All issues
Tax and public finances / Income tax

How should income tax change?

Some parties would keep today's income tax rates; others would redraw them.New Zealand taxes income at five rates, from 10.5% on the first $15,600 to 39% on income over $180,000. The thresholds were last raised in 2024 and do not rise with inflation, so as wages go up more income is taxed at higher rates (often called bracket creep). ACT, Labour and National propose no change to income tax rates or thresholds in their 2026 fiscal plans. National says it would consider tax cuts once the budget is back in surplus; Labour says surplus comes first and cuts depend on the fiscal environment. The Greens, NZ First and Te Pāti Māori would make the first part of everyone's income tax-free, and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori would add higher top rates. Opportunity would replace the rates with three rates and pay most adults a tax-free income. Most of these plans are funded by taxes on wealth, land or companies, which are covered under a separate question.

Uneven evidence. Some parties' plans have more published costings or analysis than others. Read what was found

As at 15 October 2026, the only independent check of an income tax costing found was Deloitte's Treasury-tool estimate for Te Pāti Māori, and the only independent analyses of who gains and loses were Michael Fletcher's study of Opportunity's plan and AAP FactCheck's check of which incomes would pay more under the Greens' rates. No independent costing was found for the Green, NZ First or Opportunity income tax changes. NZ First's proposal was found only in reports of a panel and in KPMG's tracker, not on the party's own site. ACT, Labour and National propose no change, so there is little to cost. Evidence sections are therefore shorter for some parties than others. This reflects what has been published, not a judgement on the plans.

How would this affect me? Work out each party's plan for your own income and circumstances.

ViewDepth
Party order is random for each visitor. Tap a party's answer for its full breakdown and sources.Order

Bottom lines on this question

What a party has publicly said it must get, or won't accept, to form or support a government after the election. Only the party's own statements count, quoted with their source. Parties marked Bottom line below have one on that answer.

  • Labour

    Won't vote for taxes partners want if Labour has said it won't support them.

    “If we've said that we won't support them, we won't support them. … That's the bottom line in terms of what we will support. Absolutely.”

    Party claimChris Hipkins, Labour leader, 1 Oct 2026 · LawNews
  • Te Pāti Māori

    Meaningful change to the tax system.

    “When the next government requires our support, there must be meaningful tax transformation”

  • No bottom line on this question found: ACT, Green, National, NZ First, Opportunity (checked 17 Oct 2026)
  • Opportunity: Its tax reset is not one of the five bottom lines, interest.co.nz reports. interest.co.nz

Every party's bottom lines, on all issues

Parties are grouped by the approach they take. A party can take more than one.

Approaches

7 of 7 parties take at least one

Keep current rates and thresholds3 parties

  • ACT

    No rate or threshold changes; $264 million set aside for targeted tax relief.Income tax stays on today's table; Seymour prefers fewer, flatter rates later over inflation-adjusted thresholds.

  • Labour

    No rate or threshold changes; surplus first, tax cuts when the budget allows.Income tax stays on today's table; Labour says surplus comes first and tax cuts depend on the fiscal environment.

  • National

    No rate or threshold changes; relief to be considered after a 2028/29 surplus.Income tax stays on today's table; any later relief would follow a return to surplus.

Make the first part of income tax-free3 parties

  • Green

    First $10,000 of income tax-free.No tax on the first $10,000, then rates rising in steps from 10% to 33.5% up to $160,000.

  • NZ First

    First $14,000 of income tax-free, by 1 April 2027.Reported from an NZ First MP at a CA ANZ panel and in KPMG's tracker; not on the party's own site.

  • Te Pāti Māori

    First $30,000 of income tax-free.No tax on the first $30,000, then 15% up to $60,000 and 33% up to $90,000.

Add higher rates for top earners2 parties

  • Green

    45% on income over $160,000, up from 39% over $180,000.A new 45% top rate starting $20,000 lower than today's 39% rate.

  • Te Pāti Māori

    42% from $180,001 and 48% over $300,000.Two new rates above today's 39% top rate, which would apply from $90,001 to $180,000.

Adjust thresholds for inflation1 party

  • NZ First

    Adjust income tax brackets for inflation.The 2026 reports give no frequency or inflation measure; NZ First's 2023 policy set a three-yearly adjustment.

Use fewer, flatter rates1 party

  • Opportunity

    Three rates of 28%, 34% and 39%, replacing today's five.28% up to $50,000, 34% up to $200,000 and 39% above, starting from the first dollar.

Add a tax credit for lower earners1 party

  • Te Pāti Māori

    An income tax kai credit for people earning $60,000 or less.The party describes it as worth up to eight weeks of kai a year, reaching about 3 million people.

Pay every adult a tax-free income1 party

  • Opportunity

    A tax-free Citizen's Income of $19,400 a year for most adults.Paid fortnightly (weekly, says the party's website) to citizens and residents aged 18 and over, replacing several main benefits, funded by a land value tax.

Each party's whole answer, under the same headings for every party.

ACT

Opposes

No change to income tax rates in its fiscal plan; prefers flatter rates later.ACT's fiscal plan, released on 11 October 2026, makes no change to income tax rates or thresholds. The plan sets aside $264 million in 2027/28, rising to $303 million in 2030/31, for "additional targeted tax relief to be announced". Its design has not been announced; Seymour has linked it to housing costs. Its other tax changes, such as removing tax on KiwiSaver investment earnings, are not changes to income tax rates. Seymour says cutting taxes by borrowing is "immoral" and wants a surplus first. He does not favour raising thresholds for inflation, and would rather use extra revenue later to reduce the top rates and flatten the rate structure. The biggest tradeoff: an earlier surplus and less debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

Approaches
Keep current rates and thresholds. No rate or threshold changes; $264 million set aside for targeted tax relief.Income tax stays on today's table; Seymour prefers fewer, flatter rates later over inflation-adjusted thresholds.

Green

First $10,000 tax-free, new rates from 10% to 33.5% up to $160,000, and 45% above.The Greens would make the first $10,000 of income tax-free and replace the five current rates with seven: 0%, then 10% to 33.5% in steps, and 45% on income over $160,000. The party says 96% of people would get a tax cut: about $27 a week more at $40,000 and $10 at $90,000, and $66 a week less at $200,000. The party costs the income tax changes at about $2.3 billion in 2027/28, rising to about $2.7 billion in 2030/31, funded by taxes on net wealth over $10 million, inheritances over $1 million, large companies and banks. It says the whole package raises a net $5.15 billion in 2027/28; no independent costing has been found. No start date is given. The biggest tradeoff: most people pay less income tax, but top earners pay up to 45% and the cuts rely on new taxes.

Approaches
Make the first part of income tax-free. First $10,000 of income tax-free.No tax on the first $10,000, then rates rising in steps from 10% to 33.5% up to $160,000.
Add higher rates for top earners. 45% on income over $160,000, up from 39% over $180,000.A new 45% top rate starting $20,000 lower than today's 39% rate.

LabourBottom line

Opposes

No income tax changes planned; would consider tax cuts once the budget allows.Labour's published policies include no change to income tax rates or thresholds, so income tax would stay on today's table. Its fiscal plan, released on 4 October 2026, relies on revenue measures that are not income tax changes. Finance spokesperson Barbara Edmonds says tax cuts "need to be allowed as the fiscal and economic environment allows for it", and that "there are always pros and cons around tax cuts or changes to thresholds". Labour says surplus comes first, which it has pledged to keep forecast for 2028/29, and tax relief would be considered when the fiscal environment allows. It has not said whether it would index thresholds. The biggest tradeoff: stable rates and lower debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

Approaches
Keep current rates and thresholds. No rate or threshold changes; surplus first, tax cuts when the budget allows.Income tax stays on today's table; Labour says surplus comes first and tax cuts depend on the fiscal environment.

National

Opposes

No income tax cuts planned; would consider relief once the budget is in surplus.National's fiscal plan, released on 12 October 2026, makes no change to income tax rates or thresholds, so income tax would stay on today's table. Willis said in September that National would campaign on adjusting settings for bracket creep; the plan has no such change. Finance Minister Nicola Willis says "now is not the time to cut taxes" and the priority is to "get on top of the debt first". She says the plan shows "a pathway to potential tax relief for working New Zealanders" once the books are back in surplus, forecast for 2028/29. No size or date is set. National also pledges no new taxes. The biggest tradeoff: stable rates and lower debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

Approaches
Keep current rates and thresholds. No rate or threshold changes; relief to be considered after a 2028/29 surplus.Income tax stays on today's table; any later relief would follow a return to surplus.

NZ First

Make the first $14,000 of income tax-free and adjust brackets for inflation.At a Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand tax panel in September 2026, NZ First MP David Wilson outlined a proposal to make the first $14,000 of income tax-free and adjust income tax brackets for inflation. KPMG's election tracker records it as making the lowest tax bracket tax-free "no later than 1 April 2027". The policy is not on NZ First's own policy page. NZ First has not published rates above the tax-free amount, a cost, a funding source or how often brackets would be adjusted (its 2023 policy said every three years), and no independent costing has been found. The biggest tradeoff: people earning over $14,000 would pay less income tax, but government revenue would fall, and the rates above it and the funding are unpublished.

Approaches
Make the first part of income tax-free. First $14,000 of income tax-free, by 1 April 2027.Reported from an NZ First MP at a CA ANZ panel and in KPMG's tracker; not on the party's own site.
Adjust thresholds for inflation. Adjust income tax brackets for inflation.The 2026 reports give no frequency or inflation measure; NZ First's 2023 policy set a three-yearly adjustment.

Opportunity

Three rates from 28% to 39%, plus $19,400 a year tax-free for most adults.Opportunity's Tax Reset would replace the five current rates with three: 28% on income up to $50,000, 34% up to $200,000 and 39% above that. Most citizens and residents aged 18 and over would also get a tax-free Citizen's Income of $19,400 a year, the Jobseeker rate, replacing several main benefits, with top-ups for superannuitants, parents and others. The party says people earning under $60,000 would pay less tax than the payment they receive, and 70% of people would be better off. It would be funded by a land value tax of 1.75% on urban and 0.5% on rural land; the party's 2024 costing shows about $4 billion left over, and no independent costing has been found. It would be phased in over ten years, starting with young people. The biggest tradeoff: most adults get a tax-free income, but landowners, including homeowners, pay a new yearly land tax.

Approaches
Use fewer, flatter rates. Three rates of 28%, 34% and 39%, replacing today's five.28% up to $50,000, 34% up to $200,000 and 39% above, starting from the first dollar.
Pay every adult a tax-free income. A tax-free Citizen's Income of $19,400 a year for most adults.Paid fortnightly (weekly, says the party's website) to citizens and residents aged 18 and over, replacing several main benefits, funded by a land value tax.

Te Pāti MāoriBottom line

First $30,000 tax-free, new 42% and 48% top rates, and a kai credit.Te Pāti Māori would make the first $30,000 of income tax-free, then 15%, 33% and 39%, with new rates of 42% from $180,001 and 48% over $300,000. The party says 97% of people would pay less income tax and 4.2 million would gain about $4,000 a year on average. It also proposes an income tax kai credit for people earning $60,000 or less, described as worth up to eight weeks of kai a year; a co-leader put it at around $1,000. The party forecasts the rate changes cost $13.4 billion; Deloitte reports Treasury's calculator puts the yearly cost at over $14 billion. Funding comes from a wealth tax on net assets over $2 million, a 33% company rate and other taxes. No start date is given. The biggest tradeoff: most people pay less income tax, but top earners pay up to 48% and the cuts rely on new taxes.

Approaches
Make the first part of income tax-free. First $30,000 of income tax-free.No tax on the first $30,000, then 15% up to $60,000 and 33% up to $90,000.
Add higher rates for top earners. 42% from $180,001 and 48% over $300,000.Two new rates above today's 39% top rate, which would apply from $90,001 to $180,000.
Add a tax credit for lower earners. An income tax kai credit for people earning $60,000 or less.The party describes it as worth up to eight weeks of kai a year, reaching about 3 million people.
Background and sources

Current rates. Since 1 April 2025 Inland Revenue has applied these rates to each dollar of income (IRD). The thresholds have not changed since July 2024 (Newswire). This is the baseline every party's plan is compared against.

Income Rate
$0 – $15,600 10.5%
$15,601 – $53,500 17.5%
$53,501 – $78,100 30%
$78,101 – $180,000 33%
$180,001 and over 39%

Bracket creep. Because the thresholds are fixed in dollars, inflation moves more income into higher rates without a vote in Parliament. The Taxpayers' Union, an advocacy group, estimates that a median earner pays $480.14 a year more than they would if the 2024 thresholds had been indexed to inflation (Taxpayers' Union). Deloitte notes that indexing thresholds lowers government revenue, which may mean spending cuts, and adds complexity; a law to index thresholds every three years after Budget 2005 was replaced before it took effect (Deloitte). Each party's position on indexing is in its own entry.

The plans side by side. In alphabetical order: ACT's fiscal plan has no change to rates or thresholds and includes $264 million of targeted tax relief that it has not yet described (ACT). The Greens would make the first $10,000 tax-free and tax income over $160,000 at 45% (Green Party). Labour lists no income tax change (Labour). National says "now is not the time to cut taxes" and would consider relief once the books are "back in the black" (1News). An NZ First MP outlined making the first $14,000 tax-free and adjusting brackets for inflation (CA ANZ). Opportunity would set rates of 28%, 34% and 39% and pay a tax-free Citizen's Income of $19,400 a year (Opportunity). Te Pāti Māori would make the first $30,000 tax-free and add rates of 42% and 48% (Te Pāti Māori). Each party's full rate table, where published, is in its Deep text.

Tax-free amounts. A 2018 Treasury and Inland Revenue paper for the Tax Working Group found transfers "are generally more targeted than income tax reductions" and that a tax-free zone "may be a poorly targeted redistributive instrument" for most low-income people. It noted that many people earning under $14,000 are students or children, who may not be the main target. The paper also notes a tax-free threshold "would benefit all earners", and that higher rates can claw back the gain from those on higher incomes (Tax Working Group). PwC says tax-free thresholds "are relatively simple but are not tightly targeted", because "anyone earning above the threshold receives the full benefit" (PwC).

Costing tools. In August 2026 the Treasury published a spreadsheet tool that estimates the revenue change from any new set of rates and thresholds, using 2024 tax-year data (Treasury). Deloitte used it to check Te Pāti Māori's figure (Deloitte).

Out of scope. Wealth, inheritance, capital gains, land, company and stamp duty taxes are compared under a separate question. They are mentioned here only where a party uses them to pay for income tax changes.

ACT

ACT's fiscal plan, released on 11 October 2026, makes no change to income tax rates or thresholds. The plan sets aside $264 million in 2027/28, rising to $303 million in 2030/31, for "additional targeted tax relief to be announced". Its design has not been announced; Seymour has linked it to housing costs. Its other tax changes, such as removing tax on KiwiSaver investment earnings, are not changes to income tax rates. Seymour says cutting taxes by borrowing is "immoral" and wants a surplus first. He does not favour raising thresholds for inflation, and would rather use extra revenue later to reduce the top rates and flatten the rate structure. The biggest tradeoff: an earlier surplus and less debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

  • Income tax stays on today's table; Seymour prefers fewer, flatter rates later over inflation-adjusted thresholds.

Who gains

  • Party claimTaxpayers, through lower interest costs: ACT's fiscal plan says taxpayers are "forced to spend more than $1 million an hour just paying interest", and reports put its debt at $12.4 billion less by 2031 than Treasury forecasts. [1][3]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceTaxpayers whose income rises with inflation, as more of it is taxed at higher rates each year (see the issue's bracket creep note). [8]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo income tax rate change is costed. [1]
  • Party claimThe plan sets aside $264 million in 2027/28 for targeted tax relief, rising to $303 million in 2030/31. [1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceDeloitte notes indexing thresholds lowers government revenue, which may mean spending cuts, and adds complexity; a 2005 law to index thresholds every three years was replaced before it took effect. [8]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceThe $264 million of targeted relief has no announced design, so who would receive it and how it would be delivered is not yet known. Unless thresholds are indexed, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [1][8]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNo change to income tax rates or thresholds is proposed. [1]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimDavid Seymour says cutting taxes by borrowing is "immoral", and that extra revenue should later "flatten the rates, which would be far preferable for simplicity, for incentives", rather than adjust thresholds. [2][7]

Strongest case against

  • Established evidenceNo named critic of ACT's income tax plan was found. [2]
  • ContestedMore generally, responding to National on bracket creep, the Taxpayers' Union, an advocacy group, said "Tax brackets should not quietly become tax rises". [7]
  1. ACT Fiscal Plan 2026 · ACT New Zealand (hosted by interest.co.nz) · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  2. Act's fiscal plan: Deeper cuts, earlier surplus, but no income tax cuts (12 October 2026) · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. ACT wants $10b slashed from the public service, $12.4b lower debt by 2031 and a lower operating allowance (11 October 2026) · interest.co.nz · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Election 2026: where do the parties stand on tax? (21 September 2026) · Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. NZ Election 2026: Every Party's Tax Policy Compared (verified 13 October 2026) · NZ Tax Tools · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Nicola Willis signals National will campaign on bracket creep and a bigger R&D tax credit (15 September 2026) · Newswire · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after second agent review; used Seymour's own reason for flatter rates, and said which source carries each figure in who gains. [7][1]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after first agent review; gave ACT's own reasons for flatter rates later in the case for. [2][7]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; listed all five tax items in the fiscal plan, quoted ACT's own words on interest costs in who gains, used the same tradeoff form as other entries, and removed an unsourced 'no new law' line. [1]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [4][7]
  5. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][4]
As at 16 Oct 2026About ACTReport a problem with this entry

Green

The Greens would make the first $10,000 of income tax-free and replace the five current rates with seven: 0%, then 10% to 33.5% in steps, and 45% on income over $160,000. The party says 96% of people would get a tax cut: about $27 a week more at $40,000 and $10 at $90,000, and $66 a week less at $200,000. The party costs the income tax changes at about $2.3 billion in 2027/28, rising to about $2.7 billion in 2030/31, funded by taxes on net wealth over $10 million, inheritances over $1 million, large companies and banks. It says the whole package raises a net $5.15 billion in 2027/28; no independent costing has been found. No start date is given. The biggest tradeoff: most people pay less income tax, but top earners pay up to 45% and the cuts rely on new taxes.

  • No tax on the first $10,000, then rates rising in steps from 10% to 33.5% up to $160,000.
  • A new 45% top rate starting $20,000 lower than today's 39% rate.

Who gains

  • Party claimMost earners: the party says 96% of New Zealanders would get a tax cut. Its modelling shows the largest weekly gains for lower earners, such as $27 a week at $40,000. [1][2]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceHigher earners: income over $160,000 is taxed at 45% (39% over $180,000 now). [1]
  • Independent estimateAAP FactCheck's analysis found people earning over about $162,000 would pay more income tax. [4]
  • Party claimThe party says the cuts would be funded by new taxes on net wealth over $10 million, inheritances and gifts over $1 million, and large companies and banks. [1]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Party claimThe income tax changes cost $2,335 million in 2027/28, rising to $2,680 million in 2030/31. The full package raises a net $5,147 million in 2027/28. [1]
  • Established evidenceNo independent costing of the income tax changes was found as at 15 October 2026. [1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA 2018 Treasury and Inland Revenue paper found transfers "are generally more targeted than income tax reductions", and that a tax-free zone may be poorly targeted for most low-income people. [7]
  • Established evidenceThe same paper notes a tax-free threshold "would benefit all earners", and PwC calls tax-free thresholds "relatively simple". Higher rates can claw back the gain from those on higher incomes; the Greens add a 45% rate. [7][8][1]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidencePwC says a wider gap between personal and company rates raises the importance of integrity rules, and that personal tax settings can influence decisions by highly mobile skilled workers. [8]
  • Established evidenceThe party's document says behavioural responses are not modelled, apart from a 28.5% avoidance and evasion allowance on the wealth tax. [1]
  • Established evidenceThe plan does not say whether thresholds would be indexed. Unless they are, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [1][9]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNo start date is given; the costings begin in 2027/28. [1]
  • Party claimInland Revenue would get about $100 million a year more for enforcement. [1][5]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimThe Greens say multi-millionaires pay "$9 in tax out of every $100 they make", a teacher $22. Taxes on wealth over $10 million, large companies and banks would fund cuts for 96% of New Zealanders. [2][1]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedPrime Minister Christopher Luxon called the plan a "wrecking ball", arguing wealth creators would leave. Deloitte says wealth taxes, which help fund the cuts, "are uncommon because they can result in capital flight". [3][5]
  1. A tax system for all: Green Party tax policy 2026 (full policy document) · Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Greens commit to tax the super-rich and large corporates fairly, cut income tax for 96% (21 June 2026) · Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. What are the Greens' tax plans - and who would have to pay? (4 October 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  4. NZ lobby group's claim distorts impact of Greens' tax plan on households (8 July 2026) · AAP FactCheck · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Election tax policies: part one (Tax Alert, 13 July 2026) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Personal tax rates and thresholds: Tax Working Group Secretariat paper (October 2018, released April 2019) · Tax Working Group (Treasury and Inland Revenue Secretariat) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Tax Tips: 2026 General Election - Tax Policy Update (September 2026) · PwC New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Fact fix after third agent review; removed 'lowest earners most' from the case for, which the party's release does not say. [2]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after first agent review; typed AAP FactCheck's finding as an independent estimate, attributed the behavioural-response point to the party's document, and dropped the typo-correction note. [4][1]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; marked rounded costings as approximate, gave the net figure as the party states it, quoted the Taxpayers' Union claim and AAP FactCheck's rating exactly, and stopped tying the 96% to an income level. [2][1]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [2][5]
  5. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1]
As at 16 Oct 2026About GreenReport a problem with this entry

Labour

Labour's published policies include no change to income tax rates or thresholds, so income tax would stay on today's table. Its fiscal plan, released on 4 October 2026, relies on revenue measures that are not income tax changes. Finance spokesperson Barbara Edmonds says tax cuts "need to be allowed as the fiscal and economic environment allows for it", and that "there are always pros and cons around tax cuts or changes to thresholds". Labour says surplus comes first, which it has pledged to keep forecast for 2028/29, and tax relief would be considered when the fiscal environment allows. It has not said whether it would index thresholds. The biggest tradeoff: stable rates and lower debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

  • Income tax stays on today's table; Labour says surplus comes first and tax cuts depend on the fiscal environment.

Who gains

  • Party claimThe public finances: Labour says a surplus leaves "enough room within your books" for a future shock, and tax relief would be considered after that. [4]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceTaxpayers whose income rises with inflation, as more of it is taxed at higher rates each year (see the issue's bracket creep note). [6]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo income tax change is costed. The fiscal plan's main revenue items, such as repealing Investment Boost, are not income tax changes. [2]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceDeloitte notes indexing thresholds lowers government revenue, which may mean spending cuts, and adds complexity; a 2005 law to index thresholds every three years was replaced before it took effect. [6]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceThe later relief is conditional and has no size, form or date. Unless thresholds are indexed, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [3][6]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNo change to income tax rates or thresholds is proposed. Labour puts surplus, forecast for 2028/29, before any later relief. [1][5][4][3][7]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimBarbara Edmonds says surplus comes first "to make sure you have enough room within your books", and that "tax cuts need to be allowed as the fiscal and economic environment allows for it". [4][3]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedThe Taxpayers' Union, an advocacy group, says "If Labour really wants to rule out tax hikes, it should stop inflation quietly pushing workers into higher tax brackets", which it says raises tax without a vote. [8][9]
  1. Our Policies · New Zealand Labour Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Labour reveals vaunted fiscal plan - here's the key details (4 October 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. Barbara Edmonds on house prices, debt and how much Labour's fuel tax freeze proposal will cost (7 October 2026) · interest.co.nz · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. 'Now is not the time': Tax cuts off the table, Nicola Willis says (12 October 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  7. Once the books are back in the black, a National Government will be in a position to consider tax relief (12 October 2026) · interest.co.nz · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
  8. Labour must rule out the inflation tax (18 August 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. The Inflation Tax (briefing paper, 7 September 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Fact fix after second agent review; cited Labour's policies, KPMG and Edmonds for the implementation line. [1][5][3]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; described Labour's position on later relief in Barbara Edmonds's terms, used Labour's own reason in who gains, used the same tradeoff form as other entries, and removed an unsourced 'no new law' line. [4][3]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [4]
  4. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][2]
As at 16 Oct 2026About LabourReport a problem with this entry

National

National's fiscal plan, released on 12 October 2026, makes no change to income tax rates or thresholds, so income tax would stay on today's table. Willis said in September that National would campaign on adjusting settings for bracket creep; the plan has no such change. Finance Minister Nicola Willis says "now is not the time to cut taxes" and the priority is to "get on top of the debt first". She says the plan shows "a pathway to potential tax relief for working New Zealanders" once the books are back in surplus, forecast for 2028/29. No size or date is set. National also pledges no new taxes. The biggest tradeoff: stable rates and lower debt, but rising wages keep moving more income into higher rates.

  • Income tax stays on today's table; any later relief would follow a return to surplus.

Who gains

  • Party claimBorrowers, through lower debt, which National says keeps interest rates down. It describes later relief for "working New Zealanders" once the books are in surplus. [2][3]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceTaxpayers whose income rises with inflation, as more of it is taxed at higher rates each year (see the issue's bracket creep note). [8]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo income tax change is costed. [2]
  • Party claimNational intends to return to surplus in 2028/29, with net core Crown debt forecast to peak at 43.9% of GDP in 2027/28. [2]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceDeloitte notes indexing thresholds lowers government revenue, which may mean spending cuts, and adds complexity; a 2005 law to index thresholds every three years was replaced before it took effect. [8]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceThe later relief is conditional and has no size, form or date. The 12 October fiscal plan has no bracket creep change. Unless thresholds are indexed, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [2][8]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNo change to income tax rates or thresholds is proposed. Any later relief depends on returning to surplus, forecast for 2028/29. [2]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimNicola Willis says "National is the party of low tax" but debt comes first, as "less debt helps keep inflation and interest rates down". She sees "a pathway to potential tax relief". [2]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedThe Taxpayers' Union, an advocacy group, says National is "allowing income taxes to rise through fiscal drag" while "offering no tax relief", and wants automatic indexation so inflation cannot raise tax burdens. [9][10]
  1. No new taxes under National (23 August 2026) · New Zealand National Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. 'Now is not the time': Tax cuts off the table, Nicola Willis says (12 October 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. Once the books are back in the black, a National Government will be in a position to consider tax relief (12 October 2026) · interest.co.nz · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
  4. National's fiscal plan: No tax cuts but a fight over health spending (13 October 2026) · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
  5. Nicola Willis signals National will campaign on bracket creep and a bigger R&D tax credit (15 September 2026) · Newswire · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Election 2026: where do the parties stand on tax? (21 September 2026) · Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  9. Nothing new in National's fiscal rules (9 August 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. The Inflation Tax (briefing paper, 7 September 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
  11. Luxon embraces the inflation tax (28 July 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after second agent review; said 'today's table' as other entries do, added Willis's September bracket-creep remark to the summary, moved Luxon's indexing remark here from the issue text, and dropped a note about unreadable sources. [5][11]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Fact fixes after first agent review; gave Willis's title as Finance Minister and quoted The Spinoff exactly. [4]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; quoted 1News on the fiscal plan, used National's own reason in who gains, used the same tradeoff form as other entries, kept Willis's September remarks to the deep text, and removed an unsourced 'no new law' line. [2]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [2][5]
  5. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [2][1]
As at 16 Oct 2026About NationalReport a problem with this entry

NZ First

At a Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand tax panel in September 2026, NZ First MP David Wilson outlined a proposal to make the first $14,000 of income tax-free and adjust income tax brackets for inflation. KPMG's election tracker records it as making the lowest tax bracket tax-free "no later than 1 April 2027". The policy is not on NZ First's own policy page. NZ First has not published rates above the tax-free amount, a cost, a funding source or how often brackets would be adjusted (its 2023 policy said every three years), and no independent costing has been found. The biggest tradeoff: people earning over $14,000 would pay less income tax, but government revenue would fall, and the rates above it and the funding are unpublished.

  • Reported from an NZ First MP at a CA ANZ panel and in KPMG's tracker; not on the party's own site.
  • The 2026 reports give no frequency or inflation measure; NZ First's 2023 policy set a three-yearly adjustment.

Who gains

  • Established evidencePeople earning above the tax-free amount would pay less income tax; the size of the cut depends on a design that has not been published. [1][3]
  • Established evidenceIndexing brackets would stop inflation alone moving income into higher rates. [7]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceTaxpayers generally, through lower government revenue. [7]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo cost has been published, and no independent costing was found as at 15 October 2026. [3][1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA 2018 Treasury and Inland Revenue paper found transfers "are generally more targeted than income tax reductions", and that a tax-free zone may be poorly targeted for most low-income people. [8]
  • Established evidenceThe same paper notes a tax-free threshold "would benefit all earners", and PwC calls tax-free thresholds "relatively simple". [8][6]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceDeloitte notes indexing thresholds lowers revenue, which may mean spending cuts, and adds complexity. The $14,000 figure is below today's $15,600 lowest bracket, and rates above it, the cost, funding and indexing method have not been published, so the design is unclear. [7][9][3]

Implementation

  • Party claimKPMG records a start no later than 1 April 2027. [2]

Strongest case for

  • Established evidenceNo named supporter of NZ First's income tax plan was found. [3][1]
  • ContestedMore generally, PwC calls tax-free thresholds "relatively simple", and the Taxpayers' Union, an advocacy group, says unindexed thresholds cost a median earner $480.14 a year. [6][10]

Strongest case against

  • Established evidenceNo named critic of NZ First's income tax plan was found. [3][1]
  • ContestedMore generally, PwC says tax-free thresholds "are not tightly targeted", as anyone above the threshold gets the full benefit, and Deloitte notes indexing lowers revenue. [6][7]
  1. Election 2026: where do the parties stand on tax? (21 September 2026) · Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. New Zealand First Policy · New Zealand First · accessed 18 Oct 2026
  4. NZ Election 2026: Every Party's Tax Policy Compared (verified 13 October 2026) · NZ Tax Tools · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. New Zealand general election: tax plans and policies of the main parties (28 September 2023, updated 9 October 2023) · William Buck · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Tax Tips: 2026 General Election - Tax Policy Update (September 2026) · PwC New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  8. Personal tax rates and thresholds: Tax Working Group Secretariat paper (October 2018, released April 2019) · Tax Working Group (Treasury and Inland Revenue Secretariat) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. Tax rates for individuals · Inland Revenue · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. The Inflation Tax (briefing paper, 7 September 2026) · New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (12 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Fact fixes after first agent review; noted the 2023 policy's three-yearly adjustment, dated Deloitte's $14,000 bracket to 2023, and stated who gains and the biggest tradeoff without assuming the unpublished design. [5][7]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; attributed the equal-gain point to PwC's general analysis rather than to reports of NZ First's plan, typed it as established, and dated the CA ANZ write-up correctly. [6][1]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [6][8]
  4. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][2]
As at 16 Oct 2026About NZ FirstReport a problem with this entry

Opportunity

Opportunity's Tax Reset would replace the five current rates with three: 28% on income up to $50,000, 34% up to $200,000 and 39% above that. Most citizens and residents aged 18 and over would also get a tax-free Citizen's Income of $19,400 a year, the Jobseeker rate, replacing several main benefits, with top-ups for superannuitants, parents and others. The party says people earning under $60,000 would pay less tax than the payment they receive, and 70% of people would be better off. It would be funded by a land value tax of 1.75% on urban and 0.5% on rural land; the party's 2024 costing shows about $4 billion left over, and no independent costing has been found. It would be phased in over ten years, starting with young people. The biggest tradeoff: most adults get a tax-free income, but landowners, including homeowners, pay a new yearly land tax.

  • 28% up to $50,000, 34% up to $200,000 and 39% above, starting from the first dollar.
  • Paid fortnightly (weekly, says the party's website) to citizens and residents aged 18 and over, replacing several main benefits, funded by a land value tax.

Who gains

  • Party claimOpportunity's Qiulae Wong says 70% of people would get a tax cut, 20% would be about neutral and 10% would pay slightly more. [3]
  • Independent estimateMichael Fletcher finds single adults earning over about $30,000 would typically gain $11,000 or more a year before land tax, and people with no income gain little. [4]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceLandowners would pay a land value tax of 1.75% a year on urban land and 0.5% on rural land, as set out in the party's policy. Retirees could defer it, making it payable by their estate. [1][2]
  • Independent estimateMichael Fletcher estimates the land tax on an average home would likely be more than $10,000 a year. [4]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Party claimOn a 2024 basis, total cost $21,916 million against $26 billion of land tax and administration savings, leaving about $4 billion. [2]
  • Established evidenceNo independent costing of the income tax changes was found as at 15 October 2026. [2]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidencePwC describes the Citizen's Income as "a different approach to combining tax and transfer settings". [7]
  • Independent estimateMichael Fletcher finds gains "much smaller (and in some cases negative) for people with little or no market income". [4]
  • ContestedFletcher says land taxes are "economically efficient and relatively hard to avoid". [4]

Risks and side effects

  • Independent estimateMichael Fletcher finds someone with no other income who adds a few hours of work could end up worse off than under current rules. [4]
  • Established evidenceDeloitte asks whether a basic income "with high tax rates on the first dollar earned" provides incentives to work. [5]
  • Established evidenceThe plan does not say whether thresholds would be indexed. Unless they are, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [2][8]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceA ten-year transition, giving the Citizen's Income to successive age groups starting with young people while the land tax rises gradually. Provisions for temporary workers are still being designed. [1][2]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimQiulae Wong: "Our tax policy overall actually would be a tax cut for 70% of New Zealanders." [3]
  • ContestedDeloitte says "those who currently don't have assets may find themselves materially better off". [5]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedVictoria University's Michael Fletcher says the plan "helps the worst off the least, namely beneficiaries on below-poverty-level incomes". Labour's Chris Hipkins: "We won't support the tax policy put forward by Opportunity." [4][3]
  1. Tax Reset · The Opportunity Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (16 Oct 2026)
  2. Tax Reset (policy paper) · The Opportunity Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. What are the Opportunity party's land tax and 'citizen's income'? (15 August 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Opportunity's tax reset could benefit many, but not the poorest (Michael Fletcher, Victoria University of Wellington, via The Conversation; 21 September 2026) · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  5. Election tax policies: part one (Tax Alert, 13 July 2026) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Tax Tips: 2026 General Election - Tax Policy Update (September 2026) · PwC New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Fact fix after third agent review; worded the retiree deferral as the party does and cited the policy paper. [1][2]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after second agent review; said the worked examples are the party's figures, dropped the costing arithmetic note, and added Deloitte's view to the case for. [3][5]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after first agent review; stated the funding source the same way as other entries and kept the costing arithmetic note in the deep text only. [2]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; noted the policy paper says fortnightly and the website weekly, corrected how abatement starts, used the party's own net revenue words, and split Fletcher's opinion from his estimate. [2][1][4]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [4]
  6. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [2]
As at 16 Oct 2026About OpportunityReport a problem with this entry

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori would make the first $30,000 of income tax-free, then 15%, 33% and 39%, with new rates of 42% from $180,001 and 48% over $300,000. The party says 97% of people would pay less income tax and 4.2 million would gain about $4,000 a year on average. It also proposes an income tax kai credit for people earning $60,000 or less, described as worth up to eight weeks of kai a year; a co-leader put it at around $1,000. The party forecasts the rate changes cost $13.4 billion; Deloitte reports Treasury's calculator puts the yearly cost at over $14 billion. Funding comes from a wealth tax on net assets over $2 million, a 33% company rate and other taxes. No start date is given. The biggest tradeoff: most people pay less income tax, but top earners pay up to 48% and the cuts rely on new taxes.

  • No tax on the first $30,000, then 15% up to $60,000 and 33% up to $90,000.
  • Two new rates above today's 39% top rate, which would apply from $90,001 to $180,000.
  • The party describes it as worth up to eight weeks of kai a year, reaching about 3 million people.

Who gains

  • Party claimThe party says 97% of people would pay less income tax and 4.2 million would gain about $4,000 a year on average, plus a kai credit for about 3 million people earning $60,000 or less. [1][2]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceHigher earners: the top rates would be 42% from $180,001 and 48% above $300,000, and income from $90,001 to $180,000 would be taxed at 39% (33% now), though the first $30,000 would be tax-free. [1]
  • Party claimThe party says its wealth tax on net assets over $2 million would apply to the wealthiest 3% of people; companies, residential property sales (a 5% stamp duty, excluding first home buyers for homes under $1 million) and land banking would also be taxed. [1]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Party claimThe party forecasts the personal tax rate changes cost $13.4 billion. Co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer says the whole package would raise $20 billion against $16 billion of spending. [5][3]
  • Independent estimateDeloitte reports Treasury's tax rate calculator models the annual cost of the proposed thresholds as over $14 billion, and says it is unclear whether the party's figure covers one year or four. [5]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA 2018 Treasury and Inland Revenue paper found transfers "are generally more targeted than income tax reductions", and that a tax-free zone may be poorly targeted for most low-income people. [6]
  • Established evidenceThe same paper notes a tax-free threshold "would benefit all earners", and PwC calls tax-free thresholds "relatively simple". Higher rates can claw back the gain from those on higher incomes; Te Pāti Māori adds 42% and 48% rates. [6][7][1]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidencePwC says a wider gap between personal and company rates raises the importance of integrity rules, and that personal tax settings can influence decisions by highly mobile skilled workers. [7]
  • Established evidenceThe plan does not say whether thresholds would be indexed. Unless they are, inflation moves more income into higher rates each year. [1][8]
  • Established evidenceDeloitte found it difficult to comment on many of the party's policies, not only income tax, for lack of detail, and the kai credit's dollar value is not stated in the policy document. [5][1]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNo start date is given. [1]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimCiting rising kai, housing and power costs, Te Pāti Māori would "put pūtea back in people's pockets". The wealthiest 3% would pay a wealth tax and 97% less income tax, which it calls "a fair economy". [2]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedNational's Simeon Brown called it "the biggest tax grab in New Zealand's history". Deloitte says wealth taxes, which help fund the cuts, "are uncommon because they can result in capital flight". [4][5]
  1. Te Pāti Māori Policy Manifesto 2026: Tax (released as A Kiwi Tax Plan, 26 August 2026) · Te Pāti Māori · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Pūtea Back In Your Pocket: TPM Unveils A Kiwi Tax Plan For Everyone (26 August 2026) · Te Pāti Māori (via Scoop) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. 'That's what a fair economy looks like': Te Pāti Māori launches election year tax policy (26 August 2026) · interest.co.nz · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Te Pāti Māori's tax plan: $30k tax-free, a new stamp duty and a kai credit (27 August 2026) · The Spinoff · accessed 14 Oct 2026
  5. Election tax policies: part three (Tax Alert, 22 September 2026) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  6. Personal tax rates and thresholds: Tax Working Group Secretariat paper (October 2018, released April 2019) · Tax Working Group (Treasury and Inland Revenue Secretariat) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Tax Tips: 2026 General Election - Tax Policy Update (September 2026) · PwC New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Inflation and personal tax bracket creep: a bigger picture (31 January 2023) · Deloitte New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  9. Election 2026: party tax policies tracker, version 4 (updated to 3 September 2026) · KPMG New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. New Zealand general election: tax plans and policies of the main parties (28 September 2023, updated 9 October 2023) · William Buck · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. NZ Election 2026: Every Party's Tax Policy Compared (verified 13 October 2026) · NZ Tax Tools · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after first agent review; noted the tax-free first $30,000 beside the higher rates, added the party's whole-package figures to costing, and said Deloitte's comment covered the wider package. [1][3][5]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; described the stamp duty as the policy does, attributed the $20 billion and $16 billion figures to Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and kept Deloitte's caveat with Deloitte's estimate. [1][3][5]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Revised after agent fairness review; quotes re-checked against sources. [2][5]
  4. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1]
As at 16 Oct 2026About Te Pāti MāoriReport a problem with this entry