By Bernard Hickey
Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has released its second set of data on the tax residency status of property buyers, but has again cautioned that the data cannot be relied on for another 12 months because of flaws in questions about whether buyers are overseas students or on temporary work visas or not.
LINZ began collecting the data from October 1 when the Government's new requirement kicked in for property buyers to declare if the property was their main home and/or they were foreign residents for tax purposes. Initially touted by the Government as a way to understand the extent of foreign buying, the first set of data for the March quarter was released on May 10, but was immediately challenged. Even LINZ said it considered not releasing the data because of its flaws. See our article from May 10.
The survey for the three months to the end of June included the same flawed question attempting to understand the residency status of buyers by asking whether they were on student and temporary work visas. LINZ said it hoped to have fixed the flawed questionaire and have more robust results within a year.
The June quarter survey found there were 57,678 property transfers in the three months to June 30, including 1,749 or 3% who declared an overseas tax residency. Of those, 555 were from China, 393 were from Australia and 138 were from Britain. There were 900 of those transfers in Auckland where at least one of the buyers declared an overseas tax residency, including 495 from China and 69 from Singapore.
The 3% figure is little different to that found in the March quarter, which was skewed by many property transactions having started before the October 1 deadline for the new information disclosure requirement.
The survey found that 8,751 of the buyers or 15% of the total appeared to say they were tax residents, but that they only had temporary work or student visas, rather than having permanent residency. However LINZ said they had found some permanent residents had also answered the question, meaning the 15% portion may be overstated. LINZ has previously said it planned to redesign the survey to ensure permanent residents did not answer the question.
A new question was also added to the June survey that allowed respondents to say if they were a corporate, rather than an individual. The survey found 7,521 property buyers or 13% of the total answered they were corporates.
Given the answers for students and corporates, the percentage of buyers who may be ultimately foreign residents ranges between 3% and 31%.
LINZ Minister Louise Upston also pointed out the data was not a register of foreign ownership.
“This data is not a register of foreign ownership – it is collected as a result of government property tax measures in Budget 2015. However, over time it will give us some useful information on the property market," Upston said.
(Updated with Minister's commnet)
Here is a summary of tax residency data released by LINZ on the analysis of quarterly New Zealand property transactions.
| Q4 - 2015 | Q1 - 2016 | Q2 - 2016 | ||||
| Tax residence | Buyers | Sellers | Buyers | Sellers | Buyers | Sellers |
| Australia | 285 | 30 | 312 | 441 | 393 | 675 |
| China | 36 | 90 | 321 | 81 | 555 | 162 |
| Hong Kong | ... | 12 | 33 | ... | 54 | ... |
| Singapore | 24 | ... | 36 | 39 | 63 | 57 |
| UK | 45 | ... | 99 | 93 | 138 | 126 |
| USA | 36 | ... | 51 | 81 | 75 | 78 |
| all others | 81 | 18 | 144 | 138 | 264 | 228 |
| Mixed | 123 | 33 | 162 | 189 | 207 | 234 |
| New Zealand | 52,056 | 52,503 | 43,986 | 44,082 | 55,929 | 56,118 |
| Total transactions | 52,686 | 45,144 | 57,678 | |||
Tax residency is not the same as nationality. You can live in New Zealand and still have tax residency in another country. Alternatively, you could be an overseas citizen and have only New Zealand tax residency.
183 Comments
Liars said that NZ reputationnis not harmed by panama papers than what is this
http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/eu-considers-blacklisting-nz-over-tax…
Can lie on anything and everything. No one trust national so how can one trust and expect agency under government to come out with correct data.
Well done J KEY. After working in this industry for years you
> ignor IRD advice on foreign trusts.
> promote the idea that NZ should be the Swttzerland of the South Pacific,
> claim NZ Isnt a tax haven one week,
> the next week we find your personal advisor is up to his neck in foreign trusts and featuring on the Panama papers
> say maybe we are after enormous amounts of con and bs.
> the week following appoint a consultant to look at it.
> find out we are
> get blacklisted by our third largest trade partner.
Clearly honesty is not in your mandate, encouraging shady business ethics Is a National priority.
As I have been saying for quite a while now, he is our version of Silvio Berlusconi. Berlusconi went for 20 years enjoying huge public popularity and no matter what he did nothing could shake that. Lets hope Key doesn't last that long or he has enough sense to get out while he is ahead.
I think he's a lot like Putin. Look at his eyes in still photos when he's debating or when he's caught off guard - the smiling assassin facade that people are tricked into trusting (the classic he uses in selfies with supporters etc) is replaced by the obsessed/corrupt/denial which I think might be the true him.
Key is more US than RU
More Globalist agenda than conquer your neighbors with military force
Key is as far away from Putin as Trump is from sanity
Keys a simply fabulous guy, a true friend to many he doesnt have to be friendly with
He deserves another full term in office x 2 then he could perhaps run NZ from his home in Hawaii
Keep those migrants coming. Im sure next year there will be a record 80,000
Haere mai
Am I the only one who is appalled by the lack of professionalism of LINZ regarding this matter??, can't they get a proper questionnaire put together that would produce a meaning full data at the end of a Quarter? how tough is that? why do we need to wait for another year to know what is happening?.
I am sorry, but i'm really disappointed to see how backward some departments are !!
this LINZ fiasco must stop now
Still waiting for the conspiracy theorists to jump in about foreign ownership, about those zillions of Chinese buyers they see at auctions or open houses and how these people are most definitely driving up prices (but property investors who are non-Chinese do not)...
You buy a house - you get residency. They're not classified as "foreign owners" so it's a huge scam.
On top of that, there's a glaring statement in there that shows you probably didn't even read the article:
"The survey found that 8,751 of the buyers or 15% of the total appeared to say they were tax residents, but that they only had temporary work or student visas, rather than having permanent residency."
Its not ethical to cherry pick the sentences out of its entire context. Did you read the very next sentences to the one you quoted? It says
"However LINZ said they had found some permanent residents had also answered the question, meaning the 15% portion may be overstated. LINZ has previously said it planned to redesign the survey to ensure permanent residents did not answer the question."
Hence your 15% of student and temporary visa holders can be anything from 0% to 15%.
Of course I read it. It says "some" (which means it couldn't be 0%) and it also says they were residents - to which I refer to my earlier statement about spending $1.5m on a house and getting residency.
Accusing me of being unethical because I didn't quote half the article? It was all there real estate guy.
I leave you to shout at your computer, I'm out.
Of course I read it. It says "some" (which means it couldn't be 0%) and it also says they were residents - to which I refer to my earlier statement about spending $1.5m on a house and getting residency. --> sighs. $1.5 million on a house (I assume you mean existing houses and not new builds) to get residency? Really? Don't let facts get into your head. See my reply to your other comment.
Stop getting it so badly wrong, it's embarrassing (for you and for me to read). Maybe that's why New Zealand needs immigration (or at least the talented ones).
You are trying to paint the permanent residents in that 15% group with "foreigner" brush. As far as I know the biggest permanent resident categories are skilled migrant category and family category. They get residency because of their highly sought after skills or family ties. It will show that your numbers still do not add up.
But you are making an interesting point that a foreigner can buy a $1.5m property and get residency. That's something I am very interested in. I would really like to see some figures of such residency grants. If it is true and happening it will a shame for the government (National or Labour) who created such a policy. We need to have good discussion about that topic.
But you are making an interesting point that a foreigner can buy a $1.5m property and get residency. That's something I am very interested in. I would really like to see some figures of such residency grants. If it is true and happening it will a shame for the government (National or Labour) who created such a policy. We need to have good discussion about that topic. --> this policy (i.e. buying 1.5 million property and get residency) does NOT exist. I have provided the link above. It's a shame that posters (not you) do not read carefully.
" this policy (i.e. buying 1.5 million property and get residency) does NOT exist"
Ok dude, sorry but it's true - from NZ Government's immigration website (in the link provided earlier):
Residential property development
We'll consider a residential property development is an acceptable investment if it meets all of the following criteria:
it's a new development, and not a renovation or extension to an existing residential property
the development has the necessary approvals and consents
the purpose of the development is to make a commercial return on the open market - it must not be for you, your family or friends to live in.
You can't include the costs of any regulatory approvals or consents in your investment funds.
What is true again? That foreigners can invest in property development (i.e. build new houses that they cannot reside in)? Was that what you meant EXACTLY? I doubt you mean investing in property development as "buying a 1.5 million property and getting residency" because frankly that's just an extreme stretch of the English language. If you somehow mean that and lump them all together, perhaps some sophistication in thinking is required.
If foreigners cannot invest in property development, who else is building your many houses required in the proposed Unitary Plan? Who forks out the capital? Hardworking kiwis?
What I read into is that 8750 respondents need to be chased up by LINZ (upon orders from the Government) to compare those names to the Permanent Residency records. Now really how hard would that be? And instead we are told that the flawed questionnaire (which hasn't been fixed in 3 months so far) will be redesigned so that we will have more relevant and accurate information in 12 MONTHS-maybe! What's pathetic is that they the Government can away with this. I suspect that if Labour makes a meal of this and the heat gets turned up. But why can't the journalists challenge them to do a "recount" of the 8750 to get to the bottom of it?
Please tell me which immigration category provides that "you buy a house, you get residency"? Provide links please. You may be surprised at what you cannot find.
"The survey found that 8,751 of the buyers or 15% of the total appeared to say they were tax residents, but that they only had temporary work or student visas, rather than having permanent residency." --> uh huh, but read the comment below. Also, assuming you are correct, that's 18% in total. Hardly the 39% that you guys love to shout about. On a slightly separate note, I may add that holders of temporary work visas can be tax residents (and usually they are because they work here and hence pay tax here).
what are you talking 39%? I've said nothing of the sort. Are you trying to lump everyone that proves you wrong into the same group?
Here you go, do some reading (though I doubt you'll learn much judging by your obvious bias):
https://www.newzealandnow.govt.nz/move-to-nz/new-zealand-visa/visas-to-…
You realise my comment is not just directed at you? My greater point was made though (about the percentage).
No, here do more reading: https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/abou…
Read about what constitutes acceptable investments. I doubt you read much or know much, judging by your insults.
It says it right there in the link you provided as an acceptable investment:
- residential property development
That's why $1.5 million houses are built in areas like Long Bay - for foreign investors who will also be given residency. What a huge scam! My mate is a landscaper who works on these houses and they have to make Chinese gardens for them! Then once they have their residency they can start buying up the existing houses that young working families would otherwise buy so they create a property portfolio.
Hardworking kiwis are being sold up the river by their greedy, sell-out National voting countrymen. And you support it!
It's an absolute disgrace and I question why anybody would defend it - let alone as poorly as you have.
It's obvious you're making money and you couldn't care less about hard-working kiwis.
I'm out.
Sighs, you are really blind:
I quote directly:
"Residential property development
We'll consider a residential property development is an acceptable investment if it meets all of the following criteria:
it's a new development, and not a renovation or extension to an existing residential property
the development has the necessary approvals and consents
the purpose of the development is to make a commercial return on the open market - it must not be for you, your family or friends to live in.
You can't include the costs of any regulatory approvals or consents in your investment funds."
Keep going, don't be discouraged. Find me something that supports your thesis. If I were hazarding a guess, I would say you are downright dishonest by completely ignoring what I just quoted when it's literally below that section about what constitutes "acceptable investments".
Ignore these European NZers. The long for the lost days of stealing Maori land while maintaining ties with Mother England. As a Maori I have no problem with Chinese coming to NZ and paying top dollar for property. Better a cashed up buyer than a thief. These so called European "kiwis" just don't like competition.
We're walking a pretty fine line here team! As a younger generation kiwi I'm certainly taking a shafting from all this as far as my ability goes to buy a 'home' - but the last thing I want to see is NZ becoming a divided society over this because of the colour of people's skin.
We can't change the past - we can certainly learn from it though and make better decisions for the here and now that will influence the future.
Did their best?... Where are you getting this from?... Compensation for stolen land has been minuscule and negotiated with 1 or 2 un-elected so called iwi representatives. The same tactics as were used in the 1800s to liquor up the local drunk and then claim he signed away all the iwi's land.
The new invasion (your obviously referring to Chinese immigrants) is paying top dollar and no one's land is being stolen. What's the problem?.... Those who believe they are the master race (i.e. you European NZers) cannot compete economically so are pulling the old race based politics out. Just like your forefathers who didn't let Chinese immigrants to NZ bring their wives so they couldn't breed. How some of you must long for the good old days.
This data released is nonsense and is on a par with using buyers surnames as indicative. Better to use the estimates from the banks.
The incompetence of LINZ is flabbergasting, it reaks of political interference and corruption. We pay the CEO over $350,000 per annum , for what?
LINZ may as well weigh the results instead of counting them if the questions are going to be deliberately misleading.
Good on Interest for showing the buy vs seller statistics though, which clearly show one Nationality is accumulating. It's not buying that matters so much as the net accumulation.
Sure the British may be the only group singled out that has purchased more than they sold in the last 3 periods shown in the table above, but I don't think that people are complaining about British buyers. Also if you subtract overseas sellers from overseas buyers then the net % of properties that change from local to foreign hands drops to something minuscule!
Wow, how can you say this??? It must be the Chinese (despite what the statistics say)!!! British buyers look white, are white (British non-whites are excluded and should be considered as "Chinese" or "Asian") and hence their purchasing is fine and somehow does NOT drive up prices.
"Over time it will give us useful information" How much time . After the first set of data they said they would have a better indication of the figures ,now its a year. How hard is it to ask the right questions??? The elephant in the room is " Given the answers for students and corporates, the percentage of buyers who may be ultimately foreign residents ranges between 3% and 31%. Of course ,these foreign buyers don't want NZers to know how many there is. How about showing us what questions they ask?
Why would foreign buyers care about whether they let NZers know they are buying or not? You assume too much. The questions are available on IRD's website I believe. They are not some secretive document and there really isn't some greater conspiracy between the foreign buyers to keep such information away from NZers.
Tired Immigrant - if that's what you really are. It appears to me that 9/10 or more of the houses in my area of Auckland are being sold to Chinese. I only know because I attend the auctions, and that's why this BS survey is so irritating. It does matter who buys the houses! I have friends who have just had a baby and they're now paying $850 p/w in rent a house. They couldn't afford to buy because of all the foreign money flowing in to Auckland. What does the future hold for them now? How will towing the National party line help them in the future?
Tired Immigrant - if that's what you really are. It appears to me that 9/10 or more of the houses in my area of Auckland are being sold to Chinese. --> uh huh and? Can you differentiate between a Chinese that is "resident" here (i.e. a NZ citizen or PR) (but I recognise that some here will consider all Chinese as non-kiwi) and a Chinese who flew in just to buy properties (I love anecdotes) just by looking at them? The short answer is that you probably cannot. If so, then why single out the Chinese in particular? If your beef is with ALL investors, then it so happens that the Chinese may constitute the more obvious racial group of property investors. Are you saying that the Chinese cannot invest?
Foreign money is flowing everywhere around the world. This is the age of globalism and globalisation (like it or not). The alternative is to be a backwater or worse a country where nobody wants to invest (like Syria). Take your pick. We can have a perfectly rational discussion about how to deal with this foreign money without singling out any particular racial group. Isn't this what makes New Zealand unique and attractive?
Rubbish – Australia, Canada, Taiwan and others have placed restrictions and they’re doing okay. You want to know how to make a third world country. 1) Make the middle class poor 2) Flood the country with 3rd world low paid immigrants. Exactly what the National party is doing. I really hope John Key and his Plutocrat cronies get destroyed at the next election, for the sake of all New Zealanders.
Oh and by the way, the grass needs cutting again at 102 Kohimarama Road. I complained last year that the Cow Parsley was knee high. The house was sold by Barfoot "again" last year and its still derelict. I suppose you're going to try to tell me that a Chinese investor doesn't own that one.
Yes I deliberately singled out the Chinese because of the capital flight is coming from that country. The Chinese are creating huge real estate asset bubbles all over the world. According to Jim Rickards (the Death of Money) whats going on in China is the "greatest episode of capital flight in human history". I cant recall what page that was on but it stuck in my head. So who's pushing up prices in Auckland I wonder? ... Hmmm If It walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.
The real nature of the debate should be what consitutes a foreigner.
Just walking around the streets of Auckland there has been a large demographic change in population. Is someone moved here recently from China or whereever and bought a few houses considered a foreigner? In these stats, probably not.
Wow, how do you know (by just walking around) that everyone is or is not a "foreigner" (whatever that means)?
Is someone moved here recently from China or whereever and bought a few houses considered a foreigner? --> not sure what this means. If they moved here (regardless of whether they bought a house or not), how are they a "foreigner"? Do you mean non-white and in your view not a kiwi? If so, please state so explicitly.
Foreign buyers in Australia include
Non residents
Temporary visa residents
Foreign students
Australia apply stamp duty when foreign purchasers buy.
Citizens and permanent residents are exempt.
In NZ the media focus on residents verses non residents. Ridiculous. They should follow Australia's lead.
Stamp duty 15% on foreign buyers will reduce their demand. Why should they have the same rights as nz citizens and permanent residents. Follow Australia, Canada and Singapore and apply stamp duty to this group.
Supply is tight and house prices are going through the 1m Mark.
Linz report tells us 60% of buyers are not NZ Citizens. Crazy
No one really cares any more, we're too busy watching Canada and Oz to see what impact their new tax regulations have on their property bubbles. At least they have enough common sense to do something.
But what is worrying is that LINZ admit that their data is inaccurate and cautioned that the data cannot be relied on for another 12 months because of flaws in questions about whether buyers are overseas students or on temporary work visas or not.
Why on earth would it take a year to fix a simply questionnaire??
what gets me is the blatant clouding of the information by making sure the question 2 was not clear and could be used to hide information that is needed to see what and whom are purchasing and in what numbers
this is so obvious it is not funny anymore and goes to the core of this governments intentions and modus operandi
heres one for conspiracy theories, JK comes out before first survey and says its around 3%. then survey comes out and guess what its 3%, then we see the question 2 which has been designed in what we would call a incompetant manner but is it?
or as those of us that have worked for a government department , would have a different opinion in that the answer range was pre determined and the question was structured in such a way to bring in the answer in the range required by the government
What does the data say? That 3% of buyers are offshore foreign citizens with zero ties to NZ.
How many buyers are citizens of NZ? This is what the average person on the street thinks of when hearing "foreign".
GIGO comes to mind. Maybe when they ask the right question then you can say - look at the data.
What does the data say? That 3% of buyers are offshore foreign citizens with zero ties to NZ. --> yup.
How many buyers are citizens of NZ? This is what the average person on the street thinks of when hearing "foreign". --> the average citizen (I assume you are speaking for yourself) probably cannot differentiate between PRs, citizens, tax residents and non-tax residents. One set is an immigration concept whereas the other is a taxation concept. They overlap but not necessarily. My question to you is: what do you mean by citizen? Is that one who holds a NZ passport or does this include PRs who do not hold NZ passports? What about people who give up their NZ citizenship but come back as PRs? What about citizens who are not tax residents? I will hazard a guess that the average citizen (like yourself) may classify certain races as "foreign", even though they may have been born in New Zealand or grew up here holding a NZ passport, but are happy to give a free pass to other races who are of certain color despite not being born in NZ or does not hold a NZ passport or PR.
Not seeing why this is so hard to understand. A NZ Citizen is very easily defined. A Citizen is an individual who holds current NZ Citizenship.
" Is that one who holds a NZ passport"
To own a NZ Passport you must be a NZ Citizen. So yes, they are a citizen.
" PRs who do not hold NZ passports?"
If they are a PR, then they are not a citizen. IF they became a citizen, then it is irrelevant if they hold a NZ passport or not.
"What about people who give up their NZ citizenship but come back as PRs?"
Not a citizen as they gave up that right, why you would do this then come back as a PR is beyond me though.
"What about citizens who are not tax residents?"
They are still a citizen
"I will hazard a guess that the average citizen (like yourself) may classify certain races as "foreign", even though they may have been born in New Zealand or grew up here holding a NZ passport, but are happy to give a free pass to other races who are of certain color despite not being born in NZ or does not hold a NZ passport or PR."
Not at all, Race is irrelevant. A foreigner is someone born overseas (technically they can be born in NZ), but they do not have NZ Citizenship.
It is actually very simple. If you do not have "Citizenship" then you are not a citizen.
If you are still confused I suggest you go to Australia, they find it very easy to differentiate. A foreigner is anyone that can be deported.
Oh trust me, I don't have a problem with defining what's a citizen (and what's not). I was merely pointing out all the nuances that may exist when commentators here use the term "foreign buyer" loosely.
My question to you that is relevant to this article: are you in favour of having only NZ citizens own property? If yes, then my next question: what happens to those that already own property but are not a NZ citizen? Want to confiscate their property? Should we levy "foreign buyer" stamp duties on PRs? What about PRs who have been here for 40 years and the only reason they do not have a NZ passport is that their birth country does not allow dual citizenship?
I'll chip in an answer to that. a. Only NZ citizens should own New Zealand land. b. if the law was couched in terms that only NZ citizens could buy NZ land, the situation would correct over time to (a) above. c. Stamp duties. No. Because they would not own NZ property. d. Not a citizen because of 'dual' issue ? You have that choice but (a) applies.
I'll chip in an answer to that. a. Only NZ citizens should own New Zealand land. --> Why? Many developed countries do not have such a law.
b. if the law was couched in terms that only NZ citizens could buy NZ land, the situation would correct over time to (a) above. --> What about kids born to PRs? Can't existing PRs simply transfer the land to their kids? I am not sure about your projected scenario. I may add that such a law will be a backdoor systematic transfer of wealth from PRs to NZ citizens by a devaluation of their property (if they choose to sell but I would not think so).
c. Stamp duties. No. Because they would not own NZ property. --> guess u are not in favour of foreign buyer stamp duties then.
d. Not a citizen because of 'dual' issue ? You have that choice but (a) applies. --> then what is necessary is reciprocal arrangements between these countries so that Kiwis in the same situation cannot own foreign property. I hope Kiwis don't cry foul then when they cannot buy property in Australia, USA, Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong etc. Way to go (backwards)!
Yes. It's a citizens policy. I see you mention Australia. There, a citizen centric policy means that if you mess up, and you are not a citizen they put you on a plane.
Clearly you do not like such a policy - thats fine. But I think you understand it more that you say.
My original point was that the average person does not understand these nuances, they pretty much see it as Citizen or foreigner (i.e. anyone on a visa is a foreigner. So why do we not just record and report this information accordingly.
To answer your questions,
are you in favour of having only NZ citizens own property?
Yes, I think only citizens should be able to own property.
what happens to those that already own property but are not a NZ citizen?
This is a difficult one, I personally don't believe you confiscate their property. After all they bought it legally. So anyone with property can keep it, however no more property can be sold to non-citizens. i.e. they could not purchase any future properties unless they were citizens.
What about PRs who have been here for 40 years and the only reason they do not have a NZ passport is that their birth country does not allow dual citizenship?
As above, they can no longer buy new property but they can stay in their existing one.
I assume this is your situation as you have made reference to it numerous times. So my question to you (or anyone in this situation) is: Why live in NZ if you obviously do not want to give up ties to your old country? or another way - why do you keep your original citizenship? It seems odd to be so dismissive of the rights of citizens over PR when it is clear you value your citizenship more so.
My original point was that the average person does not understand these nuances, they pretty much see it as Citizen or foreigner (i.e. anyone on a visa is a foreigner. So why do we not just record and report this information accordingly. --> thanks for clarifying. My point is that what constitutes a "foreigner" is a very complex question because of PRs (there are even two different kinds), individual situations (some countries allow dual citizenships whereas others don't) and the concept of tax residency. This of course does not stop a rational discussion and fact-driven analysis. What stops a proper discussion is the marginalisation and singling out of particular races even when the statistics are not supportive (or even if they are, do not lend to such conclusions).
Yes, I think only citizens should be able to own property. --> see my response to a similar comment. I may add something further: what about foreign investment in property development? Do you honestly believe that NZ can finance the Unitary Plan on its own? How about non-citizens owning shares in NZ companies that own properties? Try to stop being so parochial and insular in an age of globalisation. NZ is a great country in many ways; not so great if it refuses to open up its country.
This is a difficult one, I personally don't believe you confiscate their property. After all they bought it legally. So anyone with property can keep it, however no more property can be sold to non-citizens. i.e. they could not purchase any future properties unless they were citizens. --> doing this as opposed to a properly structured "foreign buyer" tax? Why not look at supply?
As above, they can no longer buy new property but they can stay in their existing one.
I assume this is your situation as you have made reference to it numerous times. So my question to you (or anyone in this situation) is: Why live in NZ if you obviously do not want to give up ties to your old country? or another way - why do you keep your original citizenship? It seems odd to be so dismissive of the rights of citizens over PR when it is clear you value your citizenship more so. --> it's not my situation. I merely cited an example because you asked for why some people can remain PR for 40 years and yet not become citizens. As to why "live in NZ if you obviously do not want to give up ties to your old country? or another way - why do you keep your original citizenship?", try asking the many returning Kiwis why they can still return? The answer: because they didn't give up their citizenship in the first place.
try asking the many returning Kiwis why they can still return? The answer: because they didn't give up their citizenship in the first place.
Yes - but why not get citizenship in the new country. I bet the bunch of deportees from Australia wished they hadn't been so anti-citizen for their first 40 years.
Yes - but why not get citizenship in the new country. I bet the bunch of deportees from Australia wished they hadn't been so anti-citizen for their first 40 years. --> because (hard for you to imagine) perhaps people wish to keep their door open in case things turn nasty in their adopted country?
Now what would be interesting to know is how much capital had been poured in to Auckland housing market over the last quarter from foreign buyers or non-resident investors which ever term you want to use (This needs to include those on temp visas and students).
Obviously Vancouver got quite a shock when they discovered that than C$1 billion ($760 million) of foreign money in five weeks alone.
I wonder how much the Auckland housing market made in June this year? Considering were virtually at the same average house price as Vancouver.
New article: Foreign buyers to face tax hike on Metro Vancouver real estate
http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/premier-unveils-foreign-buyers-ta…
“You hire yourself a tax lawyer, you hire yourself an accountant and you can get by that pretty quickly,” said NDP leader John Horgan. “I think sophisticated investors, those who are laundering money in our real estate market, will be able to get by that very quickly.”
Why not just ask the respondent which country they were born in ? when they fill out the form out. I mean, its not rocket science - its like our government is using weasel words all the time. I mean if it walks like a dog, barks like a dog, - dont call it a panda !!!!.
I am a lawyer, and I'd just like to provide my $0.02 on the Land Transfer Tax Statements that we fill out with our clients.
Questions 2.1 and 2.2 read as follows:
Q2.1 : Are you or a member of your immediate family a new Zealand citizen or a holder of either a resident, work or student visa? (yes/no/corporate – not an individual).
Q2.2 : If you are a buyer and you or a member of your immediate family hold a work or student visa, do you or a member of your immediate family intend living on the land? (yes/no/not applicable)
The problem is that citizens get lumped in with residents and work and student visa holders in questions 2.1. Then question 2.2 doesn't do enough to explicitly distinguish residents and citizens from visa holders. It is such a roundabout way of determining how may properties are being bought by visa holders, and has led to much confusion in the industry. Particularly in situations where clients are buying via a trust or corporate entity. The information collected is at best confusing, and at worst utterly useless, if not downright misleading. It is beyond me how this form was approved in the first place! I honestly think that I (not a statistician) could have prepared a better questionnaire for collecting meaningful data about who is purchasing houses in NZ
I agree it appears more like a confuse them type whitewashing exercise. Only slightly better than analysing purchasers surnames or throwing darts.
What's more astounding is if they can't get something as simple as this how can you trust anything else they say / do.
Was not a mistake but was done on purpose. Anyone can see it.
Also once realized that the question is not put properly, how hard is it to correct it.
Delaying till election as national does not want to upset thrir asian friends as it is them who will give them plum posistion and life after next election. So member of current government are securing their future after next election
THIS IS NATIONAL CONSPIRACY.
Is their no way or anyone who can challenge government that is by filling PIL * Public Interest Litigation * am not sure if have that provision in NZ.
Rosa you being lawyer what is the way that all this nonsense can be challenged or just have to wait till next election.
This lie and dirty politicis is highly unaceptable as is chalenging the inteligence of people.
Under Nationnal Government do not expect truth.
National government is totaly manipulative corrupt arrogant government otherwise they would have taking action to release the correct data.
Shameless.
Best part is that they are taking all NZ for a ride and no one stand up. In any other country opposistion and media would have $##% the government.
Firdt time the questionnsre were flawed so whh not rectify immediately. Waiting for a year is it judt coincidence that after a year is election. Something fishy.
Just heard an interview on radio live with Nick Smith re the results of this 'questionaire'. Smith tried to get into a semantics debate about what is a tax resident. Refused to answer the question of how many students on working visas have purchased houses. I never thought I'd say this after having voted national the last three elections but I'm seriously considering voting NZ First at the next election.
I too voted for national but never again as housing crisis is a part of ecenomy and though not acceptable as is because of government inaction - still can give them benefit of doubts but NO one like manipulative liars and national is full of them.
Best part is that national feel that all kiwis are stupid and can easily be fooled.NOT REALISING THAT NOW THEY STAND TOTALY EXPOSED.
I am actually going to posit the argument that if the student aspect of house buying were sorted that the education export industry would grind to a halt. I think it is entirely possible that a great proportion of overseas students are not here to primarily learn anything other than what is the best suburb(s) to buy in.
TV3 are half the reason why the NZ public think that Winston Peters is a racist fool and that we need all these immigrants and foreign sales.
The other half of the reason is TV1. Mike Hosking stated in one of his round up speeches that this country needs a population of 16 million people.
Our media are so right wing National that its an embarrassment to journalism.
They even have the average kiwi thinking that Iraq attacked the twin towers and America is the good guys team in Syria, just trying to help out.
You highlight the real scary thing behind this story - the unbalanced pervasiveness of conservative propaganda in MSM.
Thankfully many, mostly young people, are not buying newspapers nor watching television anymore.
The self-interest driven status-quo miasma these Tory Goons have us in at the moment is a dead end street strewn with dashed dreams, empty rhetoric and divided communities.
The sooner we get turned around and away from this mess the better.
Per the Herald
Overall, 60 per cent of house transfers involved buyers who had only New Zealand tax residency. Another 37 per cent involved buyers who did not need to provide tax information - mainly New Zealanders who were buying their main home.
60% buyers foreign purchasers if we use the definition Australia apply
HOW IS THAT NOT THE HEADLINE ?
As mentioned before
-in australia a foreign purchaser is someone who is not a permanent resident or citizen
- in nz being a tax resident means you are not a foreign purchaser.
So foreign students (with houses paid for my parents offshore)
+ temp visa workers are both classified as foreign
That is crazy. Wake up NZ you are being taken for a ride. Why should temporary residents and students be allowed to buy when supply is so tight?
http://www.sro.vic.gov.au/foreignpurchaser
Foreign purchasers
You will be a foreign purchaser if you are a foreign natural person, a foreign corporation or a trustee of a foreign trust.
Foreign natural persons
You are a foreign purchaser if you are not:
A citizen or permanent resident of Australia,
Or a New Zealand citizen with a Special Category Visa (Subclass 444)
Bernard can you please explain to the readers why you chose to mention the 3% in your headline but completely left out the 60% that are not citizens ?
You are a reporter so should be able to see the real story in the numbers.
Media in NZ are worried about advertising revenue
Banks
Realestate firms
2 biggest spenders
How is 60% tax residency status only not a headline ?
Only 40% of buyers NZ citizens
6/10 buyers don't hold a nz passport
Madness
You don't need to work at the Sun to come up with that headline. 6 out of 10 buyers in NZ are not NZ citizens.
Incredible it's like we are in Russia and we can only report what big business / govt wants
60% buyers are not citizens when we have a housing crisis
National is testing th patience of the people and will only act when people come out on street.
Uprising.
Now even EU has acknowledge that NZ is a Tax heaven. Why the denial whom is JK protecting.
60% foreign pasaport are buying property, still government not acting.
Understood a lobby has been formed to convince council to pass unitary plan than why NOT A LOBBY OF SO CALLED EXPERTS AND WELL WISHERS OF NZ TO ACT ON FOREIGNERS IN NZ INTEREST.
It's interesting why there isn't an uprising though isn't it.
But think about it. The majority of voters (for now) are home owners. They've enjoyed seeing the values of their homes increase dramatically over the last 5 years. But it was okay to ignore the 'why' prices were rising so much.
But now we're starting to get a clearer picture 'why' we've seen such dramatic price rises, it's starting to sit a bit uncomfortably - but JK has known that it's more important for the majority of people to feel rich than to worry why they were becoming so 'rich'. And it appears that is still true looking at the polls. Interesting society we live in these days.
Benard reading the article again i see you didnt even mention the 60% buyers are not citizens. I had to get that from the herald. Was that not news worthy ???
Scary thing is that as the prices increases to over 1m in Auckland the percentage that are not NZ citizens will only increase from the 60% level today
Let that soak in only 40% are citizens. For Auckland this number is likely to be even less ?
Does question nz media's integrity that something so important wouldn't get highlighted in the headlines.
Yes and the other major problem is as long as our property prices remain massively over inflated so will the NZD, which is slowly strangling our Export markets and is likely to dampen our Tourist industry, since it will be too expensive for people to visit let alone live here.
Everyone is a part of big racket thats why you see news that they all want people to see but forget that in todays time with social media, news fly faster and so does the opinion.
Everyone talks about brexit and usa but forgets Egypt where social media played the most important role in throwing the government.
BEWARE THE FURY OF A PATIENT MAN
Bernard use the above headline for your next article as is serious matter.
I think it far better to changes our Government with the power of our votes. Hopefully we can make NZ a safe and more prosperous place by allowing quality homes to be affordable to everyone and not just the wealthy elite who can win the maximum bid.
I for one would like to see an early election before our average house price goes well beyond the million mark, because I don't know how were going to get down from there to more affordable levels without a crash.
I think that would be better too. But how long will that take? Will it happen, with all the media collusion, and gerrymandering? Just don't see how we can extricate ourselves from this without it being a hell of a mess.
There are potential time-bombs ticking away in the returning Kiwis, too. The blue-collar unemployment safety valve of going to Australia to work in the mines is being closed off, and there's a small but steady trickle of disgruntled, angry and resentful deportees being sent back from Australia, who will have difficulty getting into the workforce because of those minor criminal records that are the reason for deportation. The returning Kiwis aren't all cashed-up professionals returning from London.
You are able to make sense as have nothing to hide and lie but the same cannot be said about national government.
Not acting on foreign buyers can be national party policy but LIE AND FALSE PROPOGANDA IS NOT ACCEPTED FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS AGENCIES rightly pointed out by few commentators and everyone should expose and shame manipulative liars at all platforn to save NZ.
What about PRs? You also do realise that NZ PRs can hold non-NZ passports? NZ PRs may in fact reside out of this country (i.e. non tax resident and therefore not paying tax) and people on temporary work visas are generally tax residents? The term "foreign buyer" is bandied around so often. Pin down what exactly do you guys want. And if you want to stop PRs from buying (which I have no doubt that some of you would love to), think about the greater economic consequences.
Given that being able to afford to buy is getting further and further away from NZers, the answer to your question has got to be yes, especially if those people they are FORCED to rent from are not even citizens and probably don't even live here and even more especially if the public purse in the form of accommodation top ups are being paid to the foreigner renting to the NZers who cannot afford to buy.
Why is it I get the distinct impression you are donkey deep in the status quo and are benefiting from it? You appear to have zero concern for the citizens of this nation and keep scrambling around for any excuse to excuse the buy up of our houses and land by foreigners.
Given that being able to afford to buy is getting further and further away from NZers, the answer to your question has got to be yes, especially if those people they are FORCED to rent from are not even citizens and probably don't even live here and even more especially if the public purse in the form of accommodation top ups are being paid to the foreigner renting to the NZers who cannot afford to buy. --> I thought it's quite clear from the statistics about this mythical "foreign buyer" majority?
Why is it I get the distinct impression you are donkey deep in the status quo and are benefiting from it? You appear to have zero concern for the citizens of this nation and keep scrambling around for any excuse to excuse the buy up of our houses and land by foreigners. --> I am not excusing the buy up. Have I said anywhere that I condon such purchases? I am merely pointing out that commentators have to be careful with their definition of "foreign purchasers/buyers" and avoid singling out any particular race or nationality. Unfortunately, this point seems lost on many.
A lot of nations now allow dual citizenship, so why wouldn't you apply for citizenship if you can get it? It would remove the requirement to transfer your PR from your old passport to your new passport, every time it's been renewed, for starters.
So there's definitely a cost saving, there. Plus: citizenship also allows you to partake in politics, should you wish to pursue a career helping your community through elected office.
It also shows a commitment to staying.
Take kiwis in Australia, for example: some of these people being 'deported' have lived most of their lies in Aussie. If they had applied for citizenship, they wouldn't face deportation.....
.
There are lots of benefits to being a citizen.
A lot of nations now allow dual citizenship, so why wouldn't you apply for citizenship if you can get it? It would remove the requirement to transfer your PR from your old passport to your new passport, every time it's been renewed, for starters. --> many countries still don't.
It also shows a commitment to staying. --> just as being born a NZ citizen does not prove a commitment to staying. Witness the number of kiwis in Australia?
There are lots of benefits to being a citizen. --> my point was that this is often weighed by PRs against giving up their original citizenship. Such "benefits" in being a NZ citizen do not currently exist in NZ.
Personally their should be numerous rights that a citizen should get over a PR.
e.g.
- The right to vote
- Property ownership
- Any govt Benefits (I don't agree with the "but I paid taxes" argument - you paid taxes for the infrastructure and day to day running's of the country, not to receive a benefit - that is a charitable bonus provided by the citizens to ensure that no other citizen suffers unduly.)
I would also say a PR should not exist. You are either visiting the country or you are staying there - in which case you become a citizen.
- Any govt Benefits (I don't agree with the "but I paid taxes" argument - you paid taxes for the infrastructure and day to day running's of the country, not to receive a benefit - that is a charitable bonus provided by the citizens to ensure that no other citizen suffers unduly.) --> you may find that very often, non-citizens who pay taxes support more than just their use of infrastructure and day-to-day running of the country. This includes supporting NZ citizens who are perpetually on welfare benefits. In any case, they expand the tax base and there are existing rules relating to pensions paid to PRs. Hence I am not sure where the charitable bonus is here? Who is giving and who is receiving?
I would also say a PR should not exist. You are either visiting the country or you are staying there - in which case you become a citizen. --> so no temporary workers? What's a "visit"? 10 days? 10 years? Again, a very insular way of thinking but that's fine.
Just poking my two cents in here. PR's in NZ have it pretty good.
My kiwi wife living in USA for 30 years-on a "Green Card" (=Permanent Residency in USA), however they can not vote. Now comes Obama eager to convert "illegal" immigrants who never applied for Immigration and gained a "green card" and he wants to fast tract 15 million or so to citizenship so that they can vote-for you know who!
On the LINZ debacle I listed to Morning Report today. A full propaganda mission underway by the Ministry to inform that the register is being complied for Tax Purposes only , and never intended to be used for other purposes-such as a foreign home ownership ledger. Certainly they are all circling their wagons down in Wellington on this issue.
any 'green card' holder in the US can apply for citizenship after five years (and in the case of NZers can retain their NZ citizenship). So wondering why your wife hasn't applied for citizenship so she can then vote? And if you are Tommy Yank and are a US citizen, it wouldn't take five years in any case for your wife to become a US citizen.
And wondering why you need to imagine Obama wanting to fast track 15 million 'illegals' just so they can vote for 'you know who'? It's not doable without Congress to provide the legislation to so allow, and we've all seen how political that is and how it hasn't been done. (And another 'you know who' proposing to deport many/most of the 'illegals' - and that's his solution to your problem.)
Tim 60% of buyers are not nz citizens. Read
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11685…
NZ citizens are the minority
You wonder why prices are approaching 1m in Auckland. This is why.
In australia foreign buyers include offshore residents, temp visa workers and foreign students.
Housing affects common people and speculation is more rampant and evident.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/house-sale-stats-continue-mislead-foreign-…
National too is aware but denying to avoid taking any action as private understanding and promises they must have had behind closed doors otherwise what is the reason. Surely not so ignorant and stupid to not know what is known to all and as clear as a water. It is the government mindset that is corrupt.
Even people who are in support of rising house price for personal gain, should ask to themselves if the overseas data announced is correct or not. Not acting againdt foreign buyer is one thing but LIES AND MANIPULATION IS NOT ACCEPTED.
Housing affects common people and speculation is more rampant and evident.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/house-sale-stats-continue-mislead-foreign-…
National too is aware but denying to avoid taking any action as private understanding and promises they must have had behind closed doors otherwise what is the reason. Surely not so ignorant and stupid to not know what is known to all and as clear as a water. It is the government mindset that is corrupt.
Even people who are in support of rising house price for personal gain, should ask to themselves if the overseas data announced is correct or not. Not acting againdt foreign buyer is one thing but LIES AND MANIPULATION IS NOT ACCEPTED.
we have reciprocal agreement with australia, also NZ and australia are very close, we used to part of them (part of new south wales) and can still be at any time, its enshined in their commerwealth act if we ask we can join.
so they are an exception to any rule for foreign buyers
maybe if you learned some NZ history you would know the ties between the two countries
we have reciprocal agreement with australia, also NZ and australia are very close, we used to part of them (part of new south wales) and can still be at any time, its enshined in their commerwealth act if we ask we can join.
so they are an exception to any rule for foreign buyers
maybe if you learned some NZ history you would know the ties between the two countries --> Is NZ a sovereign nation (yes it is)? If so, any other buyer from other countries (a debate can be had over this definition) should be considered as a "foreign buyer". Not sure why there should be any exception unless there are reciprocal benefits (and if so, then more questions can be raised). Funny how I will probably know more about the NZ constitutional history etc than the "average born and bred kiwi" but you can keep the challenges coming.
This is brilliant listen to this. Why won't Nick Smith answer this one simple question?
The question was at 5mins 30seconds.
"How many foreign students and temporary workers are buying and are they counted as a foreigner or as a New Zealander for these sales ?"
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Why-wont-Nick-Smith-answer-this-one-simple-q…
Joe public if this ministers have an open debate with public live will not know where to hide. They get away with media who asks soft question and on their response, no grilling by the journalist like it happens in other part of the world as a result politicians have to think 10 times before comming out with justification of their action based on lie and false manipulative data.
Need very strong journalist who can take on the power without fear for just cause and bring government lies and hidden agenda in the public domain.
We do have few but somthing at times hold them back as should remember that their fight should be issue based and not personality based so personal equation have to be kept aside in the interest of the country
I thought Garner was giving it a good go to get the truth out of Smith yesterday, didn't back down. What surprises me is that the interest.co.nz website is the only site I can see that has an article on the Linz data and is allowing comments. The NZ Herald seem to have shut down any commenting for good. I wonder what the reasoning behind that is.
National Party does not wanting to take any action on foreign buyer is upto them for whatever vested personal interest that they may have but what is ANNOYING is false manipulative reason provided by them. By doing this are testing the intelligence of people and they feel that kiwis are stupid and can be taken for a ride without realising that they now stand totally exposed and the very sight of them on media is disgusting. It is them to be blamed for this reaction as it is us who voted for them and it will be us who will throw them out of parliment...
Would like experts opinion on my comment - a commoner
http://www.linz.govt.nz/news/2016-08/new-property-data-consistent-last-…
60 percent of transfers involved buyers who have only New Zealand tax residency. This compares to 50 percent in the previous quarter.
37 percent involved buyers who did not need to provide tax information – the majority of these were New Zealand citizens or residents who were buying their main home. This is the same percentage as the previous quarter
so 37% NZ citizens ?
Yes and the LINZ did promise to “redesign its survey questions” for September this year to provide accurate information, now they're say it's going to take them a YEAR!!!! ????
What an insult. You can fool some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time!
Quote from article: LINZ said it was redesigning the survey question and was likely to have fresh data for the September quarter which correctly identified which of the New Zealand tax residents were foreign students or people in New Zealand on temporary work visas.
Original article: http://www.interest.co.nz/property/81501/linz-says-3-home-farm-and-busi…
Well at least Labour are willing to stand up and point out that they know that the LINZ data is misleading. If they're willing to follow Australia's and Canada's stance on taxing foreign property buyers then they've got my vote.
Quote from article link: "Labour Party leader Andrew Little said the LINZ data was selective, misleading and underestimated the impact of foreign speculators on New Zealand’s housing market.
Labour has long said that foreign buyers are having a significant impact on the country’s housing market".
http://www.landlords.co.nz/article/5815/foreign-buyer-stats-misleading?…+
CJ099 I agree and Labour did call it right
we need to do two things
1. Follow Australia's definition of what a foreign purchaser is: http://www.sro.vic.gov.au/foreignpurchaser
Anyone who is not a citizen or permanent Resident. So foreign students and temp visa workers although having tax residency in NZ are actual fact foreign buyers.
2. Apply the 15% stamp duty on foreign buyers that Canada (BC) brought in to tackle foreign buyer demand.
Yes I very much agree with you Joe, it's probably high time that we and hopefully those who have also realised that doing nothing is a road to selling out our Kiwi quality of life for generations to come.
We need to start lobbying our MP's so they know that they have voters backing to start taxing foreign property purchasers. Especially now that other major cities are taking this action to protect their Citizens.
Otherwise what's the alternative; National will just keep squeezing out our Kiwi citizens and local Investors until there's now where left to run to?
Well since Labour are taking up the challenge and are more likely to oust National, I'm starting here: http://www.labour.org.nz/contact-us
1. Follow Australia's definition of what a foreign purchaser is: http://www.sro.vic.gov.au/foreignpurchaser
Anyone who is not a citizen or permanent Resident. So foreign students and temp visa workers although having tax residency in NZ are actual fact foreign buyers. --> do you know that NZ has resident visas and permanent residency visas? The first one contains travel conditions that only allow a person to re-enter New Zealand as a resident until a certain date. The other allows indefinite re-entry to New Zealand. Question: should the first one be classed as a "foreign purchaser"? Why?
Thanks for analysing (I was looking for such statistics). Can't take the heat or is this board only for naysayers who are all about white kiwis?
Simple: I am here to call out racism. Racism is fine by me actually but just have the guts to admit it.
And no, I do not work for or support the National party.
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.