|
6th July 2011, 11:46 | #1 |
|
Labour's returning to the red
Proposing a capital gains tax of 15% on "investment properties" - it's a ballsy move, they'll need to package it well.
__________________
So the perkbuster Hide abusing perks, crimbuster Garrett actually a crim - what's next? Roger Douglas is secretly poor? --Saladin |
6th July 2011, 12:04 | #2 |
|
What exactly does it mean? 15% of the initial purchase price has to be paid to the govt?
|
6th July 2011, 12:12 | #3 |
|
Yeah it will be interesting to see the details and what revenue might realistically be expected etc. But it's definitely a bold (ie fuck you baby boomers) move towards what a lot of experts have indicated would be a good way to move investment out of housing and into the more productive side of the economy.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
6th July 2011, 12:29 | #4 | |
Anas Latrina
|
Quote:
|
|
6th July 2011, 12:36 | #5 |
|
It seems like the right time to broach the idea, i.e. when they have little hope of getting elected anyways. Hopefully it'll allow National to pick up the idea as well, knowing it can't be used as a political football as much.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
6th July 2011, 12:40 | #6 |
|
They're posturing it as an alternative to SOE sales.
__________________
So the perkbuster Hide abusing perks, crimbuster Garrett actually a crim - what's next? Roger Douglas is secretly poor? --Saladin |
6th July 2011, 12:55 | #8 | |
|
Quote:
Typed out a dozen more questions and realised, the details are what we are waiting for, heh. |
|
6th July 2011, 12:55 | #9 |
|
Hope this happens.
|
6th July 2011, 13:04 | #10 |
|
How can we create a climate were individuals only investment choice is to hand their money over to investment firms to play with?
Create volatility in the market, shake out all the small investors leaving only the large corporations under the guise of kicking the rich. Last edited by GRiM ReeFer : 6th July 2011 at 13:06. |
6th July 2011, 13:25 | #11 |
|
Side note:
Labour, get a clue, once the cat is out of the bag it is essential that you hold a press conference immediately and release all details of your plan, to hold back shows incompetence and invites speculation. |
6th July 2011, 13:42 | #12 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
6th July 2011, 13:50 | #13 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
6th July 2011, 13:57 | #14 |
|
Regardless of how awesome the policy is, I can't say I currently trust Labour the effectively execute it if they got into power.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
6th July 2011, 15:42 | #15 | |
|
There's gotta be a foot shot in here somewhere.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10736671 Quote:
Love to hear GT's take on the numbers. |
|
6th July 2011, 16:06 | #16 |
Electric Boogaloo
|
Hope they are not planning some gay top tax rate of like 45c that kicks in @ 100k :\
|
6th July 2011, 16:09 | #17 |
Stunt Pants
|
^
Rich people deserve to BLEED!
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
6th July 2011, 16:16 | #18 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
, ______ /l ,[____], l---⌐¬-0lllllll0- ()_) ()_)--o-)_) |
|
6th July 2011, 16:49 | #19 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
6th July 2011, 17:47 | #20 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Off the top of my head:
Why only residential property? Why not a CGT on any other sort of investment? Especially why a CGT on only residential property when the residential property market is either plateaued or tanking? If nobody is making money out of property investment then the government won't make any money in tax - or won't make enough to make it worthwhile, or won't make enough to meet the election promises that justify the law change. E.g. I see some unnamed muppet at TVNZ is saying this will be worth "4.5 billion". Over what time frame? How long will it take the govt to bring in 4.5 billion in CGT if the property market stays depressed? or tanks harder? Why is the CGT as leaked going to be non-retrospective? So someone who bought a bach at the Mount in 1950 for $100 and sells it tomorrow for $10 million will pay no tax on that ten mill, but the person who buys it tomorrow and sells it next year for $1 more pays tax on the one dollar? Huh? |
6th July 2011, 17:49 | #21 |
Nothing to See Here!
|
4.5b was the Treasury figure that was based on all capital investment, not just residential property I think.
|
6th July 2011, 19:27 | #22 |
|
count me as curious to hear GT on this too.
he's said many times that it constitutes a 'good' tax, and that the only reason we dont have one already is labours lack of support for the idea.
__________________
"Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way." |
6th July 2011, 20:39 | #23 |
|
Someone just suggested an obvious workaround - now that gift duty has been abolished, form an LLC, gift the house to it, sell the LLC. Unless shares have a CGT?
__________________
So the perkbuster Hide abusing perks, crimbuster Garrett actually a crim - what's next? Roger Douglas is secretly poor? --Saladin |
6th July 2011, 20:40 | #24 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
So the perkbuster Hide abusing perks, crimbuster Garrett actually a crim - what's next? Roger Douglas is secretly poor? --Saladin |
||
6th July 2011, 20:59 | #25 |
Love, Actuary
|
I'd vote for them if:
1. It's applied retrospectively say this a five year glide-in path, and; 2. It's set at 30% or some similar number. Anything less and their just playing electioneering. |
7th July 2011, 11:19 | #26 | |
Nothing to See Here!
|
Heh
http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2011/07...an-i-expected/ Quote:
|
|
7th July 2011, 19:21 | #27 |
|
fuck the babyboomers. go CGT!!! hopefully stop them buying up all properties and locking out first home buyers ?
|
7th July 2011, 19:44 | #28 |
|
So interest in a bank is taxed at 30%+ and property only at 15%? Won't change a thing. Yawn.
|
7th July 2011, 21:55 | #29 |
|
funny and smart enough.
http://publicaddress.net/cracker/another-capital-idea/
__________________
"Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way." |
8th July 2011, 12:31 | #30 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
a) Retrospective legislation is normally morally wrong b) The actual purchase prices from previous years/decades just isn't available. |
||
8th July 2011, 12:37 | #31 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية |
|
8th July 2011, 12:39 | #32 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
9th July 2011, 12:18 | #33 | |||
|
http://gordoncampbell.scoop.co.nz/20...ns-tax-debate/
and the sydney herald guy... http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/pr...-gains-tax.asx Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way." |
|||