EQC levy to triple as Govt posts $18.4b deficit

VERNON SMALL AND HAMISH RUTHERFORD
Last updated 15:51 11/10/2011
Opinion poll

Is tripling the EQC levy fair?

Yes

No

Vote Result

Related Links

Climbing EQC quake costs blow hole in forecasts

Relevant offers

Industries

Waiver for independent director lapse Strong oil prices help lift NZOG into black Cold comfort for kitchen company's customers Markets down on Fletcher Building stocks Chows escape prosecution for Settlement demolition Fletcher's net profit takes 13pc hit Large car sales on the rise

A trebling of the EQC levy will put ''a bit more pressure'' on some home owners ''fully stretched'' paying their mortgages, Finance Minister Bill English admits.

The Government today announced that EQC levies would triple from 5c for every $100 of cover to 15c, lifting the annual maximum for homeowners from $69 a year to $207 a year.

The increase, which takes affect in February next year, will add about $2.65 a week to most homeowners' insurance premiums.

''It will put a bit more pressure on, particularly on some home owners who are fully stretched on servicing their mortgages. But we think in the circumstances, in order to shore up the EQC's finances, it's an extra bit that households will be able to handle,'' English said.

Crown accounts for the year to June released today showed a record $18.4 billion deficit in the 2010-2011 year, a deterioration of more than $12b in a year.

The cost of the earthquakes so far, at $13.6b, included $11.6b for EQC.

Strengthening EQC's finances through an increased levy would provide confidence to homeowners that the insurer could meet its obligations now and in the future.

''We think in the circumstances, in order to shore up the EQC's finances, it's an extra bit that households will be able to handle,'' English said.

Labour's finance spokesman David Cunliffe said it was appropriate to hike the EQC levy because the country could not afford to not have cover.

However, it was another addition on to the ''sky-rocketing'' cost of living.

While inflation was rising, median incomes were falling, Cunliffe said.

''There is no doubt that middle New Zealand has borne more of the pressure and there has been relief at the top end where arguably it was neither needed nor was it particularly good stimulus,'' he said.

English said the levy hike was particularly important given the tight fiscal position reinforced by the latest accounts.

The rise would enable EQC to rebuild the disaster fund to its pre-earthquake level of $6b in about 30 years.

It would also reduce EQC's estimated cash shortfall from $1.2b to $490m, cutting the amount the Government would have to provide under its guarantee of EQC's payouts.

The total annual levy would rise from $86m to about $260m.

He said the rise in the EQC levy was not based on a full actuarial assessment of future liabilities, which would be calculated as part of a future review of EQC.

"However, it is clear the current levy is too low and needs to increase now to pay for EQC's operating costs and to begin rebuilding the NDF."

Ad Feedback

The accounts for the year to June 30, 2011 showed total revenue was almost $82b but spending was just under $100b boosted by the cost of the Christchurch earthquakes.

They added $4.5 billion to total revenues, from insurance and reinsurance, but expenses relating to the quakes were $13.6 billion out of a total increase in expenses of $18.9b.

The net impact of the quakes was $9.1b.

A recovery in investment markets contributed a net gain of $5b bringing the headline $18.4b deficit down to $13.4b.

Tax revenue at $51.5b was close to forecast, but policy changes during the year had cut tax by $2.7b while the increase in GST had added $1.6b.

The cash deficit for the year including capital expenditure was $13.3b, pushing net debt up to $40.1b or 20 per cent of gross domestic product. Gross debt was $18.9b higher at $72.4b.

English said the Government had taken steps to significantly reduce the deficit and intended to return to surplus in 2014/15.

The Crown's net worth was down $14.1b on 2010 and stood at $80.9b or 40.4 per cent of GDP.

Bank of New Zealand economist Doug Steel said if the economy tracks as the bank expects it to, then the Government should still be able to achieve surplus by 2014/15, as it is targeting.

''It's as challenging today as it was yesterday. That's not to say it's not achievable, I think it still is. Obviously a lot depends on how the world economy performs and its impact or otherwise on the performance here at home.''

The risks to achieving surplus by the target date included a drop in commodity prices, a renewed financial crisis which could push up financing costs, and a weaker than expected domestic recovery, which itself would be driven by the Canterbury rebuild, Steel said.

''Obviously [there are] many moving parts there... but if the world economy can hold up and economic growth here can truck along as predicted then that should flow through to the fiscal accounts and budget surplus by then.''

The Council of Trade Unions claims today's announced rise in the EQC levy is effectively a tax to raise funds for the government.

CTU Economist Bill Rosenberg said the EQC had insufficient funds to cover the Canterbury earthquakes, so the Government has to find an estimated $1.2b from borrowing and the increased levy reduces that to $490m.

''There is, in reality, no difference between this expenditure and all the other expenses required by the earthquakes. A much fairer way to raise funds to pay for the earthquake would be a special earthquake tax targeted at those who could most afford it."

Rosenberg said while EQC levies will have to rise, even this tripled levy will still take no less than 30 years to rebuild the EQC's Natural Disaster Fund.

''Substantial rethinking needs to be done on many aspects of the EQC in the light of the earthquakes, but this is a revenue raising exercise with no obvious logic to its size or form.''

Rosenberg said the Operating Balance was thrown out by the $9.1b provided for the earthquakes and would otherwise have been similar to the previous year, according to Treasury.

"However this has been at the expense of already very tight health and education budgets which have been under spent by $300m each.''

Rosenberg also said the cost of the tax changes that took effect in October 2010 was even higher than budgeted. In the 2010 budget, tax cuts were forecast to cost approximately $2.5b during the year when in fact they cost $2.7b.

The Government will unveil the state of its books in a pre-election fiscal update on October 25.

Finance Minister Bill English and Treasury will present the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update - Treasury's update on the state of the Government's books and the economy designed to give political parties who are campaigning an up-to-date set of numbers to base their election campaign on.

Labour has said it will wait for the release of the update before announcing  its flagship savings policy.

- © Fairfax NZ News

181 comments
Post a comment
Paul_Bags   #181   05:07 pm Jan 14 2012

Pretty disgusting, given that they are completely useless as insurers and that you cannot opt out of using them.

We're STILL waiting for them to actually assess our house properly, but they sent out a cheque for seven thousand. Guess they got bored of paying that per assessor per day. So, anyone know any contractors willing to raise and re-pile a house to building code for seven thousand?

National suck   #180   08:10 pm Dec 04 2011

Is anyone here aware this is a crock, The EQC Fund was 16Billion before national blew it all on your tax cuts and then lied to you about it being Christchurch haha GUll E BULL

bj   #179   04:16 am Oct 13 2011

hay...what about stopping giving money to overseas aid ....

Andrea   #178   07:47 pm Oct 12 2011

Andrew #170. Couldn't say it better myself. Why weren't they ready for this type of disaster. It was only a matter of time. What have they been doing to get ready and where is the money?

Moan Moan Moan   #177   04:51 pm Oct 12 2011

Good to see people moaning about contributing $2.65 a week for EQC funding which could affect anyone in NZ.

If it is such a problem to affort how about they offer instead to give up having the head in the trough of unsustainable taxpayer funded schemes such as Kiwisaver, WFF, ECE, interest free loans etc.

Jimmy   #176   03:46 pm Oct 12 2011

Halo - so who paid for Gisborne repairs in 2007? Damage in Fiordland in 2009... What that money just sprung from thin air?

The idea is that everyone puts money into a huge pot, so that if needed, it can be called on. It just so happens that Christchurch needed it, had it been any other city, the same would have happened.

Just like if there was a flood, or landslip that damaged your land you'd be able to call on it.

Soothsayer   #175   01:45 pm Oct 12 2011

@Andrew #170 have a look in here http://www.eqc.govt.nz/downloads/ar-0910/ar-2010.pdf page 14. Most of the levies goes to pay reinsurance and then some pays for the likes of the Gisborne size quakes and public education.

I think is you were to look at the history of the annual reports. Levies basically cover the RI cost, and the operating cost of the scheme, very little of the levy ends up in the Natural Disaster fund.

halo   #174   01:37 pm Oct 12 2011

#171 Jimmy re: if anything happens we can all share in the loss

SHARE ha! All of the funding has been spent on 1 city of NZ. How is this sharing???

D Advocate   #173   11:35 am Oct 12 2011

If they collect $86 million a year and the average house costs say $250,000 to rebuild, then each year they would have enough for 344 houses.

Say that there are what, 10.000 damaged properties in Chch?

That means that they would need 30 years of levies (not allowing for investment income meanwhile) to cover that.

Not too hard to see where the money went really.

Fred   #172   10:50 am Oct 12 2011

That's the problem with Labour voting idiots. They all want everything to be paid for by someone else, but when it comes to paying for something they complain about "the cost of living".

Here's some advice. Don't get a mortgage you can't afford, don't get a flash TV every year, don't have SkyTV, don't smoke. And above all, don't expect other taxpayers to pay for your luxuries.


Show 122-171 of 181 comments

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you , you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.


Maximum of 1750 characters (about 300 words)

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content