Thread: An open letter to Fish and Game

no your right your more popular.
who other than farmers get the tax breaks irrigation subcidies or drought /flood /any major wheather event help first.

Could you please provide details (including dollar amounts) for these "tax breaks irrigation subcidies or drought /flood /any major wheather event help first".

I want to believe you, but it's hard without cold hard facts. Links to web pages or copy and paste will be fine to save duplication.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

no your right your more popular.
who other than farmers get the tax breaks irrigation subcidies or drought /flood /any major wheather event help first.

Environmental expenditure

Changes have been made to ensure that all business operating costs, including those for dealing with environmental issue, are taken into consideration in calculating taxable income, and that the timing of such deductions is appropriate

Most businesses incur expenses when generating income and most of these can be deducted from its income to arrive at its net profit or taxable income. It is on this amount that you pay income tax. Certain business expenses that are paid for out of business income cannot be claimed as allowable business ]

irrigation equipment cowsheds farm vhicles ??

Inland Revenue considers updating farmhouse expenses rules
14 October 2016

Inland Revenue is looking to bring tax accounting practice regarding farmhouse expenses into line with the law.

This is all part of a review of out-dated practices and policies.

The practice of full-time farmers deducting 25% of farmhouse expenses without needing to provide evidence of their business use has been accepted by the department since the 1960s.

Farmers have also been able to deduct 100% of rates bills and interest costs on loans.

Inland Revenue Group Tax Counsel Graham Tubb said this has allowed some farmers to claim deductions for private spending.


Under proposals that go out for consultation today, the farmhouse adjustment will more strictly follow the law so farmers are treated like other businesses.

It’s suggested that farms, where the cost of the farmhouse is less than 20% of the total value of the farm, will still be able to claim a 100% deduction on interest costs.

However, deductions on rates related to the house and general farmhouse expenses would be at a new flat rate of 15% unless the taxpayer can provide evidence to substantiate a higher claim.

“It’s going to be generally business as usual for large farms except the automatic deduction will be based on 15% of farmhouse costs rather than the previous 25%.

“We see the proposed rule changes mostly affecting smaller operations or lifestyle blocks.

“These concessions have been able to be applied even in cases where farming isn’t the household’s main source of income and that’s not in keeping with the intent of the rule.

“Other industries have long had to provide evidence of business use when using their house for work purposes so it’s only fair and equitable that farming gets the same treatment.”

Where the cost of the farmhouse is valued at more than 20% of the total farm’s value, then deductions can only be claimed on expenses attributable to actual business use.

The rules would only affect farms being run by sole traders or in partnership. Those in trusts or companies are subject to different regimes.

“Business deductions certainly remain under these proposals but we’re looking to remove the practice of using the farm to claim for private spending.”

“We have already spoken with Federated Farmers and other industry groups in determining our revised position. However, we look forward to receiving submissions from farmers and their accountants affected by the change.”

The changes will apply from the start of the 2017-18 year after submissions have been considered.

The consultation document can be read online and the deadline for submissions is December 22.

Media contact:
Baden Campbell

I'm sure no evidence of the 400 mill irri fund is needed for you.

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

It appears that you think I am a dairy farmer who irrigates.
And I would presume you think that farming is the only industry which has tax deductible expenses. It's not.

not at all crop farmers irrigate as do sheep and beef.
but you are a farmer with all the other benefits and yes seasonal pit falls that go with it??

Farmers have also been able to deduct 100% of rates bills and interest costs on loans.

don't even get me started on depreciation

What depreciation? Houses and farms have never cost so much to buy in this country!

Originally Posted by gsp follower

irrigation equipment cowsheds farm vhicles ??


I'm sure no evidence of the 400 mill irri fund is needed for you.

Fair enough, the house deduction side of things is the only deduction that I can think of that doesn't apply to other businesses. Given that farm houses are typically used for farms meetings as farm office and their value is a lot less than an urban home, I'm not sure it's significant enough to justify you attitude.

Could I please some more details on the '400 mill irri fund' and also an explanation on the difference between a 'subsidy' and an 'investment' and how the terms could/should be applied to this fund.

You still need to provide details on "drought /flood /any major wheather event help first"

you know what I don't need to provide fuck all because you,l never concede the point anyway.
the irri fund is real and you know it .
investment for who?? what other private bussiness group gets a 400 million government hand up that doubles their land values while virtually, [ after depreciation for irri equipment and deductability for just about everything else],costing them buggerall .

bit like the old $100,000.00 fund that MPs carter&wilkinson got for a certain abortion of a goosecull a few elections ago eh.I had a sly dig at the local DOC boss awee while ago -he rolled his eyes and sighed "that was a fuckup start to finish" GSP follower thatll brin g a chuckle to ya chops!

Originally Posted by gsp follower

you know what I don't need to provide fuck all because you,l never concede the point anyway..

The problem is that if you can't back up your statements with facts then you become merely a 'Nutter having a rant'
If you wouldn't concede a point regardless of the facts then I'll let you decide what that makes you....

[QUOTE=the irri fund is real and you know it ...[/QUOTE]
You're right there is an irrigation fund. The government is investing money into it rather than giving money to it. You are welcome to provide evidence to the contrary.

Originally Posted by investment for who?? what other private bussiness group gets a 400 million government hand up that doubles their land values while virtually, [ after depreciation for irri equipment and deductability for just about everything else

,costing them buggerall .

Do you have any understanding of economics and how regional economic growth benefits the whole region?

What is your hang up about depreciation? Why would you not be able to depreciate an business asset that wears out (depreciates)? All businesses do this and it's not specific to the New Zealand tax system.

Do you have any understanding of economics and how regional economic growth benefits the whole region?]

by hiring foreign labour at minimum wage for instance.
you address the question for a change instead of getting on a high horse

what other private bussiness group gets a 400 million government hand up that doubles their land values overnight

just one will do.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

by hiring foreign labour at minimum wage for instance.
you address the question for a change instead of getting on a high horse


just one will do.

All I have asked you to do is to back up the comments that you have made - which you have struggled to do.

Given what farmers have to invest in the irrigation scheme and what they pay on a yearly basis to keep it running, I'm not convinced that it would 'double their land values overnight'. But then I'm not a Canterbury land agent, you might be?

But I will answer your question....

The government is currently building 'Transmission gully' and a motorway that will run from Wellington to north of Levin. This in effect makes the Kapiti coast and Horowhenua a lot closer to Wellington in terms of travel time. The area is becoming even more popular with people working in Wellington because of the shorter commute. The region is growing, businesses are relocating here and jobs are being created. As a result house prices are moving up significantly.

To be clear, the government are not doing this to increase the values of peoples houses, they are doing it to create efficiency and to stimulate growth. The increase in house prices is a positive externality.

As a result house prices are moving up significantly.

To be clear, the government are not doing this to increase the values of peoples houses, they are doing it to create efficiency and to stimulate growth. The increase in house prices is a positive externality.

house prices rising in welly has fuck all to do with transmission gully try housing shortages due to lack of supply and increased student numbers.
students paying a 1000 bucks a week for a caved in front yard luvly jubly.
how much have the house prices risen of those houses in the way or close to the new motor way.
yes some will be quids in like the guy we used to rent from whose land bought 20 to 30 years ago his investment will come good when they compulsory aquire it.

I'm not convinced that it would 'double their land values overnight'. But then I'm not a Canterbury land agent, you might be?

okay you best guess will do.
non irrigated only partially able to be used for other than growing grass at certain times of the year,as against fully irrigated guareenteed supply year round mmmmm
stop taking the michael

The government is currently building 'Transmission gully' and a motorway that will run from Wellington to north of Levin. This in effect makes the Kapiti coast and Horowhenua a lot closer to Wellington in terms of travel time. The area is becoming even more popular with people working in Wellington because of the shorter commute. The region is growing, businesses are relocating here and jobs are being created. As a result house prices are moving up significantly

yea fuckin finaly
what a load of bullshit the region aint and probably never will recover from the flight of most head offices of companies moving to Auckland and making most of those in their wellington ops redundant
.the closing of todd motors gm all the works depots railways shops severly fucked the supply of apprentices cos the market will take over and train whats needed.
another line of money grubbing bullshit.
not to mention funding private capital gain against public infrastructure is two totally different things

I don't disagree 7mmwsm

I would suggest that a hectare of industrial area would likely have bigger impact on the environment than a hectare of well run pastoral land.

but why couldn't the industrial land be well run to??
problem is we don't/cant legislate for the well run shite of any venture do we??
its the excess,s of every enterprise that fucks it for everybody else and farmings no different.
possibly made worse by the corporate farming interest bringing profit presseure where it can do the most visual damage.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

I don't disagree 7mmwsm

but why couldn't the industrial land be well run to??
problem is we don't/cant legislate for the well run shite of any venture do we??
its the excess,s of every enterprise that fucks it for everybody else and farmings no different.
possibly made worse by the corporate farming interest bringing profit presseure where it can do the most visual damage.

.......corporate farming interest..........
I think you've hit it on the head. A friend was in shares on a farm with 2 other businessmen. At every meeting they'd quote figures from a book, put more N on and you'll increase our profits, run more cows.......
He refused, and even started going the other way, going more natural, semi organic almost. The creek cleared up abit, worms came back, and clover started its natural cycle again. The smaller guy is trying because he's in it for the long term. Corporate wants the returns now.
Compare it to "all the duck shooters" that sky bust, wound and leave,and dump all the birds. It's a minority that ruin it for the majority