Low and middle income families get boost from today

National transport spokesman Jami-Lee Ross says "People on lower incomes are more reliant on fuel."

Low-income families are expected to get a boost to their incomes by an average of $66 a week from this Sunday.

Just how much more money families get will depend on their total income, how many children they have and the age of their children.

At the same time on July 1 the regional fuel tax for Auckland comes into effect, adding 11.5c to the price of a litre of petrol.

The National Party says low-income households will be worst hit by the tax. But the Coalition government argues those households will still be materially better off from the increased support in the Families Package announced last December.

Specifically, from July 1 the Best Start payment of $60 a week will begin for newborn children and for many families continue in years two and three. Incomes of middle and low-income families will also be boosted by increasing the family tax credit and by raising the Working for Families abatement threshold.

A winter energy payment of $450 for single people and $700 for couples also comes into effect for those on benefits and receiving New Zealand Superannuation.

At the same time paid parental leave is increased from 18 to 22 weeks from Sunday before rising to 26 weeks in 2020.

Overall, the implementation of the families package announced in December is expected to cost $1.157 billion in the 2018-19 year. The Treasury expects that will boost household spending and support economic growth.

Replaces National's tax plan
But it replaces the previous National-led government’s own tax package, which was expected to cost $8.36b over five years while the Coalition government’s package will cost just $5.53b over the same period.

National’s package included across-the-board tax cuts while the coalition’s package is aimed specifically at low and middle-income earners. It believes it will not only provide greater targeted support to those households but also be better for the economy because those on lower incomes are more likely to spend the money in New Zealand.

The government estimates in the first year the average increase in household incomes will be $66 a week but that varies depending on the household.

Once the package is put fully into effect in 2020-21 an estimated 385,000 families with children will be better off by $75 a week. Those without children will also benefit but not by nearly as much as families.

National claims the regional fuel tax will detract from any gains low-income families make in Auckland.

Its transport spokesman, Jami-Lee Ross, says it is a regressive tax that hurts those on low incomes the most because a higher percentage of their income is spent on fuel than higher- income households.

“Those who are on a lower income are more likely to live further away from main centres and they are also less likely to have newer and more fuel-efficient cars. This means people on lower incomes are more reliant on fuel because they need to drive further and consume more fuel when they drive,” Mr Ross says.

But the government says low-income earners will still be much better off.

Meanwhile, the government’s clampdown on multi-national tax avoidance also comes into effect on Sunday.

Parliament passed legislation earlier in the week that will ensure companies pay tax on the actual amount of business they carry out in New Zealand rather than being able to shift it to overseas jurisdictions and avoid paying tax.

Revenue Minister Stuart Nash says Inland Revenue estimates the measures could increase the tax take by $200 million a year.

But Mr Nash says it is only a first step and further measures might be required.

All content copyright NBR. Do not reproduce in any form without permission, even if you have a paid subscription.


30 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.


This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

30 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

Social engineering at its worst. Not a single incentive for middle-income earners who essentially pay for these handouts

Reply
Share
  • 3
  • 0

You can take immeasurable pleasure of knowing your taxes go to supporting those less-fortunate-than-yourself. The solo mother who celebrates the birthdays of her children by announcing the pending arrival of another.

Reply
Share
  • 3
  • 0

Yeah sucks doesn't it. It's just another thing that's wrong with the place. So was there any new taxes from the govt this week? There's hardly a week goes by these days without another tax being introduced. It's funny listening to all the Labour voters moaning about it. I just say, oh well you voted for them. You were warned by the oldies what to expect. Labour govts= more taxes.

Reply
Share
  • 5
  • 0

It's just a whole lot more government churn and money getting recycled through Wellington's sticky fingers. they handout more dole through Working for Families and then take some back through an Auckland Council fuel tax. Each step of the way another team of parasitic bureaucrats gets to
clip the ticket.

National didn't help, they could have disbanded the terribly inefficient bureaucratic churn machine that is IRD administered Working for Families and implemented a child tax-deduction instead. Changing the incentives for how societies function by way of altering incentives is part and parcel of how politics applies to liberal democracies, but parasitic bureaucratic churn by ever-bigger government, and government for government sake, is a disease both Labour and National are carrying now.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Most of the National voters seem to be on some sort of income subsidy to top up their low rate of pay. The middle class is a an entirely flexible term these days. Recently I think the UN redefined it as anybody earning more thean $10,000 and probably less. its a meaningless term now, which supposedly encompasses anyone working, to be inclusive of the broad coalition that Bill and Hillary Clinton and Bill English were trying to win votes off.
Once middle class refered to those who in conventional NZ terms did not work, but earned there income from business ownership or large share holdings. Conventional tax cuts don't seem to work anymore, particularly in NZ where Key and Bill English cyncially honoured their promises and did one big middle class tax cut after another, knowing profitable investment from business activity outside property and land sales, and fringe activities like dealerships in Maseratis, Ferraris, BMWs and Yacht building is impossible because town planning and licensing restrictions so restricted hotel and motel construction or opening or renovating excing bars and clubs.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

It is not conventional tax cuts we need. A good lesson from changes in the market place is that disruptive market change is good. Changes that challenge the status quo and make changes for the better. It is disruptive tax cuts we need.

If you want to turn the country around:
-Remove all income subsidies, as of the type instituted this week. (Direct welfare will have to stay in the short term but will die of its own accord)

-Drop the tax rate progressively in higher income brackets. Tax is an overhead to run the government, to be met by everyone. On 100,000 per year the basic tax is $25,000. The tax on 1,000,000 a year is $323, 000. There is no ethical reason why an individual should have an extra $298,000 taken off them for giving more to society through jobs and services. It is penalising their intelligence and hard work. Even at a top add-on tax rate of 15% after 100,000, a 1m income earner will still pay $160,000 in tax, still 6.4 times the amount of the individual earning 100,000.

This will create a rush for people to get to a higher income bracket, to enjoy a higher % of their income. It will pull some black market hidden GDP activities out into the light and into taxable activity.
Instead of low income earners racing to get the biggest benefits, it will start to turn the tide to increase their income.

-Cut back on govt squandering.
No more multi-million dollars committees to save 6 snails. In fact no more gravy train committees at all. If the minister cannot ad-minister (pun intended) his or her portfolio, they should be sacked. The administration of any portfolio should be aligned to some very basic acid test principles and questions. So, no more wild goose chases at the taxpayers expense, no more brown nosing to win voters.

Introduce a means test for prospective MPs. If they cannot show how they earn an honest dollar without handouts or political party contributions, no standing for MP. If they cannot manage their own money, why would we trust them with ours? Do you take your car to mechanic whose own car is a mechanical hazard? Do you go to a doctor who cannot manage his own health? If a prospective MP doesn't have the money skills, life skills, or leadership skills why would we trust them to do the right thing? Having no filtering on the honesty of who can stand as a prospective MP, means you invite all types, including those that can spin the biggest yarns (lies). Like the 434,000 trees planted per day scam.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 1

You do as you are told as we take your land and Tax you hard working scum ! NO ! I will not listen to business !

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Then in comes National and wipes the late clean and starts again.
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.
The Lords name is Jacinda for now but it changes from time to time but with the same result or worse ...never better.
She has a willing helper whose name shall be Phil the coffers for I have but a short time before they move me on.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Jacinda is in the business of giving away fishes and loaves instead of empowering those that want to fish and bake. Better off to reduce the amount the govt takes in fishes and loaves off anyone that fishes and bakes, than to keep taking and giving.

Jacinda Hood.

Reply
Share
  • 3
  • 0

Robin Hood fought against an overbearing government that taxed it's citizens into poverty. Essentially he stole from the government (the feudal lords & aristocracy) & gave to the people (taxpayers).

Jacindarella (like all socialists) has more in common with the Sheriff of Nottingham & Prince John than Robin Hood.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Point taken, and in essence you may be right, but I think that higher concept is lost on the common man, and gives out the wrong message, at this point in time. i.e steal what you 'believe' is rightfully yours, which we see happening with this govt. At some stage or another, both Libertarians and Socialists have claimed Robin Hood as a hero for their cause, and given the current psyche of the common man, most would equate it with taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Besides there is always a fine line between stealing back what rightfully belongs and what does not, and how much blood or excess you take in the process. A concept well covered in the Merchant of Venice.

My main point was that Jacinda, like all socialists, actually believe that the poor are rightfully "entitled" to the wealth created by others, which therefore justifies her and her cronies to be the agents of plunder.

All governments recognise the cost of social welfare and the ability of welfare to bankrupt a country.
A good government would institute a plan to reduce the need for welfare, and what better way to do it than by reducing taxation and a flat tax rate, not interfere in the market, and cut back on government squandering, forcing the gravy train bureaucrats to reconsider their future employment prospects as being better in the private sector.

A poor government will be a placeholder government that does not reduce welfare or tax, but also does not increase it. It will not however be able to keep check on welfare increase creep as the population and future superannuation liabilities naturally increase.

A really bad government, knowing the extent of the welfare liability, ignores that liability and increases welfare spending, interferes in the marketplace and increases plundering and squandering.

The suffix "Hood" means "state or condition". e.g. fatherhood, childhood. Because of the rate at which Jacinda is rushing to bankrupt the country through socialist ideals and emotional claptrap, "Jacinda Hood" is the right term. It is her attempt to fanatically inflict her unresolved and uninspected unconscious projections onto the world. It is both infantile and dangerous.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

With 700,000 on super, 400,000 on WFF, 330,000 on welfare, 200,000 on interest free student loans and 1.7 million ACC claims a year what a social disaster. We CANNOT continue this massive handout theme. Nearly 60% of the population with a net contribution to NZ of nothing.

Reply
Share
  • 5
  • 0

Welfare is for the needy elderly and those invalidid in some way, those needing temporary assistance through no fault of there own.
It is not to be a way of life. We now have a situation where families have 20 years on WFF and 20 years on super. We are nuts ever letting ourselves get into this situation.

Reply
Share
  • 3
  • 0

You ignore the fact that many superannuitants are still working and/or own businesses and often contribute far more to the economy than they take out in super.

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

Love, love, love all these govt handouts. Means I can up, up, up my rents, and scoop them all up! Rinse and repeat.
The $2b of accommodation supplements and rising have been great. The rise in student allowances, sweet! Now todays announcement, just the icing on the cake.
The tax favoured policies that have allowed us to gear up large and buy up from under 1st home buyers feet, send house prices rocketing, and claim, claim, claim our way to making little or no (taxable) income on these skyrocketing assets, has been dreamy too!
Tax free capital gains selling plateuing Auckland. Just follow JK for the timing of the Auckland sell, lol.
Then rinse and repeat around the regions, pricing them out, so they have to rent to. Too easy.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

You’ve got 2 votes, your left foot and your right foot

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Indeed! I stopped subsidizing this broken economy years ago. Now I keep what I earn!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

They hunt you down and squeeze your pips!

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Low and middle-income families get a boost this Sunday. So what??? What about all the low and middle-income single working-person households as well as the low and middle-income working couples without dependent children? What have they got? I'll tell you what they have got. The middle finger from this Labour Government served with a whole bunch of new taxes to pay for those who have kids.

Reply
Share
  • 4
  • 0

He rules with an iron sign "NO" and attacks political foes ! He wants everyone to be taxed and hard working homeowners to sell for $200k. Bankrupting the country and holding everyone to ransom !

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Trouble is you can complain all you like,you will never win,its like death and taxes,you can change governments but at the end of the day they are all the same,so just move on to a happy life and enjoy, I did all this moaning many years ago and in the end gave up,not worth the stress, life is short.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Discriminatory not to

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

This accidental govt propped by a vindictive , narcissistic geriatric is in the business of robbing the middle income to pander to their low income group voters . One wonders why work your butt off to subsidized others who refused to work ?

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

"If you want to see the poor remain poor, generation after generation, just keep the standards low in their schools and make excuses for their academic shortcomings and personal misbehavior. But please don't congratulate yourself on your compassion." , Thomas Sowell

Reply
Share
  • 2
  • 0

It is debatable as to whether there is any real need for any sort of rail connection to Auckland airport as the NZ city is not remotely the size of Sydney or London and the bus seems to get their fast enough. Regardless of the type of rail connection - tram, light rail or heavy rail via Onehunga or a brief branch link off the NiMT at Papatoetoe ,the train or tram travel will be anything but direct and will inevitably be a lengthy stopping service with many unattractive other passengers not going to the airport and the last thing most tourists from China, USA , Australia or the UK want to ride alongside let alone your Remuera businesswomen.
Whether tram or train it will not be a direct non stop service stopping only at say Newmarket on the way to the airport-at the most I would imagine even the most direct rail route could only offer 3/4 peak hour non stop services a day.
The main problem with the development of the Auckland rail suburban services since the late 1990s was always going to the security problems on the train and on the stations running thru South Auckland and as the demand and patronage increases these problems increase. Many of the trains and stations in S outh Auckland are dangerous after dark and part of the day and the same is true of parts of west auckland. That means an immense security staff is required etc but even then the problem is not really resolvable or manageable.
Therefore I would have prefered the whole Auckland transport development should have been light rail with the West light rail line to Henderson and Swanson built, on a closed rail corridor ( Sorry Winston but Northland railway is a rio grande historical roundabout of twice the distance and the road and three times the travel time and why do we import these old Jap cars). The link to the airport is unneccesary past Mt Roskill and Onehunga.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Does the middle class even exist in New Zealand any more? It seems that most are getting some sort of government subsidy. A big cash merry-go-round with a giant bureaucracy devoted to taking with one hand and giving back with the other.

A tax free threshold giving everyone the same dollar value benefit would have been far more equitable and efficient.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

Exactly, a tax free threshold somewhere around the "living wage" level is the only morally justifiable position. On top of that, additional increases in the tax-free threshold per dependent (children, elderly, disabled family members, 'relatives', etc) would be much more aligned with NZ traditional family living structures and personal arrangements, that the government has no business interfering in.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

We are increasingly in a socialist hell. Economic misery is being forced upon us all by this illegitimate coalition. What a wonderful ideal these losers have for us making everyone poor and miserable. In my view the accepting of any government benefit is a indictment on the accepting individual as a parasite and a failure.

Reply
Share
  • 1
  • 0

So when you retire, and then accept the super you will regard yourself as a parasite and a failure.
Just not yet, as by your comments still pretty young.

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

At least you acknowledge that the state pension is a welfare payment not a retirement savings programme

Reply
Share
  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.