4. Tax System—Changes to Tax Brackets and Working for FamiliesGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of FinanceTax System—Changes to Tax Brackets and Working for Families4. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement on tax policy to the House yesterday the Minister of Finance who I am acquainted with has not made any commitment in regard to any elements of the Budget package on 25 May"; if so why did he say on the 28th of April "We are not planning to do a reduction on rates this year"?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): In answer to the first part of the question yes I do stand by my statement; to the second part because it was an accurate answer to a question.Grant Robertson: Regardless of what is or is not in the Budget can he confirm that adjusting the tax brackets for inflation since the last tax changes in 2010 as tabled yesterday in Parliamentary Library figures would see an $18 a week benefit to him and a $2.38 a week benefit to a person earning $48000 a year?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I have not seen the details of the document the member tabled yesterday but I can confirm that the Government has plans for its Budget and on 25 May we will find out what commitments it has made in response to those plans.Grant Robertson: Has total spending on Working for Families decreased while his Government has been in office?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: That is a very specific question and if the member would like to put it down in writing I would be happy to answer it.Grant Robertson: Is the Child Poverty Action Group correct that it would take $700 million per year or $2.8 billion over the Budget cycle to restore the real value of Working for Families cuts made by his Government?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It is unlikely to be correct—I have not checked its numbers. But again the member needs to understand that the Government took a number of decisions after it came into office to get rid of the decade of deficits that we inherited from the previous Labour Government as reported independently by the New Zealand Treasury which the member has added to his list of Government sympathiser organisations that he does not listen to. We did make a number of changes we stand by those changes and as a result we see the Government books in surplus today while in contrast our friends in Australia are dealing with a large deficit.Grant Robertson: Can he confirm that actually what happened was that his Government put in place a tax package where 40 percent of the benefits went to the top 10 percent of income earners while he cut Working for Families for families earning $35000?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Just because the member has written some talking points it does not make it true. The reality is that those tax changes were distributionally neutral across the—Dr David Clark: Just because your laminated cards say it's not true it doesn't make that true either.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well the member can go back and have a look at some of the actual documents that were produced at the time that showed the distribution effects of the tax changes which were broadly neutral across the spectrum.David Seymour: Can the Minister confirm that the top 10 percent of income tax payers pay 37.7 percent of all income tax?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I cannot confirm the exact number for the member but that does resonate in terms of the percentages.Grant Robertson: Has he considered entitling his Budget speech "Taking credit for half-solving the problems that we created: the Steven Joyce story" given the infrastructure and social deficits that have grown on his watch or will he just go for the simpler "Steven Joyce: the real Slim Shady"?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I am sure the National Government would at least go with the statement that we are actually committed to our party's policies which is more than can be said for the Opposition this week which seems to have a shall we say variegated view of what policies it has to adopt and does not have to adopt. This Government stands absolutely behind the decisions we have made which have brought this country back into a fiscal surplus ahead of most other developed countries in the OECD. Mr Robertson if he wants to today can raise the issue of whether we should be in surplus but I think you just have to look across the Tasman to know that those decisions were the right decisions."