Robertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 26 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3940. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with National Party finance spokesperson Bill English: “We don’t believe in new and more taxes. We think we can manage with the tax revenue we have”?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes I do agree with my party’s finance spokesman which is more than I can say for Andrew Little who does not agree with his party’s finance spokesman. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am having trouble hearing because of the yelling from my left here. [Interruption] Well no it was this one who was distracting me.Grant Robertson: In light of that answer why then did he and John Key promise New Zealanders in the 2014 election campaign that there would be no new taxes when he has introduced a property tax an arrivals and departures tax and extended the broadband tax?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The extension of broadband was certainly discussed prior to the election. As we have discussed the tax measures are an extension of existing taxes which the member may not have known about in his case. The levy at the airports is a user charge and we would expect to be able to continue to expand the use of user charges.Grant Robertson: What is the difference between a levy and a tax?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The levy is a user charge and that is different from an income test on national superannuation.Grant Robertson: Will every dollar collected under the regime brought into place by the Border Processing (Arrivals and Departures) Levy Bill go towards the cost of border processing?Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes and I would imagine that every dollar of expenditure on those services is going to be heavily scrutinised by passengers airlines airports and anyone else who is interested in getting those levies down as we are.Grant Robertson: Does he stand by his statement: “Further extension of the current tax on capital gains is likely to have high compliance costs and that is a conclusion that three tax inquiries and several Governments have come to over the last 20 years. If it excludes the family home”—like it does—“it will not [make] much difference … ”; if so why has he now introduced a tax that he says that he does not know the impact of does not know how much revenue it will raise and that has such high compliance costs?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I do stand by the statement and part of the point of introducing a brightline test is to avoid excessive compliance costs. We have yet to see how much impact the introduction of that test will have on the housing market.Grant Robertson: Can he confirm his statement in the weekend that he does not know whether this tax that he has introduced on property speculators will work?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The question has been about what impact we expect it will have on the Auckland housing market. The member will be familiar with the discussion. If the Auckland house prices are driven significantly by speculators turning over properties within 2 years then the tax may have an impact. If the prices are not driven primarily by that but are driven by other factors such as restricted supply of land or costs of construction then it will not make much difference.