Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complexity of Tax Simplification: A New Zealand Perspective

  • Chapter
The Complexity of Tax Simplification

Abstract

Compared to many developed countries, New Zealand’s tax system is relatively simple, coherent and transparent. Why is this so? A number of reasons may underlie this, including New Zealand’s constitutional structure (operating with a unicameral Parliament, having a single House of Representatives, in which the New Zealand Government in conjunction with its coalition partners, holds a majority), coupled with a unitary State (which eliminates the issues that frequently arise in a Federal system). A further reason may be attributed to the relatively transparent and coherent public sector, to which the private sector has ready access, not only through making submissions, but also being able to discuss issues and share information (where permitted), which is facilitated by the small population and transparent and coherent tax policy process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. See, for example, Jackson, B. and Milliron, V. (1986), ‘Tax Compliance Research: Findings, Problems and Prospects’, Journal of Accounting Literature, 5, 125–165

    Google Scholar 

  2. Richardson, M. and Sawyer, A.J. (2001), ‘A Taxonomy of the Tax Compliance Literature: Further Findings, Problems and Prospects’, Australian Tax Forum, 16(2), 137–320.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See further, Sawyer, A. (2013) ‘New Zealand’s Successful Experience with Introducing GST: Informative Guidance for Hong Kong?’, Hong Kong Law Journal, 43(1), 161–187.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sir Ivor Richardson et al., (1994) Organisational Review of the Inland Revenue Department: Report to the Minister of Revenue. Wellington, NZ Crown)

    Google Scholar 

  5. For a tribute recognising many of the contributions of the Rt Hon Sir Ivor Richardson, see for example: Sawyer, A. (2015) ‘Sir Ivor Richardson: A Tribute’, New Zealand Journal of Taxation Law and Policy, 21(1), 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  6. For a comprehensive analysis of content, processes and successes of the GTPP, see Sawyer, A. (2013) ‘Reviewing Tax Policy Development in New Zealand: Lessons from a Delicate Balancing of ‘Law and Politics’, Australian Tax Forum, 28(2), 401–425.

    Google Scholar 

  7. For an analysis of how it could assist another jurisdiction, in this case, Hong Kong, see: Sawyer, A. (2013) ‘Establishing a Rigorous Framework for Tax Policy Development: Can New Zealand offer Instructional Guidance for Hong Kong?’ Hong Kong Law Journal, 43(2), 579–609.

    Google Scholar 

  8. For further explanations of dividend imputation, see for example, Dabner, J. (2004) ‘Responding to Globalisation: Are Imputation Systems up to the Challenge?’, New Zealand Journal of Taxation Law and Policy, 10(3), 271

    Google Scholar 

  9. Palmer, C. (2008) ‘The International Tax Consequences of New Zealand’s Imputation System: Past, Present and Future’, New Zealand Journal of Taxation Law and Policy, 14(2), 231.

    Google Scholar 

  10. For further discussion on the work of the TWG, see: Sawyer, A. (2013) ‘Moving on from the Tax Legislation Rewrite Projects: A Comparison of New Zealand Tax Working Group/Generic Tax Policy Process and the United Kingdom Office of Tax Simplification’, British Tax Review, 3, 321–344.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Some of the discussion on compliance costs is drawn from the following work involving the author: Gupta, R. and Sawyer, A. (2015) ‘Tax Compliance Costs for Small Businesses in New Zealand: Some Recent Findings’, Australian Tax Forum, 30(1), 135–177.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sandford, C. and Hasseldine, J. (1992) The Compliance Costs of Business Taxes in New Zealand. Wellington: Institute of Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A summary of this study is published as: Hasseldine, J. (1995) ‘Compliance Costs of Business Taxes in New Zealand’, in Sandford, C. (ed.), Tax Compliance Costs Measurement and Policy. Bath UK: Fiscal Publications, pp. 126–141.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Penny Salmon and Research NZ, National Research and Evaluation Unit of Inland Revenue, A qualitative investigation to identify steps Inland Revenue could take to reduce effort and compliance cost of SMEs (November 2014); available at: http://www.ird.govt.nz/resources/e/3/e346aae8-20fa-4ae9-99f3-58066b9d48e0/sme-tax-compliance-qualitative-report.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tran-Nam, B. (1999) ‘Tax Reform and Tax Simplification: Some Conceptual Issues and a Preliminary Assessment’, Sydney Law Review, 21, 500.

    Google Scholar 

  16. For further discussion, see Sawyer, A. (2013) ‘Rewriting Tax Legislation: Can Polishing Silver Really turn it into Gold?’ Journal of Australian Taxation, 15(1), 1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  17. For an analysis of the RAP, see Sawyer, A. (2008) ‘RAP(ping) in Taxation: A Review of New Zealand’s Rewrite Advisory Panel and its Potential for Adaptation to Other Jurisdictions’, Australian Tax Review, 37(3), 148–163.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Consultative Committee on the Taxation of Income from Capital (Valabh Committee), Final Report (New Zealand Government, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  19. See also Sawyer, A. (2011) ‘Enhancing Compliance Through Improved Readability: Evidence from New Zealand’s Rewrite “Experiment”’, in Gangi, M.E. and Plumley, A. (eds.), Recent Research on Tax Administration and Compliance: Selected Papers Given at the 2010 IRS Research Conference. Washington DC: IRS, pp. 221–253, at 247.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sir Ivor Richardson, (2012) ‘Simplicity in Legislative Drafting and Rewriting Tax Legislation’, Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 43, 517.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tan, L.M. and Tower, G. (1992) ‘The Readability of Tax Laws: An Empirical Study in New Zealand’, Australian Tax Forum, 9, 355

    Google Scholar 

  22. Richardson, M.-A. and Sawyer, A. (1998) ‘Complexity in the Expression of New Zealand Tax Laws: An Empirical Analysis’, Australian Tax Forum, 14, 325

    Google Scholar 

  23. Harrison, J. (2006) Submission to Inland Revenue, The Readability of the Income Tax Act 2004: A Report to Inland Revenue for the Rewrite Advisory Panel, Auckland.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pau, C., Sawyer, A. and Maples, A. (2007) ‘Complexity of the New Zealand’s Tax Laws: An Empirical Study’, Australian Tax Forum, 22, 59

    Google Scholar 

  25. Saw, K. and Sawyer, A. (2010) ‘Complexity of New Zealand’s Income Tax Legislation: The Final Instalment’ Australian Tax Forum, 25, 213.

    Google Scholar 

  26. For a summary of what makes a document readable, see: Castle, R. (2007) ‘What Makes a Document Readable?’, Clarity 58 (November), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  27. McClay, T. (June 2014) Speech to 21st century tax conference; available at: http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/news/2014-06-12-speech-21st-century-tax-conference.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tax Simplification Consultative Committee (the Waugh Committee), Final Report (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  29. For further information, see Foss, C. and T McClay, T. ‘Changes to Financial Reporting Requirements’ (March 2014) Media Release; available at: http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/news/2014-03-13-changes-financial-reporting-require-ments. See also: Tax Administration (Financial Statements) Order 2014 LI 2014/69.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Inland Revenue, ‘Time to speak up — New Zealanders to have their say about the future of the tax system’ (2014) Media Release (August 140: available at: http://www.ird.govt.nz/aboutir/media-centre/media-releases/2014/media-release-2014-08-14.html.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Adrian Sawyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Exeter Business School, UK

    Simon James (Associate Professor of Economics) (Associate Professor of Economics)

  2. University of Canterbury, New Zealand

    Adrian Sawyer (Professor of Taxation) (Professor of Taxation)

  3. Inonu University, Turkey

    Tamer Budak (Associate Professor of Tax Law) (Associate Professor of Tax Law)

Copyright information

© 2016 Adrian Sawyer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sawyer, A. (2016). Complexity of Tax Simplification: A New Zealand Perspective. In: James, S., Sawyer, A., Budak, T. (eds) The Complexity of Tax Simplification. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137478696_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation