Responding to Labour’s announcement of millions more in taxpayer funding for AI adoption and start-ups, Taxpayers’ Union spokesman Austin Ellingham-Banks said:

“Labour has slapped ‘AI’ on an old-fashioned corporate welfare scheme for American Big Tech and called it innovation."

“Businesses already have every incentive to invest in AI if it saves them time, cuts costs, or wins customers. If an investment stacks up, businesses will make it themselves."

"If Labour really wants small businesses to invest and grow, it should abandon its plan to scrap Investment Boost, which would kneecap productive investment."

Responding to comments from Labour MP Helen White that she wants house prices to fall, the Taxpayers’ Union is calling on Labour to explain how that squares with its capital gains tax and spending promises.

Taxpayers’ Union spokeswoman, Ella Dickson, said:

“Labour need to make their minds up. Do they want house prices to spiral, which is the only way their capital gains tax will raise anything close to what they’re claiming, or do they want them to fall, and have the CGT make zero revenue?”

“Labour can’t have it both ways, so it’s time to front up on what they want.”

Labour has today promised to fund maternity scans through its capital gains tax, but the Taxpayers’ Union says the money has already been swallowed by other spending promises. Once again, Labour’s numbers do not add up.

Taxpayers’ Union spokesman James Ross said:

“Using recent housing market data, Labour’s CGT would raise just 38.6 percent of what Labour claims by 2029/30. The tax revenue wouldn’t even cover the cost of Labour’s three taxpayer-funded GP visits, let alone any new spending commitments.”

“Labour’s CGT revenue is already spent, and there’s no money left in that pot. Where is Labour expecting to find another $28.6 million a year?”

“There are only three ways Labour’s capital gains tax can raise enough to cover its promises: rampant inflation, spiralling house prices, or expanding the tax onto main homes, shares, or KiwiSaver. Labour needs to front up to New Zealanders about which one it is planning.”

The Taxpayers’ Union is calling on Labour to release the figures behind its claim that capping public transport fares across the country will cost the Crown just $65 million a year, after new analysis shows the true cost to the taxpayer could be three times as much.

Using publicly available 2024/25 data from New Zealand’s three largest public transport-using regions, the Taxpayers’ Union estimates the annual cost to be:

• Auckland: $118,061,733 to $141,051,370
• Wellington: $23,249,363 to $38,094,684
• Canterbury: $394,877 to $3,383,523

That puts the cost for just these three regions at $141,705,972 to $182,529,576 a year, potentially up to nearly three times higher than Labour claims for the entire country.

Commenting on this, Taxpayers’ Union spokesman James Ross said:

“These figures show Auckland, Wellington, and Canterbury alone could cost between 2.5 and 3 times what Labour claims the policy would cost nationwide. Something’s not adding up, and the public has a right to know why."

“Labour has had six months since its last announcement to crunch the numbers, yet it still can’t tell the public basic details like how many people would benefit. If we can pull together rough costings in 24 hours, Labour’s taxpayer-funded researchers can release their data today."

“Of Labour’s three policy announcements so far, none has been up-front with taxpayers. A Future Fund with no costings at all, a capital gains tax that would barely raise 38 percent of what Labour claims, and now fare cap numbers that look like they have been plucked out of thin air."

“Hipkins recently said voters don’t really care about the details. Even if that were true, hopefully Labour’s researchers do. If they want to regain credibility, Labour need to release the numbers."

ENDS


NOTES TO EDITORS:

Mean weekly spend per user was calculated by dividing farebox revenue by the number of boardings.

The proportion of the regional population which use public transport was taken from the HTS Transport Survey for 2024/25. The regional number of public transport users could then be calculated.

Three log-normal distributions (with low, medium, and high variance) were calculated for each region. A log-normal distribution was chosen as this reflects the pattern of public transport use, with large numbers of occassional users and a smaller number of high-frequency users above the $20 cap. This allowed us to calculate three variables:

• The share of users who spend more than the $20 weekly cap in each region.
• The number of public transport users in each region who would benefit
• The average weekly saving of someone who spends more than the cap currently in each region.

By multiplying the number of people who benefit by the average weekly savings, we could calculate the weekly and annual cost to the Crown of a central government-funded fare cap in Auckland, Wellington, and Canterbury.

These figures do not account for Waiheke ferries or Wairarapa-to-Wellington buses, both of which Labour have said will be excluded from the cap. Given the difference between Labour’s claims and our costings, however, the effect of these will be marginal.

Responding to comments made today by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, the Taxpayers’ Union claims it is hypocritical of him to create new taxes on property ownership while using a taxpayer-funded superannuation scheme to finance his own holiday home.

Taxpayers’ Union spokeswoman, Ella Dickson, says:

“Chris Hipkins – like all MP’s – has a generous superannuation scheme with every $1 he puts in matched $2.50 by his employer (taxpayer-funded), which he admits contributes to the mortgage of his family’s holiday home. A second dwelling that would be considered taxable under the bracket of his proposed capital gains tax, yet taxpayers fund it.”

“Hipkins can claim owning a holiday home is different than owning multiple rental properties, but when his CGT sees no difference and taxes them both the same: where does he draw the line? He claimed not to ‘begrudge’ other Kiwis who own holiday homes, he just taxes them for it.”

“The Labour leader today admitted to getting the maximum entitlement from the taxpayer. When asked if it was ‘fair’, he said his goal was to ‘raise the wages of all New Zealanders’, but taxing them will not help in that mission. If Hipkins wants a fairer economy, he should start with his own benefits and his own tax policy.”

Responding to calls in The Post by Labour MP Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall that there have been “thousands of public service job losses", Taxpayers’ Union Investigations Coordinator, Rhys Hurley, said:

“Where on earth is Dr Verrall getting these numbers from? The Public Service Commission’s own data shows there are still more bureaucrats now than when Labour left office.”

“There were 63,117 public servants in 2023 compared to 63,657 at the end of 2025. That’s 540 more staff than when Labour was in charge - not fewer.”

“The truth is the public service is still larger than it was, and it’s not the cause of Wellington’s decline - that lies with the COVID hangover from work-from-home policies.”

“The idea of mass layoffs across the bureaucracy is simply a myth. If Labour really wants to back Wellington, they should support getting public servants off the couch and back into the office.”

The Taxpayers’ Union says Labour can scarcely believe its luck with the Government’s insistence that its proposed levy on electricity bills isn’t a tax because it’s a levy.

Taxpayers’ Union Executive Director Jordan Williams said:

“We’ve been fielding calls and interview requests all day from people wanting to know whether we consider a levy a tax. The definition of a levy is literally ‘the act of imposing a tax, charge, or fine’. This isn’t complicated.”

“The last Prime Minister to try this line was Jacinda Ardern, who desperately wanted her clean car emissions levy not to be called what National quite rightly branded it at the time: the ute tax. Watching National now recycle Labour’s talking points is both ironic and alarming.”

Williams said while the case for improving energy security and addressing dry-year risk is legitimate, the decision to fund an LNG terminal through a compulsory charge on electricity bills was a political and policy blunder.

“This Government campaigned relentlessly on ‘no new taxes’, and warns voters that Labour and its Green and Te Pāti Māori partners would hike costs. Then it turns around and announces a new charge on one of the most sensitive household bills in the country. You don’t need a focus group to know how that lands.”

“There are clear alternatives. The Government could recycle a small portion of the $14 billion of energy assets it already owns and ring-fence the proceeds to fix the energy mess Labour left behind. Labour would struggle to criticise asset recycling when the money is used to stabilise supply and lower prices. Instead, National has chosen to tax power bills and argue about definitions.”

Williams warned that if the Government doesn’t change course, it risks undermining its core election message just months out from polling day.

“This is an unforced error. The LNG facility is defensible. Funding it through a levy on electricity is not. If National wants to keep its credibility on tax and not hand Labour a stick to whack back with, Mr Luxon should ditch the levy and insist his Ministers find another way to pay.”

Responding to Winston Peters ruling out working with Chris Hipkins after the 2026 election, Taxpayers’ Union Spokesperson Tory Relf said:

“A potential Labour Government would now almost certainly need to rely on parties demanding wealth and death taxes. That would cripple family farms and small businesses.”

“Kiwis need economic growth, not another $44,000-per-household in taxes. If Chris Hipkins wants to be taken seriously on the economy, he must rule out these punishing taxes - no ifs, no buts.”

The Taxpayers’ Union is slamming Labour Leader Chris Hipkins for refusing to commit to the Government’s 50 percent debt ceiling on RNZ's Morning Report — a reckless move that could spook credit rating agencies and raise borrowing costs across the board.

Taxpayers' Union Executive Director Jordan Williams said:

“Even Grant Robertson had the sense to maintain a firm debt anchor. Chris Hipkins now seems to be throwing that away, sending the message that a future Labour Government would be open to borrowing beyond what’s prudent, affordable, or sustainable.”

“Markets take this kind of talk seriously. If Labour won't commit to a debt limit, credit agencies may well react by downgrading New Zealand’s rating. That means higher interest costs not just for Government, but for every Kiwi household and business trying to borrow.”

According to the New Zealand Debt Clock (www.debtclock.nz), Government debt currently sits at $190.9 billion, or $93,811 per household, and is growing every second.

“Every household in the country is already carrying nearly $94,000 in Government debt on its back. The very last thing New Zealand needs is a Prime Minister-in-waiting signalling he’s ready to make that burden even heavier.”

The Taxpayers’ Union is calling on Labour to clarify its fiscal policy and immediately recommit to the 50% debt ceiling.

“Lifting the cap isn’t a ‘mature conversation’. It’s a dangerous flirtation with economic irresponsibility and the costs will fall on taxpayers.”