When I read the kind of public perception of CGT i shudder as to how some folk just have opinions 'without asking' and how does it affect you?

Here is an example from the many responses that critiqued others perception and examples. It starts with a position statement entirely predicated on the following being factual, without considering 'the mortgage'. When people purchase a mortgage, they are not just doing a return on investment/net present value zero sum game... they are betting against inflation. That is not income. It is a wager that does or does not stack up, (other than the Banker always wins)  but the dividend is a secure tenure over 'where to live' with ALL the attendant responsibilities for the duration of the allegiance to the bank. Mtce. Rates, Insurance, (improvements, a new kitchen is not the same as investing in an overseas holiday), mandated improvements (heating, insulation, draft exclusion, ventilation etc if rented all of which have to be capitalised from some reserve or out of tax paid wages.

So, lets take this examples primary tenet, an investment property it is worth a million bucks because that is what you paid for it. (What if you inherited it, is that income?). Lets assume, for this exercise you are now freehold on your own home and purchasing a modest property that you may wish to retire too. Yes, a million dollars is a lot of 'readies' but lets say you use $300,000 savings... borrowing $700,000. (now for simplicity as with any investment property - that is any proprty yu invest in, you did an interest only financing at 5.5%, annual outgoings,  + interest about $43.000pa which yu mostly re-coup via rental/AirB&B or whatever... (dont forget underlying inflation here! we are betting against it)

So you own it for say, about ten years. And the 'valuation' is $2,000,000 (that is about a 7.6% return on investment before expenses modest  by any standard. No one is being greedy pigs here. ie it aint no windfall)
 
So you have decided to sell (wife left you for the pool attendent!) You have $1,300k realised cash, less 300 initial investment = 1,000,000 taxable at 33% or about $630,000 gain after CGT
 (and conveyancing/realestate fees of about modest $30,000).

Now consider you want to buy back into the market with your cash on hand... - go and get a loan to buy back in at $2,000,000

You have half your $630,000, half the original investment $300,000 and the pool attendant is living in your former matrimonial home. Or about $460,000.

Sorry loan declined, you don't have enough to pass the Reserve Bank 30% equity. You haven't even beat inflation...... but you can afford a fishing bach on the Selwyn though! That is until ALL the equity is removed by the stroke of a pen by a government dept, none of which is rebate-able against profit in any other investment.

Had you put the spare capital ten Years Ago on **7.6% compound effective after tax(s) you would have $600,000, had you not had to pay  Capital Gain (every year) half of what ever remains is now paying for  the pool attendant and companions world cruise.

CGT is an assault on compund interest, as well as 'reasonable' risk taken by ma an pa investors. it is a tax on inflation, where the more inflation, the more Joe citizen bleeds. Try retiring now....

** FFS if you can get anything like this in a secure investment, let me know.

---- snip -----

You are factually wrong here like so many others.
You don't pay 33% on the profit today from 20 years ago you pay 33% starting from when it was valued. Not sure how they will do this part BUT if you are now valued as you say at 1 million then you are only paying on any gain above that!! So if in one year you property increased in value by 10% you pay Tax on 100 K so only pay 33 K in tax leaving you 1.66 m to buy your new house. So you don't have to go get a loan at all.

--