gjm

One of the scaremongering responses to the idea of CGT is around the private landlord situation - some against CGT say that private landlords will cease to exist, leading to a greater shortage and (even) higher prices int he rental market. Yet countries like the UK and Germany (especially Germany) have CGT and a very healthy private landlord situation. I predict CGT will make, in the medium to long term, zero difference to investors. The only property investors who will be affected are those who have bought, with a view to selling and making money from a capital gain. Longer term investors, those who have bought but carefully funded and rented/leased their property for ongoing return, won't care.

No. 2 in a series of questions around the legality/regulation of changes to vehicles! Taking a live rego vehicle of chassis/body (not monocoque construction), removing the body (retaining the running gear and engine, gearbox, etc) and replacing the body with something of a different style. An example might be fitting a 2002 body on to an E87 135i (assuming that's possible). Anyone know what the cert requirements might be?

I feel the M43 is a brilliant engine! I know it comes in for a lot of flak, but typically only from those who want to go faster. That's not what the M43 is about!

My point exactly. National will wring their hands and say how terrible it is, but if implemented, National are very unlikely to repeal a CGT. After all, they introduand ced the brightline nonsense, while saying there was no housing issue in NZ. They didn't want a CGT, so they've pigeon-holed it called it something else. The TWG suggestions go too far in my opinion. As others have said, lifestyle blocks and homes used to run a business shouldn't be attracting a CGT. Review of the whole range of suggestions is required, and while a CGT could be applied to a family home, there should be a threshold, evaluation of any gains made, and time limits applied. The family bach overlooking the sea in East Coromandel (it'd be nice!) which has been owned for 75 years is a case in point - how do you assess gains on something like that? An agreed length of tenure means, in my opinion, that CGT shouldn't apply.

It's true... We arrived 6, maybe 7 years ago. Get our citizenship next month. I saw National offfering two tax cuts at the first election we were here, at a time when labour was saying the country couldn't afford them. The first tax cut went through, but the second didn't - National subsequently agreed it was unaffordable. The last election I felt national didn't actually have a manifesto, and trotted out some words when it became apparent Labour were doing better than expected, including the offer of a tax break. I said at the time that I felt National didn't want to win the election, and still wonder if that were the case. There were several things happening which were - and are - going to be difficult to deal with. CGT is paid on profit from gains realised through little or no effort. 33000 houses were empty in Auckland alone in 2017; these are typically owned by investors who bought them with a view to sitting on them, selling them in a couple of years, and gathering a 20%+ profit. (Whether they do get that sort of profit is another matter.) Effort - zero. Other than having the money to begin with, and there are people who do this for a 'living'. Applying CGT to these gains (to me) makes sense. Applying CGT to Kiwisaver, small business gains and so on is a different matter. Scrap the brightline bullshit (which, let's face it, is only a short-term CGT by another name) and do the job properly. It's sad that reying on a government to do someting properly isn't a rewarding passtime.

I was talking with someone about this yesterday. He has a vehicle which has passed several WoFs without issue, yet on inspection probably shouldn't (from a documentation) perspective be on the road. Esentaily - the chassis number is fundamentally wrong. Everything else is correct and there's nothing that seems amiss, but the VIN suggests it's a different vehicle to the one it is described as. I've seen similar in other circumstances, including a vehicle accurately described and with rego number matching that on rego plate and database, but with a VIN for a different vehicle. The VIN plate on the vehicle displayed a different rego number (stored in the NZTA database for a vehicle matching the description) and a chassis number which was correct for the vehicle. Is it possible to rectify this situation? Theoretically a WoF inspector will pick this sort of thing up, but how do you then go about reconciling the physical and documented records?

Let's not make this political. I can rip massive holes in the National position on this based on their own implementation of the bright line test, their extension of the brightline test, and their delayed implementation of other taxation which took place after they weren't re-elected. Criticising Labour for their housing policy is fair, but National doing it is a laugh. National are the party of 'there is no housing problem' - at least Labour are acknowledging it (although not doing a great job of sorting it). As for tax breaks - that's typically a National carrot, not a Labour one. They trot it out at most elections. I'm not a massive Labour supporter but National are really pissing me off at the moment. No policy, nothing to contribute, just lots of sniping, whinging, moaning and the like. And some National supporters are seeming increasingly like Trump supporters - they can do no wrong. A friend who was screaming and shouting about Labour introducing taxation on some older aircon refrigerant threw an absolute fit when I raised that National had implemented it in a staged fashion, with a significant tax hike scheduled for earlier this year,. He also compplains about how Labour are only 'in' as a result of other parties backing them and that more people voted for National than voted for Labour, but overlooks that more people didn't vote for National than voted for other parties (collectively). Damn. Who do I vote for? ? /politics (We should treat the forum like a pub. No politics. No religion. ? And yes - I can be as bad as anyone else. Apologies to all.) CGT... Could work. Not if taken in the form of all recommendations by the working group, but the vast majority of 1st world nations have it in one form or another, so saying it won't work is rubbish. Keep it away from the family home. Yes - that can be abused, but it'll be a tiny number of cases when compared to housesales generally. If implementing CGT, scrap the brightline test. Anyone want to describe brightline in a different way? Perhaps as a targeted CGT? I have no specific issue with CGT, but I grew up with it. As I have said, there are currently 33000 homes in Auckland alone which are registered empty, yet we have a housing problem. Those houses, when sold, will mainly garner a huge profit for the seller. That profit is (in effect) unearned income - tax it. The biggest issue with CGT is addressing what is a reasonable gain, and what is clear profit. I've seen propert investors and speculators (NOT landlords) moaning about CGT, but they are going to. They will pay the most. "Are we supposed to keep track of all our expenditure on these properties?" Yes - you f&%^$%^ well are. It's a business. It's what you're supposed to do. You get a tax break for you expenses on property upkeep - why shouldn't a regular homeowner get the same? The (investment) property market has been milked at both ends for too long. Set a threshold on CGT. If you make more than a specified amount in a set period of time, you pay CGT. The amount and the time could be scaled. CGT on other investment gains? Stocks and shares? Yup. CGT on pensions and Kiwisaver...? Hmm. More difficult. These are an investment, after all. Perhpas not... Could this mean more investment in pension funds with less likelihood of shortfalls? CGT on cars...? Don't laugh - look at the price of things like E30 M3s now. Most good ones are now being bought as an investment, not to be driven. In many cases, a threshold would mean these won't be affected, but...? For me, the most important thing to remember is that CGT is only paid on realisation of a profit. It's a tax on the profit meaning that profit may be reduced, but CGT won't (in itself) cause a loss. And where investment property is concerned, it'll affect less than 5% of people selling in NZ anyway. Put t threshold in and the only loss that will be made will be a result of poor investment or poor management. Is it a good idea? Take a slightly longer view. If one majority NZ political party (or coaliton) were to implement CGT and then lose the next election, would the incoming party scrap it, or would they happily continue to acquire the billions in tax it is said to bring?

I like the idea of rent to own. Haven't really looked into what it would involve.

This is done in the UK. It used to be the case that UK housebuyers were responsible for sorting a report on a property, which the buyer paid for, before presenting to a lending institution for a loan. This often led to several such reports being commissioned, and paid for, on a single property. That's changed (I think) and now a house seller is required to provide the report to buyers. The report is compiled by, as suggested, licensed building inspectors. It's not a ridiculously expensive document and may not be entirely exhaustive, but it will cover things like structural integrity, leaks, an overview of elctrics and plumbing, and information regarding changes and their approval.

Market is dropping a bit. Hardly a crash, but NZ tends to follow Oz in these things, and they're in a world of hurt. CVs are a council rort. You can (and should) challenge them, but no-one wants to because they like the idea that their house is miraculously suddenly worth $150k more than it was. Real estate agents *love* CVs - they slap 10, 20, 30% and more on the CV and tell buyers the CV means nothing. Of course, they're the first to shout when a property is listed or below CV...

And the closest the vultures agents will get to admitting the problems is suggesting a little tlc is needed. Although real estate agents are deserving of a rant thread all of their own...

1967 3.0 V8 fastback with styling by Frua.

Or a Reliant Scimitar?

I was going to go with a blocked fuel filter!

Anyone bringing an empty trailer back from Chch?

See here - it's in the Projects sub-forum.

Saw this advertised on Facebook by Gareth Parry. Rego is still live. I'll pass along any contact info if anyone is interested. FS: 1974 BMW e3 2500. Too many projects on the go and not enough room so this must go. Been parked up for the last 10 years and don't think has been run since. Rego on hold, recommend viewing - $2000ono

Base rate could be going down - again. Yet Aussie banks have been reaming Kiwis on loans for many years. No telling what they'll do, especialy given they're facing big fines back home.

I've now sold on my two E30 projects, or this may well have been a serious consideration. I do still have a good G260/6 gearbox that would suit if anyone needs it.

?