# Question 133: For the 2026 New Zealand general election: Who would pay more or less under the parties' tax plans, and how would those plans fund public services? Collected 31 October 2026 [NZ Election 2026 · Edition 7 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/7) ## ChatGPT Answer ID: f37f258d-2d20-4064-9514-0808ca14e6a6 # 2026 New Zealand election: Who pays more tax, who pays less, and who funds public services? As at 30 October 2026 · General election: 7 November 2026 The biggest dividing line in this election is whether New Zealand should continue relying mainly on income tax and GST, or collect more tax from wealth, property, inheritances and large corporations. There are two broad approaches: - National, ACT and largely New Zealand First: favour lower-tax settings, business investment and controlling government spending. They generally oppose introducing broad new taxes on wealth or capital gains. - Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori and Opportunity: propose more substantial changes to how wealth, property, land or higher incomes are taxed, although their approaches differ considerably. Importantly, not every party is proposing an income-tax cut. Some want to keep current personal income-tax rates while changing who pays tax elsewhere. The comparison below focuses on the main seven parties and their announced policies, rather than assuming every proposal will survive coalition negotiations. [Tax Tips: 2026 General Election](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html)[Summary of 2026 election tax policies](https://kpmg.com/nz/en/insights/tax/summary-of-2026-election-tax-policies.html) ## 1. Who would pay more or less? ### National Broadly maintains existing tax settings Who pays less? - No new general income-tax cuts are promised immediately. - Businesses retain the Investment Boost tax incentive, which allows deductions for qualifying new investment. - National says future tax relief could be considered once the Government returns to surplus. Who pays more? - There is no major new tax increase proposed. - Existing income-tax and company-tax settings would broadly continue. How would it fund public services? National's approach is to: - Reprioritise existing government spending. - Reduce spending it considers low-value. - Direct more funding towards hospitals, schools, roads, law and order and defence. - Reduce government spending towards 30% of GDP. - Return to budget surplus in 2028/29. National says it has already reprioritised approximately $50 billion across three Budgets. The trade-off is that better-funded priority services depend on savings elsewhere, rather than substantial new tax revenue. [National’s plan to secure New Zealand’s future](https://www.national.org.nz/policies/nationals-fiscal-plan)[Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html) ### Labour Targets property investment gains Labour is not proposing a broad change to personal income-tax rates. Its biggest tax change is a 28% capital gains tax on residential investment and commercial property. Who pays more? - People selling investment properties at a taxable gain. - Owners of commercial property making taxable gains. - The tax applies to gains arising from 1 July 2027 onwards. - It does not generally target the family home. - Shares, inheritances and gifts are outside this proposed property capital gains tax. Who pays less? - Small businesses with annual revenue below $10 million would receive more generous immediate deductions for eligible assets costing up to $10,000. - The compulsory GST registration threshold would increase from $60,000 to $80,000. Labour also proposes increasing employer KiwiSaver contributions to 6%, which is an additional employment cost for businesses. How would it fund public services? Labour says it will use: - Revenue from its capital gains tax. - Repealing Investment Boost in its current form. - Other smaller revenue measures and savings. Its fiscal plan forecasts: - $15.5 billion in additional health funding over the forecast period. - Reversing half the additional public-service cuts planned for the next Budget and all those planned for subsequent Budgets. - Returning to operating surplus in 2028/29. Crucially, Labour promises that all revenue from its proposed capital gains tax will be invested in health. Its fiscal plan was independently reviewed by Hall Chadwick, although the estimates remain dependent on the assumptions underlying the policies. [Labour's Fiscal Plan 2026](https://www.labour.org.nz/fiscal-plan)[Labour reveals vaunted fiscal plan](https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/10/04/labour-reveals-vaunted-fiscal-plan-heres-the-key-details/)[Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html) ### Green Party Income-tax cuts for most people; higher taxes on wealth The Greens have one of the most significant redistributive tax proposals. Who pays less? The Greens propose: - The first $10,000 of annual income becomes tax-free. - Lower and middle-income tax brackets are reduced. - 96% of New Zealanders would receive an income-tax cut, according to the party. Some examples from the Greens' own modelling: | Annual income | Estimated weekly change | | --- | --- | | $10,000 | +$20 | | $40,000 | +$27 | | $70,000 | +$11 | | $90,000 | +$10 | | $150,000 | +$4 | | $170,000 | -$20 | | $200,000 | -$66 | | $300,000 | -$181 | These are party-modelled estimates, not independently verified household forecasts. [What are the Greens' tax plans](https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/10/04/what-are-the-greens-tax-plans-and-who-would-have-to-pay/) Who pays more? The Greens propose several new taxes: - Wealth tax: 2.5% annually on an individual's net assets above $10 million. The family home is exempt. - Inheritance and gift tax: 33% on qualifying gifts and inheritances above $1 million, with family homes and family farms exempt. - Company tax: increases from 28% to 33% for companies with annual turnover above $30 million. - Bank levy: a levy on the liabilities of major banks. - Multinational tax: a 5% withholding tax on certain profits sent offshore by large multinational companies. The wealth tax is aimed at a very small proportion of the population. The inheritance tax would be paid by recipients, rather than the person leaving the inheritance. How would it fund public services? The Greens argue that the additional revenue would help fund: - Healthcare. - Education. - Public infrastructure. - Housing. - Social services. - Environmental investment. Their argument is that accumulated wealth and large corporations should contribute more towards the services and infrastructure from which they benefit. The party estimates its wealth tax alone could generate approximately $3.7 billion in 2027, rising to $4.1 billion by 2030. These are party estimates, not guaranteed revenue. [What are the Greens' tax plans](https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/10/04/what-are-the-greens-tax-plans-and-who-would-have-to-pay/)[Greens commit to tax the super-rich and large corporates fairly, cut income tax for 96%](https://www.greens.org.nz/greens_commit_to_tax_the_super_rich_and_large_corporates_fairly_cut_income_tax_for_96)[Tax Tips: 2026 General Election](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html) ### Te Pāti Māori Large income-tax-free threshold and wealth taxes Te Pāti Māori proposes substantial tax relief for lower-income earners, funded partly by higher taxes on wealth, property and corporations. Who pays less? Its headline proposal is a $30,000 tax-free income threshold. This means: - The first $30,000 earned would be tax-free. - People earning up to $60,000 would also be eligible for a targeted Kai Credit. - Lower-income households would receive substantial income-tax relief. Who pays more? Its proposals include: - A wealth tax on individuals with net wealth above $2 million. - Company tax increasing to 33%. - A 33% tax on land banking. - A 2% tax on vacant houses. - A 5% stamp duty on residential property sales, with an exemption for first-home buyers purchasing below $1 million. Its proposed wealth-tax rates are: | Individual net wealth | Proposed rate | | --- | --- | | Up to $2 million | 0% | | $2m–$5m | 1.5% | | $5m–$10m | 2% | | Above $10m | 2.5% | How would it fund public services? Te Pāti Māori wants additional revenue to support: - Healthcare and hospitals. - Education. - Housing and Māori housing development. - Whānau and community services. - Greater investment in Inland Revenue to tackle tax evasion and fraud. Its underlying philosophy is that those with substantial accumulated wealth and large corporations should contribute more, while ordinary workers and lower-income households should retain more of their earnings. One important qualification: its overall tax and spending programme is less straightforward to cost than Labour's published fiscal plan. [Tax Tips: 2026 General Election](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html)[What the parties' tax proposals could mean for your business.](https://asl.co.nz/election-2026-what-the-parties-tax-proposals-could-mean-for-your-business/) ### Opportunity Party (formerly TOP) Major tax-system restructuring Opportunity proposes a more fundamental redesign of New Zealand's tax and welfare system. Who pays less? Its central proposal is a Citizen's Income: - Approximately $19,400 annually for eligible adult New Zealand residents. - Paid as a tax-free universal income. - Designed to simplify and replace aspects of the existing welfare and income-support system. Who pays more? Opportunity proposes: - A land-value tax of 1.75% on residential and commercial land. - A 0.5% rate on rural land, with concessions. - New personal income-tax rates of 28%, 34% and 39%, depending on income. The land-value tax is particularly important because it targets the value of land rather than buildings and improvements. This means: - People owning valuable land could face higher annual tax bills. - Owners of expensive urban property could be affected even if their income is relatively modest. - People with little or no land ownership could benefit from the redistribution, depending on their income and Citizen's Income eligibility. How would it fund public services? Opportunity wants to use the tax reset to: - Fund its Citizen's Income. - Simplify welfare. - Improve incentives to work. - Reduce reliance on taxes that discourage productive activity. - Support long-term healthcare funding. However, its proposed Citizen's Income and land tax are substantial structural changes. Its coalition bottom lines do not require the land tax or Citizen's Income to be adopted. [Tax Tips: 2026 General Election](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html)[Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html)[Summary of 2026 election tax policies](https://kpmg.com/nz/en/insights/tax/summary-of-2026-election-tax-policies.html) ### ACT Lower-tax and investment-focused approach ACT does not propose a broad personal income-tax cut as its main election commitment. Who pays less? Its newer tax proposals include: - Removing tax on KiwiSaver investment earnings. - Removing the cap on charitable donation tax credits. - Abolishing residential rental loss ring-fencing, allowing eligible rental losses to be deducted against other income. - Changes to the taxation of qualifying digital assets. Who pays more? ACT does not propose a general wealth tax, inheritance tax or capital gains tax. However, one significant trade-off concerns KiwiSaver: ACT would remove government contributions while making investment earnings tax-free. This could benefit some investors more than others, depending on their balances and investment returns. How would it fund public services? ACT's approach relies on: - Reducing government expenditure. - Removing what it considers inefficient spending. - Encouraging private-sector investment and economic growth. - Using existing revenue more efficiently. ACT's position is that a smaller, more efficient government can provide essential services without continually increasing taxation. [ACT releases manifesto to unlock New Zealand’s potential](https://www.act.org.nz/news/act-releases-manifesto-to-unlock-new-zealand%E2%80%99s-potential)[Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html) ### New Zealand First Targeted household and business tax changes New Zealand First has a more selective approach than either National or the parties proposing broad wealth taxes. Who pays less? Its proposals include: - Increasing Working for Families assistance. - Reducing company tax from 28% to 20% for businesses with annual turnover below $30 million. - Targeted small-business tax reform. Who pays more? It has not announced a major new personal income tax, wealth tax or inheritance tax. However, it proposes: - Increasing KiwiSaver contributions to 8%, eventually rising to 10%. - Compulsory KiwiSaver enrolment from birth. - An immediate $1,000 Crown contribution for New Zealand citizens. Higher KiwiSaver contributions mean more money must be saved from wages and employer contributions, although this is not an income-tax increase. How would it fund public services? Its approach combines targeted tax reform, economic growth, household assistance and existing government revenue. It also favours maintaining established retirement and public-service arrangements rather than undertaking the extensive tax-system restructuring proposed by the Greens or Opportunity. [Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html)[What the parties' tax proposals could mean for your business.](https://asl.co.nz/election-2026-what-the-parties-tax-proposals-could-mean-for-your-business/) ## 2. Quick comparison: who benefits and who pays? | Party | Likely tax winners | Likely tax losers | | --- | --- | --- | | National | Businesses retaining investment incentives | No major new tax targets | | Labour | Smaller businesses; people not selling taxable investment property | Investment-property and commercial-property sellers making gains | | Greens | Low and middle-income earners | Ultra-wealthy, high earners, large companies, some inheritors | | Te Pāti Māori | Lower-income earners and eligible families | Wealthy property owners, large companies, land bankers | | Opportunity | Eligible adults receiving Citizen's Income; some low-land-ownership households | Owners of valuable land | | ACT | Some investors, landlords and charitable donors | No major new tax targets; some KiwiSaver members lose government contributions | | NZ First | Eligible families and smaller companies | No major new personal or wealth-tax targets | This is a directional comparison, not a calculation of each household's total financial position. Other policies, including benefits, housing costs and KiwiSaver, can change the outcome. ## 3. How do the parties propose funding healthcare, education and other public services? This is arguably the most important part of the election debate. There is a difference between promising more money for public services and explaining where that money will come from. The different funding philosophies National – reprioritisation Move money from lower-priority government activities into frontline services, while restraining overall spending. Labour – targeted new revenue plus existing budget allowances Use property capital gains tax revenue, removal of Investment Boost and other measures to fund healthcare and restore some public-service spending. Greens – wealth and corporate taxation Raise more from wealthy individuals, large companies, banks and inheritances to support public services and reduce inequality. Te Pāti Māori – wealth redistribution Shift more of the tax burden towards wealth, land and large corporations, with relief for lower-income households. Opportunity – land taxation and welfare redesign Restructure taxation and income support through a land-value tax and Citizen's Income. ACT – smaller government Reduce spending, improve efficiency and encourage private-sector investment rather than introduce new taxes. NZ First – targeted reforms Use existing revenue, business growth and targeted tax changes to support families and services. [Labour's Fiscal Plan 2026](https://www.labour.org.nz/fiscal-plan)[National’s plan to secure New Zealand’s future](https://www.national.org.nz/policies/nationals-fiscal-plan)[Tax Tips: 2026 General Election](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html)[Tax Policy Bulletin](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html) ## 4. What should voters look at particularly carefully? There are four important questions beyond headline tax rates. 1. Will the proposed tax actually raise the revenue expected? Wealth and land taxes can change investment behaviour, asset ownership and property markets. 2. Will tax savings reach ordinary households? A tax cut for a company does not necessarily translate into higher wages or lower prices. 3. Will public services receive additional funding? Some parties promise to redirect existing money, while others propose additional revenue. 4. Are the spending commitments independently costed? A party's own financial projections are not the same as an independent assessment of whether its policies will deliver the promised results. One useful distinction: Labour has published a fiscal plan independently reviewed by Hall Chadwick. National has also published a fiscal plan. The Greens and other parties have their own revenue and spending projections, but their underlying assumptions and the comprehensiveness of their costings differ. [Labour's Fiscal Plan 2026](https://www.labour.org.nz/fiscal-plan)[National’s plan to secure New Zealand’s future](https://www.national.org.nz/policies/nationals-fiscal-plan)[Summary of 2026 election tax policies](https://kpmg.com/nz/en/insights/tax/summary-of-2026-election-tax-policies.html) ## 5. The bottom line The election presents three particularly different choices: - If your priority is keeping taxes relatively low and avoiding new taxes on wealth and property: National and ACT are closest to that approach. - If your priority is reducing income tax for ordinary earners while collecting more from wealthier people: the Greens and Te Pāti Māori offer the more substantial redistribution proposals. - If your priority is additional healthcare investment funded through a targeted property tax: Labour has the clearest connection between a proposed new tax and a specific public service. Opportunity is a different proposition altogether, because its land tax and Citizen's Income would change the structure of both taxation and income support. My overall observation is that this election isn't simply about who promises the biggest tax cut. It is about who should carry the cost of running New Zealand, and how much government should spend on healthcare, education, housing and other essential services. ## Further reading These are useful sources for checking the actual proposals rather than relying on campaign slogans: - [PwC – 2026 election tax policy comparison](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [PwC – latest tax-policy updates, 28 October](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-policy-bulletin/28-october-2026.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [Labour – published fiscal plan](https://www.labour.org.nz/fiscal-plan?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [National – published fiscal plan](https://www.national.org.nz/policies/nationals-fiscal-plan?utm_source=chatgpt.com) - [1News – detailed explanation of the Greens' tax plans](https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/10/04/what-are-the-greens-tax-plans-and-who-would-have-to-pay/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) A useful next step would be to compare the parties using three example households: someone earning $50,000, a family earning $120,000 combined, and someone earning $200,000 who owns an investment property. That would make the differences in take-home income, property taxes and public-service funding much easier to understand. ## Gemini Answer ID: 624a9eeb-8066-45ed-bd95-317fd41731fb In the lead-up to the **2026 New Zealand general election**, political parties have proposed starkly contrasting tax policies. The core debate centers on shifting the tax burden away from median income earners and toward wealth, land, capital gains, and large corporations versus maintaining a "no new taxes" approach. --- ### 1. Who Would Pay More or Less Under Party Plans? The impact on individual and business wallets depends heavily on which party's platform is implemented: * **The Green Party:** * **Pay Less:** Low- and middle-income earners would pay less through the introduction of a **$10,000 personal income tax-free threshold**. * **Pay More:** High-income earners (introducing a new **45% tax rate on income over $160,000**), multi-millionaires (via a **2.5% net wealth tax on assets over $10 million**, excluding family homes), large corporations (company tax raised to 33% for the top 0.7% of firms), and those inheriting or gifted assets over $1 million. * **The Labour Party:** * **Pay Less / Benefit Adjustments:** Targeted relief for small businesses (raising the immediate asset write-off threshold and increasing the GST-registration threshold). Households benefit from ring-fenced spending on health (free primary care initiatives). * **Pay More:** Property speculators and commercial/residential property investors, who would face a **28% capital gains tax** on gains made after July 2027 (excluding the family home and farms). Landlords would also see the reversal of previous tax cuts. * **Te Pāti Māori:** * **Pay Less:** Low-income workers via a **$30,000 tax-free threshold** and a targeted "Kai Credit" for individuals earning $60,000 or less. * **Pay More:** Wealthy individuals (via a targeted wealth tax), property owners caught by land-banking or vacant-house taxes, stamp duty, and larger corporations (company tax raised to 33%). * **The Opportunity Party (TOP):** * **Pay Less:** Roughly 70% of New Zealanders would see increased net incomes through a universal **Citizen’s Income ($19,400 a year / ~$370 weekly)** replacing most standard benefits. * **Pay More:** Large property portfolio owners and landowners, funded by a **1.75% Land Value Tax (LVT)** designed to shift the tax load off working people and onto land. * **National Party:** * **Pay Less / Stable:** Campaigning primarily on a **"no new taxes"** pledge. They focus on maintaining current tax thresholds and reducing compliance burdens, meaning no new broad-based capital gains or wealth taxes for high-net-worth individuals. * **ACT & New Zealand First:** * **ACT:** Advocates for a simpler, lower-tax structure, opposing wealth and capital gains taxes, and proposing business-friendly adjustments like removing tax on KiwiSaver investment earnings. * **New Zealand First:** Proposes targeted relief such as cutting the company tax rate to 20% for businesses with a turnover under $30 million, alongside a tax-free threshold experiment and support for families. --- ### 2. How Would These Plans Fund Public Services? Different political blocs rely on entirely distinct mechanisms to pay for public infrastructure, healthcare, and social support: * **Wealth, Capital, and Land Taxation (Left / Progressive Blocs):** * Parties like the Greens, Labour, and Te Pāti Māori argue that New Zealand's tax system relies too heavily on income and consumption (GST) while under-taxing capital and wealth. * **Funding Mechanism:** They intend to fund public services—such as expanded healthcare access, free doctor visits, green energy transitions, and pay equity settlements—by directly tapping into capital gains (Labour), net wealth and inheritance taxes (Greens), and land/vacant property taxes (Te Pāti Māori and TOP). * **Structural Tax Resets (Alternative Structural Funding):** * **TOP** proposes a complete structural overhaul where a Land Value Tax directly finances a universal Citizen's Income, replacing fragmented benefit systems and utilizing compulsory KiwiSaver 2.0 contributions to build capital pools for national and infrastructure development. * **Economic Growth, Efficiency, and "No New Taxes" (Centre-Right / Right Blocs):** * Parties like National and ACT argue that introducing new taxes (like CGT or wealth taxes) stifles economic growth, discourages investment, and drives capital offshore. * **Funding Mechanism:** Rather than creating new revenue instruments, they aim to fund public services through **fiscal discipline, reprioritizing government spending**, cutting administrative and compliance overhead, and stimulating broader economic growth to naturally lift tax revenue without raising rates. ## Google AI Mode Answer ID: f6b2ac63-0f5e-4149-8220-2802a3500880 Tax policy has been a primary point of distinction among political groups during the 2026 New Zealand general election campaign. According to analysis from professional service firms such as Deloitte New Zealand and KPMG NZ, the competing platforms break down into two distinct approaches: structural wealth and capital taxation proposed by the political left and centre-left versus spending restraint and lower-tax settings favoured by the right and centre-right. * * * Who Pays More or Less Under the Party Plans? 1\. Labour, Green Party, and Te Pāti Māori (Higher Taxes on Wealth, Capital, and High Earners) * **Who pays more:** High-net-worth individuals, large corporations, property investors, and top-tier income earners. * **Details:** * The **Green Party** proposes new wealth, corporate, and inheritance taxes, alongside broader capital and income modifications, aiming to shift the tax burden onto high-wealth households. * **Labour** has pitched targeted tax shifts—such as repealing specific business concessions like the Investment Boost—while focusing investment funding toward public health. * **Te Pāti Māori** and the **Green Party** both advocate for structural changes encompassing capital gains or wealth taxes directed at accumulated assets. * **Who pays less:** Low-to-middle income earners, as these parties generally package their structural reforms with income tax thresholds adjustments or bottom-bracket relief. 2\. National and ACT (Lower/Status-Quo Taxes and Investment Incentives) * **Who pays more / No new taxes:** The **National Party** campaigned on a "no new taxes" pledge, avoiding broad new capital or wealth levies while accepting that ongoing "fiscal drag" (bracket creep) would naturally contribute to government books returning to surplus. * **Who pays less / Benefits for business and savers:** **National** and **ACT** emphasize maintaining or creating lower-tax settings, supporting savings, and protecting business investment incentives (such as retaining the upfront 20% depreciation deduction via Investment Boost). ACT advocates for a simplified, lower-tax structure geared towards rewarding economic success. 3\. New Zealand First and The Opportunity Party (TOP) * **New Zealand First:** Generally holds firm on retirement settings while showing openness to selective relief, such as targeted company tax rate reductions for small-and-medium enterprises (SMEs). * **The Opportunity Party (TOP):** Proposes a targeted 2.5% net asset tax on assets above $10,000,000 (with family home exemptions) alongside broader resets intended to shift towards a universal basic income framework. * * * How Do the Plans Fund Public Services? * **Left and Centre-Left (New Revenue via Capital and Wealth):** Parties like the Greens, Labour, and Te Pāti Māori propose funding public services (such as health and education) and income redistribution through new and expanded revenue streams—specifically targeting wealth, capital gains, land values, and corporate structures rather than relying solely on traditional PAYE income taxes. * **Current Coalition / Right (Spending Restraint and Economic Growth):** Conversely, National and ACT rely on strict fiscal discipline, spending restraint, and economic growth incentives to fund necessary public services and pay down national debt, rejecting the introduction of new capital or wealth taxes.