Twas the week before Christmas, when Treasury dropped the bomb: $20 billion of extra borrowing will be needed to plug Crown deficits over the next five years.
New Zealand’s recession had been deeper and the recovery would be later than expected seven months ago. Nominal gross domestic product (GDP) would be $19.8 billion less over the forecast period, contributing to a $13 billion reduction in core Crown tax revenue.
Less tax revenue and rising costs means deeper deficits, a total of $57 billion across the forecast, which will push net core Crown debt up to $234 billion or 45.2% of GDP in 2029.
Strict annual operating allowances of just $2.4 billion aren’t enough to get the Crown accounts back into surplus by the end of the decade, at least by the traditional measure.
Whatever Finance Minister Nicola Willis was wishing for this Christmas, it surely wasn’t this.
It must be said that some of this challenge was self-inflicted. The National Party campaigned on cutting taxes, despite knowing it would make their ‘fiscal repair job’ $14 billion harder.
Now, it looks increasingly like tax increases may be needed to put New Zealand back on a sustainable footing. That’s not something Willis was willing to entertain on Tuesday.
She said both tax increases and further spending cuts could threaten the economic growth which has been forecast to restart in the New Year, and neither should be pursued.
For all her tough talk, the Finance Minister is more of a fiscal dove than a hawk. Growing the economy is her number one priority and she’s willing to delay surpluses to support it.
This approach has critics on the right and the left of politics. David Seymour told Parliament he thought an extra $6 billion would have to be cut from coming budgets, while Labour said spending should be increased to stimulate growth.
The trouble is that much of the gunpowder in the fiscal cannon was fired during the pandemic and it needs to be reloaded. New Zealand does not have the luxury of infinite borrowing, and needs room on its balance sheet to finance infrastructure upgrades anyway.
Stephen Toplis, head of research at BNZ, said the HYEFU (Treasury's Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update) painted “a picture of a country that remains very much fiscally hamstrung” and could not rely on spending to drive growth.
“Achieving the targets that the government continues to pursue means there is still a long battle ahead and any thought that fiscal policy might be relaxed in the years ahead should be dismissed,” he wrote in a note.
Mark Smith, a senior economist at ASB, said the government needed to “pass the growth baton” to firms and households who had been reducing their debt levels in recent years.
The risk with that approach is that if the private sector doesn’t step up fast enough, the country could get stuck in an austerity doom loop. Deficit spending, on the other hand, kicks the can down the road in the hopes of finding a better moment to consolidate spending.
A possible third option would be to raise taxes. This would also come with a set of risks and trade-offs but is being discussed more frequently by economists.
Miles Workman, a senior economist at ANZ, said it was “hard to see [fiscal] challenges being overcome in an equitable way without bigger policy adjustments, such as broadening the tax base”.
And Nic Guesnon, an economist at UBS, even said wealth taxes could be an option given NZ’s wealth had become “increasingly skewed towards older demographics, which on average pay less tax but fiscally cost the government more”.
These aren’t really resounding endorsements but it’s notable that even non-political economists are weighing them up as serious options; the HYEFU forecasts really were that bad.
128 Comments
The recent tax cuts funded by debt look like the biggest unforced error now. What a stupid mistake. The 'growth' that it was supposed to stimulate, clearly did not eventuate.
I think this lot are out of their depth, they seem to be floundering for a plan b.
The numbers were "rock solid" they said, yet pretty much everyone could see the black hole in their finances, yet now it all comes out - and its much worse than everyone feared.
Yeah I said at the time tax relief for businesses would be a better option (or up the GST threshold for SMES to 90k). The ones that make stuff to sell overseas, the ones who employee people. No point getting a tax cut when the business you work for closed the doors, and that business is not around to pay the tax that central government spend.
If you refer to the landlord tax cuts, there are many making losses or barely breaking even, but were adjusted to being in 'profit' and having to pay tax.
The landlord tax was introduced in and environment of property euphoria = good times forever.
This has now changed and property is a sick puppy and getting worse. In such a change of outlook, this extra tax and on losses may not be such a smart idea.
Unintended consequences to the economy perhaps being much worse than we are seeing now?
I have always critisized the landlording economy and use of it as an atm to pump NZ. And was correct - it has been a disaster.
I did cheer lead the tax when it came in (i was a home owner then, since sold) - so arguably would suit me if the tax had remained
I am now making the observation that if retained the effect of this extra tax (a tax which can create a tax on a real loss) 'may' have made things much worse and much faster than what we are about to experience.
Remember it was imposed in a stage where housing euphoria was insane. A lot has changed and is changing fast.
"The recent tax cuts funded by debt look like the biggest unforced error now. What a stupid mistake. "
Very true. May I remind everyone of the tax stance going into the last election?
Labour: "There is no money for tax cuts."
National: "There is money for tax cuts and we'll not need to borrow to do it."
You drank the Koolaid. Now we all have to suffer for it. ... BTW, who voted for this RBNZ leadership?
I agree. The pollies bought into the rort that increasing tax take by simply importing more workers and consumers while underinvesting in infrastructure and public services could go on forever.
If not for that easy source of tax take, the government of the day would have had to push through much needed reforms in tax, welfare, housing, education, immigration, etc.
Well the headache from covid is just a bit more intense than people thought. So many had a good time when thrown the free, cheap money, party central. So many said that it needed to go to the productive side of the economy not the central spend it up big side, and look what the consequence is. Grant spent like no tomorrow and pushed inflation up, Orr raised interest rates to counter it and the death spiral for SME's and some bigger businesses began.
It was mainly the RBNZ that screwed the economy.
The RBNZ threw huge sums of cheap money at banks and dropped prudential controls, while dropping interest rates to less than 3%. House prices rocketed away and people started using their houses as ATMs to borrow at cheap interest rates.
The RBNZ made the ensuing inflation way, way, way worse than it would have been. And then they had to deal with the problem that they made with a long sustained period of high interest rates that has totally screwed the economy.
Labour is not blameless. But the RBNZ must shoulder the bulk of the blame for the mess we're in now.
RBNZ made a mess - but to be fair it was the successive governments that have led us all down the garden path - just stoking the immigration and residential property fires.... with no regard for the medium to long term future of our economy.
If the government had introduced policies to steer the economy away from residential property and immigration as growth and toward productive business - the RBNZ policies would have had very little impact (try getting people to borrow cheap money to buy property if the capital gain is low - and if the wealth effect from property isnt there ... then people will simply choose other investment vehicles and other careers.... and the economy would adapt ).
RBNZ didnt help - but they simply aligned their policies with the economic engine to keep things trucking along. Had our economy been steered to ward alternate industries and investment then RBNZ would have followed that path - which would have helped.
Blame lies with the leaders - key, hipkins, ardern nd now luxon. They wanted the job and didnt or arent delivering. We should be pushing them harder for results, vision and strategy.
Was it 'successive governments' that in 2020 ...
- dropped retail mortgage rates below 3%? No - It was the RBNZ.
- dropped LVR completely? No - It was the RBNZ.
- threw 000's millions at retail banks to lend? No - It was the RBNZ.
- caused house price inflation to rocket away and let people use their inflated assets as ATMs? No - It was the RBNZ.
And then when inflation rocketed away late 2021 ...
- was so slow to normalize interest rates that ...
- inflation became embedded everywhere, which resulted in ...
- punitive interest rates caused spending to dry up, which resulted in ...
- a very long period of recession that we're still? No - Once again, it was the RBNZ.
Nice conflation of two very separate issues, OldSkoolEconomics. Shame on you.
Not at all.
I am not disagreeing that RBNZ played a key part. I dont agree with much the Orr and Co do tbh.
But the key is to focus on the real issue: whether you blame the govt coz they chose Orr and Co - and renewed Orrs contract , or because the govt policies supported a really crappy economic strategy - or both. The problem is the leadership that we elect who have let it (and actively eocouraged it) to happen.
Perhaps I'll add on: RBNZ screwed the economy (however there was some influence from excessive spending in government, foolish spending from the COVID fund etc), and Labour screwed the social fabric of NZ, adding divisiveness and polarising the people, and this has yet to heal and repair. Only a national issue that everyone is on board with will unite the people however I feel this need significantly better leadership than currently on show.
I agree. The more I look at the current situation, the more I realize that things will only change if we take creative non-violent direct action to bring these issues to the forefront of the political dialogue.
In the midst of this obvious crisis exists a window of opportunity to get concrete political/legislative action to correct the imbalances of the past and redirect our economy/society onto a more sustainable and resilient future. There is a lot at stake and the future is uncertain; we can't afford to let this wasteful, destructive trajectory continue otherwise we will end up cast aside by the upheaval process happening globally
After swineflu/bird flu circa 2009 NZ authorities and health professionals had prepared an extensive pandemic response manual. Instead of following those protocols that they had developed over many years, they binned all that good local work and went with...someone else's plan.
Nah - it started with Key and possibly before that. Easy for all parties since to just keep stoking an economy that became focussed on immigration and residential house price growth.
As with musical chairs the game was always to be voted out before the cracks started to show. Luxon was the lucky guy to pick it up - and unfortunately has no clue what to do.
We are going to have to accept what is likley to be a lost decade - and find a visionary leader who is willing to tell the peasants we have to suck up the pain and rebuild everything around productive businesses, and get started or the rest of the world is simply gonna leave us behinds and the exodus of young skilled smart people is gonna accelerate.
Change will come - the question is how long til we accept it and embrace it, and how long til someone comes along with the vision and loeadership to sort it. Blue Chris will get fried at the next election and Red Chris hasnt any answers either..
"it started with Key and possibly before that"
It started with a whole heap of tax & banking changes by another National Party government back in the 80s-90s. Their stated goal was to get private landlords to take a bigger role in social housing. These tax changes went largely unnoticed by everyone ... except smart accountants and the wealthy people who could take advantage of those changes.
The incentive - way back then - was mainly the untaxed capital gain.
That's said, they also received favorable tax treatment (much has now been removed) and favourable banking treatment (e.g. interest at owner occupier rates rather than business rates like most other countries).
The incentive remains ... untaxed capital gain. The numbers simply don't stack up without it.
See where I'm going?
It is not for naught that I bitch about how bad our tax system is. "Investment" decisions get seriously screwed up if tax doesn't have a neutral effect.
Sadly, Kiwi's make some of the least productive 'investments' ever based on our atrocious tax system.
You didn't necessarily have to be wealthy back then considering the price of housing and ability to leverage was much more favourable. Heck many houses would pay themselves off in a decade with rent alone and possibly the odd top up. I know a bloke who leveraged his own house to the gilt to get a rental, then leveraged that and so on, so that they'd pay themself down and his kids could all have a house with a meagre mortgage each when they hit 21 so they'd be financially set. He isn't rich in any way, still lives a modest life. Opportunities of the times I suppose, it's not feasible today unless you're into the likes of the west coast.
Oh Cheetah. The reality is that the previous government (inept as it was) tried and failed to face up against some big challenges. This lot have noone to blame but themselves. inept, incompetent, divisive, inexperienced, arrogant, totally without empathy to real New Zealanders, JUST PLAIN STUPID.... you choose.
and central bankers around the globe printed new currency units out if thin air out the wazoo...causing inflation.
You think it's over? I don't. In some ways, we might be just getting started. Think of global debt (US$900T of global financial assets is an almighty bubble) as the numerator and GDP as the denominator. Fiat currency is the error term that solves this at the moment.
A debt spiral can trap both individuals and nations. As borrowing rises to cover existing debt, the cycle continues, resulting in higher interest payments and deeper financial struggles.
Inflation is actually currency devaluation hence NZ$ v US $ was 62c now close to 57c - 6% devalauation and possibly continuing the same trend, still this will stifle imports (Good) and promote exports (Good) - so trader balance improves but local taxes reduce due to less discretionery disposable income. Perhaps a good time to increase GST to 20% and really clobber the economy and force more productive spending.
FCM: "Grant spent like no tomorrow and pushed inflation up, Orr raised interest rates to counter it and the death spiral for SME's and some bigger businesses began. "
Sorry, FCM, but you appear to be yet another person that doesn't understand the role the RBNZ played in creating this mess.
The government had to spend to prop up NZ when covid hit. All governments did this - without exception!
In early 2020 - what didn't need to happen was for the RBNZ to drop the OCR 0.25% (which dropped mortgage rates to less than 3%). The RBNZ also dropped the LVR completely while at the same time throwing absolutely huge sums of cheap cash at the retail banks. Remember this was 2020. In two years we saw inflation out of control. Pretty much as economists - both professional and amateur - predicted. Consequently, the RBNZ had to raise interest rates .... To resolve a situation the RBNZ largely created !!!
Huge savings on consultants:
"The Government set the public service a target of eliminating $400 million in operating expenditure on contractors and consultants by 2024/25.
In 2023/24 savings of $274 million were achieved. This year the public service is on track, after the first quarter, to achieve savings of about $500 million. These savings are forecast to continue over the next three quarters, which means savings over the two-year period could total more than $800 million, according to the update."
However:
"...staff total in the public service at September 2024 is only 296 less than in June 2023."
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/12/huge_savings_on_consultants.html
The public service has been doing nothing since the coalition got it. The cuts will only be felt when the coalition try to do something. Cutting is easy initially, it comes back to bite you when you try to implement your agenda.
Unless of course your agenda is to destroy public services so they can be privatised.
"Mark Smith, a senior economist at ASB, said the government needed to “pass the growth baton” to firms and households who had been reducing their debt levels in recent years."
I doubt businesses are going to borrow up massively, so that leaves households. So this governments entire plan for growth is to load households up with more debt and kickstart the property ponzi again?
And have just seen the migration announcement, so its promote the bidding war on housing and to hell with the fact we cannot provide basic services to those already here and our infrastructure is failing around us...buy another rental, we'll lend you the dosh....our friends in gov have just guaranteed the tenancy....nevermind about unemployment.
to hell with the fact we cannot provide basic services to those already here and our infrastructure is failing around us
It will continue to fail given the gross underspending on a per capita basis coupled with ongoing mass exodus of locally trained workers. The hope is that at least a sliver of the tens of thousands arriving in NZ each month have the bare minimum skills required by a developed economy to function.
So the solution to too much private debt is more private debt?....good grief.
Correct. It is the 'solution'. And has been for quite some time. If you've been paying attention. Aoteroa h'hold debt to GDP / income has tailed off in recent times but needs to keep growing for the Ponzi to growing. And the Ponzi is the be-all-and-end-all. Price growth doesn't come from genie lamps. It comes from marginal buyers taking on greater debt loads.
It may be the model but that does not make it "the solution"....you will note the 'too much'...we are at the point where the output cannot service the current debt loading (and why moving it to the public purse removes the risk of default)....adding to private debt at this point when output shows no sign of increasing increases the risk of default(s).....therein lies deflation.
That's because the shore side (councils) could smell the cheap money from Grant, so of course they were like lets grab as much of this as we can, why would'nt you. No one thought on how we were going to pay for that debt. The other problem is you had Kiwi rail involved, probably the most bloated and hopeless of all the government's SOE's at delivering anything.
Is National thinking about how they will pay for the massive debt that their redundant road building programme entails? No. Didn't think so. Red bad, blue good, thinking means that
- Labour borrowing to invest into critically important national transport infrastructure = bad
- National recklessly borrowing to fund ideologically, donor driven and redundant transport infrastructure = good
Apparently they think the private sector will come in to sort that and kiwi motorists will be happy to pay tolls everywhere.
More wishful thinking. Just take a look at the trainwreck of a project that was Transmission Gully. The poor old taxpayer just ended up paying even more.
Tolls will barely cover the interests costs, the massive roading infrastructure costs still need to be paid for.
The infrastructure is unfunded. No Public Private partnership would touch them unless the government guaranteed them a higher rate for return than what the private sector can borrow at which is an even worse solution as it means effectively borrowing at private sector rates rather than lower govt rates.
The false promise of PPP was what fucked Labour's light rail approach.
That requires negotiation skills and prudence in the tendering process. Private entities see a publicly funded project and see a bottomless pit of money to invoice to, and it needs careful and stern negotiation on the governments end to ensure the blowout isn't excessive, penalties are severe to curtail lags in the project, and nothing will be left to slide.
Westie posted a week or so ago salary ranges at KiwiRail. He didn't specify his source so I dug around and found this report. He was pretty much spot on.
I've lost touch with salaries over the last ten years or so but even taking salary increases over time I was shocked at the numbers.
"Annual-Integrated-Report-2024-KiwiRail"
Extrapolate that salary spending over all government departments and SOE's. Then you see where a lot of that government increased government spending is going. But rather than cutting positions it would be better to cut salaries and keep people employed (just earning a little less). Afterall someone on 100k kicks back 25k in taxes and ACC and 4 of those fund someone else earning 100k. Not to mention the jobs their spending supports and the GST collected on that spending. A rough calculation of core public service workers earning over 120k each taking a pay cut of 10% would generate 300 million a year in savings. Extrapolate that over the entire public sector and we could probably save well over a billion a year. But no one has to lose their job. You won't be taking the family to Fiji this winter but you wont lose your house in a mortgagee sale either.
Or we could invest more in making them more productive so we'd need fewer. That works too.
FYI: I know quite a bit about the I.T. systems used by many large public organisations. The age of these systems are a source much lost productivity. Just another example of NZ's underspend on infrastructure.
Kiwi's get what they vote for. Tax cuts for landlords was much more important than increasing productivity.
"I've lost touch with salaries over the last ten years."
Some simple maths might help: While houses seldom double every ten years, salaries often do.
Thus, think what you were earning, or salaries you were familiar with, 10 years ago and simply double it.
E.g. if you were earning $75k in 2014 - you could easily be on $150k now.
Half of New Zealand workers are employed in SME's with under 100 employees. For those firms, fiscal responsibility is a necessity. They can't just increase wages every year. In harder times their employees fall behind while the public sector just keeps on trucking. The average public service salary ticked over 100K for the first time in 2024.
Since 2018 public sector wages have increased 23.4 percent, compared to private sector wage growth of 19.6 percent and inflation of 25.8 percent over the same period. Both sectors went backwards but the private sector was a lot faster.
The private sector pay averaged a 3.6% increase to June 2024 Public Sector had a 6.9% increase over the same period. And I would speculate that the private sector growth skews towards the larger firms with bigger moats.
The highly selective & very short time period you are using (2018-) has significantly skewed your analysis.
Over the last 30+ years public sector vs private sector pay oscillates.
A simplistic interpretation is that when the economy is booming, public sector pay lags. Conversely, when the economy is contracting, private sector pay lags. And over a 30+ period, both sectors enjoy roughly the same rate increases.
I will put it more simply. In recent years (as our national balance sheet has descended into the toilet) The public sector has been hoovering up the available talent of the nation and overpaying them to make work for each other. I don't blame the talent. Who could say no to a strict 37.5 hour week, 5 weeks annual leave, unquestioned 10 days sick leave, flexible and work-from-home privileges ect. The private sector had to compete with their largesse and that put extra pressure on inflation. But when the dust settles and staffing numbers return to saner levels we will realise we didn't need them all anyway.
A compound interest calc shows to double ever ten years salary increase would need to be 7.2% per year for 10 years. % seems a bit high to me. Since Ive been out of the permanent workforce for about 20 years and looking at my salary back then, I very much doubt that the same position now would be anywhere close according to my calc and I considered myself to be well paid back then.
I'm assuming National with resign given the extra borrowing and their inability to 'balance the books'. Labour's reckless borrowing and economic mismanagement was the platform National stood on and as they have now demonstrably failed at being any better it's time to go.
While we have persistent current account deficits, and households in aggregate want to save... we have to run persistent Govt deficits to keep our economy going. Unless, of course, we have a year or two of insane increases in private debt. I wish more people understood this.
Given ...
a) the RBNZ seems to kowtow to the banks who'd benefit enormously from increases in private debt, and
b) our foolish 'balance the books' government,
... I have every expectation that the solution will involve 'insane increases in private debt'.
In NZ ... Growth = house price inflation + rent cost inflation + immigration
You're right to worry. That could happen. But as interest rates fall (probably too far given the RBNZ's penchant for overaction) the millions that are sitting in what will be low interest TDs and savings accounts will come out to play. And let's face it - Kiwis have limited horizons when it comes to investments.
rastus: "Where's the cap gains gonna come from? It would raise b-all."
Not if a capital gains tax was backdated to 1900. This would result in immediate revenues which would also allow near immediate tax cuts to PAYE taxes and/or GST.
Taxes are seldom backdated. But in this instance, because everyone would benefit, and no one could escape it, it is justified.
Uk made these errors in 2010-14
Things cost money and public don’t seem to know that costs are rising as revenue falls. This will put pressure on dollar and raise import costs. Meaning more inflation
So it’s tax rises or interest rate rises to defend currency
National are Party of business sense eh?
In the odd case it's the other way round. Think NZ Labour 100,000 houses in ten years. UK Labour after NZ Labour's debacle on housing, 1,000,0000 houses in five years I think, maybe 10. Either number unachievable. UK Labour unchecked immigration following on from NZ's allowed immigration.
One option for Willis - and one that is fairer all around - is to reduce interest deductibility for landlords from 100% to a lesser percentage, e.g. 80%.
The correct % would put landlords and owner occupiers on much the same footing but still leaves renters out in the cold. It would also chill the housing market a tad for those looking to top up their rental portfolios or those looking to become first time landlords.
Nothing new in this by the way. It's been done all over the world to balance OOs and LLs. If memory serves, even NZ did this at one stage. In some countries, instead of reducing the interest deductibility, an alternative which isn't an option for Willis, has been tax rebates on their mortgage interest bills for OOs.
This should be an easy sell for Willis as it is firmly based on fairness. LLs will of course squeal like stuck pigs and claim both ACT and the National Party are reneging on an election 'promise'. OOs won't get any direct benefit so maybe they'll sit on the sidelines, or worry their property will fall in value (or not rise as fast).
Not quite so. The OO gets the 'benefit' of not paying rents. Thus, at 0% the OOs benefit outweighs that of the LL.
But you hit on a good point. I'd be all in favour of weighting the % slightly in favor of the OO. From memory, that's what most countries have done too. That'd be good for Willis too.
Imagine the incentive for Governments to keep house prices in check if the consequences is a huge hit to the tax base from ever increasing mortgage debt burden/rising interest rates?
Take a $500k mortgage @ 5% = $25k p.a. in interest. If that were 100% deductible then a couple each earning $100k p.a. would see 54% of their tax back. Interest rates go to 6% and 65% of their tax etc.
I did some modelling, quite some time ago, on the government's tax take if all LL's suddenly repaid their mortgages on their rentals.
Willis would love that. Tons more taxes for government and far less interest income for overseas owned banks.
Now ... How could Willis suddenly cause multiple property owners to suddenly repay mortgages on their rentals? Hmm ... [evil grin].
3 drivers of NZ economy in trouble: housing, immigration and China. Add fewer workers and more pensioners and you can see why in a mess. Then give tax cuts when investment is needed. Cuts more than offset by everything else going up more, incl charges levied by government
Fiscally inept
The immigration debate is actually very easy to fix. Government needs to model what the required income is for a citizen to be self sufficient over their expected lifetime. I.E their tax take exceeds their demand for education through infrastructure through health to pension. Any occupation offered to immigrants needs to be net positive. Otherwise it will never be sustainable. Quantitative models and AI would easily be able to define a range of acceptable jobs etc.
An OCR at 2.5% is about neutral. I'd not call that low.
Fixed retail mortgage rates would be around 5.0% - depending on the term. i.e. 'normal' and neutral. Pre-covid in fact.
https://www.interest.co.nz/charts/interest-rates/fixed-mortgage-rates
Just quietly - if this malaise continues for much longer, the RBNZ will be forced to go much lower. They'll have no choice if inflation behaves itself. See the 2009 to early 2019 period for reference: https://www.interest.co.nz/charts/interest-rates/ocr
My prediction is that the RB will cut 50 points again February and then maybe pause. We'll go into winter with a very average economy with the RB having no choice but to continue cutting. Banks will follow with further cuts to TDs and mortgage rates. I think it's going to take mortgage rates at 4 to get any real growth going.
What happens with inflation is going to be another factor. We'll see where that's at in January.
Well what does the government expect!
They are chasing the tax paying net contributing Kiwis out of the country and replacing them with excessive numbers of low value low paid immigrants that, if they pay any tax, consume far more government services than they pay for.
The country is in a death spiral race to the bottom.
If they put some real effort (as opposed to spin) significantly lowering the cost of housing, food, petrol, power etc people may be able to afford to live here and raise their families. Apart from this our education and health services are so poor it is foolish and dangerous to rely on them.
If they got these basics right they would avoid the need for the huge living for families and other welfare subsidies. The government books would look totally different.
We are also overwhelmed with the cost of our infrastructural deficit. This is directly attributable to our out of control immigration driven population growth.
It is hard to believe how stupid we are. You could not make this stuff up.
No one - commentator or Dan - have addressed the question - if we want growth what will assist with business investment.
Having owned and operated a business here in NZ I would not in the current environment start the process again. why?
taxes, regulation, bureaucratic incompetence - govt needs to address - check out page 22 to identify a serious problem
https://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/reports/cabinet-conge…
Iwi/treaty rights - needs serious action and Luxon and the lefties are just encouraging further division and failing to reign in the bureaucrats who are assisting create division
Climate change - govt of both sides have kept digging the hole deeper despite the cost - never mind understanding that working people will pay the unaffordable bill.
Attitude - there is a general belief that the govt (or someone else) will provide for every whim. Time for them to stop scratching every itch
Monopoly rights - again a serious issue with very large costs (locallised inflation) and bordering on corruption -and the Crown is one of the worst
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.