Teacher’s tax claims simply don’t add up
Rather worrying that an economics teacher states as a matter of fact in today’s Chronicle (February 25) that “those who don’t own property or shares . . . pay the bulk of taxes in this country”.
Actually, no. They do not. Facts can be annoying, but they remain facts.
Publicly available figures — easily found online, and published by the Government itself — prove the good man somewhat disingenuous in his assertion.
In 2016, more than one in three households contributed nothing to New Zealand’s tax take: 663,000 households — or 40 per cent — receive more in tax credits and other benefits than they pay in tax; many thousands more are neutral contributors, or are close to it. Households earning less than $50,000 receive more in credits than they pay in direct income tax by about a third.
Meanwhile, the percentage of NZ tax revenues gathered through corporate tax rose from 5 per cent in 1984 to 17 per cent today (even as the rate was lowered from 48 per cent to 28 per cent; you’d think Cullenatics would learn from this, but I guess they can’t).
And the top 3 per cent of individual income earners, earning more than $150,000 a year, pay 24 per cent of all tax received — bringing in (or having taken from them) even more dollars than corporate tax revenue.
No wonder economics is called the dismal science — although one would think an economics teacher could do, y’know, math. Or read up on the subject.
Mark Keating, a senior lecturer in tax at the University of Auckland Business School, agrees the
"The percentage of NZ tax revenues gathered through corporate tax rose from 5 per cent in 1984 to 17 per cent today (even as the rate was lowered from 48 per cent to 28 per cent; you’d think Cullenatics would learn from this, but I guess they can’t)."
idea of “net tax” — the amount paid after credits and benefits were deducted — “was hard for some people to get their heads around”. But people who received any benefit, or superannuation, as well as people who worked and met the criteria for Working for Families tax credits, could end up with a net result that was negative or neutral. “If you are working and earn $1000 a week but have four children, you might pay $200 a week in tax but get back $300. They are net receiving.”
Courtesy of those people who are net taxpayers . . . so the Cullenoids, the Watermelon Party and, of course, economists better hope those 3 per cent of people stick around in the work flock to be shorn of their money.
RENE DE JONGH
Whanganui
Waste worries
John Milnes states (letters, February 20) that I don’t understand the “real issue of climate change”.
In my modest opinion, it is not the modern motor vehicle that is the problem. It is some industries, and our throwaway, urban societies with overproduction in some areas, particularly food, coupled with poor distribution and waste.
This and plastic were never a problem until supermarkets came along. Now every product, it seems, is available in some form of plastic packaging. And with food, after opening, half will end up in a landfill.
(Abridged) A BARRON Aramoho
Lack of action
As the owner of a property in the Matarawa Flood Control Scheme, I attended their meeting at Whanganui Girls’ College on February 25.
Apart from Horizons cleaning out the stream and checking a few of the retention dams upstream, very little has been done to protect any properties from the next flood that will surely come.
They haven’t even decided what they will do with the $50,000 they are putting aside each year that was supposed to be used for things like waterproofing homes, lifting them or removing them.
Meantime, there are a lot of properties along Anzac Parade and Putiki that could be waterproofed for just a few thousand dollars. But Horizons still haven’t set any criteria to allow anyone to apply for such funding.
This only convinces me even more that we, as a community, should be looking after our own backyard and drop Horizons. It’s just another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy we don’t need. STEVE BARON
Whanganui