Labour unveiled their CGT. Smart play done to sucker in the lefty voters
Get it in as a minimal tax and once in only the naive will think they arenβt after your KiwiSaver and personal home next. Evidence: GST and brightline bought in small and ramped up.
And all it takes is promising $100 worth of cheaper doctors visits. Problem is thereβs no doctors and Labour doesnβt support the new medical school to get more.
Interesting.... how is giving of free doctors visits to everyone going to close the wealth gap? Those with health insurance will just change to a policy which is cheaper and won't include doctors visits.
We've already received an email from a property management company (one we used to use but are still on their database) suggesting that landlords look at putting their rent up to cover the tax when they sell.
Think off it this way.... two parents with small children will have the opportunity to receive $600 of free doctors visits each year (assuming 6 visits @ $100 each based on the figures supplied by Ayesha Verrall). But, a landlord putting their rent up by $10 PW is $520 each year.... and a landlord with a property they sell with even a modest $200,000 capital gain at 33% tax is looking at a tax bill of $66,000. Spread that out over 15 years owning the property, and that's just under $4,500 increase in rent each year to over the CGT.... or an increase in rent of $85 PW.
And, after owning a property 15 years, a landlord would expect it to have doubled in value so a $600,000 property brought 15 years ago and now worth $1.2 million would be paying just under $200,000 with a CGT of 33% (and the portion over $180,000 inc. their salary/wages would be taxed at 38%). To cover the additional tax that's an additional $255 PW rent or $13,200 each year.
What a con!!!! Paying thousands of dollars each year in additional rent to gain $600 free doctors visits.
Labour.... by the rich, for the rich.
According to Cameron Bagrie, Labour expect to bring in $250 mill in the first year of this scheme.... with a population of 5.5 mill, that works out at just over $45 per person which one doctor visit per year.... where is the funding for the other two free visits coming from? The policy isn't self funding as Labour has suggested.
More evidence needed, the first year Australia had a CPT, it produced $410 million NZD. Divide that by a population of 16.5 mill at the time and that's $25 NZD per person in CGT the government collected. Labour is trying to sell us a policy based on nearly twice the revenue ($50 NZD per person) a Capital Gains Tax made in Australia with a CGT with a much narrower base (i.e. less capital gains tax revenue) than Australia.
Yes, Australia's CGT now brings in the equivalent of $750 NZD per person.... but that's taken 40 years to build up.
And before anyone says about a CGT "narrowing the wealth gap", even at $750 per person in Australia, less than 9% of the population paid over 85% of the CGT last year.... yet, their wealth gap is increasing every year. If a CGT is supposed to close the gap, why isn't it?
Study by Monash University recommends spending increase to fix inequalities in housing, health and education
www.theguardian.com
But, wait for the left leaning bloggers and economists to call it a game changer.... a tax which, to begin with, won't bring in the revenue to pay for the free doctors visits.... let alone provide additional health funding money.... instead, it will suck money out of the health system. Based on the Australian model, which has a broader base, it won't be until 2034 until there's enough revenue from a CGT just to pay for the free doctors visits.... it's certainly not going to build new schools, or hospitals, or underwater ferry terminals, or pay police, doctors, nurses, teachers any more... let alone, be actually given to the poor to help close the wealth gap.