A thread to discuss how Jacinda will make NZ Choice again

Thread Rating: 11 votes, 3.73 average.
(11 votes)
Results 5,126 to 5,150 of 6121

  1. Post
    Because you're typically not selling it for gains, and it unnecessarily punishes people that only own one home.

  2. Post
    sorceror wrote:
    why should the family home, if sold, be exempt from CGT?
    If you sell your home in order to buy another one you hilariously end up paying the Government just because you moved house.

  3. Post
    if you made a financial gain from that sale why shouldn't it be treated as income and taxed like everything else is?

    not taxing family homes makes 0 sense to me but I can obviously see why people wouldn't want it.

  4. Post
    sorceror wrote:
    if you made a financial gain from that sale why shouldn't it be treated as income and taxed like everything else is?
    Accounting for inflation or not?

  5. Post
    Arkouda wrote:
    Accounting for inflation or not?
    probably, makes sense to after a certain length of time. you'd have to take a bunch of stuff into account - i'm sure a working group could sort out the finer details

  6. Post
    brand wrote:
    If you sell your home in order to buy another one you hilariously end up paying the Government part of the profits you made, just because you moved house.
    I corrected your statement, just for pedantry.

  7. Post
    don't sell the family home problem solved

  8. Post
    Vulcan wrote:
    Did anyone see Ron Marks on the news tonight? Between him and Shane Jones I'm not sure NZ First is going to survive through to the next election. And the greens want CGT on the family home... labour might be the last party standing.
    Well they seemed to have thrown law abiding firearms owners under the bus so I probably won't vote for them. If Top had a credible gun policy I'd vote for them.

  9. Post
    sorceror wrote:
    if you made a financial gain from that sale why shouldn't it be treated as income and taxed like everything else is?

    not taxing family homes makes 0 sense to me but I can obviously see why people wouldn't want it.
    One fundamental flaw with the CGT for non-business is you cannot take improvement and maintenance costs into account. (and you may be buying a new home to move to)

  10. Post
    Daynger wrote:
    Trouble is they attract the kind of voter that has house envy.
    If you own a home, even if you are mortgaged to the hilt you are a rich prick.
    Hippies, socialists and extreme leftists.
    Hi, me and all my Green voting friends are home owners (of quite nice houses tbh). I fully believe I should be taxed when I eventually sell up and move. Hope this helps!

  11. Post
    massive wrote:
    I corrected your statement, just for pedantry.
    But the house you're buying has also gone up, so you couldn't afford to move house without downgrading to an inferior house or paying more money out of your own pocket just to stand still.

    The government ends up taking a cut out of each sale in that respect.

  12. Post
    sorceror wrote:
    if you made a financial gain from that sale why shouldn't it be treated as income and taxed like everything else is?

    not taxing family homes makes 0 sense to me but I can obviously see why people wouldn't want it.
    Because you're buying in the same market you genius. If the house price has gone up and you make a profit, you need to use that profit to buy another house. It's not like you're cashing out.

    Typical Greens though. They barely have a brain cell between them, makes sense only dumb kids vote for them.

  13. Post
    Hence the levers for inflation etc. You guys are just arguing implementation details on how it should be taxed, the question was should it be taxed in the first place.

  14. Post
    it wont make a big difference to me if CGT is implemented, the extra tax is just added onto the price of the house when sold. You make less but the buyer pays more /shrug. You just then reevaluate what else you can invest your money into.

  15. Post
    I see James Shaw was assaulted on the way to parliament today. Probably some 1080 fruitcake no doubt.

  16. Post
    frio wrote:
    Hi, me and all my Green voting friends are home owners (of quite nice houses tbh). I fully believe I should be taxed when I eventually sell up and move. Hope this helps!
    I'm a do all or nothing type - I believe you either have no tax or if you're going to tax, it needs to be a fair taxes and since NZ does do tax it needs to tax capital gains because that's fair. The only alternative I see is removing all taxes

  17. Post
    It still maintains property speculation, but I do like how the exemption on the family home creates a disadvantage for higher volume property flippers relative to those who are upgrading/profiting off the family home.

    Did the TWG recommend keeping the bright-line test in place?


  18. Post
    Bobs wrote:
    I see James Shaw was assaulted on the way to parliament today. Probably some 1080 fruitcake no doubt.
    walking the mean streets of wellington !

  19. Post
    Bobs wrote:
    I see James Shaw was assaulted on the way to parliament today. Probably some 1080 fruitcake no doubt.
    I'm honestly surprised anyone would recognise him.

    Some nutter punching a random politician I could see but actually targeting James Shaw?

    Who cares enough about him to do that?

  20. Post
    Bobs wrote:
    I see James Shaw was assaulted on the way to parliament today. Probably some 1080 fruitcake no doubt.
    Yeah, it must've been.

  21. Post
    brand wrote:
    If you sell your home in order to buy another one you hilariously end up paying the Government just because you moved house.
    this.

  22. Post
    brand wrote:
    If you sell your home in order to buy another one you hilariously end up paying the Government just because you moved house.
    * if you're employed you hilariously end up paying the Government for spending 8 hours a day working
    * if you need to eat you hilariously end up paying the Government just for food
    * if you're keeping money in a savings account you hilariously end up paying the Government just for saving

    You can make this argument about every form of tax. The reality is that we as a society have agreed that there are public services which we all benefit from and should share in the financial burden of: healthcare, education, law enforcement, military, diplomacy, governance, etc. If we're going to live in a state that's taxed, we should strive for a tax system that doesn't cause weird distortions in the market, and is as fair as practicable for all participants.

    CGTs are pretty commonplace worldwide; we're a strange outlier in that regard. Many countries *do* exempt the family home, but many don't, and they're doing just fine. It genuinely isn't fair that people selling their $3m Parnell mansions might avoid a tax, while the people selling their baches wouldn't, and it creates a market distortion (because two classes of people with different tax eligibilities will be operating in the same market).

  23. Post
    SirGrim wrote:
    I'm a do all or nothing type - I believe you either have no tax or if you're going to tax, it needs to be a fair taxes and since NZ does do tax it needs to tax capital gains because that's fair. The only alternative I see is removing all taxes
    That is because you are incredibly stupid.

  24. Post
    frio wrote:
    Hi, me and all my Green voting friends are home owners (of quite nice houses tbh). I fully believe I should be taxed when I eventually sell up and move. Hope this helps!
    You know you can voluntarily pay more tax dont you?
    Just send the IRD some money and dont do a tax return if you are keen to pay more of your fair share.