IRD are out of control

Mark Hubbard's picture
Submitted by Mark Hubbard on Tue, 2008-08-19 07:43

I don't need to add much, just read the link.

Quote: ``If we cannot rely on written agreements with the IRD then no New Zealand taxpayers can,’’ he will say. ``What sort of tax system do we have when the IRD can impose massive, retrospective and arbitrary back taxes because – by its admission – it may have made an error?’

I don't know why, but there has been some type of decision made somewhere in IRD to be unprincipled bullying pricks. Some here would say that has always been the case, but it has not. Is now though, a development with its inception somewhere over the last four years. And the tourism issue is only a single issue, there are so many others.

( categories: )

Email to Technical Officer

Mark Hubbard's picture

This mornings email to an IRD technical officer (a good one, by the way), on an entirely different matter:


This is the legislation as it currently stands.

I understood everything up to this point, but, as you will understand, think it a crock, regardless. Not your fault. My point was it is bad legislation: first for it simply being there (Working for Families - albeit this is a philosophical qualm), and then, given it's got to be there, apparently, the way the IWTC is being denied a worthy class of taxpayer because of a hole within that legislation, or whatever. And I say this because looking at that clear space of morality that lies above the words on the page of the Act, a space through which you'll never see a politician sucking the lovely pure air of freedom into their corrupted lungs, obviously this class of people should be getting paid the IWTC. We all know that.

As I reach the other side of my mid-life crisis I am growing to understand that some things really are that simple, or should be, and where individual members of our society continue to trip, or be pushed, into the dark, unholy depths of sophisticated pot-holes of legislation, there is normally steaming, rank stuff at the bottom. And that stuff is called ...


Email to Damien O'Connor this morning

Mark Hubbard's picture

Mr O'Connor

I don't really need to say much, just read the link:

For about four years now IRD have taken on the mantle of unprincipled bully: this issue is not an isolated one, I could give you a list of other issues. And I'm also sick and tired of Ministers who are gutless, decrying no discretion to fix obvious moral rorts - the IRD needs to be taken in hand. If you can't do this, then why is the taxpayer forced to pay your salary?

The following is a paragraph I have copied from my last letter to an auditor on an entirely different issue where IRD is employing rank discrimination against a specific class of taxpayer; they know about the injustice, the relevant Minister knows, but ultimately, nothing happens. The paragraph fits just as well to this issue.

Precisely one of the problems, and its a huge one, with IRD today is that the Department never does have as its priority to administer the 'aims of the legislation'; on this and so many other issues. The Department has a team of seers (they are collectively called the Policy Unit) who take mean, literal interpretations of words on the page, words that often cannot wholly provide for the complexity of the intent of policy without reference to the aims of that policy, and then IRD staff members become as unthinking moronic religious fanatics before scripture, ruling by their decree, no matter how absurd the result. I am starting to wonder if IRD should simply contract the administration of the various Acts under their purview to the Mullahs in Iran: they would probably perform the duties required out of mere religious fervour, no payment required, so saving the very hard pressed taxpayer precious money, and the New Zealand public would not be aware of any difference in treatment. And not just IRD, trying to change any flawed law run by the bureaucracy of this country is simply, and absolutely, impossible, because I can never find someone willing to make a decision. Dumb way to run a country of only 4 million people.

Seriously Mr O'Connor, the fair answer is so obvious: you cannot fairly impose this interpretation retrospectively. Everybody within the IRD who thinks this is acceptable, including the Deputy Commissioner on the Network News last night, should be fired as not fit to hold the power they do. In fact any life-time bureaucrat that has been in the IRD since High School, get rid of them: let them see what life is like in the productive sector they, and you, are so hell bent on destroying, despite it being the hand that feeds you all.

Mark Hubbard ... who has entirely 'had enough' of the second hander, violent welfare society your Socialism has created.

Kasper, the worse batch of

Mark Hubbard's picture

Kasper, the worse batch of work/assessments we had back from IRD had a 43% error rate. My wife's full time job is just administration, checking assessments and fixing - we do not charge this out.

Although, as you have described your problem, which is not very well Smiling, IRD would not have been able to fix this for if on the wrong code, your employer would have taken out the wrong amount of tax, but that would not have changed your actual liability.

Tell me about it. I

Kasper's picture

Tell me about it. I apparently put the wrong tax code on and now owe them 209 bucks. They said I should have been on the tax code which I had just paid the tax for. Now because I was on the wrong one they added this figure to it. I suggested they change the tax code and re-calculate. They said the can't. Bull shit. So due to an administration problem I now have to pay up for income I never earned to compensate.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.