Brown Peter: Trustee Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Brown Peter: Trustee Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12357] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 On behalf of New Zealand First I intend to take only a short call. I should say from the onset that New Zealand First will certainly support this bill’s referral to a select committee but we are hopeful that the select committee will look at the ability individuals will have to transfer their financial assets into a trust and the level for doing that. As I think most people in this Parliament know—and indeed as most New Zealanders know—an individual is allowed to transfer only up to $27000 per year from his or her personal asset base into a trust. The amount has been set at that level since Adam was a boy and we believe that it should be increased markedly. By looking back we have come up with a figure—and I accept there could be some adjustment—closer to $60000 than $27000. We hope that the select committee will take this issue on board and have a close look at it. I listened to Mr Worth when he spoke a few moments ago. He talked about the transferring of assets and I felt he was getting very close to saying that $27000 is not enough. I can see that Mr Worth is nodding his head so I am hopeful that the National Party will pick up on this issue that New Zealand First has raised. 
A second issue that we hope the select committee will take on board look at very closely and make recommendations to this Parliament about is the situation that applies more likely to elderly folk who have been transferring their assets on a regular basis at $27000 a year but then who have had to go into care. It is our understanding that if an individual goes into care Work and Income writes back the $27000 per year by $5000 per year for the last 5 years—it writes it back to $22000 for that previous 5 years. That means for example that if a person had a house in the year 1999 valued at $300000 and for 8 years that person transferred across $27000 the residue value of that house by 2007 would be $84000. But if that individual then had to go into care Work and Income would write back a further $110000—5 years at $22000 per year—which means the residue value of that house would be $84000 plus $110000 which equates to $194000. We think that is unfair and of course the calculation of that person’s subsidy would be based on that figure and in that circumstance he or she would lose it pretty much in its entirety. We think that is unfair and we urge the select committee to take a close look at this sort of legislation. 
We hope the Government will react positively. We have advised the Government informally of our concerns and the feedback we have had is fairly neutral. It has not flattened the idea completely but we are well aware that the Minister of Finance could say that this is a fiscal matter and he could veto the whole thing. So I urge the select committee to take a close look at the ability that individuals have to transfer assets across into a trust and the level at which they are allowed to do that on a yearly basis. That is our only concern about this bill; we think it goes quite some way towards addressing the technical issues that Mr Worth spoke about. 
New Zealand First will support this bill going to a select committee but we will be urging the members of that committee to take a close look at the value of the $27000 ceiling. It should be increased markedly and in our view it should be tagged to Consumers Price Index arrangements in the future. As I said earlier the amount of $27000 came into being when Adam was a boy and it is about time it was adjusted significantly upwards. The write-back regime operated by Work and Income is in our view totally unfair and needs to be examined.