Tremain Chris: Income Tax Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Tremain Chris: Income Tax Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:11280] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Income Tax Bill and to respond particularly to some comments made by Mr Paul Swain in regard to the Minister in the chair at the time the Hon. Lianne Dalziel. It is interesting to see there has been a change of Minister since that time and it would be good to have the present Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Tizard take a couple of calls on the Income Tax Bill. Mr Swain referred to the Hon Lianne Dalziel as having a deep understanding of the Income Tax Act and I suggest that probably the present Minister has a good understanding as well. But perhaps the comments Mr Swain made about Minister Dalziel in terms of referring to her as a goldfish in respect of how she used to turn on the television set should not be applied to the present Minister. 
For the benefit of listeners out there who are engrossed in the Committee stage of this bill I want to focus on what it has all been about. It has been about the rewriting or reorganisation of the Income Tax Act 1976. As Dr Cullen said earlier it has been a historic process which was commenced by Wyatt Creech many years ago. It has had the hand of many Ministers over that time as has been alluded to today. Tony Ryall has had his hand in there; David Carter has had his hand in there; Minister Cullen himself has had his hand in there. There has been a real mix in regard to bringing this legislation together. 
I remind members that the initial stage was the reorganisation of the Income Tax Act 1976 and that reorganisation was enacted by means of the Income Tax Act 1994. Stage two a dynamic process was the rewrite of the core provisions of the Act and that was completed in 1996. Stage three was a rewrite of Parts C to E and was completed in 2004. But stage four is the one we are debating now in the Committee stage. 
This is the ultimate stage of the Income Tax Bill. It rewrites Parts F to Z. I would like the Minister in the chair to give us an explanation of Parts F to Z. I remind her that Part F deals with the taxation treatment of certain transactions and arrangements. I would like her to address Part G in particular which deals with avoidance issues because the Minister of Finance the “Treasurer” has avoided any sort of discussion around tax—around the philosophical reduction of tax over the last 8 years. That Minister has set about increasing the tax take of this country significantly. Some $20 billion in additional tax has been collected over that period—$20 billion. 
That Minister has also introduced a 39 percent tax rate; that was done in 1999. He promised the citizens of this country that only 5 percent of them would end up in that tax bracket—just 5 percent. But at Budget time this year Treasury papers released on Budget day showed that nearly 14 percent of Kiwis were now in that top tax bracket. So the more worrying point is the tax bracket creep that we have seen. Hard-working Kiwis in this country—workers on the wharf in Napier doctors nurses—have moved through different tax categories. I know that some members on the other side of the Chamber have a strong union background and would be concerned about their members particularly those at the Port of Napier. It would be interesting— 
Moana Mackey 
: Look at the huge pay increase we gave them. We gave nurses a huge pay increase. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: Pay increase? People are paying a lot more tax than they did before. The average Kiwi out there is paying $2400 more tax than he or she was back in 1999—$2400 for the average tax earner is significantly more. 
We have seen tax bracket creep over this time. We have seen Kiwis move from paying 19.5 percent to 33 percent and then go from 33 percent into the 39 percent tax rate. But the Minister said not to worry and that the Government would give people a tax break in 2008. It was called the “chewing gum tax break” if members can remember. But did we get that tax break? 
Hon Member 
: Never. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: Never! It became fiscally impossible for the Minister to give that. He thought he knew best how to spend the tax he got from people’s income but he could not deliver on his “chewing gum tax break”.