Goff: no GST hikes or tax cuts for rich

30 comments on “Goff: no GST hikes or tax cuts for rich ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Brett Dale 1

   29 January 2010 at 11:34 am

   Does anyone in the labour party think that those rich people that
   they are always knocking, may of decided early on in their lifes
   to chhose a field thast would earn them money, decided to study and
   get A’s at school and go on to university.
   • Pete 1.1

     29 January 2010 at 12:11 pm

     Hi Brett – do you mean the top earners who pay a smaller percentage of tax than those on lower incomes? The ones that even the National Party has indicated are a problem for dodging their responsibility? (regardless of their feckless response to the problem)

     I don’t see what your point is here.

     I also don’t see why you think there’s a distinction between Labour Party members(?) and people who choose to educate themselves, get As etc? Do you not think that these people exist across the political spectrum?

     Oh, and where does Goff’s speech ‘knock these people (talking in the broad sense, of course)?
   • DeeDub 1.2

     29 January 2010 at 12:32 pm

     You obviously got LOTS of ‘A’s, eh Brett, ’cause you speak such good England.
2. gomango 2

   29 January 2010 at 12:22 pm

   Pot. Kettle. Black. Perhaps Goff could start with his caucus?

   Rick Barker
   Barker Family Trust
   Upton Family Trust

   Brendon Burns
   BP and PL Burns Family Trust
   PL and BP Burns Family Trust

   Steve Chadwick
   Gonzo Family Trust

   Charles Chauvel
   Kittery Trust
   Pepperrell Trust
   Victory Trust

   Helen Clark
   Burke Trust
   FG Clark Family Trust

   Clayton Cosgrove
   Eagle Bay Family Trust
   September Trust (blind trust)

   David Cunliffe
   Bozzie Family Trust

   Kelvin Davis
   Davis Family Trust

   Parekura Horomia
   Panikau A2
   Mangatuna 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8
   Mangaheia 1B3Y and 2G1
   Tokomaru K4A and K4B1 trustee
   Tuatini Maori Township section 1 block vi lot 2
   Rosaleen Aorangi Smith Whanau Trust

   Raymond Huo
   Chesterfields Trust (family trust)

   Shane Jones
   Te Puna o Te Anaru Trust
   Castlerigg Trust

   Annette King
   King-Lind Family Trust

   Nanaia Mahuta
   Mahuta Whānau Trust

   Stuart Nash
   Nash Family Trust

   David Parker
   Karitane Trust
   Sue Wootton Family Trust
   FD Parker Children’s Trust
   Tarras Trust

   Lynne Pillay
   The Pillay Trust

   Mita Ririnui
   Ririnui-Calhoun Family Trust
   Te Aomihi Anne Ririnui-Horne Family Trust
   Riripiti Timi Waati Lands Trust
   Te Arawa Lakes Trust
   Ngati Awa Māori Trust Board
   Pukeroa Oruawhata Lands Trust

   Ross Robertson
   The Robertson Family Trust
   • Lanthanide 2.1

     29 January 2010 at 12:28 pm

     Yes, all of his caucus would lose out if trusts were taxed fairly.

     What’s your point?
     • spot 2.1.1

       29 January 2010 at 12:42 pm

       Of course, not all those Trusts are necessarily for the purposes of avoiding/evading (or whatever the term is) tax.

       Perfectly legitimate I would think to use for asset protection, inheritance planning etc etc.

       I doubt he’d set a standard in a well publicised speech that he wasn’t sure is own caucus could stand by.
       • Mr Magoo 2.1.1.1

         29 January 2010 at 1:04 pm

         Like the maori MPs listed who have maori land trusts most likely for multiple owner title…

         Nice straw man. Also the fact that they have trusts and are willing to close the holes makes them MORE honest, not less.
       • Cactus Kate 2.1.1.2

         30 January 2010 at 12:50 am

         Spot

         So it’s okay if Labour caucus members use trusts, but not John Key or the Nats?

         Goff is quoted here as:

         “Too many people on good incomes AVOID and EVADE paying taxes. It’s not right that SOME TOP earners pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on the average wage”.

         The only way this is happening is not filling in your tax return (very few) or using the trust or company vehicles to pay less. Goff here is referring to the apparent 100 top income earners who do not pay the top personal rate.

         Labour’s language of avoidance meaning simply “avoiding” the top tax rate of 38 in favour of 33 or 30, means it does bring the entire list here into their own definition of avoidance.

         Labour have fallen into the trap of re-defining “avoidance” to supposedly “rich pricks” using trusts and companies.

         When they are all at it as well and have been for a long time.
         • spot 2.1.1.2.1

           30 January 2010 at 7:20 am

           Nah Kate, didn’t say that.

           I’m just assuming that not every asset in every trust has or is tax assessable income.
         • AngryTory 2.1.1.2.2

           31 January 2010 at 3:05 pm

           Labour’s language of avoidance means simply that you’re earning more than 60K.

           Not content will calling us all “Rich Pricks” now we are criminals and tax evaders.

           Apart from North Korea, no other country in the world – not Sweden, not Norway, not Slovenia or Slovakia or anywhere else in Eastern Europe – nowhere else has a basically unreconstructed communist party like NZ Labour. And nowhere else ever let those kind of scum anywhere ever near government – let alone for ten disastrous economy-destroying years.
           • Pascal's bookie 2.1.1.2.2.1

             31 January 2010 at 3:10 pm

             So the definition of commn1sm is circa 6 points on the marginal tax rate. Who knew?
           • felix 2.1.1.2.2.2

             31 January 2010 at 3:13 pm

             Not content will calling us all “Rich Pricks’

             Cullen called Key a rich prick. What does that have to do with you?

             You guys remember funny.
           • lprent 2.1.1.2.2.3

             31 January 2010 at 4:19 pm

             Oh a boring wingnut with no ideas apart from trite meaningless phrases.

             • 1. NZ Labour was the main party in government for 9 years – not 10.
             • 2. As far as I can see he is complaining about having a progressive personal tax system – the same as every OECD country has. There are higher tax rates for those earning higher incomes. Almost all of which have higher top rates than we do.
             • 3. Most of the countries have social democratic parties that look remarkably like NZ Labour.
             • 4. The ‘Rich Prick’ comment was directed at John Key. This clown is delusional enough to think that he is John Key. Perhaps he should seek some help to cope with his delusions of grandeur.
             • 5. Kind of amusing looking at a fool articulating about things he hasn’t bothered to understand.
3. tsmithfield 3

   29 January 2010 at 1:07 pm

   Goff: “Too many people on good incomes avoid and evade paying taxes. It’s not right that some top earners pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than those on the average wage.”

   Duh. So what does he propose to do about it? FFS how long has family support been in place now? How long has it been getting rorted? The new government is waking up to this fact. But how many years did Labour have to do something about it but didn’t?

   The fact is that when governments close off one loophole, they invariably create another one for accountants to exploit. The way to stop avoidance is to make the tax system as simple as possible. Flat tax rates achieve the goal of simplifying the tax system. Then there is no point in trying to avoid the system. With a flat tax rate, the wealthy will probably end up paying more.
   • Daveski 3.1

     29 January 2010 at 1:27 pm

     Further, let’s ask the question which govt made changes to the tax rates which incentivised those who could afford it to legally minimise their payment of tax. This is where I think Labour has a credibility problem – it caused the problem yet is demanding a solution but when the logical solution is proposed (standard tax rates across companies, taxes, and trusts) it yells and screams. It’s no different to how Labour actively contributed to the housing boom.

     Anyway, with Goff and King reappointed, it’s clear that Labour has a front bench ready to take on the challenges of the twentieth century 😉
     • Zetetic 3.1.1

       30 January 2010 at 1:08 am

       Yup. By cutting the corp rate Labour made tax dodging more lucrative. Shouldn’t have done it.

       Btw. How come no other rich country has aligned top tax rates?
   • Draco T Bastard 3.2

     29 January 2010 at 8:43 pm

     Translation:
     Why didn’t Labour fix it while in power huh?
     huh?
     huh?

     Flat tax rates achieve the goal of simplifying the tax system.

     No they don’t as it’s not the tax rates that cause the complexity. It’s the number and type of things that can be deducted and/or depreciated. A flat tax will be just as complex and not raise enough income.

     With a flat tax rate, the wealthy will probably end up paying more.

     No, they won’t as they’ll still have all their tax dodges that the poor don’t have.
4. Bill 4

   29 January 2010 at 1:43 pm

   Wonder what the majority of people would prefer if given the choice…..hmmm….and why their is no mechanism to allow a choice to be made?

   “Oregon voters bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment Tuesday, raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services.

   The tax measures passed easily, with late returns showing a 54 percent to 46 percent ratio. Measure 66 raises taxes on households with taxable income above $250,000, and Measure 67 sets higher minimum taxes on corporations and increases the tax rate on upper-level profits.”

   http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/voters_pass_tax_measures_by_bi.html
5. tc 5

   29 January 2010 at 5:03 pm

   woo hoo….go goff, keep it simple, consistent and repeat ad nauseum.

   intelligent, statesmanlike and delivered without anoyones hand up his back in stark contrast to……….insert NACT gov’t here.

   you can tell from the posts the logic/rationality is fanning the flames of the righteous monty burns types……awesome.

   labor lost it’s way as it tried to appease everyone and a return to core values will see them come back as NZ needs an even handed gov’t not this lot of idelogical pillagers and looters.
6. Jenny 6

   29 January 2010 at 8:42 pm

   Time for a Tobin Tax?

   It is said that GST is a flat tax that unfairly loads the tax burden onto working people and beneficiaries, because all the income the working class and beneficiaries, (rather than just a fraction), goes to buy the goods and services needed to survive.

   In comparison the wealthy who have surplus income above their survival needs which they can reinvest to increase their wealth. These transactions are exempt from GST.

   But the rich often avoid paying even their relatively small share of GST as well.

   I once knew a man who lived in Remuera, who owned a bakery.

   All his friends and neighbours got supplied free baked goods.

   His immediate next door neighbour owned a car yard. In return for his friends largesse, when ever his friend needed to upgrade his car, he was always given a hefty discount.

   Another friend and denizen of Remuera, who owned a menswear business, gave this guy a free suit every year.

   This was only two examples that I knew of. I imagine that those wealthy enough to own businesses have a whole network of handing out free stuff from their inventories to each other, so avoiding GST.

   However if you don’t own a factory or business you can’t tap into this stream of free goods and services, and so can’t avoid GST in this manner.

   Of course if this bakery owner’s employees, who actually made these goods, gave their friends free stuff from their work, they would be sacked and possibly arrested for theft.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.1

     29 January 2010 at 8:46 pm

     Time for a Tobin Tax?

     Yep, and to get rid of GST.
     • Jenny 6.1.1

       29 January 2010 at 9:19 pm

       Maybe we could start by supporting the Maori Party’s private members bill to remove GST from food.
       • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1

         30 January 2010 at 1:58 am

         Removing GST only from food is actually a very expensive nightmare. Just ask any of the countries that do that. It’s one of those all or none taxes and it’s better being none.
   • mike 6.2

     29 January 2010 at 9:43 pm

     We should find this ‘Remuera baker’ and linch him – how dare he have “surplus income” and get his friends do “discounts”

     You bitter twat…
     • felix 6.2.1

       29 January 2010 at 10:17 pm

       That’s not what she said at all, mike.

       The point is that people who own businesses are in a position to do this and others aren’t. This puts the lie to the idea that burden of GST is fairly spread.

       The poor have to pay their full share of GST because they don’t have access to the means to avoid it. The rich can get around it in many ways.
     • lprent 6.2.2

       30 January 2010 at 10:36 am

       😈 ‘linch’ – Why would we want to join two things together? I suspect that you meant ‘lynch’
   • prism 6.3

     30 January 2010 at 9:38 am

     That’s like a Masonic brotherhood sharing advantages with each other, giving each other preference. It is the beneficial circle that some get in families where all support the others.
     People with different backgrounds, different living styles, levels of income, different colour, gender, culture can get placed outside these circles. They don’t get the handy mateship advantages and perhaps have little to return from their own small store of advantage.
7. hix 7

   29 January 2010 at 11:26 pm

   “Tax bludger”

   I like the sound of that.
8. gomango 8

   30 January 2010 at 8:44 pm

   a tobin tax won’t work unless it is levied multilaterally in all markets where trading can take place. Otherwise transacions will just take place in other jurisdictions. And given the propensity of governments to compete with each other for this business there will always be plenty of jurisdictions with no Tobin tax.

   Seriously if a tobin tax was a realistic option it would have happened somewhere in the world by now. Can you imagine a government choosing not to introduce a new tax? The reason that form of tax has never been introduced is because gummints know all the transactions they think they would tax would disappear offshore in a day, leaving the tax burden to be carried by the small and medium businesses who transact FX for their fundamental import/export functions.
   • charlie 8.1

     14 February 2010 at 9:20 am

     Working in a sector that oversees the accounts of many of NZ ‘rich’ folk, I see, wealthy families receiving maximum Working for Families Tax Credits (10 k plus) per year. They manage this by running their businesses via companies and flowing income down into trusts, paying themselves minimum shareholder salaries, whilst taking considerable drawings (100k plus)…these wealthy people are literally stealing from those on lower incomes and I can only assume it is because they are greedy, bludging thieves.

     These are the people who through John Keys new tax policies will enjoy higher tax cuts, whilst still receiving maximum Working for Families Tax Credits (let’s not forget that Key is promising an increase to this tax credit).

     To scale this further, these company owners manipulate their income through their companies to avoid paying child support, I see this all to often and to be honest, it is quite sickening.

     These are the type of people, who went through university (probably getting c degrees) on the backs of the tax payer, now those wishing to attend university have to pay and work whilst doing it. Which reminds me of the wealthy families, who through income manipulation can hide their incomes (taking hefty drawings instead) so that their children can receive Student Allowances, while those on lower incomes can’t.

     Sorry folks, I see it everyday, I see these people as thieves, fraudsters, albeit the government continues to make this legal by not closing the loop holes (which incidentally were noted in the recent TWG papers).

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS