ChatGPT · No location
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?
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 ElectionSummary of 2026 election tax policies
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 futureTax Policy Bulletin
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 2026Labour reveals vaunted fiscal planTax Policy Bulletin
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
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 plansGreens commit to tax the super-rich and large corporates fairly, cut income tax for 96%Tax Tips: 2026 General Election
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 ElectionWhat 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 ElectionTax Policy BulletinSummary of 2026 election tax policies
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 potentialTax Policy Bulletin
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 BulletinWhat 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 2026National’s plan to secure New Zealand’s futureTax Tips: 2026 General ElectionTax Policy Bulletin
4. What should voters look at particularly carefully?
There are four important questions beyond headline tax rates.
Will the proposed tax actually raise the revenue expected? Wealth and land taxes can change investment behaviour, asset ownership and property markets.
Will tax savings reach ordinary households? A tax cut for a company does not necessarily translate into higher wages or lower prices.
Will public services receive additional funding? Some parties promise to redirect existing money, while others propose additional revenue.
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 2026National’s plan to secure New Zealand’s futureSummary of 2026 election tax policies
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
- PwC – latest tax-policy updates, 28 October
- Labour – published fiscal plan
- National – published fiscal plan
- 1News – detailed explanation of the Greens' tax plans
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.
ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.
Captured 31 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account