She said the threshold was chosen to \u201cnot be immediately equivalent to most people\u2019s family home\u201d, therefore reassuring them they would not be hit by the tax. <\/p>\n
However, she added that once the tax was implemented and was proved to be working, there might be a conversation about lowering the threshold to capture more people. <\/p>\n
\u201cIf we implement it, and we demonstrate to people that it works, then hopefully there is also the continuing arguments to obviously lower the threshold,\u201d Swarbrick said.<\/p>\n
A lower threshold would mean that people who were less wealthy would pay the tax. <\/p>\n
National campaign chair Simeon Brown attacked the Greens’ and Labour’s tax plans. Photo \/ Dean Purcell<\/p>\n
National\u2019s campaign chair Simeon Brown leapt on the comments, pushing out a press release accused the Swarbrick of letting \u201cthe real plan slip\u201d. <\/p>\n
\u201cThere you have it. Ten million dollars is where the Greens want to start, not where they intend to stop.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe $10 million threshold is a Trojan horse. The Greens want to get the wealth tax through the door first, then lower the threshold so it captures more New Zealanders,\u201d Brown said. <\/p>\n
Brown noted that in 2020 Labour campaigned on one tax change, but implemented several more in government. <\/p>\n
Brown should \u2018have a cup of tea and a lie down\u2019 \u2013 Swarbrick <\/p>\n
Swarbrick told the Herald if National wanted to attack the Greens\u2019 tax plans it should agree to a debate between its finance spokeswoman Nicola Willis and Swarbrick. <\/p>\n
Swarbrick has featured heavily in National\u2019s attack ads in the final weeks of the campaign, with National arguing that Labour\u2019s relatively poor polling would see Swarbrick as a potential contender for finance minister. Labour has ruled this possibility out. <\/p>\n
\u201cIt would be awesome if National\u2019s finance spokesperson wanted to accept the many offers for a public debate so we could discuss economics like adults, as this country deserves. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re focused on campaigning on the things that matter. Unlike the National Party, the Greens don\u2019t intend on ramming through profoundly unpopular laws we didn\u2019t campaign on. We are campaigning on a wealth tax with a threshold of $10 million excluding the family home. Simeon Brown could use a cup of tea and a lie down,\u201d Swarbrick said.<\/p>\n
Swarbrick also took aim at Brown\u2019s allegation that working New Zealanders would have their taxes hiked under the Greens. The party is promising a tax-free threshold giving 96% of New Zealanders a tax cut. The plan does include hiking income tax rates for those earning $160,000 or above. The Greens would set a new 45% top income tax rate at this level. <\/p>\n
Rich pay half effective tax rate of middle-income people \u2013 report <\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Swarbrick celebrated the release of a report from a pro-tax campaign group, Better Taxes for a Better Future, which argued New Zealand\u2019s \u201cvery wealthy\u201d paid 47% less of their income in tax than a middle-income earner. <\/p>\n
The report picks up from IRD\u2019s report into the tax paid by the richest New Zealanders, which was commissioned by Labour\u2019s Revenue Minister David Parker during the last term to make the case for a wealth tax. <\/p>\n
That report looked at the \u201ceconomic income\u201d that wealthy people derived from their ownership of property and companies and compared the tax paid on this income to the tax most other New Zealanders pay, which is predominately income tax and GST.<\/p>\n
The new report, by economist Tayla Forward, argued that the very wealthy pay roughly 47% the effective tax rate of the median-wealth adult. The very wealthy are defined as a synthetic dataset roughly equivalent to the 311 very wealthy individuals who were forced to take part in Parker\u2019s IRD project. <\/p>\n
The report argued that simply increasing the tax rates of the taxes we already have will not address the problem and new taxes are needed.<\/p>\n
Labour leader Chris Hipkins defended a tax level 10% higher than National’s. Photo \/ NZME<\/p>\n
Swarbrick said of the report showed the \u201csuper rich are being given a hall pass to rip hard-working New Zealanders off\u201d. <\/p>\n
New research today proves, once again, how the system allows them to make bank at everyone else\u2019s expense,\u201d Swarbrick said. <\/p>\n
\u201cNicola Willis says, \u2018There\u2019s no magic money tree\u2019, while she upholds a system that makes hard-working New Zealanders pay double the effective tax rate of multi-multi-millionaires and billionaires. <\/p>\n
\u201cShe knows that she\u2019s starving our public services and driving up the cost of living for regular people, but I guess she\u2019s keeping National\u2019s donors happy,\u201d Swarbrick said.<\/p>\n
Labour defends manifesto pledge to lift share of taxation <\/p>\n
Meanwhile, in Dunedin, Labour defended wording in its manifesto which appeared to concede the party plans to lift taxation as a share of the economy.<\/p>\n
The argument harks back to a scrap earlier in the campaign, when the Labour Party released its fiscal strategy, which included the \u201cobjective\u201d of having government spending and revenue \u201cmaintained at around 33%\u201d of gross domestic product (GDP) once Labour\u2019s capital gains tax (CGT) is fully implemented. <\/p>\n
In dollar terms, spending and revenue at that 33% level would be substantially higher than what is forecast in the coming years and 10% higher than National\u2019s target of 30% of GDP, or about $12b less in dollar terms. <\/p>\n
With Labour\u2019s GCT netting only about $1.35b once fully rolled out in 2030, National seized on the plan to argue Labour planned hidden taxes to make up the difference.<\/p>\n