Collins JudithHon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Oh thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. It's been a delight to listen to the discussion this afternoon and as the former Minister who brought this bill first to the House it's good to see it continued on except with one exception.I want to talk about the brightline test changes. So for a start as someone who has been involved in tax and the tax system for a long time before I came to Parliament speculators are already subject to tax. The issue was whether or not they were found to be speculating at the time that they bought and sold properties. So it's always been a taxable activity to buy and sell properties with the intention of profit. The issue has always been about finding them in the first place. With the tax administration changes and also the electronic transfer of documents it's a lot easier for departments to be able to police this issue.When the two-year brightline test was brought in—or was proposed I should say and brought in—by National it already caught many people who had been engaged in what's been called by Mr Wood flipping properties". It's an entirely different thing to say two years and then five years. I thought this Government wasn't going to have new taxes before its working tax group came back with its response. What we know is that this is actually quite a severe imposition of tax on people who weren't expecting it.When we look at the five-year brightline test what that actually means is that no new houses are going to be built with this—nothing new in terms of building. We've heard a lot about how there's not enough housing particularly in Auckland that some people are making more money—well in which case they should pay tax if they're buying properties for the purpose of reselling and making profit and they already would have been caught by that if that was their intention. So what about in those relationships where a relationship breaks down after a couple have bought for instance an investment property to rent out? What about that? Is that going to be now caught by the five-year brightline test? The answer is it most likely will be or else people are going to have to try and prove somehow how they can get out of it.The Inland Revenue Department has undergone tremendous transformation particularly with the Business Transformation project but there is more to come. None of that is actually easy for the department and when the department says that this bill or this proposed change is going too far and it will catch too many people this Parliament should listen. The Inland Revenue Department is an incredibly professional bunch of people and what they do when their advice comes through—my advice to the new Minister of Revenue is that he should listen. I've found that they are very responsive in trying to deal with solutions but I've never before heard where a Department of Inland Revenue has said "Hang on. I think this is going to wrongly catch too many people—too many investors."Is it in fact the purpose of this Government to drive mum and dad investors out of a market where they're already leaving? Is that their point? None of this will affect the big investors. None of it will affect the people who don't have to worry that if a mortgage rate goes up they don't have to bother about selling the property because they've already got enough money. This will open up a market to people who don't have to go to the banks to ask for money to borrow. This is actually not going to add one new house into any market let alone the Auckland market.So what happens to this Tax Working Group if it comes back and says a five-year test is too much? What happens then? Are we going to come back again? Why has this not gone back to the Finance and Expenditure Committee? I heard Mr Wood say that this has the support of their side of the House. Well actually on that basis then nothing should go to select committee should it really. Any bill put up by the Government should just go straight through! Because why would you want to hear from the people who might know more?Is it that this Government is too frightened to ask the people for their comments? Are they too frightened to hear from the tax experts—the people who actually understand the area and what happens when you overtax? Are they too frightened to hear from the property investors as they say that all this is going to do is to feed the property investments of those who are already extremely wealthy who will actually no longer have to compete with the mum and dad investors? Are they too frightened to hear that?What we're seeing is a Government that is actually filibustering its own bill—well actually our bill by the way which they took over. Why are they doing that? It's because they've got nothing new to talk about because otherwise this bill would just go through without any comment at all. So they're relying on us having to say "This is not good enough." A Government that's too frightened to go to the select committee to ask for the advice of experts is a Government that doesn't expect and is too frightened to actually make those big decisions.So I'd say to this Government and to the new Minister so what happened to your promise of no new taxes before the Tax Working Group came in? What happened to GST on goods which you said you couldn't do until after the Tax Working Group? What happened to everything else you promised that you couldn't do until after the Tax Working Group?This is just another capital gains tax on mum and dad investors and as I say from my experience in this area there's going to be a lot of big investors who'll be very happy because it will take the small investors out of the market. And if the Inland Revenue Department is saying it's too much you should be listening."