GST is going up today

62 comments on “GST is going up today ”

• Comments are now closed

1. BLiP 1

   1 October 2010 at 1:49 pm

   Reporter: “Can you rule out National Ltd™ raising GST to 15%?”

   John Key: “Yeh yeah. National Ltd™ is not going to be raising GST”.

   . . . but he’s such a nice man.
2. Kaplan 2

   1 October 2010 at 2:41 pm

   “What the legal advice shows is that my blind trust is indeed that, totally and utterly blind and out of my control or sight, and what it also clearly shows is that the allegations made around the trustee company Whitechapel are incorrect. I have no involvement, no interest in Whitechapel and it is a trustee company.”

   Yeah. Right.
3. nilats 3

   1 October 2010 at 3:37 pm

   How come Labours 12.5% GST is ok, but a teeny bit more added by National is bad?
   I will enjoy my extra $40/wk after the increase so I can pay off debt. It’s nice having the choice to be able to do what I like with my money. Also like the part where WFF will become less of a strain on taxpayers like myself and we can start ending middle class welfare.

   BTW, if Phil Goof’s F&V tax rate zero goes ahead will this apply to $5000/kg truffles as well?

   BTW, what did Clark say about smacking children before the 2005 election?
   • Dave 3.1

     1 October 2010 at 4:07 pm

     Could you explain how a smack on the bum is not allowed to correct a child’s poor discipline? Would you like to cite where in the legislation that was put into law where this is not applicable? Or are you just repeating what is being told to you in highly sensationalised soundbites? It angers me when people call it the anti-smacking legislation when all it was was to extend the same rights to children that were available to animals!! I know this is kind of off topic and most of the country detests Sue Bradford, but I dare say you would have a hard time nilats trying to find anyone in the country who cares more about people than Ms. Bradford, go and get out the jug cord and bash the kids you barbarian.
     
     [lprent: It is off-topic – I’d move to OpenMike but nilats in his usual personal irrelevant tradition mixed unrelated in with on-topic material. Now you know why he is on my personal attention list. ]
     • jbanks 3.1.1

       1 October 2010 at 7:49 pm

       Using force for the purposes of correction is an illegal act.

       s59 Crimes Act: Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of— (a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or (b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or (c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or (d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting. (2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
       To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.
       • Vicky32 3.1.1.1

         1 October 2010 at 9:21 pm

         Your point is, jbanks?
         Deb
         • jbanks 3.1.1.1.1

           2 October 2010 at 8:40 am

           Don’t be a silly bitch.

           Obviously I was responding to ‘Dave’ saying ‘Could you explain how a smack on the bum is not allowed to correct a child’s poor discipline? Would you like to cite where in the legislation that was put into law where this is not applicable‘

           Using force for the purposes of correction is an illegal act. Anyone with half a brain knows this fact.
           • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.1.1.1

             2 October 2010 at 8:46 am

             “Anyone with half a brain knows this fact.”

             Well, that certainly clears up the mystery about the low quality of your contributions, wanksy.
             • jbanks …

               2 October 2010 at 9:55 am

               Read the legislation you small minded fool. Specifically
               (2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

               Or if you’re not capable of understanding that, ask a lawyer.

               It’s illegal to use force for the purposes of correction. You’re out of your depth on this one small fries.
           • Vicky32 3.1.1.1.1.2

             3 October 2010 at 6:16 pm

             If there was such a facility, I would report you for the “silly bitch” remark, you sexist tugger..
             Deb
           • Vicky32 3.1.1.1.1.3

             3 October 2010 at 6:24 pm

             If there was a facility for doing so, I would report you for the “silly bitch” comment, you sexist tugger…
             Note also:
             “To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.”
   • Joe Bloggs 3.2

     1 October 2010 at 4:08 pm

     BTW, if Phil Goof’s F&V tax rate zero goes ahead will this apply to $5000/kg truffles as well? No a truffle is a fungus and a fungus is not a vegetable – it’s as different from a vegetable as an animal is.

     So truffles do not qualify for Labour’s fruit & vege exemption.

     Milk also doesn’t quality,

     Cheese doesn’t qualify,

     Fresh meat doesn’t qualify,

     Frozen veges don’t qualify (even though they can be healthier than fresh equivalents e.g. peas)

     Wheatbix don’t qualify

     Wholegrain bread fortified with folic acid certainly doesn’t qualify

     Fresh fish doesn’t qualify

     Talk about a desperate piece of policy… reminds me of Cullen’s chewing gum budget, only sadder…
     • nilats 3.2.1

       1 October 2010 at 4:31 pm

       mushrooms do not qualify then? Does not pay to be a fun guy then.
       Maybe an expensive lawyers job then by mushroom suppliers.
     • pollywog 3.2.2

       1 October 2010 at 4:41 pm

       Once we have a system that will easily take the GST component off any given product, it will be easier to add to the list of exempted things.

       Today fresh fruit and veg, tomorrow…???

       …funding this initial exemption by taxing fizzy drinks out of the market, that’ll be a hard sell but it’s gotta be done…Jus fink of da gids !!!
     • Craig Glen Eden 3.2.3

       1 October 2010 at 4:54 pm

       All the above don’t qualify because the are not fresh fruit and vegetables. Simple really!

       The raising of GST at this time when the economy is struggling will only make the economy stall further, also it has been a cost to all businesses and all purchasers of goods.
       This will impact more on the less well off and leave them even worse off as wages are not increasing.

       Cullen did more for our country eg Super Scheme, than English the thief will ever do.

       Labour invested heavily in projects like the New Lynn train station, National will do jack shit!

       Oh sorry thats a bit unkind isn’t it, Keys cycle way has been hugely successful. What a man what a visionary.
       • jcuknz 3.2.3.1

         2 October 2010 at 4:21 am

         What a load of rubbish …tax cuts greater than the minuscule 2.5% increase … you guys just can’t do your maths and are blinded/deafened by the political spin of the left. The confusion above indicates just how stupid Goff’s position is. For the facts of the matter it was worth going to Kiwiblog yesterday .. not that I needed to, I’d worked it out months ago.
         It was also worth going there to read with amusement several moaning about the 2% rise in benefits and claiming they were getting nothing … yeah right.
         • Vicky32 3.2.3.1.1

           3 October 2010 at 6:29 pm

           What rise in benefits? We *are* getting nothing, numb-nuts…
           Deb
       • Joe Bloggs 3.2.3.2

         3 October 2010 at 10:35 am

         All the above don’t qualify because the are not fresh fruit and vegetables. Simple really!

         well duh!

         The point that went whizzing past your pointy little head (and Felix’s as well) is that all of these items are equally as nutritious and healthful as fruit and vegetables. So why would GST remain on them yet be taken off fruit and veges?

         And… just in passing … why should vegans benefit any more than the rest of us from Goff’s magnanimity?
         • Draco T Bastard 3.2.3.2.1

           3 October 2010 at 6:53 pm

           I have no problems with mushrooms being GST exempt as long as they’re fresh and not processed, i.e. Not wrapped in plastic.

           Milk isn’t good for you. Cheese is a bit better as it’s got the fungus chewing it up first.

           Fresh meat doesn’t qualify,

           And it actually shouldn’t – it’s not particularly good for you and it costs far more to produce as well as being environmentally damaging. The processing of it also carries GST.

           Wholegrain bread fortified with folic acid certainly doesn’t qualify

           No, but you could purchase the unprocessed stuff that goes into making the bread and then make the bread yourself. Warm, hot, fresh bread – yummy.

           Frozen veges don’t qualify (even though they can be healthier than fresh equivalents e.g. peas)

           Got link to peer reviewed research?
           I don’t think they should be exempt anyway – the processing carries GST and so it brings in all those nasty complications that Dr Cullen was talking about.

           why should vegans benefit any more than the rest of us from Goff’s magnanimity?

           If you’re that worried about it – become a vegan. I hear it’s good for you.
         • felix 3.2.3.2.2

           3 October 2010 at 7:19 pm

           Ah Joe, my slow-witted little friend.

           The whole point of a narrow definition like “fresh fruit and veg” is that it focuses on stuff that pretty much everyone agrees is good healthy food and deliberately avoids messy debates about most of the grey area stuff.

           Trouble is you’re still trying to pretend that Labour have proposed taking GST off “healthy food” cos that’d be an easy idea to pick holes in.

           But Labour haven’t done that Joe. They’ve gone straight for fruit & veg and neatly cut you out of the argument, leaving you, Hooten, Farrar, English and the rest of the goon squad pathetically flapping around in the stinking filth of your own irrelevance.
           • Colonial Viper 3.2.3.2.2.1

             3 October 2010 at 8:27 pm

             leaving you, Hooten, Farrar, English and the rest of the goon squad pathetically flapping around in the stinking filth of your own irrelevance.

             Dem’s fightin’ talk 😯
     • felix 3.2.4

       1 October 2010 at 9:30 pm

       Clap clap Joe Bloggs.

       Milk, meat, cheese, bread, fish are neither fruit nor vegetables.

       Keep this up and you’ll get a gold star for your primer one nutrition project.
   • Vicky32 3.3

     1 October 2010 at 5:51 pm

     You will get frakkin’ $40 a week! How complacent you must be… You claim to be against ‘middle class welfare’, but upper class welfare is fine by you, hey?
     Deb
     • nilats 3.3.1

       1 October 2010 at 6:04 pm

       How can this be upper class welfare Deb? Keeping more of MY earned money is not welfare as I have earned it.

       Welfare is when you use other peoples money to give to other people to do jack shit. The left have an ingrained sense of entitlement with other peoples money and use it inefficiently.
       • Vicky32 3.3.1.1

         1 October 2010 at 9:15 pm

         Er… huge tax cuts? Borrowing to pay for them? GST rise to help pay for them? You claim that’s not welfare?
         Deb
       • RedLogix 3.3.1.2

         1 October 2010 at 9:23 pm

         Oh dear…are you still imagining that it’s your money?

         Look I tell you what, if you’re so concerned about all us working class folk sitting on our lazy arses doing jack shit and stealing your precious hard earned money off you… then how about you take it all and bugger off to some deserted island somewhere.

         You’ll do just fine.
         • infused 3.3.1.2.1

           1 October 2010 at 11:03 pm

           It is his money. What the hell are you on about?
           • Jeremy 3.3.1.2.1.1

             2 October 2010 at 3:11 am

             it was his company’s customers’ money not long ago, what he doesn’t realise is he’ll have less customers now GST has gone up
           • felix 3.3.1.2.1.2

             3 October 2010 at 11:03 am

             If you think it’s his money then perhaps you and he would both like to excuse yourselves from the construct known as society and you’ll see how much use “your” money is.
             • Colonial Viper …

               3 October 2010 at 8:29 pm

               The usefulness of money in general – bits of paper, or ledger entries in an electronic record – is questionable at best. You can’t eat it and you can’t breathe it. That’s why the Chinese is trading in the stuff for things of actual material use: mineral ores, farms, mines.
   • lprent 3.4

     1 October 2010 at 6:41 pm

     nilats: talk about living in the past. The shift from 10% to 12.5% was when? 1989?

     You probably didn’t have to shave and may have even been dribbling in your bib. (come to think of it, nothing much has changed)

     Hell the Internet was still running on serial ports and uucp
4. Peter G 4

   1 October 2010 at 3:50 pm

   First foray to the supermarket today, Prices quite different to yesterdays…Only 7 or 8 cents per item in some cases but still noticible.

   Could well be the start of the end for Key N Co !
5. Joe Bloggs 5

   1 October 2010 at 3:56 pm

   What’s that old gem about people in glass houses and stone throwing??

   Lest we forget what flip-flopping really sounds like :

   Hon CHRIS CARTER: GST is designed to apply to the widest range of goods and ser­vices sup­plied in New Zealand. This ensures that the tax is as fair and equi­table as pos­si­ble. The GST régime works best with few exemp­tions, as they can cre­ate dis­tor­tions and extra com­pli­ance costs.

   Hon TREVOR MALLARD: In two weeks the Maori Party will vote for a very silly bill to take GST off “Healthy Food”. Just imagine trying to define that. And how much of each we are allowed each hour/day/week before GST kicks in. And the army of inspectors to check the food. And the increase in GST or other tax to cover the diff.

   Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: I am aware of many countries that have appallingly inefficient GST systems where they exempt various articles, where they have differential rates, and where one has to differentiate between food taken away from a place and food consumed within a place. Thank goodness we have not followed those very bad policies.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     1 October 2010 at 4:10 pm

     Looks like the NATs are getting increasingly nervous. And this is only the start.
   • bbfloyd 5.2

     1 October 2010 at 5:30 pm

     JB… the only reason this situation has come about is because the national government went back on yet another commitment, and raised gst to a level that will create imbalances. if you have a grasp of history, then you will remember that roger douglas said in the eighties that 12.5% was, after studying all the different systems in place around the world, the ideal level, as it did not impact on prices to an onerous level, and provided enough revenue to provide for reductions in direct taxes.

     this laural and hardy govt has done no more than upset the balance of economy for ordinary NZers in order to provide people who already have more than enough money with even more. the only people who could possibly think this is good governance are the same selfish, reactionary pricks that applauded the gutting of norman kirks groundbreaking superannuation scheme. (lauded around the world as “far sighted and rational” forward thinking policy).
   • jcuknz 5.3

     2 October 2010 at 4:27 am

     I doubt if you kiddy-winkies remember the days before Sir Roger introduced GST with the numerous and different taxes and duties on goods .. a socialist’s heaven of course … which is where Goff wants to head back to.
     • Vicky32 5.3.1

       3 October 2010 at 6:36 pm

       I remember those days! Vividly. I also remember that the import duties you are whingeing about applied only to big ticket items such as cars and big-screen TVs (such as existed then!) , not food, rent, clothing and tampons…
       No wonder the ACT-in-disguise government wanted GST, so that people who didn’t buy a new Porsche every year would have to subsidise those who did…
       Deb
     • Colonial Viper 5.3.2

       3 October 2010 at 8:31 pm

       Socialist = caring for the social cohesion of society

       😀
6. Fisiani 6

   1 October 2010 at 4:37 pm

   Take a video clip out of context. Miss out the question that prompted it. Attempt to smear. Fail. Face plant Standard moment again.
   • Armchair Critic 6.1

     1 October 2010 at 4:45 pm

     Give us the context then, Fisiani. What exactly is it that we are missing?
     • Pascal's bookie 6.1.1

       1 October 2010 at 4:47 pm

       Was it the bit were he said the average wage earner would be seeing fifty nicker a week in tax cutz?
     • Fisiani 6.1.2

       1 October 2010 at 4:53 pm

       Dont be coy!
       Let me spell it out for you but I’m sure you know already.
       “Will you raise GST to fund the deficit?”
       He then answered the question truthfully and has kept his word. Typical smear leftist tactic trying to rewrite history.
       • Craig Glen Eden 6.1.2.1

         1 October 2010 at 5:53 pm

         Oh Right Fis so the reporter should have asked will you increase GST to give the rich a big tax break and make the poor even poorer.

         So just how is he going to fund the deficit Fis? oh thats right by using attrition in the public service! Yes thats right another lie, redundancies anyone?

         Typical wingnut distraction on your behalf Fis!
       • Armchair Critic 6.1.2.2

         1 October 2010 at 8:39 pm

         You’ve actually been called out on this one before and shown to be full of it. I’m still waiting for you to confirm which of your opinions you want to resile from.
         Let’s be clear, John Key ruled out raising GST, then he went back on his word.
         • jcuknz 6.1.2.2.1

           2 October 2010 at 4:33 am

           It is the dumb and foolish blockheads that are unable to change their minds in the face of fresh evidence … obviously the Nats are far from that … pity in my view the left seem unable to come up with sensible alternatives … all very sad that they seem to be simply floundering around with nothing but mis-information that is so obvious you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see through it. All very sad and tragic for the welfare of the country.
           • felix 6.1.2.2.1.1

             2 October 2010 at 9:42 pm

             This fresh evidence the Nats found, it wouldn’t consist largely of evidence that “Hey fuck we’re the govt now innit” would it?
   • bbfloyd 6.2

     1 October 2010 at 10:03 pm

     taking your stupid pills again fisi?
7. Fabregas4 7

   1 October 2010 at 5:03 pm

   GST exemptions may be tricky for some but I know my fruit and vegetables and it seems easy to me. I’m guessing that those wishing to muddy the waters will do so with the ‘what about frozen peas?’ argument but it is actually pretty straight forward and in actual fact lots of things are currently GST exempt and plenty of countries including our aspirational goal friends Australia have exemptions. Further to the strange contradictions of government file – price of smoking is increased to encourage people to smoke less but price of healthy foods is not reduced to encourage a reduction in obesity – go figure.
   • nilats 7.1

     1 October 2010 at 6:09 pm

     What about large employers of processed veg like Heinz & McCains? This will hurt them as their foods will not be GST exempt, frozen peas, peas etc.
     I am sure the people of Hastings will love this idea when it will make many unemployed.
     • Craig Glen Eden 7.1.1

       1 October 2010 at 9:50 pm

       Nice to see that you obviously think Labour will get in at the next election nilats. How many workers at Heinz will be lost then nilats do you have any idea or are you just talking out your arse?

       How many people have National made unemployed in the public service nilates.

       I would have thought given all the fruit and veg produced in the Bay the people there will do just fine.
     • Maynard J 7.1.2

       1 October 2010 at 9:52 pm

       Don’t be daft, people will still buy frozen vegetables.
   • jcuknz 7.2

     2 October 2010 at 4:36 am

     Actually since frozen peas are just that and not cooked then they are vegetables and should be included in the silly exemption.
8. Policy Parrot 8

   1 October 2010 at 5:40 pm

   To be perfectly honest, Labour should continue to add exemption after exemption to GST.

   – Next up, milk and bread.
   – Then all healthy foods.
   – Finally, exclude all items except those considered “luxuries”

   Why? Because it destroys GST – a regressive consumption tax, as a comprehensive weapon that the right can wield against low income earners. Consumers can simply avoid paying tax by making health conscious choices. And the Nats will have to hike GST on the remaining luxury items that only their core supporters can afford to fund tax cuts for them.

   From the mouths of babes, they taketh.
9. Akldnut 9

   1 October 2010 at 7:03 pm

   artichokes for dinner anyone?.
   Rose petals in my salad……. mmmm…mmmmm…… hey hold on these are fowers!!! Dohl
   Will that make florists able to sell a product with a rose or thistle in it as a salad per se?
   Darn……… huhu grubs will cost a fortune at 15% gst now. lol
10. Drakula 10

    1 October 2010 at 10:55 pm

    I think it’s either all or nothing, I agree with no GST on food in principle but that would be fraught with anomalies. Like in the UK.

    So why not scrap it altogether, workers cannot claim their bus tickets and cloths off GST but businesmen can, yet small businessmen don’t like spending hours doing the paperwork on claims and being the tax collector.

    I can see where this is going; it was once only 10% then it moved to 12.5% now it’s 15% etc.etc.

    We won’t feel the full effects yet until industry starts to purchase new stock. A lot of people think that commodities will only go up 2,5%!!!

    WRONG!

    Don’t forget the NZ manufacturer, the importer, the wholesaler and the retailer will all be putting on their 2.5% which will increase the price by at least 10%
    • Fisiani 10.1

      1 October 2010 at 11:25 pm

      Drakula get some sleep. GST is only fully payable by the end user.
11. Tanz 11

    2 October 2010 at 6:37 pm

    Lovely John Key. Thanks, mate. Goodbye vote.
12. Uroskin 12

    3 October 2010 at 3:31 pm

    Why not cut the GST off tomato seedlings I want to grow in my backyard? How more healthy can you get?

    Captcha: naive
13. aj 13

    3 October 2010 at 6:36 pm

    The GST rise is also theft from savers. Anyone with money in the bank on the morning of the 1st Oct has just lost 2.5% of their money.
    • jacinda 13.1

      4 October 2010 at 10:54 am

      Ummmm, no they haven’t. If they are saving for a house or an overseas holiday, then they haven’t lost a cent. And it is highly likely that money being saved would go to those sorts of things.

      F.U.D.
      • aj 13.1.1

        4 October 2010 at 5:21 pm

        I disagree. your examples are true, but most people who have savings are not saving for overseas trips. If only. Most retirees, for example, will have saved money that will be spent, eventually, on domestic spending. If they are saving for building a house then it’s just cost them $6000 more to build. I don’t think either of us can quote research here, but from my life expereience, money saved is mostly spent within NZ and will attract the higher rate of GST

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 1 October 2010 at 12:22 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS