The Capital Gains Tax and —Guess What— Iraq

pn292

Liam Hehir, B.A,. LLB (VUW), is a lawyer, a partner in the Palmerston North law firm, Fitzgerald Rowe. In his LinkedIn page he writes that he has "expertise and interests in contract drafting, commercial and property law, intellectual property, and transactional and persuasive writing." That's probably where his weekly Stuff-stable newspaper column, the "Firing Line," purportedly on media and culture, comes in. His latest persuasive column on media and politics (sic!) on the Capital Gains Tax is a pearler.


It sets the stage  for its discussion on New Zealand CGT with a six short paragraph resumé of the American invasion of Iraq in 2003.  

You read that correctly. The link is that the supposedly good intentions in Iraq (which were based on false information) turned out very differently than intended.  In fact, almost everything went wrong.  

He concedes that CGT is not in the "same moral universe, of course" as the invasion of Iraq but, figuratively speaking,   "Labour will have its own Iraq with the Capital Gains Tax." Everything could go wrong.

He then traces supposed "shifting justifications" (read "changes" or "emphases") in Labour's policy on  CGT since 2011 based on the assumption that later announced changes displace earlier ones. 

As if a policy ever has only one purpose.  As if Labour's and NZ's circumstances have not changed since 2011. As if it's ever easy to talk convincingly about introducing a new tax. 

He then lists the "justifications" (read, reasons.) 

It started with a "silver bullet" to reduce house prices, and then to raising more money for government programmes, to rebalancing the economy towards investment in things like shares, to reducing inequality, and when it became clear (to whom?) that the CGT would not cure any of these things, the proposed tax "morphed into an abstract sense that it just isn't fair not to have one... Whatever the problem, the CGT was the answer. It has become an end unto itself."

Where did he get this from? I've read nothing from Government about a cure or an answer. Rather, it's been a cautious step or two towards. Hence the Tax Working Group.   And Government has yet to accept or modify any of the recommendations. Nothing is set in stone at this stage. Had he waited  a few more days to when we have a response from Government,  he might have had some substance to justify his "justifications."

So what is the purpose of this article? It has some merit. What intelligent person's opinions don't? 

GST has unproven benefits and could do some damage, it is unpopular, it could  lose Labour the next election, and it could  cause a Coalition split, with NZ First generally opposed to CGT and the Greens very much in favour. 

But we've heard all these arguments before, and repeatedly over the past few days. We don't need another reminder. 

But reminder we have. And it won't be the last one. 

Almost all saying much the same thing: Vote National!

                                             ***

And Liam, I see you also have an article in David Farrar's right-wing Kiwiblog on Venezuela supporting the US and its allies and attacking Kiwi centre-left columnist Chris Trotter. 

Liam, please search for and present (or at least acknowledge) two sides of an argument,  or keep to your less controversial interest in law, the media and culture. But not media and politics.

You may say the same criticisms could be levelled at my blog postings but, Liam, I provide links to sources;  I present the the main arguments of those with whom I disagree; I try to avoid emotive and persuasive language; and my blog heading clearly states my political leaning.    

--ACW