Summary<\/p>\n
Heading into this year\u2019s election, most political parties have limited awareness that a fundamental transformation of our tax system is required. Only the Greens and Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori (TPM) appear to recognise that the tax system is the major tool we have to improve public health and modify the drivers of inequity and poverty.<\/p>\n
We surveyed political parties about their tax policies and assessed them using criteria, including their evidence base and relevance to public health objectives of increasing equity and reducing poverty, mortality and morbidity.\u00a0<\/p>\n
From the responses and published party policies, four of the parties met, to at least some extent, the analysis criteria – Greens, TPM, Labour, and Opportunity. NZ First (NZF) had some income tax proposals for low-income households. Neither National nor ACT proposed use of the taxation system to address fundamental public health outcomes.<\/p>\n
Tax policies have a fundamental influence on the health and wellbeing of people and communities. Our current tax system, with its reliance on income tax (as well as GST), emphasises tax on work rather than accumulated wealth, and allows large companies to contribute less than their fair share to government revenue. Changes to these current features of our tax system would redistribute income and reduce poverty and inequality, as well as raising increased funds for health and other essential public services.1,2 Taxes on unhealthy products can also discourage their consumption, while taxes on pollutants can help reduce exposures that harm health.3,4<\/p>\n
The Public Health Communication Centre survey asked the political parties to provide their tax policies as a means to improve public health. Five of the seven parties surveyed responded, while ACT or National did not. \u00a0For these two parties, we relied on publicly available information. We also considered information from the published tax policies of all parties to gain a comprehensive view.5-11\u00a0<\/p>\n
To analyse responses, we considered their use of a population and system-wide approach; their evidence and research base; any awareness of trade-offs and policy linkages; indication of the purposes of increased revenue; estimates regarding revenue gained from any proposal, and costings; potential adequacy of government revenue; relevance to public health objectives of increasing equity and reducing poverty, mortality and morbidity.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Box 1: Questions put to political parties on democratic systems as part of the Public Health Communication Centre\u2019s Election 2026 survey<\/p>\n
Will your party introduce any of the following taxes: a wealth tax, a tax on revenue received by inheritance, or a comprehensive capital gains tax?Will your party make more sustained and effective use of remedial taxes to reprice unhealthy products, such as sugar taxes, which have been effective internationally?Please expand on your answers above and\/or outline any other policies your party may have to make the tax system more equitable and for making better use of taxes on unhealthy products or pollutants.Survey responses: Wealth, inheritance and capital gains tax policies<\/p>\n
Greens, TPM, and Labour all favour one or more of these taxes. Greens propose a net wealth tax and an inheritance tax. Labour is committed to a minimal capital gains tax, ring-fenced for access to primary health care.\u00a0<\/p>\n
TPM supports a net wealth tax, with a lower exclusion level than Greens. TPM proposes a land banking tax, a vacant house tax, and stamp duty. Any such tax could, at least partially, fulfil functions similar to a wealth tax.<\/p>\n
NZF, ACT and National do not appear to support a wealth tax or capital gains tax.\u00a0Opportunity would not introduce an inheritance or capital gains tax; however, its land tax is a limited wealth tax.<\/p>\n
Remedial taxes to improve population health<\/p>\n
TPM indicates support in its survey response for such an initiative. Labour, National, ACT, NZF and Opportunity either make it clear that they would not support such policies or make no reference to them.\u00a0<\/p>\n
National does not appear to envisage any change to its 50% excise tax reduction on heated tobacco products, while Labour is committed to its reversal.<\/p>\n
The Greens would establish a minimum price on alcohol and an alcohol tax proportional to the quantity of pure alcohol<\/p>\n
Tax policies to make the tax system more equitable\u00a0<\/p>\n
TPM would remove tax from the first $30,000 of income, and increase rates for high-income people. Company tax would be 33% and an \u2018international profit transfer tax\u2019 is proposed on 5% of the value of profits transferred offshore.5<\/p>\n
NZF supports a tax-free threshold for the first $14,000 by April 2027; and would cut tax to offset compulsory Kiwisaver contributions.12 NZF\u00a0recently announced\u00a0it would lower the company tax rate to 20% for companies with turnover under $30 million, from the current 28% tax rate.13\u00a0Their response to the PHCC survey supports removing GST from rates.\u00a0NZF would introduce a tax-free \u2018Kiwi Kids Grant\u2019 of $5000 annually for the first three years, for each of the first, second, and third child.7<\/p>\n
Labour and National do not appear to propose changes to income tax, corporate tax, trusts, GST, or international tax.<\/p>\n
The Greens would introduce\u00a0a tax-free threshold of $10,000 and a new tax rate of 45% for income over $160,000.14 Other tax proposals for a more progressive tax system include a\u00a0corporate tax rate of 33% for the 0.7% of biggest corporations, with a 28% rate for small\/medium enterprises. The party supports an annual Bank Levy of 0.06 percent on the liabilities of the four big banks; and a 5% withholding tax rate for big multinational companies on profits sent offshore. They would reverse the 2024 and 2025 landlord tax cuts and changes to the \u2018brightline\u2019 period.14<\/p>\n
Opportunity proposes income tax rates of 28% up to $50,000, 34% from $50,001 to $200,000 and 39% above $200,000. Its Citizen\u2019s Income of $19,400 a year for eligible New Zealand residents aged 18 and over would be tax free.15<\/p>\n
Tax and the environment<\/p>\n
TPM indicated support for policies to incentivise lowering-emissions and discourage environmental harm. Labour would defer fuel tax rises for three years. National and ACT would defer them for one year, with a lower than current annual rise afterwards.16,17\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Greens have detailed and costed emission pricing proposals (a form of tax) and would continue annual fuel tax rises at the current rate.18 Opportunity seems to support fuel tax rises.19<\/p>\n
Conclusion<\/p>\n
Overall, there is limited recognition across parties, with the exception of the Greens and TPM, that broader tax reform is needed to improve public health, reduce poverty and inequities. However, some parties, such as Labour, NZF, and the Opportunity Party, met our analysis criteria to different degrees.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Greens have detailed, costed policies that would substantially reshape the tax system, making income tax more progressive, placing greater emphasis on wealth, and increasing the contribution of large companies. TPM\u2019s policies are less detailed but indicate support for reform.<\/p>\n
Labour\u2019s policies tinker with rather than transform the current tax system, with limited likely impact on equity or poverty. NZF focuses on making income tax more progressive but does little to shift taxation towards wealth or increase contributions from large companies. NZF does, however, recognise the need to support the families of young children with their proposed Kiwi Kids Grant. Opportunity\u2019s Citizen\u2019s Income could improve equity and reduce poverty, although its impact on government revenue is unclear.<\/p>\n
Neither National nor ACT propose using taxation to address population health or reduce poverty and inequities.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Table 1: Summary of TPM, NZF, Labour, Greens, Opportunity parties\u2019 responses. Full responses in Appendix<\/a>. National and ACT did not respond.<\/p>\n PartyWealth tax, tax on revenue received by inheritance, or a comprehensive capital gains tax?New remedial taxes to reprice unhealthy products, such as sugar taxes?Other tax policies\u00a0Te P\u0101ti M\u0101oriUnclear, not announced at the time of the survey.Unclear; indicated support for remedial taxes\u00a0Indicated support for taxes on unhealthy and polluting products; future announcement on tax signalled including \u201ctax changes that will encourage accessibility and affordability of kai.\u201dNew Zealand FirstNo, opposed.No, opposed.<\/p>\n Stated, \u201ckey priority is establishing a tax-free threshold on the first $14,000 of income by April 2027 to directly assist low-and-fixed-income families.\u201d<\/p>\n Remove GST on rates, highlighted difficulty of rates for retirees on fixed incomes.<\/p>\n Stated they will protect government revenue by expanding \u201cthe IRD’s tax audit capacity and crack down on tax evasion and multinational e-commerce corporations (e.g., Google, Facebook) that pay minimal domestic tax.\u201d<\/p>\n New Zealand Labour Party<\/p>\n No, committed to targeted capital gains tax ring-fenced for free GP visits.<\/p>\n \u201cFully exempt are: the family home, farms, KiwiSaver, shares, business assets, inheritances and personal items.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n No.Reinstate previous excise tax on heated tobacco products and stated that the consequence of the current Government cutting it by 50% was \u201ceffectively handing millions in tax breaks to one tobacco company.\u201dGreen Party of Aotearoa New ZealandYes, \u201cintroduce a super-rich tax of 2.5% on net wealth over $10 million\u201d and \u201cintroduce a Capital Acquisitions Tax on gifts and inheritances over $1 million, excluding family homes and farms.\u201dIndicated support for \u201cinvestigating a sugary drinks levy\u201d. Would ensure \u201calcohol excise tax is staggered between off and on-licences, and proportionate to the harm caused.\u201d\u201cReform the Emissions Trading Scheme so that it works as an effective tax on carbon emissions, including by phasing out free allocations for big emitters, removing forestry offsetting, and ringfencing revenue to decarbonise industry\u201dThe Opportunity PartyNot as such. However, the land value tax is a form of wealth tax.No.\u201cFavoured approach to taxation reform is a comprehensive land value tax paired with a universal citizens\u2019 income.\u201dWhat this Briefing adds\u00a0Our analysis finds that, with the exception of the Greens and TPM, political parties largely do not propose transformation of our tax system to improve public health or reduce poverty.Greens recognise the need to de-emphasise the current focus on income tax with a proposed tax on wealth and inheritances. Labour has a minimal capital gains tax, and Opportunity a land tax. TPM would tax wealth, land banking, vacant houses and have a stamp tax on most residential property purchases but has provided limited detail at this point.Details are also provided on parties\u2019 policies for income tax and taxes on unhealthy products and environmentally harmful activities.Implications for policy and practiceParty consensus that\u00a0recognises that the tax system is the major tool we have to modify the drivers of inequity and poverty is needed.Recognition is\u00a0also\u00a0needed that our tax system over-emphasises income tax and GST. An increased focus on accumulated wealth, and measures to ensure greater contributions from large companies, would make our tax system fairer, more equitable, and produce more revenue,\u00a0Parties that form the next Government could reform the tax system to better support public health, reduce poverty and address inequities.Author details<\/p>\n