-
Would be nice for NZ to have a National Day to be proud to be kiwi. Rather than the acrimonious Waitangi Day “celebrations”. I haven’t a drop of Maori blood, but I’d be a fan of renaming the North & South Islands too. It’s good to see an increase in all things Maori
-
@taniwharugby Should have had "increases" in there and yes brackets could be modified.
-
@Snowy said in NZ Politics:
I'm not anti labour, and would vote for them if the pros outweighed the cons for me personally of course, but damaging the economy even more is pretty bloody dumb by buying a day off.
I agree. There is no way that I would start voting labour for a day off. No chance.
I just support that idea.
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
@Snowy I don't think direct taxation is likely to rise. Haven't Collins and Adern both ruled them out. Indirect consumption tax is another matter
Quoting myself only because I was W.R.O.N.G.
Labour has announced one change to their tax policy. Reintroducing a top rate of 39% on any earnings over 180K. Apparently this only affects 2% of Kiwi's and will generate 550Mill p.a.Also talked about the possibility of introducing a Digital Services Tax.
I guess if 98% of people are unaffected its hardly likely to cost them votes. No movement on tax bands
-
They will do more. We just don't know about it yet I suspect.
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
@Snowy I don't think direct taxation is likely to rise. Haven't Collins and Adern both ruled them out. Indirect consumption tax is another matter
Quoting myself only because I was W.R.O.N.G.
Labour has announced one change to their tax policy. Reintroducing a top rate of 39% on any earnings over 180K. Apparently this only affects 2% of Kiwi's and will generate 550Mill p.a.Also talked about the possibility of introducing a Digital Services Tax.
I guess if 98% of people are unaffected its hardly likely to cost them votes. No movement on tax bands
Only slightly wrong, so far. I seriously doubt that it will generate much revenue. People with income of over 180K know how to shift / distribute money so that they don't hit the threshold.
WTF is a digital services tax? They going to tax prostrate examinations? Or is it just for people who like that sort of thing?
I do actually know what it is and kind of agree with it. If you do business here, you pay tax here. Isn't that the principle?
-
It's absolutely bloody ridiculous that no one is championing a tax bracket adjustment.
Up to $14,000 a year = 10.5%
$14,000 - $48,000 = 17.5%
$48,000 - $70,000 = 30%
Over $70,000 = 33%Acting like 70k is a high income in 2020 is a fucking joke. Median income in NZ is $52,000.
-
Still a lot lower than Aus for comparable government services. And that's before you add on flood levies, budget repair levies, private health levies.
$0 – $18,200 0%
$18,201 – $37,000 19%
$37,001 – $90,000 32.5%
$90,001 – $180,000 37%
$180,001 and over 45% -
@Mokey said in NZ Politics:
It's absolutely bloody ridiculous that no one is championing a tax bracket adjustment.
Up to $14,000 a year = 10.5%
$14,000 - $48,000 = 17.5%
$48,000 - $70,000 = 30%
Over $70,000 = 33%Acting like 70k is a high income in 2020 is a fucking joke. Median income in NZ is $52,000.
I agree, those on the lowest tax bracket should be taxed less to help them aspire to raise to higher levels
-
@Mokey said in NZ Politics:
It's absolutely bloody ridiculous that no one is championing a tax bracket adjustment.
Up to $14,000 a year = 10.5%
$14,000 - $48,000 = 17.5%
$48,000 - $70,000 = 30%
Over $70,000 = 33%Acting like 70k is a high income in 2020 is a fucking joke. Median income in NZ is $52,000.
You have to take into account the total tax take per 'income level'.
Obviously, those on lower amounts will have GST to pay with all but their mortgage/rent.
I saw some calcs that used average % of non taxable and investment monies (not spent) and the overall tax %s paid didn't differ that much as you went up. Apart from very low incomes it ranged 28-32%.
It isn't that $70k is considered a high income, it is more that at $70 you are in a bracket that is collecting a little less GST.
Marginal tax is the key that gets looked at and that gets driven by where people sit in the range. What you need to avoid is high rates kicking in at 'tipping' levels.
So someone on the median has a decent range in which to improve earnings and not get rewarded.Average salary is around $75k, which is pulled up from the median by higher numbers.
If on that average then you pay around 21% on salary before getting hit with GST on spending which is about the same as OzPolitically I agree that raising the 70 to say 80 might sound good to many but in reality $300 pa equals $6 a week. That would make a difference for those on very low incomes but not much on those earng 80k
Can see a good argument to move that $48k up to the median although even that is $10 a week. Good but not great
-
@Crucial but the 'average' salary should not be in our highest bracket.
Maybe they need to look at it as a household income as well (adult earners, not kids)
I reckon they should be more like
Up to $30,000 a year = 10.5%
$30,000 - $50,000 = 17.5%
$50,000 - $90,000 = 30%
Over $90,000 = 33%I'd think pretty much every single dollar all those earners upto $90k get back would be spent and recovered in other forms of taxes, but would certainly help alot more people out!
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial but the 'average' salary should not be in our highest bracket.
Why not? Average is well above the median which shows that high earnings are disproportionate to the total number.
Maybe they need to look at it as a household income as well (adult earners, not kids)
I reckon they should be more like
Up to $30,000 a year = 10.5%
$30,000 - $50,000 = 17.5%
$50,000 - $90,000 = 30%
Over $90,000 = 33%I'd think pretty much every single dollar all those earners upto $90k get back would be spent and recovered in other forms of taxes, but would certainly help alot more people out!
Not quite. You don't pay GST on rent or mortgage costs.
Your proposal there is simply a lower total tax take overall. I get what you are saying, that more available money could help stimulate the economy but the balance is that it can stimulate inflation so no one is 'better off'
I think they model these numbers and the impacts across earners all the time and only move when it makes both fiscal and political sense. -
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial they wont be spending the 'extra money' they get on thier mortgage or rent, majority would just be spent on essentials - food, power, petrol, clothes etc
Sorry, misread your statement
-
@taniwharugby said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial this is TSF, happens every day
Hey, at least I did actually read it. Just misunderstood it.
NZ Politics