NZ Politics

872 readers

3 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Dave@lemmy.nz

RaoulDuke@lemmy.nz

The Green Party’s tax plan (www.greens.org.nz)

submitted 4 days ago by BaconWrappedEnigma@lemmy.nz to c/politics@lemmy.nz

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Some interesting "Wealth Tax" ideas in there and proposed changes that would net an extra ~$5B (estimated).

Big corporations tax: The corporate tax rate will be increased from 28 percent to 33 percent for big companies with annual turnover exceeding $30 million. This will impact about 0.7 percent of businesses (e.g. banks, supermarkets and energy companies).

And new income tax rates:

Current

Income band	Tax rate
0 - $15,600	10.5%
$15,601 - $53,500	17.5%
$53,501 - $78,100	30%
$78,101 - $180,000	33%
$180,001 and over	39%

Proposed

Income band	Proposed rate
$0–$9,999	0%
$10,000–$19,999	10%
$20,000–$39,999	17.5%
$40,000–$59,999	25.5%
$60,000–$79,999	30.5%
$80,000–$159,999	33.5%
$160,000+	45%

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BlueEther@no.lastname.nz 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

If we are going to move the tax brackets then I think the low and mid rates should be lower:
$20k-$40k => 15%.
$40l-$60k => 20%.

These are the workers that are doing it the hardest, and up the corporate tax rates up a touch, all to 33%? and the to 1% to 39/45%?

[–] MadPsyentist@lemmy.nz 1 points 2 days ago

It is important to remember that if you earn 60k you dont pay a flat 25.5% tax. You only pay 25.5% tax on the portion of your income in the 40k to 60k bracket. You would still pay 0% tax on your first 10k you earn in a year then 10% tax on the next 10k you earn in the 10k-19k bracket, and 17.5% tax on the 20k earnt between 20k and 40k. That means for 60k your "effective" tax rate is more like 17% once calculated

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

IMHO the tax brackets should be defined by a minimum wage multiplier.

E.g. someone part time on minimum wage: 0%, full time minimum wage: 5% and so on... Go as high as necessary.

Corporate tax? Every $ they're paying tax on could have been used to pay their employees better.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Corporate tax? Every $ they’re paying tax on could have been used to pay their employees better.

You know that the tax is paid on profit right; money they pay to employees is an expense and thus not taxed.

They could pay their employees more and reduce their tax burden currently and in the Greens tax plan.

Lets run a thought experiment:

If we raised the corp tax rate to 100%; all profit goes to govt shareholders/owners get nothing.
Corps would work very hard to ensure their expenses; matched as closely as possible to the income they receive.
One easy way to do this is at the end of the tax year; give bonuses to employees (who then pay income tax) to balance your expenses exactly to your income.

And another:

If we drop the corp tax rate to 0%; all profit goes into the pockets of the shareholders/owners
Corps would work very hard to ensure the expenses are as low as possible to get the most for those who own the business.
One easy way to do this is to squeeze the employees pay as low as is possible.

Obviously there is a happy medium between 0-100%; that exact number is up for debate. But lowering the corp tax rate does not necessarily incentivize higher employee pay. In fact the opposite would be true in many cases; especially in mature industries where labor is not constrained.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago

Corporate tax? Every $ they're paying tax on could have been used to pay their employees better.

sure and they still can and take it from profit, that lowers they're profit and fence thief tax. Seems unlikely though

[–] BaconWrappedEnigma@lemmy.nz 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What about median income instead of minimum wage?

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Hmm, maybe. I suspect that the median income is quite close to minimum wage :-/ at least in magnitude.

Mean income as a floor for the larger tax rates would shift the tax burden up over the mean... and egregiously large incomes would drag that floor up.