Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT in opposition to this tax bill. The number one reason is not for the many minor tweaks the spring cleaning that needs to be done to a taxation system each year by a bill such as this—a lot of that is well-supported sensible stuff: making sure that GST continues to function making sure that the emerging technology of cryptocurrencies is fitted into New Zealand's taxation system. That's good stuff. But what is unforgiveable and unsupportable by ACT is the increase in the top tax rate to 39 percent.Let's just put this in a little bit of perspective. Now James Shaw he got up and he huffed and he puffed and he told us this then he told us that and then he said the Green Party was going to—wait for it—abstain! Abstinence makes the heart grow fonder for Green Party co-leaders it seems! They can't decide if they're coming or going. The ACT Party says it is crystal clear. When James Shaw says it's time to tax the rich he doesn't even know what bill he's speaking on because this income tax bill does not tax wealth; it is all about taxing income. And what this bill will do—introducing a 39 percent tax rate—is simply punish people who work hard save invest and try to make tomorrow better than today. If James Shaw wants to tax the rich if the Labour Party wants to tax high-income earners they are not going to do it by adding this new tax rate. And one reason for that is very simple: they already are.People might be surprised to know how much tax is paid by the top 9 percent of income earners in this country. I wonder if anyone in the Labour Party wants to give it a guess. How much of the income tax in this country is paid by the top 9 percent? Does Duncan Webb know? He's slouching down in his chair. Can Duncan Webb tell us how much of the income tax is paid by the top 9 percent of income taxpayers? No Duncan Webb doesn't know. Anyone else on the Labour Party benches? Angie Warren-Clark? What about the Minister of Revenue? Does David Parker know how much of the income tax is paid by just 9 percent of taxpayers? Is he going to tell us?Hon David Parker: I listened to Michael Woodhouse just before.DAVID SEYMOUR: He listened to Michael Woodhouse. So he knows. Can he tell us how much it is? He can't remember. He's getting forgetful. Well let me remind him: 42 percent of all income tax in this country is paid by just 9 percent of taxpayers—or it was. And how much of the income tax is paid by the bottom 48 percent of taxpayers?Dr Duncan Webb: Too much.DAVID SEYMOUR: The bottom half of taxpayers pay only 8 percent of all of the income tax. And Duncan Webb says it's too much. Duncan Webb wants the bottom half of taxpayers—he wants half of New Zealanders—to pay less than 8 percent tax. Is that what Duncan Webb is saying? Yeah it is.Hon David Parker: Tell us about GST!DAVID SEYMOUR: Oh and he says Tell us about GST!" Well let's think about this. How much GST is going to be paid by the top half of income earners? The revenue Minister will tell us they're earning more they're spending more; so I would guess they're also paying more GST. But nice try from the revenue Minister.We don't need to raise the top rate of income tax because the top 9 percent of taxpayers are paying nearly half the income tax in New Zealand and the bottom half of taxpayers are paying only 8 percent of the income tax. Or they were; that was last year. This year this Labour Government has decided that it is not punishing people who work hard save invest study and get ahead—that they're not being punished enough. So now they want to introduce a new top tax rate just to really send the message that if you do the things we ask kids in New Zealand to do: if you go to school if you listen to your teacher if you do your homework you get good grades you turn them into qualifications and if you start a job and if you work hard and if you put some money away and if you save it and invest it carefully—if you do all of those things the Labour Party's message is "We're here to take more money off you with a top tax rate." and is it there to raise more money? Maybe they're putting this new tax rate there because they want to raise more money. Can we ask the Minister of Revenue? Now let's put this in context: the Government spent $120 billion—$120000 million—last year. Can we ask the Minister of Revenue: how much extra money does he think he's going to raise by putting in this new tax rate? Hon David Parker: It's in the Budget. DAVID SEYMOUR: It's in the Budget. Well what it said in the Budget was optimistically $300 million or $400 million plays $120000 million. You note that the Minister of Revenue he didn't want to say because it's so embarrassing for the Labour Party. They're putting in place this new tax not to raise more revenue because it's barely going to do that. They're putting in place this new tax just because they want to put a little bit more tall poppy syndrome in the tax code. That's what it's all about. Well there is another way. Instead of a Government that constantly seeks to divide people commodifying us into identities and divide wealth with new taxes and new regulations what if we had a Government that said "We are going to unite New Zealanders behind good ideas. When people do well when people make tomorrow better than yesterday by applying new ideas and new investments and provide people with better goods and better services more efficiently we're not going to put an extra tax on them. We're not going to punish them; actually we're going to say 'That's pretty cool. How do we get more of that activity so that all New Zealanders can live in an environment where we get wealthier?' " That would be a better way. That's what a Government that truly wanted to unite New Zealanders behind good ideas and make this country more prosperous would do. We would have lower flatter taxes and do you know what else we'd do? We'd open up opportunity so the next generation have a pathway to be in a property-owning democracy and would we do that by introducing new taxes? Not like this Government. This Government have just decided to remove interest deductibility from landlords' mortgages and what are they going to achieve by that? Well the Prime Minister says that they're going to tilt the balance towards first-home buyers. Now let's just think through the logic of this. They are increasing the tax bill for landlords in a tight rental market. I wonder who landlords are going to pass those extra taxes on to. Could it be tenants? Now let's just think about this: who are tenants and what are tenants often doing? Trying to save for a first home deposit. The Labour Party is so madly manic with taxing people that they have just scored yet another own goal. They've actually decided that the solution to the housing market is to tax it more. Well if you could tax your way to prosperity the Soviet Union—Duncan Webb's buddies; comrades—would have won the Cold War. But unfortunately nobody has ever managed to tax their way to prosperity. The only thing that they're achieving by putting more taxes on landlords is that they are going to increase the costs paid by tenants and decrease the savings that tenants have to put a deposit on their first home and that's what happens when you have a tax-mad Government—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! DAVID SEYMOUR: —on the loose. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! DAVID SEYMOUR: Madam Speaker—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! DAVID SEYMOUR: I know you're enjoying this speech—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! The member will resume his seat. [Interruption] The member will resume his seat. [Interruption] The member will resume his seat. Thank you so much I appreciate that. The debate is interrupted mostly by me and set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow. Good evening. Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 10.05 p.m."