A vast and growing majority of New Zealanders want to see income tax brackets automatically adjusted for inflation, according to a Taxpayers’ Union–Curia poll released on Thursday.
Only 10% of the survey’s 1000 respondents were opposed to indexing tax brackets to inflation, compared with 74% who were in favour of the idea.
Support for indexation has been growing since the election. The same question asked in June last year, and again last month, found 67% of respondents were in favour and 14% opposed.
However, the political makeup of those in support does appear to have shifted.
In the 2023 poll, support was strongest among Act Party voters and weakest with Green voters, despite that being an inversion of the two parties’ actual tax policies.
The Greens campaigned on indexation, albeit with a higher top rate, while the Act Party campaigned on a flatter tax structure that would not be adjusted with inflation.
Voters appear to have picked up on their party preferences and support for indexation is now highest among Green voters, with net 72% support, and lower for Act voters with a net 68%.
The strongest opposition was among Te Pati Maori and New Zealand First supporters, where only a net 25% and 28% of their voters were in favour of automatic indexation.
National and Labour voters were at a net 68% and 63%, respectively.
Just do it
Connor Molloy, a campaigns manager at the Taxpayers’ Union, said Prime Minister Christopher Luxon should commit to indexation given his recent comments indicating his support for the policy change.
Following a speech to the Auckland Business Chamber on Wednesday, the Prime Minister said many countries already indexed their tax thresholds to annual inflation.
“The problem when you don’t do that, [and] what we’ve seen in the last six years, is that inflation actually helps the government’s books,” he said.
Governments can end up being “quite lazy” and leveraging inflation in a “very unhelpful and bad way” to fund their spending plans.
Molloy said politicians had been allowing these “stealth tax hikes” since 2010 and workers had been dragged into higher tax brackets, despite their purchasing power staying the same.
““The impact of this stealth tax is so significant that it means the average worker is paying an additional $49 per week in income tax compared with someone on the same real income when tax brackets were last adjusted in 2010,” he said.
“The Prime Minister thinks income tax brackets should be inflation adjusted, as do an overwhelming majority of New Zealanders. Then why is he refusing to commit to it at this years’ budget?”
Too hard basket
While Luxon appears to be sympathetic to indexation, NZ Treasury has advised the Government it will struggle to achieve its fiscal goals without raising revenue.
Advice prepared for the 2023 mini-budget warned the Coalition fiscal drag had played “an important role” in enabling successive governments to meet their objectives.
“If you wish to offset or end fiscal drag, through adjustment of personal income tax rates and thresholds, the fiscal headroom which needs to be created will further increase,” it said.
Freeing up enough fiscal space to deliver on all the Coalition's promises would be a “significant challenge” and would require both reducing spending and raising revenue.
Treasury recommended introducing a capital gains tax, among other changes, so that future governments could be less reliant on fiscal drag for revenue increases.
The Taxpayers’ Union poll was conducted by Curia Market Research in early May and had a 3% margin of error.
Voters were asked: “As welfare benefits automatically increase with inflation, would you support or oppose a law so that income tax thresholds also adjust for inflation, so that someone whose income increases in line with inflation doesn’t end up paying proportionally more income tax than previously?".
108 Comments
In fact "those at the bottom" are extracting money from those at the top.
60% of NZ households pay no net income taxes after credits benefits etc.12 per cent of individuals pay just under half of all personal taxation, and the top 3 per cent account for almost a quarter of all personal tax paid.
The majority of those transfers in that stat are going to those on superannuation, there are 842,000+ over 65's, it's literally 50% of the welfare budget. The accomodation supplement is another one that is hardly a benefit as it ends up being a handout to landlords rather than actually benefitting any tenants, and in fact likely just increases rental costs for all renters.
Here is a link to the actual document.
Here is a link to the new one that was released very recently.
Once again you trot out this b.s.
You can not claim the numbers you do in the first part using just "net income taxes" and then use "personal tax paid" for the other part.
Grow up kiwikidsnz. We're sick of this b.s.
Terry provided a link to the truer figures. Go find that and start using them!
Once again, you resort to ad hominem abuse when others do not share your partisan opinions. Apparently it's you who should grow up.
From Cullens Tax Working Group An inconvenient truth about tax in New Zealand | Stuff
Noting that the recent Treasury update increased the Households paying no net income tax from 50% in 2017 to 60% in 2023.
Building on that, what you linked is an opinion piece, I might be wrong but generally it's better to refer to the source material rather than an opinion piece with it's own agenda and spin. The source itself may still have some bias baked in but I would expect it to be less than what you would find in the opinion section of stuff.
Here is a link to the actual document.
Here is a link to the new one that was released very recently.
Did you even read the damn article, kiwikidsnz?
It's starts off talking about income tax !!!!!
And when it talks about other taxes ... Guess what? ... It makes ABSOLUTELY NO REFERENCE to taxes NZ doesn't have but just about all other countries do !!! And further - the wealthy in NZ benefit enormously from these non-taxes. In fact, they structure their affairs exactly so they can. (And note who the author is? None other than a key beneficiary of such 'tax planning'!)
I made no reference to taxes NZ doesn't have, that's irrelevant.
You're once again attempting to conflate your responses to justify extending your partisan argument that I never entered into.
Also, I have never suggested Super wasn't included in tax credits/rebates, that wasn't relevant to my comment.
You still banging on about this.
There happens to be a middleman doing the extracting, much like those at the top do the extracting via their position of power. And of course there's those pesky landlords doing the most extracting - taxes, rents, housing stock.
Maybe you could put some effort into understanding how the situation has happened that has resulted in 60% of households being net receivers. Obviously there are some structural flaws in the system.
I wonder how many of those households are property investors receiving tax credits via negative gearing?
NZ's unwillingness to pay taxes (especially those with the power not too), means the workers pay more.
Of course taxes don't appear to solve any of the problems.
There's a root cause that we're unwilling to see. And if we could see it I doubt we're capable of addressing it.
NZ GDP $248 Billiion tax take $104 Billion = 41.93% Germany's tax take is 39% of GDP and Australia 29% there is something different in NZ and I think its productivity which is stifled by RBNZ lousy decision making ORR is it something ealse and over regulation with obstructionist bureacrats de motivating the productive members of society who thenj ust do enough to get by and enjoy life as much as they can. Until the playing field is levelled and the real players allowed/encouraged to adapt, invent and invest with out penal taxes and regualtion NZ will continue to decline. Good to see Luxflakes reduce public sector jobs but why not get rid of all the 16,000 extra jobs invesnted by a coven of incompetents.
Te Kooti - you hit the nail on the head, immigrants demand more goods and services we cannot supply to existing citizens - NZ is full - close the door until we can cope exceptions for people we desperately need, Doctors Nurses etc and then root out overstayers and export them back to their country of origin. Necessity is the mother of invention and let NZ No8 wire creativness return.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, "sticks & stones" etc
The personal abuse occasionally directed by the usual suspects at myself & others because we hold different perspectives & opinions is somewhat trying. I've defended our internal comment moderation robustness before so will wear it.
But any manufacturing, farming & productive work is highly polluting. Hence most of NZs manufacturing was encouraged to close down and move to overseas. So we ship logs & metals to China so they can be processed with coal fired plants only to have them shipped back so we can build houses and use appliances. Apparently that is more environmentally friendly in that it makes NZ look greener...
Hence NZ does not have a productive economy, it has a bunch of investors & low skilled policy govt workers trading houses between each other. We also don't have much of an education system either, we have a costly day care that is failing to keep kids safe.
It's really about math. If two people earn 100k per year, and one saves 50% and the other spends everything over 20 year period one will end up with a house and about a million dollars in other investments. One will be rich and one will be poor and trying to figure out how they can retire with no money. After 20 years, one will be generating about 200k per year in capital gains and dividends and if they are still on 100K (for the purposes of this example), then they earn 3x as much as the other guy.....but they both started earning the same money at the beginning and they were both equal. Are we saying this is unfair or is one of these people just not that bright...
After 20 years, one will be generating about 200k per year in capital gains and dividends
200k/year in capital gains and dividens??? Sorry but that's an outlandish call which assumes the same capital gains seen over the last 30 years will go on forever with the same rate and this isn't tenable considering the real cost of debt will not get so low again. At some point in the next 10years the people will demand a CGT by means of voting for it, as the wealthy will have gobbled everything up and there will be even less hope of a future for the young than there currently is.
It' s an example based on around 10% return on dividends and capital gains across property and other assets. The point is the person that saved and invested is going to be pretty loaded. and the other that didn't will be moaning for handouts. It's an example based on an easy return number. If CGT comes along, which it may do, then assets are just transferred overseas or to kids. Job done, no change.
There is much bleating about how some people end up with the wealth and others don't. My example is a clear example of how that happens....and no I am not arguing for the end of super. Both of these fictious individuals will receive the same national super, except one will be rich and one won't. But, they have earned the same amount from their career. Now someone will tell me the rich guy does not deserve super I am sure.
You don't clarify which one of the two is happy with what he/she has, has had 20 years of joyful experiences, developed amazing and healthy relationships with a partner and friends, and is still capable of contributing and earning even though they've reached some magical retirement age.
Also, spending over 20 years does not preclude the second person from retiring with money. He's still earning $100k per year and could continue earning that even after he's "retired".
Some big projections there of who's rich and who's poor, and being equal.
But you are assuming that everyone wants to end up with stuff or that that is how it should be.
And it's not really math that defines the outcome - the math don't care if the house of cards falls down and all those valuations go poof - it would imply that we have flawed math as much as we have flawed economics.
Your maths may be out but you are right in principle. Actions have consequences and bad actions are too often pandered to with little accountability, global economics is a jungle and the fittest survive, right now NZ is a Wilderbeast with a hungry Lion a few yards behind.
The issue is that NZ businesses have to convince citizens that it is worth the extra to buy their product vs an imported, much cheaper alternative. Same as with the USA's current conundrum I commented on recently. When you can get something delivered to your house online for 1/2-1/10 the price of the same item locally, and are willing to wait, why would you go for the local one on a feel good factor when we are getting walloped left right and centre with price increases for practically everything, some of which have no reason apart from gouging?
"In other news 10,000s of Nzers leave, thousands of the low skilled 3rd world imported as replacements."
No. The "low skilled 3rd world" are not replacing the majority of NZdrs who leave because they are mostly skilled.
The imports are replacing a couple of hundred thousands of NZdrs who can't be bothered getting off the couch.
Your source? Interest says different
"The latest arrivals pushed the total number of people in NZ on work visas up to 194,181 at the end of February, and up by 63,252 (+48.3%) compared to February last year."
https://www.interest.co.nz/economy/126821/more-36000-people-arrived-new…
Immigration New Zealand Statistics via MBIE data explorer.
Excluding returning residents, that is the percentage of people walking through customs with a work visa. And sure, total number of people on work visas have increased significantly over the last year, but that is glossing over the effect of the fast track residency pathway in which those previously on work visas could get residency before their two year period in NZ. You can see this in the data explorer too as both work and student visa population plummeted while recent residency visa sky rocketed. Also, a larger number of people still in NZ on essential skills visas (closed 2022) which allow them to stay longer on this visa than previously, up to 3 years.
ANYWAY, my point is that no, migrants are not coming to take over jobs that people are too lazy to do, our work visa immigration stats are trending down after a post-covid peak at around 2016 levels. The jobs aren't there, and people are leaving.
"No. You get $12pw relief for the next 6 years and that is it."
Funny though pretty sure whatever tax relief our family will receive has been surpassed by inflation within the last year. Not that we really need it right now, it's still amusing to think, tax relief and still slightly worse off.
I'm almost vehemently opposed to PAYE tax band / rate indexation.
As we seem to entrust the RBNZ with all other major elements of monetary policy ...
Why not hand over the setting of PAYE tax bands and rates to the RBNZ?
If you think I jest, I'm not. I'm deadly serious.
Automatic PAYE indexation raises serious issues at the macro-economic level. And it will lead to complex, additional taxes (as it did in the USA).
Mind you, I'm also vehemently opposed to political parties buying votes by promising 'tax cuts' we can not afford.
And it will lead to complex, additional taxes
please explain, how can indexation lead to more taxes when it's actually a tax cut?
I'm also vehemently opposed to political parties buying votes by promising 'tax cuts' we can not afford.
if we cannot afford certain things, then don't spend like crazy.
Not what I said.
There are times in the economic cycle that tax cuts are completely appropriate. And other times when belts need to tighten as governments must take a bigger role in the economy to prop things up by - for example - investing in longer term things (e.g. infrastructure) that private enterprise would never invest in.
Indexing will only work if comprehensive capital gains tax and inheritance tax is also implemented.
Otherwise it will simply lead to a reduction in public services and government abuse of the most vulnerable in society.
NZ already has massive social and environmental deficits that need to be addressed and require funding to do so.
How about we demand some results and accountability from this massive government machine that you insist on funding so well? Not to mention admitting that children who grow up in traditional nuclear families with both their mother and their father present on a daily basis leads to the best chance (although nothing is ever for certain) of educated, well adjusted children who might over time just grow up to be responsible and productive members of society.
I have absolutely no problem with proportionate cost benefit analysis (CBA) being undertaken on all government spending items to help ensure productive spending that assists maximising the wellbeing per capita of NZers. The CBA should also be made public so it is transparent.
If you live and intend staying in say the UK you will enjoy many different additional taxes- NIC/GSt at 20%/CGT/Stamop Duty/Death duties/Insurance tax/pension withdrawl tax and none of this has turned UK into a thriving happy low crime country - I wonder why - hint - Govt over reach/ Govt waste/Lousy Govt planning/over regulation thank god they left the Evil Union.
...the Oz version of Forest and Bird is a bit different from here
BushBarbie (caution NSFW)
https://youtube.com/@nikkiosborneofficial?feature=shared
I’m on super and have paid $$$$$$ taxes over my working life to NZ
everybody seems to pick on superannuation as though we are bludgers and expect handouts all the time.
i work 20hrs a week on minimum wage to make ends meet on top of super.
i pay 33% tax on my super as secondary income ST and 17.5% on my 20hrs worked
so like many other superannuation people we have paid taxes before retiring and still pay taxes after retiring so where’s this so called free handout?
so like many other superannuation people we have paid taxes before retiring and still pay taxes after retiring so where’s this so called free handout?
The fact that you paid taxes through your life isn't relevant to now, as those taxes were funding those on the pension at the time, and likely when life expectancy was much lower, leading to much less draw down on the superannuation fund. The conundrum we have now is not a personal vendetta, but a matter of logic. We now have a much greater life expectancy, leading to longer draw on the pension, and lower birth rates leading to less people to fund the current pension scheme. It was implemented on the premise that people would continue to have large families.
Life expectancy in NZ:
1977: 72.17yrs (when universal pension introduced)
2001: 78.69
2024: 82.95 years
The age of eligibility to NZ super was raised form 61 to 65 between 1993 and 2001 in line with recognised increase in life expectancy - they could see the additional long term cost to the scheme
So we now have an increase in life expectancy by an average of 4.26years since 2001 and no increase in the age of eligibility to super, meaning increased costs over time and nothing done to address these, less people to fund this who are working now, where the money comes from (as well as investments by the fund of course).
Logic dictates it isn't sustainable and with a large generation nearing the end of being eligible to all draw from it, we have the situation where it won't hold up unless we import more workers to pay tax, find the vast sums of money elsewhere via taxation, or simply means test it so those in need of it get it to hold up a minimum standard of living. the USA is going to be in for this issue too as they have pilfered the social security fund for all sorts over the years, not paid much or any back in, and there isn't the money to put back in now.
So, the bludgers that are not retired folk that are sitting on their arse getting handouts need to get out and work and contribute some takes rather than being parasites and sucking money out of the system that they do not need (as they can actually work). I'm glad we agree. The solution is to make lazy people work to support the older generation. Well done.
There's less and less sympathy for super because the people currently on it were the ones that voted in the politicians that robbed this country blind and failed to be fiscally responsible in accounting for the future. NZ Superannuation Scheme was basically Kiwisaver in the 70s and the voters brought in a National government to destroy it and replace it with a Ponzi scheme.
Focusing on 'bludgers' however is a terrible distraction. Workers should be angry that they are facing a higher and higher share of the burden of government. It is ridiculous that gains made through sweat are taxed more than gains made with no effort. Capital gains, inheritance, land value taxes need to be reinstated and used to reduce the income tax burden.
"i pay 33% tax on my super as secondary income ST and 17.5% on my 20hrs worked"
Make sure you file a tax return (or at least calculate what your tax should have been) at the end of each year
The income tax you pay is calculated on the total income for the year and NOT at separate rates for different jobs / income streams. Lots of people complaining about 'secondary tax' don't file tax returns and get either screwed by (or cheat) the IRD because this.
You misunderstand the issue.
If, for example, a CGT was implemented where CGT is paid on realisation and PAYE was reduced accordingly, workers would receive more disposable income throughout their working lives but when they started selling their assets towards, or in, retirement they'd pay more tax at that time.
Totally understand and I’m all for broadening the tax base. What I’m saying is we all want more money in our hand but we also want better health, roads etc etc. Who pays for that? We need productivity and more people earning more. At present a small % of people pay most of the tax. The reason for creep is both a narrow tax catchment, income and GST, but also that not enough people earn enough to actually pay tax after rebates back. The creep funds the requirements, well not all, and without it there’s no money. CGT would help but we still need to increase the pot of money to tax, and then hopefully stop creep.
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.