

“The Government is clear that it isn’t appropriate to apply the bright-line test to these property sales because the impact of weather events gave the property owner little option other than to sell to the local authority,” Edmonds said in a press release. 

Officials from Inland Revenue and the Cyclone Recovery Unit have been working on a fix since the voluntary buyouts were announced. A supplementary order paper will make the changes via a broad tax bill already before Parliament. 

“The amendment will ensure the bright-line and other time related tests do not apply following a Government or local authority buy-out of a North Island flood or cyclone-affected property.” 

Ordinarily, the bright-line test applies to properties like second homes or rental properties where profit is taxable if it is sold within 10 years of purchase, or five years under the previous test.

Stealth-y taxes

Nicola Willis, the National Party’s finance spokesperson, said the extended bright-line test was a “capital gains tax by stealth”. 

A family could have to pay capital gains on the sale of their home, just because one parent had to move out for more than 12 months because of work or a family illness. 

Edmonds retorted that the law had been introduced by the National Party and the same situation would have been caught under their rules. 

“I absolutely refute the mischaracterization by that member who says that there is a capital gains tax by stealth. There is no capital gains tax in New Zealand on the family home.” 

Willis said National would roll the bright-line test back to just two years. While these absences would still trigger the rule, owners could just wait out the two-year threshold before selling. 

Rolling back the tax isn’t enough for the Taxpayers’ Union, however. The small government pressure group wants the bright-line test scrapped altogether. 

Callum Purves, the group’s campaigns manager, said the National Party had opened a back door for a capital gains tax to walk through. 

 “When John Key’s Government introduced the bright-line test in 2015, this was the start of a slippery slope,” he said. 

 “As many warned at the time, the IRD’s reinterpretation of Labour’s 2021 amendment to the test now means that working Kiwi families can be taxed on the value of their family home.”

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.



Decision on the submission in a couple weeks.


How about a cancer patient getting treatment away from home Revenue Minister Barbara Edmonds unsure if cancer patient staying away from home for treatment subject to capital gains tax, seeking advice | Newshub

I could take a good guess where IRDs pinheads are stuck...


We must indeed always support property owners and speculators and tax only working Kiwis.


That's the point of what is happening here. The IRD has taken an interpretation on the Brightline that could impact non-investors who are away from their properties for natural disasters or work reasons and the Government is giving them a rolled up newspaper across the nose for it. 


This is possibly one of labours dumbest pieces of legislation (and there are a lot to choose from) full of unintended consequences.

the piece of the law where if you move house for longer than 12 months (ie a secondment or job in a different city )has an enormous impact on productivity and the ability to grow capability. This is before we even start on what people do if family members are sick, or they get stuck overseas such as in another pandemic etc.

I can’t see any good justification for changing the law on this - the Australian model is you can rent your main house for up to 6 years without paying CGT on the proviso you don’t own another residence that you live in. If you buy another residence then you have 12 months to sell your prior residence. Labour could have and should have copied the Australian model and would have avoided all the mess they have created. 



Air NZ . Billion dollar turn around on a 6 Billion  turnover.?

412 million profit?