How much do you give John?

30 comments on “How much do you give John? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. saveNZ 1

   13 April 2016 at 8:18 am

   Yep, happy to tell everyone what a great guy he is, but where is the actual proof, John.

   This is in light of billionaires giving to their own ‘charitable trusts’ with great publicity but which turn out to be not charity at all, more often a trust they run themselves and often for dubious social engineering projects.
2. esoteric pineapples 2

   13 April 2016 at 8:30 am

   I find it hard to imagine a person who tried to get the tax payer to pay for his settlement with Bradley Ambrose would be giving away thousands of dollars to charity every year
   • maui 2.1

     13 April 2016 at 8:38 am

     +1
     • Psycho Milt 2.1.1

       13 April 2016 at 8:53 am

       Yep. Ditto, the kind of guy who boasts to the media that he donates a lot of his salary to charities but won’t disclose the details.
   • NZJester 2.2

     13 April 2016 at 9:28 am

     The National Party is a charity is it not? ;-p
   • Rae 2.3

     13 April 2016 at 2:13 pm

     Not too long a bow to draw
   • Matthew Whitehead 2.4

     15 April 2016 at 11:55 am

     Oh, I can see him giving thousands of dollars, I just can’t see him giving the majority of his salary if he’s not willing to tell us the amount he’s donated. And I don’t buy he doesn’t keep records, this is the guy who puts his investments in a trust before becoming PM, he’s totally claiming back tax on his charitable donations.
3. roy cartland 3

   13 April 2016 at 8:31 am

   If he voluntarily leaves any of his money in a country which is able to tax it, he is making a donation. In his mind.
4. ianmac 4

   13 April 2016 at 8:47 am

   The PM’s salary is $428,000.
   We could almost predict what his tax should be.
   So what harm in publishing?
   I wonder if those extras for expenses are taxable?
   • Lanthanide 4.1

     13 April 2016 at 9:01 am

     John Key should be paying $132,160.00 in PAYE tax on his salary, not accounting for any other benefits or credits he may be entitled to.

     Under Labour’s 2008 tax regime, he would have paid $157,460.00 (this doesn’t include Labour’s further tax cuts that National repealed in the 2009 budget).

     So National’s tax cuts were worth ~$25,000 for him.
5. ianmac 5

   13 April 2016 at 8:51 am

   However his yearly income from his fortune might be a complication. (It has been rumored that his fortune is way beyond $50million.)
6. slumbergod 6

   13 April 2016 at 8:52 am

   The more they hoard, the more they fear losing it. It’s a double blow for NZ because our leader happens to be one of those greedy people. It’s seemingly OK for poor people to be whacked with secondary tax because they need multiple jobs to survive but equally OK for rich people to use trusts to hide their wealth. Absolutely disgusting and unacceptable.

   Not only do we need to close the tax loopholes, we also need to reclaim the wealth that was stolen and put these criminals in prison.
   • Stuart Munro 6.1

     13 April 2016 at 9:24 am

     +100
7. shorts 7

   13 April 2016 at 9:57 am

   I’m sure he gives something to charities (including the national party) and if held to account (yeah right) would offer up just enough evidence for the story to move on

   I mean how does one define a “chunk” of his salary, 10K… 100K, half of it?

   the guys a cock but this is really a non story
   • weka 7.1

     13 April 2016 at 11:49 am

     The reason that it’s a story is because John Key, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, tells lies. He also manipulates the truth. Many people don’t trust him because of this. This means that when something is unclear, as in this case, people are inclined to think he is hiding something and lying. This is unacceptable for someone in his position of power. NZers have to be able to trust the PM. If he had any integrity he would be open and honest. I appreciate that’s a problem for him at this late stage, but that’s the consequences of being a liar for so long.
     • shorts 7.1.1

       13 April 2016 at 1:16 pm

       While I totally agree with you Weka, his lies have done virtually nothing to harm him (yet – one hopes), to hold him to account over one he told years ago isn’t going to do much except give whale another “look at the nasty party” posts in reply

       If Key comes undone because of his default position of lying, that lie has yet to be said I would suggest, and whatever it is it has to be such that middle NZ reels in shock and horror (it will probably be something quite small on the key scale of porkies)
       • weka 7.1.1.1

         13 April 2016 at 2:05 pm

         If Key falls, it will be because of the accumulation of lies and bullshit. I’m not waiting for a single silver bullet. I also happen to believe that the role of PM means something. Key needs to be held accountable irrespective of whether that impacts on him politically or not. That’s integrity.
         • shorts 7.1.1.1.1

           13 April 2016 at 3:07 pm

           I do believe it will be a silver bullet and it will be something trivial that will offend those who don’t really care about integrity or corruption as long as their house price goes up – such is the state of our national discourse

           I would like toes him and his peers held accountable but in the interests of personal sanity won’t hold my breathe, he’ll get a knighthood before that ever happens (happy to be proved wrong)

           Perhaps one day we’ll have a states person running things again
           • weka 7.1.1.1.1.1

             13 April 2016 at 3:20 pm

             I’m not holding my breath either, but this is still a story for the reason that he is the PM beyond the politics.
       • Hanswurst 7.1.1.2

         13 April 2016 at 6:48 pm

         This isn’t really true. There is a popularity myth surrounding Key that convinces people to state quite confidently, as you do here, that nothing has stuck to him. However, his preferred prime minister rating in the most recent poll is lower than Helen Clark’s was in plenty of polls during 2008, the year in which she lost hte election. Key gets a lot of media coverage, but I think that if an opposition platform captured the imagination of even a relatively small number of swing voters, he would be down on his luck very quickly, because the evidence suggests that the majority of NZers really don’t give a shit about Key one way or another.
8. weka 8

   13 April 2016 at 10:05 am

   Sean Plunket tweeted in 2014 that he had investigated the donation to charity claim and couldn’t find anything to substantiate it, so concluded it was a myth.

   https://twitter.com/dairymanNZ/status/719680420070055938
9. UncookedSelachimorpha 9

   13 April 2016 at 10:09 am

   If he has $50m, can expect the annual return to be a minimum of 5% (but usually large fortunes return more than smaller ones – so more likely over 10%).

   So let’s say 7.5% = $3.75m p.a. return on $50m (before you add his PM salary).

   If he earned this actually working (e.g. in a factory) he would pay over $1.2m p.a. income tax. I bet he pays far, far less.

   Of course on his way to having the $50m in the first place – his income (probably including a lot of capital gains) must have been considerably greater – and again he certainly paid far,far less tax than he would have if he earned it by ordinary work. And this illustrates an important point – the tax he didn’t pay in the past is still sitting in his pile of ill-gotten loot, earning him more money today.

   Is tax only for the poor John?

   Is your money-trading of so much more value to society than ordinary work that it should be subject to much lower tax??
   • Colonial Viper 9.1

     13 April 2016 at 6:33 pm

     The idea that Key is only worth $50M today is utterly laughable. I reckon he is in the $100M to $200M range today.
     • UncookedSelachimorpha 9.1.1

       13 April 2016 at 7:01 pm

       You could well be right – the secrecy of the rich is one of the problems.

       Be nice if JK could disclose these trifling details – the fact he doesn’t contribute his fair share while being exceptionally wealthy – speaks volumes about his values.

       If I am wrong, and he pays a similar or higher rate of tax than an ordinary worker – then he can easily produce the evidence to prove it, but he dodges that question.
10. Puckish Rogue 10

    13 April 2016 at 10:36 am

    Its threads like this that keep me coming back 🙂
11. McFlock 11

    13 April 2016 at 11:58 am

    “Honest” John, “Honest” John, with nothing to hide,
    Was nonetheless protective of his wallet’s private side.
    Of his hair-fetish ways we knew all the facts
    But not what he paid, if any, in tax

    👿
12. Craig H 12

    13 April 2016 at 12:25 pm

    Individual income tax returns don’t record charitable donations – if someone wishes to claim the tax credits available, they file a separate return (IR526).
13. stigie 13

    13 April 2016 at 5:54 pm

    “Its threads like this that keep me coming back”

    All these conspiracy’s about John Key well before 2008 will keep you on the opposition benches forever. Please carry on, it’s working wonders for national and Key..?
    • Colonial Viper 13.1

      13 April 2016 at 6:30 pm

      Key is a bankster, financial speculator and market profiteer. He is also a serial liar.

      Not conspiracy theory; simply conspiracy fact.

      Having said that your point remains correct – none of this will convince people to vote for the Opposition.
14. Dale 14

    13 April 2016 at 9:07 pm

    You lot must be so annoyed that Keys name didn’t appear in the Panama papers you stoop to new levels of desperation.
    Most of what you want to look at is none of your bloody business.
    Labour and the msm need to get over your personal hatred of Key. When you do maybe you can start to win the voters over and become a proper opposition party.
    Look at the polls,your a disgrace.
    Start serving the people you say you represent!
    I used to be one of them.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS