I think a key point is that people’s income from their labour is taxed, but their income from their capital is not. And because labour is not always the source of their capital, this is grossly unfair and leads to the unhelpful practice of most wealth coming from selling houses c to each other.
How about FER an approach recommended by macro-economist Susan St John and tax accountant Terry Baucher.
She article below in which Susan St John outlines why she is advocating for what she describes as the Fair Economic Return rather than a Capital Gains Tax
If you want to bring in a wealth tax, you have to start with a thin edge of the wedge. Just text the super wealthy say those who have 50 million or more. It may not bring in large amounts of money to start with, but it gets people used to it people will see that only those who can afford it are paying
At the moment, the right wing scare mongers people into thinking that everyone will be charged a wealth tax
Labour won't win on a CGT or a wealth tax - there are simply too many middle class people who see capital gains on housing as the path to wealth. A fair tax system on the other hand is more saleable as long as they avoid being pinned down on what "fair" is.
Not sure how you think the 'housing crisis' or productivity issues will be solved by implementing a CGT that exempts the family home, when the family home currently has the biggest tax distortions in favour of it, thereby driving our overinvestment in real estate. This is also the least productive way we can possibly invest, and its tax advantage would be even greater than currently if it was the only thing not subject to a CGT....
True, though dealing in political realities, I think it's safe to say that any wealth or capital tax implemented or proposed by any of the political parties before us currently, is almost certain to include a family home exemption or reduction, especially for it to survive a change of government...
Can't fault the fact content or analysis but I'm neither a political scientist or an economic analyst. For a conspiracy theory tho let me say my understanding is John Key sold his megabucks house to a lobbyist who on sold at a loss after John cut and ran leaving English to pick up the pieces and lose. On the basis Luxon has to sell two to equate with JK then he too has a war chest to fight an election with funds the Electoral Commission will not be bothered about. Just need to check who Luxon has sold too
I think a key point is that people’s income from their labour is taxed, but their income from their capital is not. And because labour is not always the source of their capital, this is grossly unfair and leads to the unhelpful practice of most wealth coming from selling houses c to each other.
How about FER an approach recommended by macro-economist Susan St John and tax accountant Terry Baucher.
She article below in which Susan St John outlines why she is advocating for what she describes as the Fair Economic Return rather than a Capital Gains Tax
https://www.interest.co.nz/public-policy/129998/susan-st-john-outlines-why-she-advocating-what-she-describes-fair-economic
If you want to bring in a wealth tax, you have to start with a thin edge of the wedge. Just text the super wealthy say those who have 50 million or more. It may not bring in large amounts of money to start with, but it gets people used to it people will see that only those who can afford it are paying
At the moment, the right wing scare mongers people into thinking that everyone will be charged a wealth tax
Wouldn't taxing financial transactions be less contraversal? Unless that's already happened and I missed it.
Labour won't win on a CGT or a wealth tax - there are simply too many middle class people who see capital gains on housing as the path to wealth. A fair tax system on the other hand is more saleable as long as they avoid being pinned down on what "fair" is.
Why not both...
Or 3 put a tax on Bank fees? The banks would have to absorb it being at pussycats' bow already
Anyone who writes about taxation does us a disservice if they don't understand what Modern Monetary Theory teaches.
Not sure how you think the 'housing crisis' or productivity issues will be solved by implementing a CGT that exempts the family home, when the family home currently has the biggest tax distortions in favour of it, thereby driving our overinvestment in real estate. This is also the least productive way we can possibly invest, and its tax advantage would be even greater than currently if it was the only thing not subject to a CGT....
at no point in this post do I endorse exemption of the family home
True, though dealing in political realities, I think it's safe to say that any wealth or capital tax implemented or proposed by any of the political parties before us currently, is almost certain to include a family home exemption or reduction, especially for it to survive a change of government...
John Ganz is wrong in his Substack you linked to, for the well-argued reasons in the extensive comments to that post.
Can't fault the fact content or analysis but I'm neither a political scientist or an economic analyst. For a conspiracy theory tho let me say my understanding is John Key sold his megabucks house to a lobbyist who on sold at a loss after John cut and ran leaving English to pick up the pieces and lose. On the basis Luxon has to sell two to equate with JK then he too has a war chest to fight an election with funds the Electoral Commission will not be bothered about. Just need to check who Luxon has sold too