Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2)

I present a legislative statement on the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2).

SPEAKER: The legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on Parliament’s website.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I move, That the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2) be now read a first time.

This bill contains three tax measures announced in Budget 2025: the new Investment Boost tax incentive to grow our economy, changes to KiwiSaver settings to encourage New Zealanders to save more for their first home or their retirement, and changes to Working for Families to better target the scheme at low to middle income families. The reason for it being called a No. 2 bill is simply that a bill of the same name was introduced after Budget 2024, because this is a Government that knows that tax relief is always welcomed.

Mr Speaker, let me start with Investment Boost—

Hon Rachel Brooking: Madam Speaker.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: —Madam Speaker—a tax incentive that will lift capital investment and increase productivity. New Zealand has long been recognised for its low rates of capital intensity. That is, we lack the machinery, tools, and technology per worker that other countries have. That has an impact on the country’s economic performance, as more capital per worker means higher productivity and it means higher wages; it means more competitive businesses. So Investment Boost is a policy to increase capital investment in New Zealand. It allows New Zealand businesses to immediately deduct 20 percent of the cost of qualifying assets, on top of depreciation. That means a much lower tax bill in the year they purchase or create or construct the asset compared to the current rules. The remaining book value of the asset is depreciated at normal rates. Loading deductions into the first year means that cash flow arising from investments is more favourable. The present value of the investment is greater; the after-tax returns are higher. It is good news all around. More investment opportunities stack up financially, so more will be made. This will help the cash flow of businesses already investing and it will encourage more investment from those who aren’t.

All businesses, regardless of size, will be eligible for Investment Boost at the full rate of 20 percent. Farmers, tradies, manufacturers, small-business people—all. There is no cap on the value of new investments a business can claim Investment Boost on, and there is no cap on the number of assets a business can claim for. Investment Boost is generally available for all assets that are depreciable for tax purposes, as well as a number of assets that are allowed depreciationlike deductions. It applies to commercial buildings, but it excludes land, residential buildings, and fixed-life and tangible assets. The main proviso is that assets cannot have previously been used in New Zealand.

Investment Boost starts today. We do not want businesses to delay investments while waiting for the new rules to apply, and that is one of the reasons this bill is being debated under urgency. The Government did consider other options for driving productivity, including a reduction in the company tax rate. It soon became clear, however—and I encourage members to read the regulatory impact statement on this one—that dollar for dollar, Investment Boost has more impact on business investment than a reduction in the company tax rate, as it only applies ties to new investments and not those made in the past. Over 20 years, Investment Boost is expected to lift New Zealand’s capital stock by 1.6 percent, GDP by 1 percent, and wages by 1.5 percent. These are orders of magnitude, not precise values. But officials estimate that roughly half the impacts happen in the first five years. Investment Boost is good for Kiwi businesses and it’s good for New Zealand.

I want to read you this, Madam Speaker, from that regulatory impact statement I referred to, because members may ask who this policy really benefits, and I want to read you the view of the non-partisan Government officials. They say, “Our view is the majority of the increase in national income from this policy would flow to workers. And this increase would come from a combination of higher wages and higher employment, and we therefore expect that the benefits of this policy will be spread broadly across a wide range of New Zealanders.” So I dare members opposite to oppose this move for New Zealand’s workers.

This bill also proposes changes to KiwiSaver to encourage New Zealanders to save more, while also making the scheme more fiscally sustainable. The default employer and employee contribution rates in KiwiSaver are currently 3 percent of salaries and wages. These rates will rise to 3.5 percent from 1 April 2026, followed by a further increase to 4 percent from 1 April 2028. In addition, employer matching and the Government contribution will be extended to 16- and 17-year-olds. This will encourage more young people to adopt a savings habit and help them build a deposit for their first home. The Government, of course, recognises not everyone will be in a position to increase savings every year—it depends on their own particular circumstances—and we believe in choice. Employees will therefore be able to opt down to the current 3 percent rate and still be matched by their employer at that lower rate. Their contributions will be reset to the default rate after 12 months, but they can opt down again if they wish.

Budget 2025 ensures KiwiSaver remains affordable and sustainable by lowering and better targeting the Government contribution. Without changes, members, the Government contribution is expected to cost an average of $1.2 billion a year over the next four years. Under this bill, the annual Government contribution will be halved to 25c for each dollar a member contributes each year, up to a maximum of $260.72. In addition, the Government contribution will no longer be paid to people with an annual taxable income of more than $180,000, because they do not need it. These changes to the Government contribution will apply from 1 July 2025 and they do not affect the current year’s Government contribution, which will be paid out in July and August.

The third tax measure in this bill makes fiscally neutral changes to Working for Families to better target low and middle income families with children. Working for Families has a family income threshold, above which family tax credit and in-work tax credit payments are gradually reduced. This bill raises the family income threshold from $42,700, where it has been since 2018, non-adjusted. This bill adjusts it to $44,900 and increases the abatement rate of reduction from 27c for each dollar above the threshold to 27.5c. As a result, families with incomes just above the new threshold will get an extra $23 per fortnight from Working for Families, with this additional support reducing gradually as family income rises. This will also increase the gap between those on a benefit and those who are working, because our Government believes that work should pay and you should always be better off in work than on a benefit. An estimated 142,000 families with children will receive $14 more per fortnight on average, and the vast majority of these families will have incomes below $100,000 a year.

The cost of this extra support, members, is met from income-targeting the first year of the Best Start tax credit. From 1 April next year, the first year will no longer be universal; it’ll be income tested, exactly the same way the second and third years already are, at exactly the same level of income testing. Let me stress: the change to Best Start only applies for births on or after 1 April 2026. So no family will see an actual reduction in their current payments, and you’ve all got time to make babies yet.

These are meaningful, forward-looking tax changes that will help boost wages, savings, and growth. These are changes that will help families who most need financial support. These are changes that will not only grow New Zealand and create opportunities in the here and now but they will set this country up for a better, better future. New Zealanders will be better off for this bill passing through this House. And anyone who opposes this bill may ask themselves why they oppose growth, why they oppose workers, and why they oppose savings. We’re about to find out if people like that exist in this House. If they do, they’ll be answering to the New Zealanders they are letting down. I commend this bill to the House.

The question—[Interruption] Quiet now! You’ve had enough applause. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

The person who will be answering to the New Zealand public, to New Zealand workers, is the person who has balanced this Budget on the backs of working women, on the backs of families, and on the backs of low-paid workers who rely on that Government contribution to KiwiSaver to save for their old age. Those people are all worse off because of this Budget.

When this Government Minister, the Minister of Finance, says that this is a Budget that is going for growth, let’s remember who is enabling that growth. When she says some of these Budget moves are fiscally neutral, are they fiscally neutral to the families who are paying for them? Are they fiscally neutral to the women who are paying for them? Are they fiscally neutral to the low-paid workers who will now have less when they retire? It’s an interesting use of “fiscally neutral” to describe it as a good thing when it hurts so many people.

Now, in terms of these tax measures which have been introduced in this bill, there’s a pretty interesting tax measure with the Investment Boost, and some large promises have been made with respect to that Investment Boost. In fact, the large promise is—as the Minister of Finance pointed out—that over the long term, the benefits would flow through in terms of increased growth, increases in labour productivity and in wages, which would materialise over a long time frame. But, in the short term, we’ve got women, we’ve got families, we’ve got low-paid workers who are suffering. That is a pretty grand promise. We’re only going to see the reality of it in 20 years’ time.

Now, as it turns out, we do acknowledge, of course, the problem with labour productivity in this country. We do acknowledge, of course, the problem with capital intensity in this country. We do know that in order to become more productive, we need better tools within businesses. So doing something in this space is a good idea. But the interesting thing is the options that were analysed, and there are only two of them—only two. One was this Investment Boost, the 20 percent immediate deduction for purchasing an asset, and the other was a cut to the company tax rate. But why did they not look at increasing the low-value asset threshold for writing off a low-value asset? Why did they not look at targeting this measure towards small business? That would not have cost as much and it would not have had to be taken out on the backs of women. Why did they not consider an accelerated depreciation rate?

Now, these are options that all should have been looked at as alternate measures, but sitting in the regulatory impact statement we find they considered only two options. Of course, the Investment Boost looks good when you’ve only considered that option. Of course it does. I want to know why those other options weren’t considered, especially given the large promises that have been made around it, the large promises of growth in the future. I’ll be wanting the Minister of Revenue and possibly the Minister of Finance to answer for that in the committee stage of this bill. In the meantime, there are some very serious questions to be asked about the other measures in this bill, some very serious questions to be asked about the KiwiSaver changes that mean that people will be worse off in retirement.

Now, in recent days, we’ve heard the Minister of Finance saying that we need to examine superannuation in the future—we know who’s holding her back from doing that; that’s New Zealand First. But we need to get serious about New Zealand superannuation. Well, it doesn’t seem to be getting very serious about it when we cut the savings of people in retirement. One way to ensure that we could adjust superannuation in the future would be ensuring that low-paid workers have more saved up by the time they retire. But that Government, we estimate they have taken $66,000 away from a person who’s starting work tomorrow. That’s a lot of money that’s gone.

There’s another very, very serious question to be asked around the Working for Families changes. When we looked into it, when we asked Treasury, here is what Treasury said about those changes: it turns out that 61,000 families will be $43 a fortnight worse.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. A friend of mine messaged me during the speeches earlier saying, “Wow, this Budget is catastrophically bad and cartoonishly evil.”, and I wonder if the members opposite on the Government benches realise how out of touch they are. Another person suggested that maybe the Budget should be known as the “Budget for the wealthy and sorted”, because it’s very, very clear that the members of the Government, clapping like seals in their little chorus of applause for their party leaders and finance Minister, are completely out of touch with what ordinary New Zealanders are having to deal with in terms of the increased cost of living, and now a huge number of people, hundreds of thousands of people, looking at not having the increase to pay that they are deserved for the important work that they’re doing.

What’s very clear in the Minister’s speech on this bill, which brings in their Budget measures, is that her vision of New Zealand is one of a bunch of individuals who don’t work together and those who are competitive and hard-working climb up ahead and shove everyone else down and then enjoy, you know, their multiple properties or whatever, this tiny proportion of people.

Look, we’re not going to support this bill. Mainly, I want to speak to the Best Start payment, because the Best Start payment was a really awesome initiative, and the Green Party would’ve extended the universality of it. We would not have brought in means testing for year two and year three. So thousands of families having a brand-new baby have their income cut by $3,800 a year by this bill. That’s what the Budget does. It takes money away from families with new babies.

The changes to Working for Families, we haven’t been able to get into the detail of that yet, but, ultimately, what the Minister has said demonstrates that she does not understand. She doesn’t think people who have lost their jobs deserve to live in dignity. The 5 percent unemployment, higher for certain populations like Māori, like women, like Pasifika, people with disabilities, she’s going to make it harder for them—this Government’s making it harder for them to make ends meet just because they’re not in a position to find paid work.

The reality is we’re not at 100 percent employment. The whole purpose of this attitude of, like, punishing those who are out of work rather than ensuring that everybody, when they fall on hard times, has the means to live with dignity—the purpose of that is to keep wages lower. It is to keep wages lower, and in the meantime we all suffer from having more child poverty in our country.

It’s very clear from the Budget that child poverty is not going to get better because of these Budget measures. That is what we see, and that’s all a political choice that this Government has made because they lack empathy. The crazy thing, from my point of view, is that they actually believe that this is going to—well, from what they say, it sounds like they think this is going to be good for growth or the economy. I mean, it’s good for growth in poverty. It’s good for growth in the number of people who are homeless. This idea of growth that they’re cheerleading for demonstrably does not come from cutting investment in people. It doesn’t come from cutting benefits. It doesn’t come from taking money away from young families. It doesn’t come from underpaying women who do some of the most essential work in our country. That’s not what leads to economic prosperity and productivity.

Finally, I’ll just touch on these tax cuts or tax breaks for businesses. If the Government was truly serious about tackling low productivity in New Zealand, they would take the mainstream economic advice from institutions like the IMF who have recommended tax reforms, including a comprehensive capital gains tax or a land value tax. Like, the problem with productivity—

Simon Court: The woke mind virus has spread far.

Hon JULIE ANNE GENTER: Yeah, Simon Court says the woke mind virus has spread to the IMF, I guess. It’s just, like, laughable. It’s really hard not to sit in here and laugh at the absurdity of the claims from the Government benches when we know what it takes to achieve improvements in productivity, and it’s not tax breaks for new utes, all right, so stop pretending like you care about the future of this country when all you care about is lining the pockets of your mates and your donors.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to commend the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2) to the House.

In particular, I am really excited on behalf of the ACT Party around the Investment Boost scheme. We’ve talked for a while about how important it is to improve productivity in this country, to get investment happening in this country—

Hon Julie Anne Genter: Yeah, capital gains tax.

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: —and pushing it further. The member opposite talks about a land tax. How’s that going to help anything? That’s going to discourage you from doing any other investment because you’re too busy paying their death taxes and their land taxes and their capital gains taxes and every other tax there is.

I just want to provide a really simple, practical example of how investment in a business can drive productivity and how incentivising that will improve outcomes not only for a class of businesses but the entire country. Now, a few nights ago here in Parliament, we had a function over at the Banquet Hall for a really innovative, awesome Kiwi firm that’s taking on the world; that’s fastest-growing in the country. The product they’ve got, it’s not cheap; it’s a serious investment—trust me, I know—but if you were there, you would have heard about some pretty impressive numbers.

By using this product, the farmers that use it were getting a 20 percent improvement in pasture production. Now, that means a 20 percent improvement in production. That pasture gets eaten by a cow and it gets turned into either more beef or more milk. That’s money for this country. It leads to a 70 percent reduction in lameness. Now, you may not think, “Well, what does that mean?”

Grant McCallum: Animal welfare—really important.

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: Well, it’s animal welfare, but it’s more than that. A lame animal isn’t making you as much money; it is costing you money. Again, this is improvements in productivity and it also led to 20 percent less time that the people on those properties needed to work. They were more efficient—

Grant McCallum: Better working conditions.

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: —they were more productive, better working conditions, enjoying their jobs more. The whole business improved.

That enables higher wages for everyone and that just flows through the economy: 20 percent more milk would mean 20 percent more tanker drivers, 20 percent more workers in the factory. The numbers that Treasury have put in the regulatory impact statement around what we might see—you know, the member opposite was questioning, “Oh, will these promises come true?” If anything, they’re probably half undercooked, quite frankly, from what I know of when you’re able to invest new technology, new innovation, new ideas into your business.

It was insinuated that, “Oh, this is just for the big boys; the big corporations.” No. New Zealand is built on small family businesses, and these businesses being able to invest and look for new, productive ideas, improving their business, helps all of New Zealand. This is an absolutely great scheme and I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Taxation (Budget Measures) Bill (No 2). It’s been a great day sitting in the House, in, obviously, still my first term here, and hearing the finance Minister deliver her second Budget, and also having that Budget delivered, to actually see our finances in this country being turned around and, at the same point of time, with the other Associate Ministers, the effort that’s been put into that Budget today. But even on this side of the House, and especially from a New Zealand First point of view, seeing some of the wins in that Budget today and some of the hard work that we’ve put in and, in the past, said about compliance with the Inland Revenue Department and actually seeing some extra money flowing into the Budget there—we’ve actually seen savings that now we’ve been able to put into other incentives around the SuperGold card; we’ve had an increase in New Zealand Customs Service staff; Māori wardens are getting more money; that great thing that we championed, the rail; and also Matua Jones around energy. So having that extra money in our pockets to actually be able to put into some really important places.

The bill here today addresses three issues: the Investment Boost is the main part that I want to come back to and talk about, the KiwiSaver reforms, and the Working for Families changes. But hearing the Budget delivered today, we heard about this being a responsible Budget. Obviously the other side of the House doesn’t understand what responsible is, because they’re just bemused by what we’ve actually done, actually turning this economy around. We’re talking about economic growth, we’re talking about getting behind the productive sectors in New Zealand. This is an investment Budget. When you look at the Investment Boost—and just as the last speaker alluded to—this is a game-changer. This is a game-changer for small businesses. It’s a game-changer for businesses in New Zealand.

And what an idea! We’re going to look back on this day and we are going to say “Investment Boost; what a terrific, what a great idea that was.” I’ve owned a small business. Most people on this side of this House have actually worked. We have actually owned businesses. We actually know, buying an asset, how difficult that is. And if we can invest into capital, if we can actually take that 20 percent and then still depreciate, what a game-changer that is for businesses. I think, tomorrow, people are going to be out to shops. I think Mark Patterson, he’s going out to buy a tractor tomorrow; I think he’s going to buy a tractor. I think there’s some people on this side of the House—we’re going to go out and we’re going to have Fieldays and we’re going to be spending up, because this is the day that this has changed. So Investment Boost, I think we’ll look back—what a stroke—that this has been a real change today.

KiwiSaver reforms—again, that side of the House doesn’t understand: why would we say to 16- and 17-year-olds that we don’t want to contribute to them? They’re going to say “No” to that. They’re going to say “No” to my teenagers who are that age who are working—they’re now going to get the contribution, and guess where they’re going to put that money! Into their first homes. We want people in their first homes, we want them to have that opportunity. That, again, is a game-changer today. So this has been a great Budget, great incentives. This is a great bill. I commend it to the House.

Probably the first thing I’d want to say, possibly to the speaker just before me, is that that’s mighty white of you—so let me repeat that: that’s mighty white of you—because in all of your expression and all of your ideology and all of your Pākehā reo, which is quite limited, at the end of the day, what I’m hearing in it is that it suits you, it fits with you, and, sadly, it does nothing for Māori. I know that you want to think it is, because Matua Jones, who happens to be my relation, by the way, gets—you misunderstand the whole scenario.

But, look, I don’t expect much more, and, by the way, look, I’m pleased to stand and oppose this. I’m pleased and I must, and it is a duty. Why? Because the number of people outside this House—you obviously weren’t listening to it. You were probably—I don’t know what you were doing—flicking through your papers. But outside, this morning, you had a number of people come and tell you lot that “You are failing. You are screwing us over. You are damaging our future. You are bad for our health. Cut it out.” That’s what they were saying, and guess what! They were women and girls, and they were full of it, wanting to possibly get you to understand and think this through. But you won’t, because you’re carried away with your mighty white selves. So here we go—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): He paku āwhina mō te mema. Taihoa, he paku āwhina mō te mema, me kōrero mai ki a au. Hei aha te kōrero ki a rātou. Tērā te tikanga o te Whare. Āe, haere tonu.

[A little help for the member. Hold on, a little help for the member, you should speak to. Don’t worry about speaking to them. That’s the procedure of the House. Yes, continue.]

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: Ka pai. Tēnā koe. So the Minister of Finance is, essentially, asking Māori and low-income whānau to front a $170 million tax cut to implement a 20 percent tax deduction for businesses. Let’s be clear about what’s happening here under these new proposals: KiwiSaver contributions for lower-income earners are being cut, meaning that they will pay more and receive less than they do now. This isn’t just a tweak to the system; this is a fundamental shift that undermines the retirement security of the very people who need it most.

I really wish that the lot on my left listened to “Doc’s” speech this morning, and I know it would have irritated particularly the most ignorant, possibly because you just can’t get it. But, look, do some reading and understand the shared history that you have, and you’re welcome that you get to live here at all.

Hon Members: Oh!

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: Yeah, I know—having feelings. Come on, come on, come on, come on—go ahead.

Simon Court: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): A point of order, Simon Court. [Interruption] There’s a point of order.

Simon Court: That reference that that member made to “we should be thankful that we should be allowed to live here at all”, I find offensive—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): What’s the point of order?

Simon Court: —I find it—the point of order is that that member is creating disorder in the House by suggesting that some members don’t deserve to live here, and I ask that you ask that member, please, to withdraw—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): That’s enough.

Simon Court: —and apologise.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): OK, I’ve heard that. Speaking to the point of order?

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: Speaking to the point of order, it wouldn’t be the first time that people had feelings and offence in this House—I mean, that was constantly my feeling as soon as the first speech began this morning. So that’s my response to the point of order.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): Well, I found it very difficult to hear the member talking at all because of the number of interruptions on that side of the House. There always has to be a bit of give and take in this place, but I would invite all members to think carefully about their contributions and also their interjections, as well, because it is important that the people at home can hear this debate. So, Mariameno Kapa-Kingi, I call you to continue.

MARIAMENO KAPA-KINGI: Thank you, Mr Speaker. We are making it harder, not easier, for young people to own a home, and for Māori, who already face significant barriers to homeownership, this is another door being slammed shut in their faces. This tax cut is being propped up by Māori, by low-income earners, by solo parents, and by whānau who are already doing it tough. That is not economic strategy; that is economic exploitation of vulnerable communities, who have been absolutely pummelled with legislation that is stealing right from underneath their noses, again.

Make no mistake, the changes for Working for Families will mean that fewer whānau will qualify for support—I mean, please hear that. The increase for whānau who do receive it will only amount to $14 per fortnight. You think that’s OK—you can tolerate that? Sorry, Mr Speaker—through you.

These taxation measures are redistributing wealth upwards. It is taking from the poor and handing it to the rich. They are blocking out our mokopuna and our young whānau from getting into homeownership. The change to KiwiSaver puts homeownership even further out of rich, out of reach—“rich”; funny—for young people.

Really, if I can just refer back again to the great voices this morning that were speaking to this House, if people were daring to listen to it, and saying, “You are failing us, you are failing our children, you are failing women.” You are failing women—the number of women that are out there, fists-upping, going, “Eh, sisters are doing it for themselves.” Please, I’d ask the side on my left to take note, because it’s coming. Tēnā koe e te Pīka.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I acknowledge the enthusiasm from the other side. But what a great day we have in the House today, and I tell you what, as the Minister of Revenue for this Government, I am very, very proud of the initiatives which we have outlined today under this Government. Under the leadership of Christopher Luxon, under the leadership and thought of Nicola Willis, as our Minister of Finance, we have delivered our Budget, which is going to increase investment in this country. That is great for our economy, it is great for our people, and it is great for future generations, and we should be proud of that as a party and as a country.

This Budget delivers tax incentives to lift growth through Investment Boost. It means that KiwiSaver changes are going to encourage more savings. It’s going to increase support for families. Those elements matter. They are going to make a difference, because we know that, for too long, Kiwis have been doing it tough. Life has become very challenging for many New Zealanders, with the rising cost of living and placing real pressure on households across this country. But that is why this Government is focused on growing the economy and putting in place changes such as the tax legislation that we’re passing today, which will turn that reality around, to increase economic growth, to increase jobs, and to increase the wages and grow our economy and get Kiwis back on track. That is really, really important.

This bill covers three key areas, which we’ll walk our way through today. It is going to drive investment, it is going to lift productivity, and certainly, as I noted, it will lead to an increase in wages. However, these measures are not the only aspects which this Government is doing; we have outlined a suite of interventions today that deal with the core issues and opportunities in this country.

This Government wants to boost investment, but actions speak louder than words, and this legislation, from today, means that hard-working Kiwis can get benefit, can reduce the tax implications of investments. Let’s give a real example. Let’s think about an electrician in my electorate of Takapuna who’s going out tomorrow and wants to buy a new van for their small business. Well, immediately, from tomorrow, that electrician—that small business—will be able to get a benefit of 20 percent reduction in terms of that investment, of that vehicle, tomorrow and be able to offset that against their tax. That means that that amount of tax saved is more money that that individual can put back into their business to help grow their livelihoods, to help grow our economy, and to help deliver core services to our communities. That is real action, and that is what that initiative is going to do.

Changes in the KiwiSaver regime that have been announced by this Government will make tangible differences for New Zealanders. For the first time, 16- and 17-year-old New Zealanders will be able to get the benefits of KiwiSaver; 85,000 young New Zealanders will be able to now get the benefit of KiwiSaver. That is tangible investment in our young people. Why? Because they deserve it, and this Government recognises that. Won’t it be interesting to see if, on that side of the House, they vote against that change?

We also know that increasing contribution rates will increase the amount of money that people have at retirement. That is very, very important. It’s prudent, it is sensible policy, and we’re giving time to make sure that increases over time as well. We have also increased the thresholds for Working for Families—tangible increases that mean those benefits will go to those individuals with incomes below $100,000. The examples provided by some people in this House are completely misleading in the context of those people who will not benefit. This is targeted at those families that most need that benefit. Those changes would have not been updated since 2018. This Government is making changes, and those benefits will flow through importantly to those families.

The changes today are important, substantial changes in tax policy to drive economic growth, to drive the livelihoods of all New Zealanders, and to put more money in their back pockets. I commend this bill.

I agree with one statement that the previous speaker, the Hon Simon Watts, said, and that is that actions speak louder than words. Today, we have seen the actions of a Government where they have laid their values very bare for New Zealanders to see, because Budgets are about choices. Budgets are a time where Governments have to make value-based decisions about what their priorities are. What have we seen in this year’s Budget? We’ve seen a Government that has decided that it is absolutely their priority to take nearly $3 billion a year out of the pay packets and pockets of some of our lowest-paid women workers and their families, and to give that for tax breaks to other people. For $200 million for the oil and gas sector—multinational companies. That is more of a priority for this Government than $3 billion going into the pockets of our families.

Let’s have a look at the legislation before us. Let’s have a reality check on some of the excitement that the Minister of Finance—followed, but not quite as excitedly, by the Minister for Revenue—got. The Minister of Finance came down here, thinking she was some latter-day champion of working people, and challenged us to vote for this because this was the panacea for working people. But let’s look at the detail of this legislation that we have before us.

So when we’re told that this is the centrepiece of growth, this piece of legislation, for the Government, now let’s not make any mistakes. On this side of the House, we are open to discussions about good policy that will increase productivity in New Zealand. But as my colleague the Hon Deborah Russell has identified, there’s just two options that have been explored and we’re now debating in urgency. There were a bunch of other options that could and should have been looked at and weighed very carefully to see if they were the right ways. Because the centrepiece for growth—the thing that the Prime Minister is hanging his hat on and the Minister of Finance is hanging her hat on—is 1 percent growth in GDP over 20 years. For those working people that the latter-day champion of the working people—Nicola Willis—comes down and says she’s speaking on behalf of, when you look at the detail of the changes, the Treasury have been telling the Government we’re looking at a 1.5 percent increase in wages over 20 years as a result of these changes. So let’s not let facts get in the way of what we’re actually doing here.

In terms of the KiwiSaver contributions, again, on this side of the House, we’re not opposed to 16- and 17-year-olds starting to save for their retirement, but to halve the Government contribution—what are we seeing? We’re seeing that for an 18-year-old today, they are going to enter retirement with $66,000 less than they would have had if the Government kept its contribution where they are today. For a 30-year-old—

Suze Redmayne: Read the RIS.

Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: —that is $30,000 less—

Hon Simon Watts: Read the RIS.

Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: —that they will be taking into their retirement than they would have had today.

What we also see from the Treasury advice in the regulatory impact statement (RIS)—and, yes, I have read the RIS—is that the Government was told very clearly that 80 percent of the cost increases with employer contributions would result in lower wage growth for those working people. So before we start championing this as the panacea for working people, let’s have a look at that.

Let’s have a look at the fact that we do have tens of thousands of families that are going to be up to $43 a week worse off under this. We have the vaunted changes that are going to help families with the cost of living being less than a block of butter a week. This is not the real relief that New Zealanders get and it has been paid for off the backs of working women and not paying them what they are worth.

Oh, aren’t the Labour Party jealous of this Budget? Aren’t they jealous of this Budget? Aren’t they jealous of the KiwiSaver changes we’ve made? Let’s have a look at the KiwiSaver changes, and they’ll be thinking, “No wonder Barbara Edmonds is invisible at the moment.” They will be thinking, “Why didn’t we come up with this? Why didn’t we come up with extending employer matching on KiwiSaver to 16- and 17-year-olds?” Why didn’t they—why didn’t they back our young people? Why didn’t they allow 16- and 17-year-olds to get matched by Government contribution? That’s what will happen from 1 July. That contribution will encourage young people to start saving. It will encourage young people to start saving for a deposit. And this is this, and the National Party - ACT Party - New Zealand First coalition Government has done that for 16- and 17-year-olds. That’s what we’ve done.

What else have we done? What else have we done that they’ll be thinking “Why the hell didn’t we do that?” Axing the Government contribution for those that earn over $180,000.

Hon members: Oh, wow!

CAMERON BREWER: Oh, wow! Oh, is that us looking after our mates? No, why on earth didn’t they do that? Why wouldn’t they axe it for the rich? Why wouldn’t they axe it for the rich? In 2021, they brought in that top tax rate, 39c in the dollar. Oh, for everyone earning over $180,000, they said: “They don’t need it.” They didn’t do that, though, did they? They didn’t save the average working New Zealander any money—any money—by axing the Government contribution for those that earn over $180,000. So we did that. We did that and that’s why we are the party of workers and the party of SMEs—and we’re the country of small to medium sized businesses: 97 percent of our businesses are small to medium sized businesses. And guess what! They’re all eligible for Investment Boost—they’re all eligible for Investment Boost. That will be for tradies. That’ll be a 20 percent deduction on the cost of new machinery, tools, equipment from their taxable income at the next financial year, kicking in now, isn’t it? Isn’t it Minister of Revenue—kicking in now to be redeemable next year?

When do we have Fieldays? On 11 June, Fieldays kicks off at Mystery Creek. What a time to buy a tractor. What a time for farmers to get in and buy some technology. What a time. Utes! If utes got cheaper last year, they’re about to get another 20 percent cheaper. People say, “Oh, but, surely, they can’t get their depreciation off that ute as well.” We dropped the ute tax; they still get their depreciation, minus 20 percent—they get that off their tax bill. Wow. Oh my—you won’t be able to see the Government marquees at the Fieldays for people lining up saying, “Wow, you are making it easier for me to invest in my business.”

As has been alluded to, the regulatory impact statement—this lot always says, “Where’s your regulatory impact statement? Where is your regulatory impact statement?” Well, they don’t want to read this one, do they? They won’t be reading this one because this shows us a lot of things about Investment Boost and its contribution to the national economy. Holy smoke—Investment Boost—this is big. It is expected to lift—get this—the levels of business investment with longer-run benefits including increasing the level of GDP by 1 percent—GDP by 1 percent—capital stock by 1.6 percent, and wages by 1.5 percent over 20 years with at least half of those benefits happening within the next five years. This is an amazing regulatory statement and if anyone wants to read it, it will put you to sleep as well. But it’s got incredible figures from our officials at IRD. One thing about IRD is they don’t exaggerate; if anything, they’re conservative, and that is their estimate. That is their estimate. Huge for GDP growth, huge for investment growth, huge for wage growth, huge for business growth. This Investment Boost initiative—

Joseph Mooney: Is huge!

CAMERON BREWER: Is huge. That’s it; that is the word I was looking for. Everyone in business, those 612,000 small businesses are eligible in New Zealand. They’re all eligible to get 20 percent off their asset purchases, their machineries, their utes, their carports for their cars that they’re building—

The member’s time has expired.

Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. Cameron Brewer is sounding more and more like Donald Trump as each minute ticks by. As we hear the National Party congratulating themselves on how proud they’ll be at Fieldays when they can see their mates all buy a tractor for a cheaper price, let them be reminded that in 2026, this Budget saves $2.9 billion from working women. In 2027, it saves another $2.6 billion from pay that would have gone to working women.

In 2029, it saves $2.6 billion from the pockets of working women. How many tractors is that, Mr Brewer? Because, on top of that, there’s $1.8 billion saved in capital expenditure from the pockets of working women. All up, that is $12.8 billion saved by taking the wages of working women. Those opposite jump up and down with excitement at the thought of Fieldays, of what technology and tractors that their friends will be able to purchase out of the pockets of working New Zealand women—women in libraries, women in hospitals, women in hospices, teachers, women who hold this country together, who were in line for a pay equity settlement that has been ripped out of their hands by this Budget. This Budget is funded by working women and by taking the future superannuation savings of New Zealanders. I would not be proud of that Budget. I would hang my head in shame, because it is a short-sighted and self-serving Budget.

What has the money gone to be spent on? Let’s take a look. So $15 million in increasing funding for private schools, because David Seymour says that kids who go to private schools, their parents pay tax too. What about the kids at public schools? The oil and gas sector has also been increased in its funding, out of the pockets of working women. Ministerial budget for international travel, increased by $8 million, out of the pockets of working women.

The cuts that have gone on in this Budget are absolutely unbelievable. KiwiSaver—it hits the lowest-paid New Zealanders. Recently, we have seen the highest number of people withdrawing their KiwiSavers because of hardship. And what does this Government do to respond to the cost of living crisis? It halves the Government contribution to KiwiSaver. An 18-year-old today will get $66,000 less in their superannuation. Also, a 30-year-old will get $30,000 less out of their KiwiSaver by halving the Government contribution in this Budget. It has the biggest impact on lowest-earning New Zealanders, but those members opposite don’t seem to be too concerned about that.

And let’s take a look at Working for Families, while we’re at it. Working for Families, changing the abatement levels is great, but around 61,000 New Zealand families will receive a decrease of $43 per fortnight, and 89 percent have taxable incomes above $100,000. You’re taking money out of the pockets of New Zealanders. It is a shameful Budget—absolutely shameful.

To top it all off, from going from the most vulnerable, this Budget also makes it harder for younger New Zealanders who are trying to get a job and trying to get training, by preventing the jobseeker benefit being paid to 18- and 19-year-olds—the very young people that already find themselves on the streets of New Zealand, making it harder for them to get access to emergency housing, making it harder for them to access any funding, and asking them to go to their parents. Well, many of those young people are looking for the jobseeker benefit because they cannot get the support of a parent. The individual circumstances that young people find themselves in will be even harder under this Budget.

This is a self-serving Budget, because it benefits those who are in power already and it further marginalises those who are not in power. It is an absolute disgrace—a Budget that is paid for by working women. That is how this Budget will be remembered in New Zealand history, and I would hang my head in shame if I were you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s fantastic to stand to speak on this bill, being the last speaker. It’s almost an opportunity to fact-check some of the misinformation, and it’s good to welcome you back. I’ve got some good information for you, but let me just start with Investment Boost. Wasn’t that a great contribution from the chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee? It was powerful, it was exciting, and it reminded me of the excitement that’s going to be generated next week in Fieldays Wednesday, the largest agricultural event in the Southern Hemisphere, held in the mighty Waikato. And now, with high farmer payouts and an extra 20 percent depreciation on top of normal depreciation, in many cases that’ll be like a 25 to 30 percent depreciation boost. That’s cash flow, that’s investment, that’s confidence. Like the Minister said, for small business, that’s an extra van, that’s an extra ute, and that gives you the confidence to hire an extra employee. It’s a win-win situation. It’s so good, and, like our Minister said earlier today, with a 1 percent increase in GDP coming up, that’s an order of magnitude. That’s a huge impact on the economy. It’s just massive.

Now, let’s just do a little bit of fact-checking around KiwiSaver. My son worked at a takeaway shop—I won’t name the one, but you could probably imagine; there’s only a few—as a 16- and 17-year-old, and I made sure he ratcheted up his KiwiSaver contribution. “Put it as high as you can, son—why not?” The only difference was his employer wasn’t contributing to it; it was all his own savings. This makes a small adjustment for the employer to contribute up to 4 percent, and it’s a marginal upkeep for employers. As Cameron Brewer said, aren’t we supposed to be against the little man? Aren’t we supposed to be supporting our mates in employment and the big business? No, we’re actually saying, “You guys can actually put up an increase from 1 percent to 4 percent because it’s the right thing to do and it’s going to be of benefit to your employee.” So I think it’s fantastic.

We’ve heard comments saying that with the reduction in employment contribution, Kiwis are going to be $60,000 worse off because of it. Well, remember, that Government contribution was put there as an incentive when KiwiSaver was first set up, and now we’ve got such huge intake, we’ve got to look: is that still fit for purpose? We’re not getting rid of it; we’re just reducing it. Actually, if you want to do a quick fact-check on the old ChatGPT, you will see that over a 10-year period, someone on $60,000, cutting the Government contribution by half but lifting the employee and employer contribution to 4 percent, they’re $10,000 better off in 10 years—just in 10 years. You compound that over time; it’s huge.

Now, what about some of those comments that had racial overtones and said, “What about Māori? It’s harder for them to get into housing.” Well, let me give you some facts—let me give you some facts—85,000 kids will now be eligible for KiwiSaver at the age of 16 and 17. Do you think some of those 85,000 children will be Māori? You bet they will be. Tens of thousands of kids will be Māori, and they will benefit from this employee and employer contribution for KiwiSaver. So this will help more people get into housing. It’s a wonderful thing—it’s a wonderful thing, and I’m so proud to do it. Of course, now families, with the Working for Families, $23 better off a fortnight. When does this kick in? As of tonight, hopefully, we’ll cement this legislation. It’s a great day for New Zealand. I commend this bill to the House.