News

Key kicks for touch on property tax

Tuesday 9th of February 2010

Land tax, capital gains tax, and risk free rate of return (RFRM) tax - all gone.

Prime Minister John Key told Parliament this afternoon in his scene setting speech for the year that
none of the options stacked up.

"A land tax is effectively a lump sum tax on people who own the land at the time the tax is introduced,
would only fall on people who hold their wealth in one particular form and would create cash flow
problems for many landowners, especially those with lower incomes," Key said.

While RFRM tax has "some conceptual appeal," it would also create cash flow problems for taxpayers as it is applied at a fixed rate - probably 5% of the value of the property, adjusted for the taxpayer's marginal tax rate - every year.

That does mean taxpayers can budget for it, because they know what the tax will be - but collecting a
tax in years the investment made a loss is seen as problematic.

That could see rents go up, Key said.

A capital gains tax is progressive and extends the tax net more widely to areas not currently covered,
he said.

However, it "would make the tax system more complex to administer and comply with, and may
encourage taxpayers to hold onto assets longer simply to avoid tax".

There will be changes aimed at property investors in the Budget - on May 20 - Key said.

But on what they will be, he was silent.

All he would say is that there are gaps in the tax system "around property investments where income is
being derived but, in aggregate, no tax is being paid - in fact the government is actually losing revenue
in this sector.

"We will therefore be making changes to the way property is taxed, which will result in increased
government revenue and more fairness for taxpayers."

Comments (6)
Penny Darwin
I think the government might look at ring-fencing losses
0 0
14 years ago

Paul Gullery
Welcome news that some sense has prevailed but we are far from out of the woods. We are still in the cross hairs to be penalised. Most likely will be via depreciation. This will cause huge impact still. Also unclear is how widely this would apply. Just to residential or to commercial and farming. Any change needs to be fair and apply to all otherwise imbalances appear yet again and unfair. Ring fencing could still be an option on the table too. Again rin-fencing needs to apply to all not just residential. By kicking for touch in his speech it might be aimed to diffuse some of the heat from investors but we can't be complacent. Change is coming!
0 0
14 years ago

Diane Snape
Gary, you took the words out of my mouth. We too chose property as our retirement investment, coming into it later in life because of other commitments in earlier days. Getting very cynical and thinking maybe should do, or have done, what thousands others appear to do - leave it to welfare to provide for us. Just can't win it seems. Will be a fretful time till May I'm thinking, to find out exactly what is in store for us.
0 0
14 years ago

Tony Hastie
I too have bought a couple of houses looking to retirement. The only thing thats making me happy about this situation is the fact that at least I didnt vote for it :o)
0 0
14 years ago

desmond everett
The "fat cats" will dodge the top tax and always have.
0 0
14 years ago

Tuang Loy
Stopping depreciation claims will only cause rent to go up and house prices to drop from mass selling by investors. This, in turn, will decrease the wealth of the average New Zealanders whose main asset is their home. The government is already getting depreciation claw back when the property is sold; the only difference is that they are trying to get this earlier. Australia has to reverse similar policy (in the 80s, I think)when the Mum & Dad investors (who provided a significant proportion of accommodation) exited the rental property market and the governemt couldn't cope with the pressure on state housing and other flow-on effects. Very short-sighted.
0 0
14 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.