sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

The Opportunity Party wants to create 'Kiwisaver 2.0', with a 12% tax-free combined employee and employer contribution, and no first home withdrawals

Public Policy / news
The Opportunity Party wants to create 'Kiwisaver 2.0', with a 12% tax-free combined employee and employer contribution, and no first home withdrawals

By Anna Whyte and Mandy Te

The Opportunity Party is proposing to create an entirely new compulsory retirement savings scheme, KiwiSaver 2.0, with combined employer/employee contributions rising to 12% that are exempt from income tax.

KiwiSaver 2.0 would be entirely separate from the current KiwiSaver scheme, and savings would not be able to be withdrawn for first-home purchases or financial hardship.

Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong told interest.co.nz the reason they're proposing a new scheme is because the current rules around KiwiSaver, such as the ability to withdraw to buy a first home, means it's "unfair to necessarily change the rules on that because people have invested in that ... scheme in that way, and funds have been set up for that purpose."

"That's why we propose creating it as a new scheme."

Progressively, both employer and employee contributions would increase to 6% each, phased in over eight years. (Both are currently 3.5% and set to rise to 4% in April 2028). People could still remain in the original KiwiSaver as a supplementary saving scheme, and people would also have the ability to transition their funds across to the new account that Opportunity is proposing. 

They also want the 12% contributions to be exempt from income tax. The tax would be progressively reduced, with all fund income tax-exempt after 20 years.

Currently, people pay tax on the money their KiwiSaver investments earn but they do not pay tax on any money withdrawn from their account. Employers pay tax on all employer contributions to KiwiSaver schemes and complying funds - this is called the employer superannuation contribution tax (ESCT), while employees pay income tax prior to their contribution into their KiwiSaver. 

"We propose making it tax free on the contribution side when you're putting it [money] in, because then you get the gains of that compound interest on the money that you put in, versus what it is now - you get taxed on it," Wong said. 

Opportunity want to progressively move to an Exempt-Exempt-Taxed (EET) model where contributions and gains are untaxed and withdrawals are taxed.

Wong was not able to say how much making contributions tax exempt was estimated to cost the Government. A spokesperson said they did not have full workings as it would need to be introduced progressively over time.  

"Other schemes around the world have got tax free contributions to superannuation. It gives so many more benefits to individuals that it just makes sense, and we have to find a way to make it work."

Opportunity Party leader Qiulae Wong. Image source: Mandy Te

 

The party's policy document states the gains from KiwiSaver 2.0 would still be taxed.

"It means that when someone puts $100 into their KiwiSaver it won’t be taxed down to around $70. They can then earn investment returns on the full $100 and only be taxed on those gains."

"The tax exemptions will be funded by the National Superannuation Fund. In the long run, increased returns on a bigger pool of savings will more than cover that initial cost to government," the document states. 

Wong also wants KiwiSaver 2.0 to be more rigid, doing away with aspects such as withdrawals for first home deposits or financial hardship. 

"Australia doesn't have that allowance for their superannuation scheme, and people are still able to buy a first home there," she said. 

"It's important to also recognise that this is part of the tax reset package where people would have a citizen's income [Opportunity's proposed universal weekly payment scheme] as well, so that gives them more money in their pocket to be able to contribute to their KiwiSaver, but also be able to put money away for a deposit that's separate from their KiwiSaver," she said.

"It is challenging on current wages and current cost of living to put compulsory KiwiSaver in without any other changes, we would still like to see a shift to compulsory KiwiSaver, regardless. But admittedly, it is a lot harder if we're not going to change anything else in our economic settings to make that easier for particular lower income people."

The party does say it will "enable bank loans over balances to support first home buyers to access lending."

Labour announced its KiwiSaver policy over the weekend, promising to make employer contributions to KiwiSaver compulsory and rising to 6%, extend employer contributions to workers over 65, make the default employee contribution rate at 4%, as well as removing the minimum contribution rate.

They also want a ban on total remuneration contracts that factor in employer KiwiSaver contributions, and provide a KiwiSaver contribution to those on paid parental leave.

New Zealand First announced its KiwiSaver election policy last year, proposing to increase employee and employer contributions to 10% and making KiwiSaver compulsory. At the time, NZ First leader Winston Peters said KiwiSavers and employers would receive tax cuts to cover the increases.

Peters also promised to make KiwiSaver compulsory from birth, with an automatic Crown contribution of $1000.

National leader Christopher Luxon has announced that if re-elected in November's election, National would make KiwiSaver or an equivalent scheme compulsory for workers, automatically enrol every baby born in New Zealand along with a $1500 Baby Boost payment, and make a contribution into a parent’s KiwiSaver while they’re on paid parental leave.

That followed a promise to increase contribution rates for employers and employees from April 2029, rising by 0.5% per year until April 2032 - to a 6% contribution rate for employers and employees each. 

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.

16 Comments

The no tax on contributions to kiwi saver is the one policy that I agree with from opportunity party.

Up
5

I agree with more of their policies - and agree that's a good one.  Seems a lot more straight-forward and I like that Kiwisaver2 has differences to the current one, but that one can invest in both.  That makes sense.

Up
1

Kiwisaver is a debt-bet on there being resources and energy stocks, in the future.

Which there increasingly won't be. 

Economics forgot about physics - as apparently have the media.

 

Up
2

Isn't it more a savings (as opposed to debt) bet?

Up
0

I am delighted to see the political parties bidding up the Kiwisaver improvements.  And this Opportunity party idea is a step up, although there is more to go.

(and just so you know, I'm not voting Opportunity, mainly on the grounds of the weird tax ideas.  Also I say "respect the treaty", just not the recently invented stuff, which stupidly Opportunity have fallen for)

Anyway I would add to what they say.

Kiwisaver becomes compulsory and universal.  Phases in as National Super phases out completely.

No tax at all.  So EEE.  And no taxpayer subsidies.  No withdrawals.

At 65, or later at your choice, you have to buy an annuity at some minimum level of income.  And retain the rest.

I do agree with the Kiwisaver 2.0 concept, as the rules which people have planned on have changed.     

Up
4

So you are thoroughly unconcerned about the level of both public and private debt?

Up
0

Very concerned about public and private debt actually.  No sure how you got to the idea of the opposite.

A robust Kiwisaver replacing our current weak Kiwisaver takes individuals into working from ownership rather than operating in debt.

Elimination of National Super puts the government system into surplus.  Unless they go into mad spend.

Entirely tax free Kiwisaver (EEE) is  a small loss for the government now, and in future years the bigger tax they miss out on is something they never had anyway.

Up
2

You do know where Kiwisaver funds are invested, 'robust or otherwise'?

Up
1

Yes I do know.   Seems you have a burning point to make.  Please do.

Up
2

Lol...if you cant see it then explaining is redundant.

Up
1

I see.  A troll.

Up
2

Neither a troll nor a financial advisor

Up
0

No tax on employer contributions (or at least a low percentage like in Australia) is a good idea (although I won't waste my vote on a party who won't get 5% on election day) 

As we watch Australia's incredible super scheme with 12% employer contribution only taxed at 15%, massively increase their individual's net worth and provide a source of capital, its hard to believe that we voted against such a compulsory super scheme in a 1997 Referendum.

Anyway its a good thing that improving Kiwisaver is on the political radar screen and increases in employer contributions now locked in

Up
2

(although I won't waste my vote on a party who won't get 5% on election day) 

Guess you won't be accurately voting for what you believe in based on your mantra. If everyone thought like this back when National and Labour were started they would never have gotten to the size of voter base they are today. 

Up
2

So you'll just waste it elsewhere. You want changes but refuse to vote for it prefering the status quo 

Up
3

I suspect they will get there and maybe even win an electorate seat.

But, yes there is an element of 'keep the faith' as they are the only way to electorate change.  Time for a new 'boy/gal' on the block.  Particularly if they are in the king-maker position.

Both Act and NZF have abused their ability to wag the tail on the dog - basically knee-capping the National Party.  Thank goodness neither Seymour's flagship ToW punt or NZF's failed fisheries proposed 'theft' made it.  Both hard fought citizen-opposition.

Up
0