Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has promised there will be no new taxes and “no-frills” in the Labour government’s May budget, which will be focused on funding only the basics.
In a pre-Budget speech in Auckland, Hipkins ruled out using a cyclone levy to pay for the recovery from the Auckland floods and Cyclone Gabrielle.
“This will be an orthodox no-frills Budget focused on funding the things most important to New Zealanders like support with the cost of living and cyclone recovery,” he said.
He also ruled out any possibility of a wealth or capital gains tax, promising no major tax changes in the budget. This followed the release of IRD research on Wednesday, which found the ultra-wealthy paid a lower tax rate than salaried workers.
Revenue Minister David Parker has said that tax policy was a matter for Cabinet to decide and any proposed changes would be taken to the election in October.
Hipkins’ pre-budget speech highlighted his unwillingness to impose new taxes on households that are already struggling to make ends meet.
The Treasury has estimated the cost of repairing the damage from the Auckland floods and Cyclone Gabrielle will between $9 billion and $14.5 billion.
The government is comfortable it can meet this cost using a combination of annual operating and capital allowances, savings and reprioritization, and some debt.
With inflation falling but still too high, the Reserve Bank will be weighing up the inflationary impact of the May budget when it meets later that month for its Monetary Policy Statement.
Paul Conway, the central bank’s chief economist, explicitly warned the rebuild would result in higher interest rates if it generated inflationary pressure.
“Alternatively, diverting Government resources from projects elsewhere in the country or funding the rebuild via increased government revenues would free up resources without the need for higher interest rates,” he said in a March speech.
Hipkins has ruled out increased revenue but has promised more reprioritization. Whether it will be enough to prevent a bonus rate hike remains to be seen.
Kiwibank economist Jarrod Kerr said a cyclone reconstruction levy, similar to what the Australian government used after the Queensland floods in 2010, would have been a “clean and clear” way to fund the rebuild.
But the government can “easily absorb the cost” without the political risk of imposing an extra tax in an election year, and has decided to do so.
Kerr would like the government and the public to reconsider its definition of fiscal responsibility as something that goes beyond just nominal spending levels.
“We neglect things in order to adhere to these numbers which are probably too strict”.
It should not be considered fiscally responsible to keep spending low by under-investing in critical infrastructure or cutting core services, for example.
No-frills Prime Minister
Hipkins said cost of living was his top priority as Prime Minister and promised better delivery of more modest goals.
“The reality is the Government was previously doing too much, too fast, and the effect of that was being tied up with issues taking time and money away from where our primary focus needed to be”.
He said Government spending was falling towards “the low thirties” as a percent of GDP and should settle there overtime.
“I’d call it a no-frills approach, and that characterises the decisions we’ve made since I became Prime Minister as well as decisions we have made in the upcoming Budget”.
The term no-frills began being used in the 1800s to refer to simple clothing and, later in the century, as a polite way to describe someone as being plain or unrefined.
But it took off in the modern lexicon when, during a period of high inflation in 1978, a struggling Canadian supermarket rebranded its worst performing supermarkets as No Frills.
It mostly sold brandless products with just the items’ name printed in black Helvetica font on a yellow background.
Customers had to bag their own groceries and the whole building was painted with the same garish yellow as the no-name products it sold.
It was a hit with cost-conscious consumers and the idea spread to other markets, including New Zealand in the form of PaknSave.
The prime minister said he doesn’t make the trip into his local yellow-and-black store as often as he used to — but he still does his own shopping and keeps an eye on prices.
“But I think it is incumbent on leaders to not only walk in the shoes of others, but to reflect those experiences in the choices we make. That means it’s not right for households to be tightening their belts if the Government doesn’t too,” he said.
The future of frills
Being a no-frills Prime Minister doesn’t only mean making spending cuts to keep debt-to-GDP levels low, Hipkins also wants to set NZ up to be “the best little trading nation in the world”.
The budget will make targeted investments in things that could help improve economic growth and productivity: skills, science and technology and infrastructure.
“Rather than a long laundry list of worthy ideas, I want the Government to do a small number of things very well. And those small number of things need to be focused on growing our economy”.
Advanced economies such as Germany, South Korea, Japan and Singapore demonstrated that these items were the best possible investments in the future of an economy.
“When we came into office, we inherited infrastructure investment which had averaged just under $5 billion a year under the previous Government. It simply wasn’t enough and explains the deficit we are experiencing now”.
Infrastructure investment in the past five years was an average of nearly $9 billion and the Treasury estimates it will average more than $12.5 billion between 2023 to 2027.
55 Comments
It should not be considered fiscally responsible to keep spending low by under-investing in critical infrastructure or cutting core services, for example.
Nor should we consider the books balanced if it relies on a decade plus of tax increases by stealth. This goes for all parties.
If you want to increase taxes, then take it to the electorate and let them decide whether your policies (even if it is neglect of wholesale infra and state services) are acceptable.
Agreed about the tax band creep, but the rest of that statement is daft. Parliamentary democracies don’t work like that. The NZ electorate did not:
- Vote to lose thousands of soldiers in WW2 by holding a referendum on declaring war on the Axis;
- Sign off on high unemployment to introduce Rogernomics and ‘liberalise’ the economy in the 80s;
- Agree to mandate seat belts, eliminate leaded petrol & enforce NCAP ratings that resulted in new cars becoming more expensive for voters to buy.
Governments are there to govern based on a ‘general direction & style’ understood by the voters. They can’t wait 3-5 years for elections to make operational decisions on their revenue & expenses.
No, it isn't. Those are cabinet and regulatory decisions. Any government makes those regularly. That's what governments do. They are also stonkingly old and no longer relevant. If you want to call my statement daft, you should probably come up with something that's even in the ballpark of what is being discussed.
Governments govern, but the underwriting thereof through taxation is something the Finance Minister is happy to politicise when it comes to poo-pooing the idea of indexation as a 'tax cut'. Well, if he wants to do that, he creates a defacto obligation to come clean about his own tax increases, which he has not put to the electorate and has not explained why he continues to increase taxes by not adjusting for inflation - the inflation his government agrees should exist with RBNZ and doesn't seem to care if it's out by a factor of three or so.
At that point, the electorate can decide whether the ever-declining state of our core crown services like Health, Education and Law & Order are giving us good value for money.
“Rather than a long laundry list of worthy ideas, I want the Government to do a small number of things very well. And those small number of things need to be focused on growing our economy”.
Advanced economies such as Germany, South Korea, Japan and Singapore demonstrated that these items were the best possible investments in the future of an economy.
The 4 countries mentioned differ from NZ in that they have a long-term strategic mindset. And they have a reputation for getting sh*t done. Sure they don't have a good national rugby team. All good at football, except S'pore of course.
Two of those countries had previous long term strategic minsets that killed 10s of millions of people, and required them to have to totally reinvent themselves.
NZ is currently undertaking some long term strategic mindsets that are eschewing short term profits for longer term conservation. Whether that will pay a dividend will be something decades in the making.
It is mind blowing how many Russians died in WW2, there is a presentation at the Omaka Aviation Heritage Centre.... that shows via scale just how many died.
You mean Americans. Without America, Russia would've been charging with pitchforks.
#lendlease.
And I believe Rommel noted that the Maori Battalion were the toughest sons a bitches he ever went up against. But, as NZ is a minnow population wise, we'd have no where near enough of them to make a serious dent.
Salient contributions as always JC.
Sure, but JC was specifically trying to downplay Tangata Whenua military contribution
Yeah, right. Long term strategic thinking like He Puapua's roadmap to an apartheid system of government with a Maori only upper house of parliament by 2040.
There's minimal strategic thinking by any of our political leaders or public service. They spend most of their days hand-wringing about social issues and procrastinating rather than getting stuff done. How many reports have been written on shifting the Port of Auckland? How many on the 2nd harbour crossing? Light-rail anyone?? Coastal shipping? Battery projects??
We'll all die of old age before any dividends are realised.
Everyone now knows that the Labour Govt lies through its teeth and does things behind citizen's backs. Promise to reduce immigration in the 2017 election campaign = record immigration numbers in 2019. Promise of no vaccine mandates = forced thousands of people out of jobs and excluded hundreds of thousands from society. Separatist Co-Governance developed in secret and then forced onto the population with zero discussion. 3 Waters = sneak in an anti-democratic entrenchment provision and hope no one notices.
So we can expect promises made before the election will not be kept. And things not even discussed before the election will be implemented.
Thankfully, Australia has agreed to take us as economic refugees.
The budget will make targeted investments in things that could help improve economic growth and productivity: skills, science and technology and infrastructure
Classic clickbait politics: talk big game on productivity in the run up only to spare some loose change for these critical initiatives on Budget day alongside billions more to MSD's baseline.
Sadly, even National seem to be more interested in people buying rental properties than people trying to do business with the rest of the world. No recognition of the need to re-balance our economy and investments away from bricks and mortar and into productive enterprise.
I wouldnt trust either party. Whoever wins they need to be forced into a coalition to include Winston, The Greens and maybe Top/Act for good measure.
That would curtail the co-governance, allow for some climate action and stop CGT and pointless spending in its tracks. They would get Jack done - but thats preferable to the current nonsense policies they all have.
Would also stop the drive to learn maori in every subject school and renaming everything. (i have no issue with doing it as long as kids have the basics nailed and are turning up.. which they dont/arent)
“When we came into office, we inherited infrastructure investment which had averaged just under $5 billion a year under the previous Government. It simply wasn’t enough and explains the deficit we are experiencing now”.
Infrastructure investment in the past five years was an average of nearly $9 billion and the Treasury estimates it will average more than $12.5 billion between 2023 to 2027."
This isn't granny herald, nor is it tabloid stuff or newshub. Interest.co.nz seems to have readers with at least a basic understanding of economics, which I suspect isn't the case of those publications, or most of our politicians.
Can we please therefore in light of this, always present these numbers in both real and nominal terms? (or perhaps just real?). Your readers understand what that means, and it conveys more useful information in the same or similar number of words. Food for thought.
That’s a fairly difficult question to answer, but if I can find data I’ll include it.
Just a simple adjustment for CPI inflation would mean $5b in (say) 2010 would be about $6.8b today.
So, those numbers are a lift in real terms relative to CPI. Infrastructure seems to be getting crazy expensive, however.
$6.8b apparently gets you about half a harbour crossing today.
Brain dead-gangs + affiliates, people with convictions for violence and/or aggravated assault, then conclude with people getting KO housing whilst continuing to breed, or worse meet the definition of poverty yet bring more kids into the world.
Significant overlap in the above but you have a sizeable voting block typically supporting Labour or Te Pati.
I think people were afraid if Labour didn’t get a clear majority at the 2020 election they would go into coalition with the greens so many voted Labour instead of National to keep the greens away.
This time it’s a possibility of a three way coalition between Labour, Greens and the Maori party although it appears the Greens are eating themselves and may implode before the election.
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.