Labour drops plan to tax Netflix and other streaming services
Labour leader Chris Hipkins has said Labour will not introduce a tax on streaming services like Netflix if elected, blaming an "administrative oversight" for confusion within his own team.
The proposal came from a member's bill — a type of law an MP can put forward without it being official government policy. Senior MP Willie Jackson lodged the bill more than a year ago, when he was Labour's media spokesperson. His bill suggested charging streaming services a levy, with the money going towards local New Zealand screen productions. Labour had earlier called the proposal "game-changing" (RNZ, 15 January 2026).
Hipkins said the bill had been pulled from the ballot — the random draw system that decides which member's bills get debated — and called the situation an administrative oversight (RNZ, 18 August 2026). Labour's current media spokesperson, Reuben Davidson, told reporters the removal was "a bit of administrative tidying up." That sits awkwardly next to Davidson's own comments to The Post in January, when he said Labour would look to implement a streaming levy "as early as possible" after the election. Davidson at the time denied that was confusing.
The timing matters. The National Party drew attention to the streaming levy bill around the same time Labour quietly dropped the proposal (NZ Herald, 17 August 2026). National's push included a statement from finance spokesperson Nicola Willis saying there would be no streaming tax under National and that National had no bill in the ballot for one either (National Party, 17 August 2026). National has also pointed to sector leaders estimating a 5% streaming levy could raise around $25 million a year (National Party, Facebook, 16 August 2026).
National campaign chair Simeon Brown attacked Hipkins on X, posting: "Chris Hipkins is a serial flip flopper, telling Kiwis one thing, while his caucus is doing another" (RNZ, 18 August 2026). Brown had earlier given Hipkins 24 hours to rule out a streaming tax and a ute tax, saying all they had heard was "radio silence" (RNZ, 17 August 2026). Hipkins responded by calling National "hysteric" over Labour's tax plans.
This is not the only recent messaging stumble for Labour. Willie Jackson offered what was described as a half-hearted apology for saying "who knows?" when asked about a potential land tax on Ryan Bridge's Today programme (RNZ, 18 August 2026).
The sequence of events is simple enough: Jackson lodged the bill while he was media spokesperson, Davidson then publicly committed to pursuing a levy in government, and the bill stayed in the ballot until National drew attention to it. The withdrawal and the "administrative oversight" explanation only came after National started publicly pressuring Labour.
The broader context is that for a party trying to stay on message in an election year, the gap between a spokesperson's January commitment and the leader's August reversal is hard to explain away as tidying up. The "who knows?" land tax comment from Jackson adds to a picture of a caucus where MPs speaking freely on tax policy has cost the leadership credibility it would rather keep intact heading into the election.
National has kept its message disciplined. Willis was clear: no streaming tax under National, no bill in the ballot. Brown's 24-hour deadline and "radio silence" framing kept the story in the news until Hipkins moved to shut it down. Whether the "administrative oversight" explanation satisfies voters who heard Davidson's January commitment, or the caucus members who supported the levy, is a question the campaign will have to answer.
