Civil liberties are under threat as the Inland Revenue wields its search and seizure powers more freely, a senior tax barrister warns.
The taxman’s use of its powers to search and seize property has risen seven-fold over the past five years, from 12 in 2007 to 85 in the last year.
Mike Lennard, a former senior IRD lawyer, says the surge does not appear justified given the high level of compliance by New Zealand taxpayers.
“As the commissioner herself said only a couple of months ago, our tax compliance is among the best in the OECD, “ Mr Lennard says.
In today’s print edition of the National Business Review, he explains why the trend concerns him and why questions need to be asked at the right levels of the Inland Revenue.
“Are we prosecuting people more and intruding on their privacy and liberty more because we need to do so or simply because we have lawyers and investigators who would otherwise have nothing to do?"
He notes that people on the receiving end of the IRD’s search and seizure activity tend to have somewhat chequered records.
“It’s easy for the department to say all of these people have bad compliance histories. They probably do.
"But the fact is, historically, infringements on civil liberties rarely begin against totally blameless people,” he says.
This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags
- Brexit aftermath: disdain, the elites, and the warning for conservative parties everywhere
- Desperate Gen-Y Herne Bay home buyers thrown a compromise
- Brexit fallout for New Zealand: sub 2% OCR and uncertainty
- 'I'm not worried about this part of the world': Gaynor on Brexit
- World Week Ahead: Brexit carnage
Most listened to
- The challenge for the conservative side of politics is to recapture the focus on national identity
- Craigs' Mark Lister says Brexit fallout is likely to mean more volatility and a sub-2% OCR
- NBR's Jenny Ruth on a report suggesting electric car uptake will be slow
- Sunday Business with Andrew Patterson: Brexit Special
- Matthew Hooton on making a moral case for social capital