The Government has said today that it is exploring a number of options for charging a general services tax on transactions made between players during sessions of classic Parker Brothers board game Monopoly; a move aimed at building New Zealand’s strategic reserve of Monopoly money.
The nation’s Treasury has been low on Monopoly money ever since the National Government bought the Mayfair property earlier this year, only to later discover that Australia already owned the corresponding dark blue property of Park Lane.
This complicated the Government’s plan to raise revenue by allowing entertainment company SkyCity to build a hotel at Mayfair, something that required it to own both properties. But despite intense negotiations with Australian Prime Ministers Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd, a deal was never reached to purchase Park Lane, and the Government has been forced to raise additional Monopoly money so that it can present Canberra with a more compelling offer.
Finance Minister Bill English confirmed today that the Government was looking at ways to tax Monopoly transactions as a means by which to raise that money.
“Basically, it would be some form of GST on Monopoly transactions,” he said. “Nothing more than 15%, but it would probably apply to all in-game exchanges, including private deals between players.”
English said there would be some leniency for those players struggling to pay off mortgages.
“Yeah, well, if you’ve got a couple of properties turned upside down, we’ll probably be looking for ways to help you out,” he said.
While not yet fully formed, the Government’s plan is already drawing intense criticism from the left, with Labour leader David Shearer – who had gained the permission of his caucus to speak in public – saying that the tax would hit the poorest players hardest, and that it would unfairly disadvantage first home buyers.
“It’s hard enough already to get ahead in a game called Monopoly,” said Shearer. “Hard-working kiwis get hit hard out there every day in this National economy. Under this Government, countless New Zealanders have found themselves unable to afford property, paying rent to stay at places they didn’t even want to spend the night, and ending up in jail without being sure of exactly what they’ve done.
“Someone came up to me the other day and he said ‘David, I was just going about my business, and then I got told by the Government that I owed income tax. But I don’t make any income.’ Another person told me they had to pay for a plane ticket to go on a flight that never left the airport. It’s senseless out there, and for the Government to want to drain more money out of the poorest players in an already struggling economy is simply cruel.”
Responding to those comments, English said that Shearer was “exaggerating,” and that New Zealanders struggling to get ahead already received a “generous” $200-a-week benefit.
“As for first home buyers,” he said, “it mightn’t be a popular thing to say, but if you can only afford the one house, you should probably hold onto your money anyway. You need at least a few before you start making serious revenue, and you never know when you might have to pay a hefty rent.”
Green Party co-leader Russel Norman had a different complaint, questioning why the Government wasn’t playing the New Zealand version of the board game.
“Well we can sit around and argue about whether to buy Park Lane or whether we can afford it,” said Norman, “but what we really want to know is, why are we not looking at buying Lambton Quay instead? Or why we don’t own Queen Street instead of Mayfair?”
For some, the controversy has provided a welcome reprieve from the ongoing debate between National and Labour over whether to sell the electric company; something Labour says is a valuable asset, but which National argues is unreliable and raises “shit all” money.