Business backs National

A survey by MYOB shows that National is a sure thing for business voters.

Despite some unpopular policies and a slight fall off in popularity, National will still capture the vast majority of the business vote according to the latest MYOB Business Monitor.

The MYOB Business Monitor survey of over 1000 business owners around the country shows that National is most likely to get the vote of 59% of business owners in the November election, down slightly from the previous Monitor survey in March when the Government polled 62%, but still well ahead of Labour on 11%. . .

MYOB general manager Julian Smith says, a month out from the election, business owners have signalled a clear choice for a continuation of the fifth National Government.

“Although the MYOB Business Monitor surveys a wide range of business owners right around the country – from sole traders to those running larger enterprises – Kiwi business owners across the board have been consistent in their support for National,” says Julian Smith

Support for the Government is even higher among small business owners (71%) and those with a turnover of between $1-5million (72%). By sector, National is most popular with business owners in the Finance and Insurance sector (67%) and in the Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing sector (65%). Labour finds its strongest support amongst Transport and Warehousing business owners, with 22% of them saying that they will vote Labour, compared with 49% of them likely to vote National.

That is stating the obvious for anyone who has compared the policies we’re likely to get under a National-led government with those we’re likely to get under a Labour-led one.

National’s policies are designed to promote economic growth and show the party understands the important role that businesses play in doing that.

Labour’s policies would add costs and complexities to doing business and employing people.

The capital gains tax, other tax increases, changes to ACC, the increase in the minimum wage and the 1970s employment policy will add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of doing business and increase both the cost and risk of employing people.

In addition, farmers will face extra costs through the early entry tot he ETS, changes to the RMA and water allocation.

The survey found a small majority of businesses were in favour of asset sales and the policy they opposed most strongly was the CGT.

It also found that businesses can be socialist when other people’s money might come their way:

Businesses would clearly like to see the Government direct more investment into the economy, with things like funding for R&D (popular with 58%), a ‘Buy Kiwi-made’ policy for all Central and Local Government agencies (51%), and more investment in key transport infrastructure (51%).”

More investment in infrastructure is sensible but a buying Kiwi-made policy is getting dangerously close to subsidising businesses which can’t compete on their own.

“However, the one policy that is far and away the most popular for business is the simplification of provisional tax rules, supported by nearly three-quarters (74%) of all businesses,” says Julian Smith.

“This particular policy isn’t on any party’s radar at the moment, but what it emphasises is how complex and time consuming businesses find the current tax regime, and how much any party would stand to gain by making a concerted effort to make life easier for business.”

Good tax might be an oxymoron but simple taxes are better. Time and energy wasted complying with complex tax law, and any other regulatory requirements, are time and money not spent getting on the the businesses which create jobs and contribute to economic growth.

2 Responses to Business backs National

  1. Tribeless says:

    I realise you’re a National Party supporter Homepaddock, and certainly, any businessman/women or farmer/ess would choose National over Labour, and for every conceivable reason, including Cunliffe’s typically heavy handed statement on Friday that:

    Labour is promising a massive tax crackdown to pay for its election promises.

    Because it doesn’t matter whether you’re (stupidly) evading tax or not, and remembering much of tax is so complicated now it’s just straight bloody hard to comply with anymore, but in this statement lay the full force of State used against the citizens forced to pay for it, via a massive intrusion into their businesses, farms and lives, period, in time and stress. Indeed, as I said in my post here, free men and women voting labour, is like sheep voting for abattoirs.

    However, that said, IRD have been every bit as ruthless under Dunne and National. They’ve destroyed the ‘faintly’ classical liberal ethic of the Westminster Rule via a compliant, dumbed down judiciary; they’ve initiated a reign of terror via a stream of press releases threatening the penalties for those poor sods who are so busy trying to run their businesses they got it wrong; and their head of compliance openly brags he ‘loves to use private sector assets against the private sector’, talking in that instance about Waikato University’s benchmarking database which IRD audit is mining – obviously to peaceable, freedom loving people, such an adversarial attitude so high up in IRD is no where near acceptable, but this, apparently, is the Orwellian State, so that man has the current governments absolute support, indeed, over the last three years have continued to grant him full police state powers of snooping, search and seizure in an abuse of the right to privacy and their property of every individual in New Zealand that is breath-taking in its audacity, as well as a death-stroke to a classical liberalism that National is supposed to stand for (limited government, remember) but which, other than Rob Hosking at NBR, I’ve not seen a single MSM repeater (HT Cactus Kate) comment on.

    And just as bad, I simply do not trust National and it’s intentions for an ETS on the farming sector. This is a huge issue. An ETS is an arrow to the heart of one of our few successful sectors, and even the proponents of the ETS admit its influence on any supposed ‘climate change’ is nil. (Plus note how we never hear of the climate change argument in the MSM anymore?)

    I suspect I’d never get through the pragmatism of farmers’ to vote Libertarianz, as I will be doing, but if you want to keep farming profitable, and keep an asset to pass down to the next generation, then be wary of National also: you may well find you want a strong Brash to hold them back.

    Like

  2. homepaddock says:

    I agree there are grounds for concern about the IRD – as an example it does appear to have taken the ruling on the doctors who paid themselves too little to an extreme not supported by statute or case law.

    National has made a commitment to exclude agriculture from the ETS unless our trading partners do and fortunately, none of them have any intention of doing that.

    If people want policies which are further to the right than National’s, Act is the only option which might result in some MPs.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: