Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Dunne Peter: Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5989] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 I take a call at this stage just to highlight what a number of members have referred to already which is the significant nature of the Taxation (International Taxation Life Insurance and Remedial Matters) Bill. I will then comment on the matters that another speaker raised earlier on. 
I cannot let the criticism that this bill was somehow rushed go unchallenged. The bill was introduced in July 2008; admittedly a general election intervened. The submissions were all called for and received by the previous Finance and Expenditure Committee. The new select committee began work on the bill early this year. To have a bill reported back by August 2009 in that context no matter its significant weight is not in my view rushing legislation. It was not rushed for this reason as well: many of the issues that this bill contains have been the subject of a long period of gestation and public consultation. The international tax rules changes have been the subject of review consultation discussion and debate since at least 2006 and by the time the proposals came to be incorporated in the bill and referred to the select committee most of the major issues of principle had been resolved and the committee’s work was in essence around the drafting and the detail. So I do not think it is fair to claim that the process was rushed. Similarly the life insurance rules are long overdue for reform. Again those changes had gone through a process that included a discussion paper an issues paper and technical consultations over a long period of time before finding their way into this legislation. Even as that process was continuing discussions with interested parties were ongoing. Issues such as payroll giving had been foreshadowed as early as 2006—also in a discussion document—and had been included and worked through. 
In recognition of the fact that an election had intervened and a change of Government had taken place I wrote to the select committee—I cannot remember precisely when but some months ago—recommending that it give consideration to changing a number of the application dates which originally were to be 1 April 2009. I am grateful for the committee’s acceptance of those recommendations because I think they give taxpayers who will be affected by the changes a greater degree of comfort and time to adjust to the significance of them. 
I now turn to the points made by Mr Boscawen in particular relating to petroleum mining situations. I say at the beginning that I will not discuss the affairs of any particular company. I think it is extremely unwise in tax debates in this Chamber to start drawing the circumstances of individuals or of companies into public debate. Those matters are worked through with officials and with the appropriate authorities. What I will say—and in this instance I have said this to the company involved on a number of occasions in the last few months—is that once this legislation is passed I am more than happy for it to work through with the relevant tax policy officials in its particular instance precisely what their contractual obligations were and the implications that arise from those obligations. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: On principle of retrospectivity. 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I will come to that point in a moment if I may. I am not prepared to say more than that at this stage because that is then bringing that company’s affairs to the floor of this Chamber which I think is grossly inappropriate. 
The member interjects: “On principle of retrospectivity.” The position in the bill is quite straightforward. On 4 March 2008 we announced a change in the regime. My understanding is that everyone in the Chamber agrees with that particular change. We indicated when the bill came in in the middle of 2008 that the change would be retrospective if you like to the date of the announcement—4 March 2008. As I understand it everyone agrees with that position and the signal that was sent. The question that arises is with regard to that period of indeterminate length prior to 4 March 2008. I am saying in respect of this company in this particular instance that they need to start talking to officials about how they are affected contractually by the change in the law and as I said before what the implications of that change might be for them. I am not prepared to discuss on the floor of the Chamber the ifs and buts that might arise from that and the technical details of that case because it is simply not appropriate for me to do that. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: What about at a principled level? 
Hon PETER DUNNE 
: I think we need to be very careful about drawing that line too tightly because of the nature of the rules that were in place prior to 4 March. I am saying that anyone who feels that they have been caught by this change should once the law comes into effect talk with the Inland Revenue Department to determine how they might be affected and what the implications for that company might be. I offer that advice in respect of the particular company Mr Boscawen referred to and any other companies who may feel that they are in a similar situation. I am not prepared to go beyond that for reasons I think would be obvious to members. 
These are always quite difficult areas to draw boundaries. In this instance there is a considerable elapsing of time between the drawing of that boundary and the passage of this legislation. I would have thought that people who thought they might be affected would be talking about these issues far earlier than the last few weeks when the legislation comes before the House. I make that observation. I also make the point about the action I think is available to those who think they might be affected.