Taxpayer Update: $1.84m to shrink an office 🏢 | Hipkins’ gang funding memory lapse 🤕 | Greens hit $254 billion 💸

Our Policy Analyst, Austin Ellingham-Banks, has put together an explainer showing how Labour's new tax would actually work.

Take a rental property worth $700,000. If its value rises by three percent, matching inflation, it's now worth $721,000.

The owner hasn't made a cent in real terms, but Labour's 28 percent capital gains tax would still leave them with a $5,880 tax bill when they choose to sell.

And the 'median rule' Edmonds cited? That doesn't change the calculation either.

With advance voting opening today, it would be nice for Labour to clarify which explanation voters should rely on...

When did checking the numbers become a bad thing? 🤔

In an editorial last week, a Wellington newspaper declared “good riddance” to the politics of fiscal holes.

The editorial incorrectly credited National with identifying a $90 million error in Labour's fiscal plan (actually, that was your humble Taxpayers' Union 💁‍♂️), before claiming the Taxpayers' Union had simply “cobbled together some statements from Labour MPs” to suggest a much larger problem.

For a newspaper that claims to take policy seriously, it's uncharitably dismissive.

If political parties are going to go out there and promise policy, but then totally fail to account for the costs of that policy as part of their so-called "comprehensive fiscal plans", we say that's worth calling out.

If you can't pay for a policy, how can you deliver it?

As part of our Bribe-O-Meter, we've been independently costing election promises and comparing them with the parties' published fiscal plans.

Our analysis identified $33.17 billion in Labour spending commitments, compared with $15.25 billion accounted for in its fiscal plan. That's a gap of nearly $18 billion, or $8,649 per household.

And while The Post argues that fiscal-hole politics distracts from the bigger economic questions, we'd suggest knowing what politicians have promised to spend is a fairly important part of answering them.

Take this for example: Labour’s social development spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime has repeatedly committed to establishing an independent redress system for survivors of abuse in state care, but the party’s fiscal plan does not mention or cost this promise.

Last week our research team unearthed official (government) costings that put the costs of what Labour are promising at between $98.5 million and $150.5 million over four years.

That's not a rounding error. Either Labour are making a promise, and have accounted for its cost, or they're taking victims (and voters) for a ride.

The Post's editorial team calls it merely bookkeeping. We call it keeping 'em honest.

And speaking of the costs of promises, this week's Bribe-O-Meter update has thrown up some extraordinary figures.

Bribe-O-Meter Week 7: The Greens hit a quarter of a trillion dollars! 💸

With early voting kicking off today, you'd think the politicians might be running out of expensive election promises. But you'd be wrong.

Apparently, the Greens are just getting warmed up!

Our latest Bribe-O-Meter weekly update sees the Greens pass an extraordinary milestone.

The Greens' total election promises now equal $253.88 billion over the next four years. That's $122,528 for every household in New Zealand!

Their latest economic development plan adds another $5.94 billion to the bill, plus another $700 million in payments for students on placements, apprenticeship grants, and training subsidies. You can read the breakdown over at Bribe-O-Meter.nz

And there's another problem: the Greens have only identified enough additional tax revenue to cover 8.6 percent of their spending promises.  😳

With less than a tenth of their promises accounted for, the Greens have slipped to just half a star in the fiscal transparency rankings.

ACT remains the only party promising net savings, at $17.86 billion, while National's total has fallen slightly to $5.11 billion.

New Zealand First, meanwhile, has reached $51.87 billion, with new commitments for coastguard funding, commuter rail and a combat sports commission.

See how all the parties stack up in the latest Bribe-O-Meter update.

Taxpayer Talk: Andrew Bayly on Superannuation, spending, and life after politics 🎙️

What do you do after 12 years in Parliament? Apparently, an 800km camel trek across Saudi Arabia is one option! 🐪

This week, former Minister Andrew Bayly joins Peter Williams on Taxpayer Talk to discuss the state of New Zealand's finances and the big decisions he believes politicians are still avoiding.

From tackling government waste and soaring debt costs to raising the retirement age and protecting KiwiSaver, Bayly shares his thoughts on the reforms needed to get the country's finances back on track.

He also opens up about his controversial departure from Cabinet, the risks of tactical voting, and what comes next after politics.

It's a wide-ranging conversation, with plenty to chew over before election day.

Watch the latest episode of Taxpayer Talk on YouTube, or search "Taxpayer Talk" on your podcast app.

Next stop: Auckland Central! 🗳️

Our election debate roadshow is heading back to Auckland, and this time we're taking on Auckland Central!

Tomorrow night, we'll be putting the Auckland Central candidates through their paces at HeadQuarters on the Viaduct, from 7pm.

Former Labour MP Anna Lorck and commentator Damien Grant will once again be asking the questions and keeping the candidates on their toes.

And, as with our other debates, we'll be revealing a brand-new Taxpayers' Union–Curia electorate poll live on the night, giving locals a first look at how the race is shaping up.

Tickets are just $10 and include a complimentary drink. 🥂

If you're in Auckland, come along. We'd love to see you there.

Enjoy the rest of your long weekend.

Jordan Williams Executive Director New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union