Tabuteau Fletcher: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTabuteau Fletcher: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 09 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9505. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.FLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First) to the Minister of Revenue: Is he satisfied with all legislation regarding tax on property sales to foreigners?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Revenue):Yes.Fletcher Tabuteau: Given that satisfaction with the recent array of tax legislation why are so many foreign buyers speculating in the Auckland housing market yet again?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I would be very interested in the information the member uses to frame that question. I do not believe there has been any material change in that. In fact if there has been it has been a slight damping on the interest of overseas buyers in Auckland.Fletcher Tabuteau: Will the Minister not concede that foreign speculators have seen through the puffery have dismissed the ineffectual tax legislation and are now already back in force with evidence—3000 foreigners a month being issued Inland Revenue Department (IRD) numbers for the purpose of buying and selling property?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: No I would not. There are many reasons why people from overseas require an IRD number and if anything the process has become more challenging in order to fulfil our obligations under anti-money-laundering legislation and the brightline test that the previous Minister brought in last year. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just ask that when the question has been asked and the answer has been given could I have a little less interjection particularly from New Zealand First members?Fletcher Tabuteau: Will he at least acknowledge that he will need other more substantive measures to clamp down on this problem as Auckland has had a high rate of properties being flicked for quick financial gain and actually money-laundering purposes?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: What that demonstrates is that an irrational rant from a New Zealand First member does not a fact make. There is absolutely no substance—Fletcher Tabuteau: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I simply take offence at the statement from the Minister. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question was asked with quite a lot of—the question was asked in a way where I am not surprised with the answer being given put it that way.Phil Twyford: Why has he rejected the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders who want a ban on foreign buyers given that his tax rules already in the words of Colleen Milne of the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand seem to be having limited effect and the effect is transitory and in the words of Jonno Ingerson of Quotable Value saying that foreign buyers are back in the market?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: There are three threads to that question. I will start with the middle one first. There is no evidence yet that the policies that have been put in place which have just commenced are going to do the things the member claims. The chief executive of Quotable Value did not say what the member has just claimed. To the first part of the question this party—this Government—appreciates foreign investment. It does not reject people with Chinese-sounding surnames and it has very balanced policies on investment.David Seymour: In light of the scandalous influxes why will the Minister not cut the crap and build a wall?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: To the question of scandalous influxes I remind the member that the number of residencies gained in New Zealand last year was about 15 percent lower than when the New Zealand First leader was the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I see no reason to build a wall.Fletcher Tabuteau: On behalf of all New Zealanders whether they were here last year or—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member knows the rules. Simply ask a supplementary question. I am quite happy to move on if the member wants us to. Ask the question.Fletcher Tabuteau: What measures does the Minister have in place to clamp down on money-laundering given that financial transactions suspected of being linked to terrorism have almost doubled in the past 2 years with the Auckland property market expected to go haywire yet again?Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: That goes well beyond the primary question. It is a question best asked of the Minister of Police I would suggest. But I am satisfied that she has very good policies in place with New Zealand First to deter detect and prosecute money-laundering.Fletcher Tabuteau: What specific legislation does the Minister have in mind to keep dairy land in New Zealand hands given that the New Zealand Government cannot act to prohibit sales under the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)accepting—Mr SPEAKER: Order! This is a question to the Minister of Revenue. The questionmust therefore relate to the portfolio of revenue. I give the opportunity for the member to rephrase his question to include something of relevance to the revenue portfolio.Fletcher Tabuteau: May I speak to your ruling?Mr SPEAKER: No you cannot; you can ask your question.Fletcher Tabuteau: I asked the Minister of Revenue to outline what legislation—revenue legislation—he has in mind considering we cannot prohibit—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have given the member a chance to rephrase his question. He has rephrased it now asking about revenue legislation.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: I am satisfied that tax policies and tax administration legislation are fit for purpose. I am also aware although it is not within my area of responsibility that the Overseas Investment Act provides very strong criteria and hurdles to be met before sensitive land such as dairy farms is purchased.Fletcher Tabuteau: Has his Government abandoned farmers to the whims of Fonterra management thus exposing all New Zealanders but especially our farmers to the foreign buy-up of high-quality New Zealand land?Mr SPEAKER: No there is absolutely no revenue responsibility in that question.