Direct Quote from John Key

[TheLiberalLeft]

when questioned on Breakfast TV about the lavish spend-up tarting up Premier House, as reported in the Herald...

"If we don't paint you've got an asset that would devalue"

Surely not - that would be depreciation.

And he's still preferred PM.

I think we should have to pass an IQ test and a series of questions on relevent topics before we're allowed to vote.

[eri]

I think we should have to pass an IQ test and a series of questions on relevant topics before we're allowed to vote.

i agree

it'd be the end of the left

[TheLiberalLeft]

That's also what

Tzar Nicholas thought

and the ruling French classes.

[eri]

your mentors?

[TheLiberalLeft]

My 1st question would be: Are you able to stay on topic when replying on internet forums?

BZZZZZZT. No vote for you.

I'm surprised no one has yet found Key's opinion on this incredible, since it was his gummint that removed the depreciation on residential property. He's a two-faced hypocrite.

[eri]

Labour MP Chris Hipkins said the Premier House makeover reeked of hypocrisy.
....................

Mr Key defended the spending this morning, saying the property had not been painted for 11 years.
...................

Mr Key said he was happy to take any scrutiny he was put under, but questioned Labour's focus on the "smaller issues".
"We are a couple of weeks out from the budget, and we're six months out from an election so what is Labour talking about? In the scheme of things, very minor things."


what's incredible about this?


he has an 11 year old house that needs paint


you call it a "local stimulus package" if you want as i assume he won't be painting it himself


and i assume, unlike some former labour MP's he won't be getting some thai tiler to work cheap for promises of better visa


really, if the left are floundering around this badly this close to the next general election


it's not going to be pretty

[TheLiberalLeft]

I suggest you re-read the quote in the OP. The point I'm making is regarding depreciation.

BZZZT - no vote next time either.

[damage]

when questioned on Breakfast TV about the lavish spend-up tarting up Premier House, as reported in the Herald...

"If we don't paint you've got an asset that would devalue"

Surely not - that would be depreciation.

And he's still preferred PM.

I think we should have to pass an IQ test and a series of questions on relevent topics before we're allowed to vote.

I dont really see what the issue is. So what if he painted it to maintain its value?

[TheLiberalLeft]

The point is that on one hand he recognises that without painting, the property would devalue (ie depreciate). What's changed recently re depreciation?

[damage]

The point is that on one hand he recognises that without painting, the property would devalue (ie depreciate). What's changed recently re depreciation?

I dont think there is any comparision to be made as you are comparing two different types of depreciation, albeit very similar.
One affects the value of the asset, and the other affects net income.

(This is my understanding anyway)

[CJ]

The point is that on one hand he recognises that without painting, the property would devalue (ie depreciate). What's changed recently re depreciation?

Which is why he (and the IRD) allow you to claim a deduction for painting your home.

BZZZT - no vote for you.

Side note: If it was painted 11 years ago, was it was painted in HC first term of government

[AMR]

It would be maintainance, not capital expenditure? So tax would be immediately deductable as an expense.

[TheLiberalLeft]

The Govt effectly said that depreciation doesn't occur on residential homes with the law change. Key's admission that is does should raise some eyebrows.

[damage]

The Govt effectly said that depreciation doesn't occur on residential homes with the law change. Key's admission that is does should raise some eyebrows.

I dont think that is quite the case. Depreciation prior to the law change was use as an expense as part of a LAQC structure / tax write off, and had nothing to do with the value of the property ( which was Key's reference)

His point about the value of the property has little to do with the depreciation law changes.

[drelly]

This is a lame smear attempt! Depreciation was axed because property maintenance expenses could be claimed at the same time as depreciation. All things being equal, a property that is maintained does not depreciate.