Blog description.

Accentuating the Liberal in Classical Liberal: Advocating Ascendency of the Individual & a Politick & Literature to Fight the Rise & Rise of the Tax Surveillance State. 'Illigitum non carborundum'.

Liberty and freedom are two proud words that have been executed from the political lexicon: they were frog marched and stood before a wall of blank minds, then forcibly blindfolded, and shot, with the whimpering staccato of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ resounding over and over. And not only did this atrocity go unreported by journalists in the mainstream media, they were in the firing squad.

The premise of this blog is simple: the Soviets thought they had equality, and welfare from cradle to grave, until the illusory free lunch of redistribution took its inevitable course, and cost them everything they had. First to go was their privacy, after that their freedom, then on being ground down to an equality of poverty only, for many of them their lives as they tried to escape a life behind the Iron Curtain. In the state-enforced common good, was found only slavery to the prison of each other's mind; instead of the caring state, they had imposed the surveillance state to keep them in line. So why are we accumulating a national debt to build the slave state again in the West? Where is the contrarian, uncomfortable literature to put the state experiment finally to rest?

Comments Policy: I'm not moderating comments, so keep it sane and go away with the spam. Government officials please read disclaimer at bottom of page.

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

IRD and Retrospective Law Making Again – A Question for the Politicians.

Rob Hosking at NBR has penned two articles on IRD’s newly issued interpretation statement on tax avoidance. Pursuant to his latest:

IRD officials can make changes to tax law retrospectively and on the hoof – and it is hurting New Zealand business, tax practitioners say.

A long-awaited Inland Revenue interpretation statement on tax avoidance was finally released yesterday, and it confirms the ability of officials to deem activity tax avoidance even if it meets other criteria of the tax law.

The interpretation statement has been in the works since 2001, and although several drafts have been published a series of court wins by IRD have shifted the legal boundary of what is, and is not, tax avoidance further and further in favour of the taxman.

I have a question:

I'd like someone in opposition to explain to me why they get (rightly) exercised by government spooks spying on us, yet in this instance, not a word of protest from the Fortress of Legislation on government officials having the power to rewrite a taxpayer's history, just like they do in police states. Because retrospective legislation gives them that power: what I do today that's legal, they can manipulate at their discretion to be illegal tomorrow. By bureaucratic whim, innocence is turned to (fiat) criminality, and so taxpayers live at the whim of the state. No government, no state, should ever have such power.

Note I know the answer, I just want someone in the Fortress, including a minister in government, honest enough to admit it (and with it, admit the death of the free West, with its civilising rule of law). 

And for that matter, what about all those other private sector groups protesting the new powers of the GCSB, such as Tech Liberty New Zealand: why no protest over taxation matters, given tax administration is where the truncheon of the police state truly hits our backsides.


  1. Because - as you well know - only 5-10% of kiwis - depending on how you count - actually pay any tax. The remaining 95% live off the backs of the high-value, high-worth 5%.

    But for some crazy reason the 95% still have the vote.

    That's why Don Brash's "fiscal council" was such an important idea - that decisions on taxes and spending should be made only by those who payed for it all - No Representation Without Taxation

    1. :)

      Stats a bit out, but yeah. And again, I don't agree with democracy: representative democracy will always become hopelessly encumbered with majoritarianism. Best to go for minarchy. Won't happen in our lifetimes though: we're lurching way, way, way over into the Gulag of the Big Brother State for another century first.