The Greens’ 2026 Tax Policy & What it Could Mean for You

The Green Party has released its 2026 tax policy with a clear objective: shift the tax burden away from wages and towards wealth, large corporates, and capital.

At a high level, the proposal is simple in concept but significant in impact. It combines tax cuts for most individuals with new taxes on wealth, inheritances, and large businesses, alongside tighter rules for property investors and multinational companies.

We have prepared a practical overview of the key measures and what they are likely to mean if implemented.

A Shift Towards Taxing Wealth

The most significant change is the introduction of a 2.5% annual tax on net wealth above $10 million (excluding the family home).

In addition, the Greens propose a 33% tax on inheritances and gifts above $1 million, with exemptions for family homes and farms.

From a policy perspective, this represents a major shift. New Zealand has traditionally relied heavily on taxing income rather than capital. This proposal moves us closer to a European-style system where wealth itself is taxed on an ongoing basis and on transfer.

In practice, if implemented, this would significantly increase the complexity of tax affairs for high-net-worth individuals, particularly where assets are held in trusts, companies, or illiquid investments.

Higher Tax for Large Corporates

The Greens propose a two-tier company tax system:

• 28% remains for small and medium enterprises

• 33% applies to large businesses with turnover over $30 million

Additional measures include:

• A bank levy of 0.06% on large banks

• Enforcement of withholding tax on profits shifted offshore by large technology companies

While politically attractive, a split-rate system introduces practical issues. In particular, it creates strong incentives for restructuring to remain below the “large business” threshold and may discourage growth beyond that point.

Property Investors Face Tighter Rules

The policy would reverse recent changes affecting residential property investors by:

• Reinstating the 10-year bright-line test

• Removing interest deductibility for residential investment property

While widely noted by the left as “tax loopholes”, interest deductibility is allowed across all other investments, and is not, in fact, a tax loophole.

Income Tax Cuts for Most

For individuals, the proposal introduces:

• A tax-free threshold on the first $10,000 of income

• A new progressive scale, with a top rate of 45% above $160,000

  
  

According to the Greens’ modelling, around 96% of taxpayers would receive a tax cut, with the largest relative benefit for lower-income earners.

The trade-off is a higher marginal rate at the top end, which may reintroduce familiar planning issues involving trusts, companies, and income structuring.

While significantly scaled back from their alternative budget, the policy is internally consistent and clearly directed at a single goal: redistributing the tax burden from labour to capital.

However, the practical implications should not be underestimated.

• For high-net-worth individuals, the introduction of a wealth tax and inheritance tax would materially change long-term structuring, valuation, and succession planning.

• For business owners, particularly those approaching the $30m threshold, careful consideration would need to be given to structure and growth strategies.

• For property investors, the changes would reduce profitability and significantly disadvantage property investors when compared to other investors. This seems likely to alter investment activity.

For many taxpayers the changes would be modest. For others, particularly those with substantial assets, complex structures, or cross-border interests, the impact would be considerable and would require proactive planning.

If implemented, this would represent one of the most significant shifts in New Zealand’s tax system in decades.

In reality, however, no single party is likely to govern alone. Any final outcome would almost certainly reflect a blend of policies negotiated across a coalition, meaning these proposals are best viewed as a direction of travel rather than a complete end-state.

As always, the detail will matter, but so too will the political process that shapes it. For now, it is more useful to understand the themes than react to the headlines.

This article is intended for informational purposes only and should not replace specific tax advice. For personalised advice on all tax issues please contact us.

This article was accurate at the time of publishing.