this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
17 points (100.0% liked)

Aotearoa / New Zealand

1959 readers
32 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general

Rules:

FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom

 

Banner image by Bernard Spragg

Got an idea for next month's banner?

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Dave@lemmy.nz
RaoulDuke@lemmy.nz
17
NZ should remove GST on meat and veggies (www.change.org)
submitted 3 weeks ago by GGNZ@lemmy.nz to c/newzealand@lemmy.nz
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

With the cost of living soaring, many Kiwi families are struggling to afford healthy food. Countries like Canada and the UK don’t tax basic groceries, and it's time New Zealand followed suit. Removing GST—or offering a rebate—on meat and vegetables would ease financial pressure, improve access to nutrition, and support better long-term health for all New Zealanders. Let’s push for tax policy that puts people’s wellbeing first. Sign the petition and help make real change happen.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We also have no true capital gains tax. Without this, GST is practically the only way we get tax from the ultra wealthy, right?

This is a major problem with flat taxes; the ultra wealthy pay a tiny portion of said income/wealth in GST; vs the poor who pay a huge portion of their income in GST.

but that seems to also be making the system more complex by balancing tax collection against subsidies for the same thing

Not true; complicating GST, complicates it for all businesses. It adds compliance overhead to everyone; even though it would be minimal extra for most businesses, it is not zero. Not zero multiplied across all businesses is still millions in compliance dead weight cost.

So do we just hand cash to supermarkets to make certain products cheaper? This seems more complex than just removing GST.

A targeted subsidy; could be applied at the producer end, making the bureaucratic overhead much smaller. Thus giving NZ producers a leg up compared to overseas producers.

This isn't as anti-competitive as it first seems either. Since feeding ourselves is a national security concern. It behooves us to prioritize local production, even in the event we have to subsidize production.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

When you talk about a targeted subsidy, the farmers would receive this regardless of if their product is sold in NZ or overseas? Or would there be some apportionment of subsidy based on how much is sold locally?

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I would make sure it was NZ production into the NZ market.

No produce heading offshore would get subsidised.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Since NZ produces way more food than we consume, how would that work in practice? Are there models for this in other countries we could follow?

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The grower/farmer would have to declare where the produce was going.

I'm not sure how much of this is already done, for traceability reasons, but some is done.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 2 points 3 weeks ago

Ah yes. Presumably there would be records of exports and records of sales to local retailers (as well as records to e.g. places that can foods), there must currently be enough information recorded to know where food ends up. So probably isn't that much overhead to have this process.

Makes sense.