Govt won’t prioritise any Tax Working Group environmental tax proposals

So, no Capital Gains Tax to rule them all, not even a wafer-thin mint partial extension of the existing bright-line test to cover all residential investment property/holiday homes.  I’m almost certainly not the only one who didn’t see that coming.

The other big surprise for me is the decision to not prioritise any new environmental tax proposals for now.  When introducing the TWG’s final report Michael Cullen made much of using the funds from these measures to help farmers transition to a lower-carbon economy.  That appears to have fallen by the wayside for the moment.

The Tax Working Group made a dozen recommendations regarding environmental and ecological outcomes.  One of these was to develop a framework for taxing “negative environmental externalities” (i.e. pollution).

The TWG report noted that the approximately $5 billion of environmental taxes raised in 2016 represented about 6.2% of tax revenue.  According to the OECD, New Zealand ranked 30th of 33 OECD countries for environmental tax revenue as a share of total tax revenue in 2013.

Surprising and a little disappointing

Accordingly, given our dependence on the environment for our agricultural and tourism sectors, it’s surprising and a little disappointing that the TWG’s recommendation for developing a framework is simply rated “Consider for inclusion in the 2019/20 tax policy work programme.”  Furthermore, the Government has decided not to advance any new environmental tax proposals other than those within the current tax policy work programme.

The other eleven environmental proposals covered Greenhouse gases, water abstraction and water pollution, solid waste and transport. All are within the current tax policy work programme, but critically the Government has ruled out both resource rentals for water and the introduction of input-based instruments such as a fertiliser tax in this term of Parliament.  Unlike CGT these issues are not completely off the table.

Although property owners in particular will be relieved by Wednesday’s decision, there will be far more losers as a result because the TWG’s suggested options for recycling the revenue raised from a CGT through reductions in personal income tax are off the table entirely.  This would appear to include any changes to tax rates and thresholds which might come out of any proposals made by the Welfare Expert Advisory Group.

So which TWG recommendations has the Government marked out as high priority?

The most significant would be introducing measures to counter land-banking and land speculators.  The TWG’s final report suggested residential vacant land taxes were best levied by local government.  There are few other details so far apart from a direction for the Productivity Commission to include vacant land taxes into its enquiry into local government funding and financing.

The other high-priorities include the tax treatment of seismic strengthening work which frankly should already have been a priority; an interesting proposal from the New Zealand Superannuation Fund to develop a regime encouraging investment into nationally significant infrastructure projects; and a number of technical tax integrity items relating to loss-trading, and better tax collection.

Overall the TWG made 99 recommendations.  Eleven have been deemed high priority for progression in the 2019/20 current tax policy work programme.  The Government rejected 14 including CGT; another 14 such as the current rate of GST are current tax policy and will remain unchanged; work is already underway on considering 30 recommendations and the remaining 30 should be considered for inclusion in the tax policy work programme in due course.  This last group includes business taxation changes aimed at reducing compliance and the TWG’s suggested changes for KiwiSaver.  Given the well documented imbalance of tax treatment between residential property and KiwiSaver funds this is particularly disappointing.

‘Not healthy for a democracy for interest groups to wield such influence they can effectively exempt themselves from tax’

Finally, a note on the politics of the decision. I do not believe it is healthy for a democracy for interest groups, whether property owners, business owners or multinationals, to wield such influence that they can effectively exempt themselves from tax.

Over the past 50 years various working groups at regular intervals have reviewed the tax system, considered the merits or otherwise of a capital gains tax and then backed off. In between each review governments of both hues have steadily broadened the scope of taxation.

The Prime Minister may have said no this time, but the pressure for widening the scope of capital taxation still remains whether it’s from widening inequality or the continued tax-favoured status of property investment. We will therefore be re-litigating the issue of capital taxation within 10 years.

This article first appeared on Interest.co.nz

18 April 2019 Podcast

The Government announces its decision not to introduce a Capital Gains Tax in this parliament.  Terry runs through the TWG proposals and the implications for New Zealand.

11 recommendations are likely to be implemented by the Inland Revenue. Others such as Environmental, Water and Maori related taxes are not.

My articles on the topic published elsewhere:

17 April on Interest.co.nz predicting a CGT – Will there be one CGT to rule them all? https://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/99191/terry-baucher-ponders-whether-there-will-be-one-capital-gains-tax-rule-them-all

18 April on Interest.co.nz admitting I got the prediction wrong – I am surprised the environmental tax proposals aren’t prioritised https://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/99212/terry-baucher-surprised-govt-wont-prioritise-any-tax-working-group-environmental-tax

18 April on The Spinoff – The other tax recommendations the Government ignored https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/18-04-2019/the-other-tax-recommendations-the-government-ignored/

Podcast Transcript

(more…)

The other tax recommendations the government ignored

Perhaps the Tax Working Group was fatally compromised from the outset when the taxation of the family home was excluded from its terms of reference. My view is that too often proponents of a capital gains tax default to arguing the difficulties and are therefore on the back foot from the outset.

Even so, the decision to not expand the taxation of capital gains in any form is extremely surprising, not just to me but probably also even to groups such as the New Zealand Property Investors Federation.

But the question of a CGT was just one of the issues the Tax Working Group (TWG) examined. Its final report contained 99 recommendations across the entire tax system. The government’s response to these recommendations breaks down into five categories:

  • rejected and no further work;
  • the recommendation is a high priority for the tax policy work programme;
  • the recommendation should be considered for the current tax policy work programme;
  • the recommendation represents policy work which is already underway; and
  • endorsed because the TWG agrees with the present policy settings and the government agrees with the recommendation.

Also dead in the water alongside CGT are 13 other recommendations, including all the TWG’s proposals for using the proceeds of a CGT to reduce personal income tax, a framework for applying any new “corrective taxes” and the development of a clearer articulation of the government’s goals regarding sugar consumption and gambling activity.

Finally, there will be no new environmental tax proposals beyond those already on the tax policy work programme. This also means that this parliamentary term there will be no resource rentals for water or input-based instruments such as a fertiliser tax.

The lack of significant environmental taxation changes is perhaps as big a surprise as the CGT decision. This is not only because it represents a clear rebuff for the Green Party, but also because during the media lock-up at the launch of the TWG’s final report, Sir Michael Cullen made much of recycling environmental taxes to help farmers transition to a lower-emission economy.

Not proceeding with a CGT means the TWG’s suggestions over using the proceeds to reduce income tax particularly for lower income earners will not proceed. This leaves the government with the problem of what to do about income tax thresholds which now have not been adjusted since 2010. Pressure for some movement on these will continue to build up until and beyond next year’s election.

The 11 recommendations that the government considers a high priority for the tax policy work programme are a mix of system integrity issues such as a review of tax loss-trading, better compliance around debt collection, and more politically visible initiatives like seismic strengthening work (which given it’s been more than eight years since the Canterbury earthquakes is something which really should have been resolved by now).

Devising rules for land speculators and land bankers is also a high priority but there’s not much detail at the moment. The TWG suggested that local government should levy residential land taxes on vacant land and the government has told the Productivity Commission to include this issue as part of its inquiry into local government funding and financing. We shall have to wait to see more detail on this initiative.

The TWG made a number of recommendations regarding compliance costs for businesses. All of these have been put into the “consider for inclusion in the tax policy work programme” category. It would have been good to see these be given higher priority, as several measures which increased thresholds such as that for provisional tax would be very helpful for smaller businesses. Instead, the tax policy process means that it could be two, or more likely three, years at the earliest before these recommendations become law.

To be frank, although the TWG’s recommendations around business compliance costs are welcome, they are also on the timid scale. For example, there’s nothing which compares with the proposal in the recent Australian Budget allowing small businesses to instantly write off assets costing less than A$30,000.

All of the TWG’s proposals regarding international taxation are already in the work programme. This means that an Inland Revenue discussion document about a digital services tax will be released in May.

Watching international developments on equalisation, or diverted profits taxes, is part of the current work agenda. It’s interesting to note that Britain’s HM Revenue and Customs has seen its tax take from diverted profits tax rise from £31 million in the 2015-16 tax year to £388 million in 2017-18. HMRC puts part of the increased tax take down to behavioural changes by multinationals following the introduction of the diverted profits tax. Could a diverted profits tax have a similar effect in New Zealand?

The TWG’s recommendations relating to retirement savings such as reducing prescribed investor rates of KiwiSaver funds for those earning below $48,000 have been parked in the “consider for inclusion” pile.  And the deferment of this work highlights one of the issues a CGT was intended to address: the imbalance in tax treatment between various asset classes.

With the decision to walk away from a CGT, property investors retain their significant tax advantage over ordinary savers and those investing via KiwiSaver funds. It is this continuing imbalance in treatment plus the wider concern of growing wealth inequality which means that despite her decision today the prime minister has, as Macbeth lamented, “scotch’d the snake not killed it.” We will be re-litigating these issues in another ten years if not sooner.

This article first appeared on The Spinoff