The desperation of Dunne...
Apparently Peter Dunne is blaming opposition to 'his' new capital gains tax on off-shore investment companies. His arguments are spurious. Yet they also appear to be a desperate attempt to defend a tax that is widely seen as a tax too far.
Far from opposition being orchastrated by shadowy UK investment trusts - most of whom could not give a fig for what happens in little old New Zealand - the opposition to the tax has come from Kiwi investors.
Gran and Grandad, who saved for retirement and heeded the call to diversify. People that read Mary Holm, or Peter Hensley, and decided they would put a bit of money in shares. This is how they will be rewarded for their prudence.
New Zealand stock brokers representing these clients are aghast. Sure they have a powerful self-interest, but they have justifiably fought their corner pointing out the inconsistencies with property investment, here and overseas, and with managed funds.
Alerted to little-publicised features of the new tax such as the 'death duties by stealth' aspect of the deferred tax component, or the 100% tax on income possible in certain circumstances (see earlier post) there has been a justifiable concern about the proposed policy.
If Dunne really has form letters he says have been manufactured by off-shore investment trusts, maybe he should produce them. But were they all form letters that recently hit the select committee? Nope, there were not - more than 3000 submissions, over 1800 'substantial' according to John Key who also said they might normally only get 30 or 40 on a technical tax bill.
Recently polling (see earlier posts) showed that there was broadly based opposition to another new tax - even amongst labour voters - I am sure they would have asked a United Future voter too, but maybe they couldn't find anyone that remembered, or would own up to, voting for them.
Time to wake up and smell the coffee.