Red Alert

Posts Tagged ‘trusts’

Systemic Market Failure?

Posted by David Cunliffe on September 22nd, 2010

When this country is in recession and Kiwi families are doing it bloody tough, I cannot bear to stand by and see rich and powerful private interests – whom I will not name at this point and this post is not about SCF – rorting the rules and using their clubs and networks to finesse processes.

It makes Godzone look like “the coldest banana republic in the world”.

For goodness sake interests associated with the Natural Dairy Crafar farms bid (potentially with Nat links) reportedly gave $200,000 to the National Party while the Natural Dairy application was still before the OIO and while National has a ministerial policy review underway. 

National should IMMEDIATELY reject that bid – otherwise what is left to separate this from complete corruption?  Brown envelopes?  Is David Garrett really the only sick or crooked puppy on the Govt benches? 

Was it OK for the OIO-overseeing Minister of Finance to lease his (trust’s) house to the govt for a staggering ministerial rent, or accept hours of free TV for his “Plain English” ads?  Isn’t it time we Kiwis stood up and demanded that the tories do sweat the small stuff like the rest of us?  Isn’t it time John key held SOMEONE to account for SOMETHING rather than smile, wave and make excuses?

The Fendalton and Queen St methods are different from the Crafar one but they are even more dangerous and subversive: very polite circles of influence in the clubs and boardrooms - with massive flows of funds through anonymous trusts that violate the intent of the Electoral Finance Act.  Prestigious law firms and lobbyists.  This is up with the worst sort of influence peddling  I saw in Washington D.C. -  One dollar one vote:  permanent plutocracy unless we fight back.

Beyond political donations, look at the ability of the rich and powerful to get their way while the poor and middle struggle: $2 billion a year of tax avoidance through LAQCs and trusts that National in government has refused to touch.  Half the top 100 welathiest NZers are still not on the top tax rate!

This post is not about SCF, but researching that issue has opened my eyes to the complexity of the company and accounting structures in daily use around the markets.   One prominent international investment broker told me he tells his clients never to invest in NZ other than through an ASIC-regulated (Australian) vehicle, because our market is a wild west.

Well what is the point of getting our savings rate up (and asking hard working families to go without consumtion) if the investment vehicles we need to get the money to our struggling firms are being milked and siphoned by fees and sweet deals to the cronies in the markets?  Why would any sane Kiwi sweat 80 hours a week to build a real business here?  Where will our kids choose to live?

We are talking the need for a full scale root and branch reform.  For example, is the Trustee model not a fiction?  Issuers want tame trustees; trustees want clients.  How do you prevent a race to the bottom?  I will wager now the FMA Bill will not do the job.  We have BIG problems here folks. 

It might have been cool to point the finger at Labour when the champers was flowing during the bubble hype days; but corporate influence peddling is about as attractive as a bucket of sick in the middle of a recession.

There is a real risk of systemic market failure in the NZ financial markets.     They remind me of telecommunications markets in the 1990s – time for a big cleanup.

It is not right and not fair on the silent majority who play by the rules and who are getting absolutely screwed. 

It will only get worse until we have a Govt with the guts to stand up to it.   The smiling millionaire from Bankers Trust is hardly likely to do that!


BUDGET 2010: Will they fix the rorts?

Posted by David Cunliffe on May 19th, 2010

Interesting piece in the Dom front page today about the tax avoidance around trusts – but mostly interesting for what it does not say. 

The National government has spent much of the last year cutting “low quality” services like home help for frail elderly because of the supposed fiscal crunch.

Tomorrow they will announce billion dollar plus tax cuts, overwhelmingly benefitting the wealthy few, while the many just tread water in the face of rising GST, rent, power and food costs. 

They lamely justify the top end tax cut as either a growth stimulant (which is nonsense – much more stimulus results from good investments or tax cuts at lower income bands)…

…or a way or retaining talent (branding Kiwis as “envious” is rubbish, as not all talented people are wealthy and NZ already has the third lowest taxes in the OECD!  Our real need is to lift wages and sustainably grow the economy)….

….or a way of stopping the $300 m tax fiddle arising from the abuse of Trusts.  Ironically the way they plan to do that is by giving all top rate earners the same rate as if they too werre fiddling.  (Of course, without sin there would be no sinners)….

But here’s the real rub: even that trust tax avoidance is puny compared with the writeoffs around loss attributing companies (LAQCs) – $2.3 billion in 2008 alone.   Plus a $500m writeoff around rental property losses.  Plus more around the abuse of savings vehicle (portfolio investment entities – PIEs). 

Not to mention the wider issue of the income/capital boundary and the incentives created to hock off small companies too soon, taking the tax free proceeds to buy the bach and the BMW rather than to grow the business.

Does this government have the nerve to address these issues, which have spiralled out of control since the election?   Or will it just continue to take home help off oldies and special ed services off crippled kids?  Will it penny pinch on night classes while boosting private schools? 

Will it stop the rorts?  Is it capable of governing for the many not the few? 

Increasingly, Kiwis are coming around to the view that it cannot, but Labour can and will.


Exploding tax myths – Part 5

Posted by Stuart Nash on February 18th, 2010

Myth: Alignment between corporate and personal tax rates is required for a coherent tax system

Reality: only two countries in the world (Mexico and Slovenia) have an aligned company and top marginal tax rate.

Rate alignment is the major recommendation of the Tax Working Group’s report.  They believe that this is vital in the battle against tax minimisation, and non-alignment is one of the reasons why the system is ‘broken’..  As an aside, an interesting fact is that a person has to be earning $130k/ann or more at the flat 30% company rate to be better off than paying tax using the graduated personal tax regime.

If there is one structure that needs a comprehensive review it is the Trust vehicle.  Unlike company profits for individuals, which are taxed at marginal rates, the Trust rate of 33% is the final rate.   Many people have companies owned by Trusts, which will allow for tax minimisation.

Back to aligning the top marginal and the company rate: this is highly unusual internationally.   In the OECD, only Mexico and the Slovak Republic have top marginal and company rate alignment  In fact, some countries have gaps far wider than New Zealand.  Australia, for example, if you include the 1.5% Medicare levy, has a top tax rate of 46.5%, making a gap between the two rates of 16.5%.  If Australia does decide to further reduce their corporate rate, this gap will widen further.  I suspect that rate alignment between the top marginal and the company rate isn’t essential to fix a “broken” system.

1

Ireland

28.5

2

Netherlands

26.5

3

Austria

25

4

Poland

21

5

Belgium

16.01

6

Hungary

16

7

Italy

15.5

8

Portugal

15.5

9

Australia

15

10

Greece

15

11

Turkey

15

12

Germany

14.82

13

United Kingdom

12

14

Korea

10.8

15

Luxembourg

9.41

16

New Zealand

8

17

Iceland

7.75

18

France

5.57

19

Finland

5.5

20

Denmark

1.48

21

Japan

0.46

22

Mexico

0

23

Slovak Republic

0

24

Sweden

-1.3

25

Canada

-2.32

26

Norway

-2.7

27

Spain

-2.87

28

United States

-4.1

29

Czech Republic

-5

30

Switzerland

-7.97


The standard on pay the bill english’s changing story on trust

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 31st, 2009

They call it Bill’s pants are on fire.


Cactus Kate on pay the bill english

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 28th, 2009

I’m sure a few of my colleagues won’t think much of me linking to Cactus Kate.

This story has comments that are wrong – and her conclusion is pure Acting – but the nub of it that Bill English is on the ropes, a liability and a hypocrite is where we have common ground.


Pay the bill english on trusts and tax

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 27th, 2009

Cactus Kate highlights the problem pay the bill has as MoF.

“Bill English has absolutely no right to talk about Trusts with any authority ever again. He set the Endeavour Trust up with the purpose of using it as a vehicle for not only home ownership but rorting the taxpayer of their subsidy on housing. This is beyond what English says he is now targetting – the age old fair practice of using companies or trust to lower the top personal tax rate from the high thirties to the low thirties. Still too bloody high.”

The last bit confirms that Kate hasn’t joined the enlightened side of politics and shows that pay the bill is being written off as a credible figure by the right as well as the left.

I do however want to warn against the idea that government can just hike up the tax rate in order to cover the budget. It doesn’t work.

When I was first an MP the Nats left us a legacy of a 66% top tax rate. Anyone with brains could work out that money invested with an accountant or tax lawyer resulted in a better return than investing it in productive activity.

And when GST was introduced and all rates dropped – including the top rate coming down to 33% – income tax revenue increased. Partly because a pile of exemptions and legal rorts were removed, partly because some people who had never had a relationship with the tax system became registered for GST and therefore paid income tax as well and partly because it was better to get on with earning money and cop the tax rather than spending valuable time energy and money trying to avoid it.


Pay the bill english yet another thing

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 25th, 2009

So Bill has repaid the cash he got for pretending to being resident in Dipton when he was in fact living in Wellington.

But he only repaid to Ministerial Services the amount since the election. He hasn’t paid back for the previous nine years when he pretended to reside in Dipton when he was in fact living in Wellington.

And surely as an Opposition member the expectation that he live in his electorate was even stronger then.

He certainly doesn’t look happy in the House trying to preach fiscal restraint.


Pay the bill english one more thing

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 23rd, 2009

A very good authority has indicated that despite Bill English repaying the money he (or his iffy trust) received from Ministerial Services he has not withdrawn or amended the form he lodged with the Speaker indicating that Dipton is his primary place of residence.

I wonder why. Is it on legal advice because of the investigation?  Or because he knows Key would require him to repay that $250k?  Or another reason?

Or two of the above?

Or all three?


So lets be open and transparent John

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 20th, 2009

Key takes pride in claiming open and transparent government.

So I’m challenging him to come clean on why he is not being tough on Bill English ripping the taxpayer off for over a decade.

I think I know why. Key feels guilty. He took out a mortgage on a Wellington flat for the sole purpose of claiming an allowance from the taxpayer when he was worth over $50m. When caught by Cullen he repaid the mortgage and stopped claiming.

I’m not saying he made a false declaration as to his circumstances – but it helps understand why he is protecting someone who almost certainly did.


Melissa and bill

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 13th, 2009

What is it with these Nats. Years of false declarations and they think an offer to pay back part of the money (Bill) and all of it (Melissa) means  they can expect to be forgiven. And no doubt they are going to tell us again today what careful custodians they are of the public purse. They are just not credible.

Now is when we see if Key has backbone. It is a big test for him.


A decade old bill II

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 10th, 2009

Another goodie.

englighcutout


A decade old bill I

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 9th, 2009

Just to show that we haven’t forgotten thought would share a few of the gems that haven’t made it to the net previously.

booby


Transtasman on English Succession

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 8th, 2009

Steven Joyce looks to be stand-out candidate. Of course Joyce is a list MP, so even if he is regarded as Key’s right-hand man, he mightn’t be in the running for deputy, …….

Trans-Tasman’s money is on Simon Power.

And here is what I said last week.

But I’m not sure what they mean by being a list MP. Could be an advantage especially if you don’t feel an obligation to go back to your primary place of residence in Dipton every week.


English – corruption

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 3rd, 2009

Friday, 25 August 2006, 4:52 pm
Column: New Zealand National Party
Plain English – Thoughts from your MP for Clutha/Southland

There is No Shame

“The New Zealand public will ultimately decide the standards of public probity in politics. If they let [... get] away with … rort, then standards of transparency and honesty will drop across the board. … New Zealand politics stays clean because all politicians have presumed the public don’t tolerate corruption, and because politicians do not want the shame of being seen as anything but squeaky clean – until now that is. … believe that … can tough it out, that if … doesn’t admit any wrongdoing, the media will eventually drop it, and the public don’t really care. … doesn’t appear to believe the idea than any rules of public probity should get in the way of [the party's] interests.”

Thanks to Jack McDonald commenting on the Standard.

Doesn’t need much elaboration.


Good luck Bill

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 2nd, 2009

The government website reports:-

Finance Minister Bill English leaves for Hong Kong and London this Sunday to raise New Zealand’s profile with investors and business groups, and to share ideas about the next steps in economic recovery.

On behalf of lots of Kiwis I wish Bill good luck and hope that his domestic credibility problems don’t cause the sort of questioning that flows through into rate margins on Crown borrowing. We can’t afford it.


So Bill can be a beneficiary after all

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 1st, 2009

John Key challenged me across the House if I supported opening up MPs trusts.

After reading Vernon Small today, I do.  Some trusts are  just a rort.