Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in opposition to the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2017-18 Employment and Investment Income and Remedial Matters) Bill. There are three parts to this bill and I'll start with the good which is that this bill addresses all manner of mischief in our complex taxation system. It's a great tribute to the officials to the Ministers from both sides of the House who have worked on this bill over the past year and I might say to the members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee that issues such as the treatment of an offshore insurance market place such as Lloyd's of London have been accommodated in this bill in such a way that our taxation system is neutral towards activities and raises revenue fairly. So I think it is worth acknowledging the work that so many people have done on deeply technical and difficult matters so that our taxation system maintains integrity.The second part that I'll draw your attention to—it's actually Part 1 of the bill—is setting the annual rates. The tax rates in this bill are completely unchanged for another year and for another year families in this country through no fault of their own simply because inflation has increased their nominal take-home earnings but not what they can actually afford to buy they find themselves pushed into higher tax brackets for the same purchasing power. Families in this country on the average wage find themselves paying thousands of dollars more every year in income tax simply because not only the current Government but the one before it for eight long years refused to adjust tax brackets and have pushed more and more people into higher and higher tax rates just through inflation. That is a great shame and this bill tonight should be giving relief to the taxpayers of New Zealand and allowing the people who earn the money to keep more of it.But the part that's attracted the most debate tonight is not the technical amendments it's not the tax rates although those are important and should be given more attention; the part that's attracted the most attention tonight is the extension somewhat surreptitious as it's been pointed out of the brightline test to five years from two. You see if you sell a house a house that is not your primary residence—and let's not go into how the IRD judges whether it's your primary residence except to quote Adam Smith who said that an income tax would be an intolerable interference in the affairs of everyday people. But let's just say that you sell a house within five years you will now pay tax on any capital gain that you make. Tonight this Parliament is introducing a de facto capital gains tax to New Zealand housing. Let's make that absolutely clear.Let's not listen to the braying from the National Party who find themselves in this absurd position of arguing that a two-year brightline test is not a capital gains tax but a five-year brightline test somehow is. Amy Adams said that that's in the regulatory impact statement and I can tell the people sitting at home that the regulatory impact statement says no such thing. The message to the National Party is that if you want to fight socialism don't adopt it. If you don't like oak trees then don't plant acorns because taxes are like acorns: they grow. [Speaker holds up bill] If you plant an acorn and you start a tax it will inevitably grow as it is growing in this bill tonight Mr Speaker. We have a capital gains tax being introduced on houses tonight and it is happening because this Government punishes success because this Government resents the accumulation of wealth but also because the previous Government in introducing a two-year brightline test enabled a five-year brightline test. Thank you Mr Speaker.