The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand released its 2026 tax platform on 21 June, proposing a 2.5 percent wealth tax on net assets above $2 million, a $10,000 tax-free threshold, and a guaranteed minimum income of $385 per week after tax for every New Zealander, according to the party's policy document published at greens.org.nz/fairtax2026.

The package has three interlocking parts: redistribution from the top of the wealth distribution, relief across the middle of the income scale, and a floor beneath it. The wealth tax applies to net assets — mortgages and other debt are excluded from the calculation — meaning it targets equity rather than gross holdings. Capital gains and a land value tax are also part of the expanded tax base the party is proposing, alongside the net wealth levy.

On income tax, the plan creates a $10,000 tax-free threshold at the bottom and a small rate increase for those earning $160,000 or more at the top. The party says 96 percent of New Zealanders would receive a net income tax cut under the settings. That figure, if it holds under independent scrutiny, covers a very large share of the wage and salary workforce and most beneficiaries — the top four percent threshold sits well above median household income.

The Income Guarantee — $385 per week after tax — functions as a universal minimum income floor. The party frames it as a structural reform rather than a benefit adjustment: it would apply to every New Zealander, not just those currently receiving a main benefit. At current settings, $385 per week after tax sits above the base rate of most working-age benefits but below the net weekly equivalent of the minimum wage at 40 hours, so the practical effect for those already in full-time minimum-wage work would be limited; for those in precarious or part-time work, or outside the labour market entirely, the floor could be material.

The stated purpose of the plan is to ensure "the super-rich and big corporations contribute their share" while reducing the tax burden on salaried and waged workers. That framing is straightforward political positioning ahead of a likely 2026 election cycle — the policy is explicitly a campaign document — but the structural content is substantive enough to warrant close examination by fiscal analysts.

New Zealand has no general capital gains tax and no wealth tax. Both have been debated intermittently since at least the 2019 Tax Working Group recommended a capital gains tax, which the then-Labour-led government declined to implement. The Greens' 2026 package is broader than that recommendation: it bundles a net wealth levy, capital gains, and land value taxation together, which multiplies the design and compliance complexity considerably.

The wealth tax design question that will draw most scrutiny is liquidity. A 2.5 percent annual levy on net assets above $2 million hits asset-rich, cash-poor households — farmers, small business owners with property-heavy balance sheets — in ways that require either asset sales or borrowing to fund the liability. How the party intends to handle that is not detailed in the published summary; the answer will matter to any revenue modelling. A land value tax, if implemented alongside a wealth levy, would create partially overlapping incidence for landholders, which needs to be reconciled in the design.

The $10,000 tax-free threshold change is technically straightforward by comparison. New Zealand currently has no general tax-free threshold — the first dollar of income is taxed — so the measure would structurally simplify the bottom of the income tax schedule and deliver a flat nominal benefit to every income earner regardless of income level, with the highest dollar gain per capita going to those at the lower end of the income distribution.

The Greens are currently in opposition. The plan requires parliamentary support to become law, and in the current composition of the House it has no obvious path to implementation without a change of government. What it does is set a clear fiscal position heading into the election campaign — one that differs materially from Labour's stated tax settings as well as from National's — and forces a debate about wealth taxation that neither of the two larger parties has been willing to initiate.