Forum Archive Index - June 2001

["Neil Moros" <morosnz8@ihug.co.nz>]

Agree that it is not a political goer.  But think on it may simply be a ruse for the real tax aim of Capital Gain on property.  ie scare the pants off the electorate with owner occupied tax then bring in capital tax on sales similar to australia. 

 

I see the owner occupied tax as nothing more than a rich tax similiar to that existing now ie Rates   the higher the value of property the higher the rates  when another property next door worth half the price and twice the number of occupants using twice the water, sewrage etc pay less.

 

Just say no to any more taxes in NZ and get the public service including the politicians to thibk in a more positive mode than taxing the people they serve.    ie look at what happened in OZ  there building industry received a huge increase in activity where those building new homes received assistance by way of a grant.    In NZ THE ADDITIONAL gst alone from such action should more than pay for any grant provided, increase building activity and improve employment etc etc .  But in NZ WE COULD NOT POSSIBILY DO THAT???

OR COULD WE.?   What result do you think application of such a grant in NZ would have on the Sharemaket and across the board,.

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: DR

To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz

Sent: Friday, 22 June 2001 7:24 AM

Subject: Re: [sharechat] Property Vs Shares

While the proposed taxing of owner occupied housing is not politically a goer, there are good reasons for doing it and some options available for allowing it to proceed in a way that does not affect a large part of the voter base.

Perhaps a threshhold of relief (say the first $100,000 of net value).

However, while I have not seen anything other than what is in the newspaper, I would be inclined to tax every asset for notional income at a lower rate. This would include second houses and vacant land, boats, and even art works. After all the money used to buy them could have been more usefully invested.

D.