Time for a Dismount, Taxing car parks seems Pretty Vacant

Pretty Vacant from the Sex Pistol’s album Flogging a Dead Horse seems appropriate.

Despite Bill English and his factotum in the blogosphere both declaring that the Car park tax was a good thing there are signs that the government is set to dismount the dead horse that Bill and Peter are flogging.

Colin Espiner calls this National’s light bulb moment:

There comes a time in any government’s term in office when it does something so unbelievably stupid, so mind-bendingly dumb, so ridiculously petty and so clearly idiotic that you know it’s losing the plot.

I remember well when Labour jumped the shark. It wasn’t the anti-smacking legislation – that had a huge impact on its core support but at least it could argue it was doing the right thing, even it wasn’t popular at the time.¬†

And it wasn’t even the decision to regulate what schools could sell in tuckshops. Granted, it was ridiculously petty and mind-bendingly dumb, but probably not completely idiotic. Labour could, and did, claim that students needed more help in making healthy eating choices.

No, what sealed Labour’s fate, I reckon, was the ill-advised (and later abandoned) plan to regulate the flow of water from shower heads, and to ban lightbulbs that didn’t meet certain energy specifications.

That was when Labour’s “nanny state” tag became attached like a tar baby that Helen Clark just couldn’t shake.

National rightly campaigned on a promise to rid voters of such a pestilent and petty administration, and to restore sanity and a little less heavy-handed regulation to our lives.

So what, you might well ask, is the Government doing trying to tax the inner-city car parks provided by employers for their staff? Particularly when John Key specifically ruled out such a tax when he was opposition finance spokesman back in 2005?

Meanwhile it looks like my snitches in Wellington were right when they whispered to me that Peter Dunne was called to stand on the naughty spot and instructed to dismount from the dead horse or it would be shot from under him.

Senior Government officials are understood to be distancing themselves from a controversial car park tax that has sparked fierce opposition from business groups and unionists.

The proposal to extend a fringe benefit tax (FBT) of almost 50 per cent to employer-provided onsite parking was the brainchild of United Future leader and Revenue Minister Peter Dunne.

The tax, which would apply only to workers in the Auckland and Wellington CBDs, has been widely described as petty and discriminatory.

Now National Party officials at the very highest levels are understood to be trying to shift the heat to Dunne, who is currently out of the country.

“Points are being made that this was not a National Party initiative,” said a source close to the FBT Action Group, a coalition of interested parties fighting against the new tax.

The source said the group had received “positive communications” from officials, who had also expressed real concern over the increased cost of compliance for businesses.

An independent report presented to Parliament’s finance and expenditure committee yesterday estimated the extra costs would add up to more than $30 million, dwarfing the expected $17m of actual revenue generated.

The National Party was aware that the FBT issue could become the equivalent of Labour’s infamous attempt to regulate shower-head flows and lightbulb types, the source said.

  • Sir Cullen’s Sidekick

    Let us screw Peter Dunne’s head instead of a light bulb in the socket. I know Naked Emperor is a dumb kid, but even he can’t be this dumb to let Done Deal Dunne get away with this crap…

  • Jman

    One seriously has to question the intelligence of anybody who thought this would be a good idea.

    • Sir Cullen’s Sidekick

      Englsh – Dunne naughty idea to dig a hole to bury Emperor…

  • Callum

    Such SHIT reporting on this whole issue. A tax of nearly 50% on a net expense actually aligns with the top tax rate when grossed up.

    Employee A gets salary of $100k and pay for own carparking at $5k/year. Whole $100k deductible to employer and taxable to employee.
    Employee B gets salary of $95k and gets free carparking at value of $5k/year. Whole $100k deductible to employer but only $95k taxable to employee.

    Basically employee B gets a private cost (getting to and from work) paid by the employer but doesn’t pay tax on that value.

  • BJ

    Its not about taxing carparks its about discouraging fringe benefits so employees pay fair tax on their real income

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Greg-Davis/624235869 Greg Davis

    You statist cunts should wake up to the idea that this is the sort of regulation that is already killing us.

98%