The global ideas behind the Greens’ tax plan

Tuesday, 23 June 2026

ANALYSIS: National Party campaign manager Simeon Brown has described the Greens’ tax policy as “wild”.

Yet many of its core elements have close parallels overseas and some have been seriously considered by Labour, with at least one even looked at by the National Party.

The latter is the Greens’ proposal to introduce a levy of 0.06% on the liabilities of the four big banks, which mirrors the Major Bank Levy introduced in Australia in 2017.

“Liabilities” in this context mostly means the value of people’s bank deposits.

Read more:

• Greens to campaign on smaller wealth tax alongside inheritance tax and new top tax rate

• Nicola Willis has unfinished business as banks set to become an election issue

• The Irish tax that’s caught Labour’s eye: What is it and how is it seen there?

The levy would raise about $400 million a year, so it would only contribute a small part of the extra $5.5 billion that the Greens estimate their package would raise on average each year during its first four years.

Last year, Finance Minister Nicola Willis asked officials to investigate introducing the Australian levy here.

She made clear in the Budget that she could only get support from the ACT Party for a smaller levy that will raise about $70m a year, but has made clear she hasn’t given up on the idea of something more significant.

The alternative mini-levy will require a wider range of banks, insurers and financial institutions pay for the cost of being regulated by the Reserve Bank.

The Greens’ stated rationale for its larger proposed levy echoes one given by former Australian Liberal Party treasurer Scott Morrison for its Major Bank Levy, which was that it was a quid pro quo for the practical reality that the Government would need to bail out a major bank if it failed.

The Greens’ proposed Capital Acquisition Tax, which it estimates would raise about $1b a year, was the subject of much internal discussion within Labour last year.

Modelled on an almost identical tax in Ireland, it would impose a 33% tax on any inheritances and other gifts people received over and above the value of $1m over their lifetime, with carve-outs for the family home and farm.

Supporters argue it is among the fairest and most efficient models for taxing inheritances, which is fairly common in most developed countries.

Kiwi tax expert Eugen Trombitas, who headed PwC’s business in Ireland up until August, has said tax policy there is “very well thought through”.

Senior voices within Labour are believed to have argued for the adoption of the Irish tax here.

But that appears unlikely under the leadership of Chris Hipkins who has made the call that an inheritance tax, however cleverly designed and with whatever thresholds and exemptions, would be electoral poison.

The centrepiece of the Greens’ tax policy is a proposed annual wealth tax of 2.5% on the net wealth of people who own assets worth more than $10m, but with an exemption for a family home.

Labour also famously toyed with an annual wealth tax in its final year in office in 2023, before Hipkins pulled the pin.

It would have taxed more people but at a lower rate, with tax being applied at 1.5% on assets over $5 million.

The Treasury estimated in 2023 that Labour’s version of the tax would have raised $3.8b a year in the current financial year.

That is exactly the same sum that the Greens estimate its version would raise in the first year it is suggesting it should come into effect, the year to June 2028.

Annual wealth taxes are not unheard of, but more unusual internationally.

Spain applies one on a sliding scale of between 0.2% and 3.5%, with the lowest rate kicking in on assets with more than €700,000 (NZ$1.4m), with a €300,000 exemption for family homes and the top rate applying on net wealth over €10.7m.

Switzerland raises about 4% of all tax from a wealth tax which is applied at different rates by local government, according to the OECD, and Norway also has an annual wealth tax.

Other elements of the Greens’ tax package also have parallels overseas.

The party is proposing a tax-free income threshold on income up to $10,000, which is markedly less generous than Britain’s standard ₤12,570 (NZ$30,000) so-called personal allowance or Australia’s A$18,200 (NZ$20,000) allowance.

The Greens’ proposal to introduce a differentiated company tax rate — 28% on most businesses but 33% for those with an annual turnover of more than $30m — has a parallel close to home.

Australia also has a two-tier company rate, set at 25% or 30%, depending largely on whether businesses have a turnover above or below A$50m.

More traditionally, the Greens propose replacing the current 39% top income tax rate on income over $180,000 with a 45% band on income over $160,000.

The average top rate of tax in the OECD is about 42% and the Greens’ proposal would bring the top rate into line with Australia’s top rate which applies on annual income over A$190,000.

So “radical” in a New Zealand context, rather than “wild” in an international context, perhaps.