The Green Party has announced a new suite of tax policies including making the first $10,000 people earn each year tax free, which the party says will give 96% of New Zealanders a tax cut.
The Green Party released its election year tax policy called A tax policy for all of us: Contributing fairly to society on Sunday, saying its plan; "will make sure the super-rich and big corporations contribute their share, reduce tax on salaried and waged workers, and fund the critical social services we all rely on.”
Alongside creating a tax-free threshold of $10,000 for those on an income under $160,000, it would also set tax brackets between $10,000 and $160,000 thresholds, including a 45% threshold for incomes that are $160,000 and over.
Corporate tax rate, big tech tax and bank levy
The Greens also want to:
- Return the corporate tax rate to 33% for the 0.7% biggest corporations like energy companies, banks and supermarkets - this would apply to companies with an annual turnover of over $30 million
- Keep the corporate tax rate at 28% for small and medium enterprises to level the playing field for local businesses
- Introduce a bank levy of 0.06% on the liabilities of banks who have more than $100 billion in liabilities [ANZ NZ, ASB, BNZ and Westpac NZ]
- Enforce a 5% withholding tax rate on the profits that big tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Uber, Visa and Mastercard send offshore
- Reverse the Coalition Government’s interest deductibility on residential investment property for landlords and changes to the brightline test
“Big corporations that set up shop in Aotearoa are profiting from society while often making little contribution to it, while New Zealanders struggle to keep up with costs for life’s essentials, like food and electricity," the Green Party says.
When it came to the corporate tax rate, the policy points out how in the early 1980s, it was 48%. Currently at 28%, the Green Party says reducing the corporate tax rate has not led to “any measurable, meaningful improvement for working New Zealanders.”
“It reduces the collective pool of resource that pays for things we all use and need.”
Bank levy 'to address the fiscal risks of highly leveraged banks to the economy'
Of its proposed bank levy, the Green Party says: “The purpose of this is to address the fiscal risks of highly leveraged banks to the economy in Aotearoa, the high profitability of the big banks, and level the playing field for smaller competitors such as Kiwibank.”
Of big tech companies the Green Party says they use service fees and license fees to reduce their taxable profits paid in NZ by shifting profits offshore.
"These fees are often, in substance, royalties that are supposed to be subjected to withholding taxes."
A withholding tax would also apply to companies like Netflix and credit card companies, such as Visa and Mastercard, who use a service company model where the local subsidiary operates as a marketing and support service to an overseas group company, with the sales booked offshore, the Greens say.
"This enforcement action would apply to all companies who misclassify royalties as service fees and license fees, not just the big tech companies listed as examples.”
The Greens would fund Inland Revenue to implement transparency work to crack down on multinational tax evasion.
Taxing 'the super-rich' and an inheritance tax
The Green Party has put forward a 2.5% tax on the net assets of "the super-rich" above $10 million, things like properties, companies or shares, with an exemption on family homes.
“For an individual with net assets above $10m, or $20m for a couple, minus mortgages and other debt, a 2.5% annual tax will apply on those assets.”
The Green Party says this means the richest 0.3% of New Zealanders would contribute more to "solving the big challenges we face together".
Māori land under Te Ture Whenua Māori Act would be exempt, and so would the assets of Post-Settlement Governance Entities, such as land returned under a Treaty Settlement or vested in a Treaty Settlement Entity.
Assets belonging to charities, Non-governmental organisations, clubs and other entities would not be part of anyone’s individual taxable wealth, the tax policy document says.
“Wealth held in trusts will be apportioned to an individual’s taxable wealth, based on their interest in the trust. For discretionary trusts, the settlor of the trust will be liable for the trust’s net wealth," the Greens say.
“For fixed-interest trusts, the net wealth of the trust will be apportioned to each beneficiary’s tax liability per their interest in the trust.”
The Greens are also proposing to implement a Capital Acquisitions Tax of 33% on inheritance and gifts received worth over $1 million - family farms , small gifts and family homes are not included in this.
“The person receiving the inheritance or gift will pay the tax, not the estate or person passing it on. It would apply to approximately 1100 people a year.”
The Greens say their tax policy will increase net revenue by $5.15 billion in 2027/28, rising to $5.73 billion by 2030/31.
‘The big rip-off ends here’
Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says the party was “proud to announce a tax policy that will tackle inequality and corporate greed to rebuild our country and put more money in the pockets of 96% of New Zealanders”.
“People aren’t dumb. They know that while their cost of living has gone through the roof, corporate profits have skyrocketed and the wealthiest 150 rich listers now own more than half of the country. The big rip-off ends here,” Swarbrick says.
Greens co-leader Marama Davidson says some people are making record profits yet the cost of living has jumped for ordinary people.
She says the country’s hospitals, schools, public transport and environment “are all starved of funding.”
“These are critical social services that all New Zealanders need, including the super-rich.”
“Essential services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure could be funded if the super-rich and mega-corporates like the supermarkets duopoly, banks, and power companies contribute fairly to the society they profit from,” Davidson says.
Note: The Greens initially said on Sunday that their tax policy would increase net revenue by $5.35 billion in 2027/28, rising to $5.94 billion by 2030/31. These figures have been updated and corrected on Monday due to the Greens' own error.
28 Comments
Nice try by the Greens. But I prefer Opportunity's universal 'citizens' income: a JobSeeker benefit for everyone.
That, of course, must mean quite a high tax rate on the first dollar of any other income; otherwise the economy would be awash with devaluing currency that would impoverish the low paid it was intended to help.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KgTXUgjVipAA7EcDas-EJmOr6ZkeCf9B/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c0gMASTHrVvZI87WGFV9NNKyGj1WzpgW/view
The majority of wealth in Aotearoa has been created via the Ponzi, which is essentially the destruction of purchasing power (or devaluing the currency as you put it). Now some of those uber-wealthy have created their wealth through the Ponzi, while others have earned their wealth through the production of goods and services. It seems to me that the Greens don't understand the difference and don't have any idea of how the bulk of 'wealth' has been generated in Aotearoa.
Also, we need to understand that taxation is not necessarily how govts fund their spending. Taxation is also a way of controlling inflation. It seems to me that the Greens are all about centralized power while paying lip service to community. Hypocritical if you ask me.
Funny to blame the people who are already paying for everything like they are the enemy.
They are "paying for everything" because they've grabbed everything Jimbo.
Most people on 160k plus work bloody hard for it. Take Peter Beck for example, is he the enemy, would we be better off without him and the thousands of high paying jobs he's created?
It's tax, not exile
Its excessive additional tax punishing the creative and successful kiwi. Look at what happened in California and the UK with their "targeted" tax. Companies and jobs and their associated wealth relocated en mass.
A simple welcome mat in Aussie would see the same thing.
Like the tax targeting the global tec gians. Their business models are all designed to profit shift for tax purposes out of NZ.
If we are going to continue to allow (encourage?) the extraction of benefit without contribution then we find ourselves (as do others) that the systems which enable that benefit to be created become non functional.
It is curious that those that benefit the most fight the hardest to destroy the systems that provide that benefit.
160K+ earners would escape our 45% top tax rate by moving to aussie where the top tax rate is.... 45%?
Starts at $190000 aud though
Note California hasn't "happened" yet and a few high profile individuals throwing their toys will not move silicon valley elsewhere.
Successful kiwis aiming high will do better going elsewhere due to the larger markets, tax irrelevant. The draw of living in NZ is not and has not been purely for financial gain and there are plenty that will understand and appreciate that while happily paying a larger share for the privilege
The Green Party is quite daft. But the two below are worthy.
But as for a withholding tax at 5%. Quite naive. These outfits manage to make no new Zealand profit at all by the use of quite dodgy transfer payments. I would suggest instead a turnover tax of say 35%.
- Enforce a 5% withholding tax rate on the profits that big tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Uber, Visa and Mastercard send offshore
- Reverse the Coalition Government’s interest deductibility on residential investment property for landlords and changes to the brightline test
If you make a physical thing overseas and bring it here and sell it, you only pay tax on the profit. When Panasonic sell a TV in NZ we don't expect them to pay 28% tax on the full sale price. So why would services / software be any different?
"Green with envy"
Bilious shade too. Bile does that.
The Green Party has put forward a 2.5% tax on the net assets of "the super-rich" above $10 million, things like properties, companies or shares, with an exemption on family homes.
Why exclude the family home? Don't invest in businesses because we'll tax ya, just buy the best house you can afford instead.
I have an issue with that too. The obvious go-around is to pour your wealth into a $30m "family home" and still dodge the taxman. That would account for 99.9% of the population.
I see equity merit in this tax policy. But it stands alone, so far in their overall party manifesto, yet to be revealed.
What, to me, are their other policies going to be? Like losing productive farmland to blanket pine plantation forestry?
I don't disagree.
Problem is as people have said the tax free wealth created to date sitting there.
The Green Party says this means the richest 0.3% of New Zealanders would contribute more to "solving the big challenges we face together".
Don't think the richest 0.3% will be voting Green.
Unlikely to even vote. Much more effective just to hand over a donation to get what they want.
You should. think, that is
So if I borrow to buy a warehouse to rent out I can claim interest as a tax deduction, but if I borrow to buy a house to rent out, I can't. I don't understand this arbitrary distinction.
The last time this policy was introduced resulted in an increase in rents. I would think a significant portion of the Green's constituency are renters rather than owners, and so would be aversely impacted by this kind of policy.
I read these reactions on here, and the negative and insulting language and dont actually see that anyone has read the policy in depth; nor are they offering any other solutions- except for the comment by a TOP supporter.
We have to change things and we have to find a way to support the children of New Zealand to be well provided for, well educated and good citizens. You cant do that if you are hungry, your parents are absent at work,and you are in a cold damp home.
Yes. I will have to pay a lot more tax, and you know what- I can afford to. Most of the readers here can afford to as well.
We have to change things and we have to find a way to support the children of New Zealand to be well provided for, well educated and good citizens. You cant do that if you are hungry, your parents are absent at work,and you are in a cold damp home.
Is the Aoteraoa govt's top brass hungry and living in damp, miserable conditions? No they're not. Therefore it should not impact on their abilities as the architects of change.
But lumping a large property tax on the Mowbrays and other Aotearoans only alleviates poverty to some extent if it's given directly to those in desperate need.
If the govt as middleman to manage all this is the way, we need concrete illustrations of how it all works.
I gave you a thumbs up for the good intentions.
Unfortunately I don't think we can solve multi-generational welfare dependency by tax policy.
Sure, collect more tax if you can without capital flight and employment loss. The bigger test is the responsible and careful way it's spent.
It's a start though right
What sticks out is the $5-6b increase on the existing ~$120bn annual tax take is relatively small (less than 5%) and only half of our current deficit. With this extra revenue they would still be operating a sizeable deficit before the additional spending kicks in.
Or am I missing something here?
How much do we trust the greens - or any party - to not fiddle with regulations inside tax legislation, once the mechanisms are in place?
At the moment there are things like bracket creep with tax thresholds that are locked place, that quietly ease more people on to higher tax rates.
And where is the undertaking, from any progressive party, to make effective and efficient use of the taxes collected?
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.