A delusional alternative Budget from Greens is what we’ve come to expect – Editorial

Greens co-leaders Chlöe Swarbrick (left) and Marama Davidson after their Budget 2025 launch at Parliament on May 14. Photo / Mark Mitchell

Editorial

THREE KEY FACTS

• The Green Party’s alternative Budget proposes $88.8 billion in new revenue over four years, mainly from a wealth tax and inheritance tax.
• The plan includes a 2.5% tax on net assets over $2 million and higher income tax rates for earnings above $120,000.
• Analysis suggests the plan would reduce after-tax income for professions like nurses, with the total cost estimated at $99.1b.

The Green Party released its alternative Budget this week to the predictable cheers we have come to expect from the party faithful.

Alternative, however, would be underselling how radical Chlöe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson’s tax plan is.

It is perhaps more accurately described as delusional.

target="_self" rel="" title="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/an-average-registered-nurses-after-tax-pay-will-fall-under-the-green-partys-tax-plan/NGZMP2M4HRF7DP4UWMPBJW7PXA/">Analysis by the Herald‘s political editor Thomas Coughlan showed how the Greens’ uber keenness to slap more taxes on people would bring reduced after-tax income for the average registered nurse under their scheme.

Nurses wouldn’t be alone: they would be one of many hard-working professions to have less money in their back pocket.

The Greens’ plan promised $88.8 billion in new revenue over four years, comprised mainly of a wealth tax and inheritance tax.

It suggests those who earn an income of more than $120,000 should be stung with the current highest tax rate, 39%. For anyone earning more than $180,000, a 45% rate would be applied.

The wealth tax would be a 2.5% tax on net assets, such as property and shares, over an individual threshold of $2 million (or $4m for couples). If you’re living mortgage-free in Auckland, then it’s time to pay up, according to Swarbrick and Davidson.

The $88.8b figure has also been found to be a little light. An Infometrics analysis of the party’s costings, commissioned by the Greens, put the full cost of the party’s changes to the Crown’s revenue position at $99.11b.

Some $11b more is no chump change.

Coughlan’s analysis suggests the $99.1b figure is 30 times more new tax than Labour promised in its 2020 tax plan (using figures adjusted for inflation).

The Green Party of today derives much of its support from urban liberals, those living in the Auckland Central, Wellington Central and Mt Albert electorates.

Even in David Seymour’s electorate of Epsom, more people gave their party vote to the Greens than Act at the 2023 election.

These areas contain some of the highest-earning households in our country. They would be the people responsible for paying the vast majority of the Greens’ proposed tax bill.

While it might be fun for white-collar workers at a Mount Eden dinner party to debate the pros and cons of a wealth tax, would any of them be prepared to see their money and inheritance for their children significantly curtailed?

Maybe, but we will likely never see the day to find out.

While Labour has refused to rule in or out any aspect of the Greens’ alternative Budget, there is zero prospect of it adopting such a radical proposal if it wants to return to power in 2026.

The Greens have increasingly become a protest party and by proxy a protest vote. Tamatha Paul’s public disdain for the police is evidence enough this year.

So, if there is a continued willingness to be outside a future cabinet throwing stones than inside making decisions, why should anyone take their fiscal policies seriously?

Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.