Back to Making Tax Simpler
Information collection overview

Do you have any comments on the necessary and relevant requirement that is proposed to be retained?

The need for an information collection standard

Inland Revenue has powers to require the provision of information, and to access premises to obtain information.  These powers are subject to the requirement that the information sought is “necessary or relevant” to Inland Revenue’s functions.

Given the broad nature of Inland Revenue’s information gathering powers, the “necessary or relevant” requirement is an important assurance that Inland Revenue will not use its powers to collect information that is not needed.

Question

Do you have any comments on the necessary and relevant requirement that is proposed to be retained?

Comments

David Snell
Commissioner needs to be careful here. Her powers are already exceptionally wide. Absolutely agree that safeguards must remain, would be very concerned at any hint that they could be removed.

Do you agree with this comment?

  • agree8
  • disagree8
8 months ago
MichaelAngelo
I have concerns for the invasion of privacy and IRD seems to have ridiculous powers to acquire information if it suits them but do not try more normal means first. For instance IRD tracked down a tax payer using a section 17 on his bank when mail was returned no address but two occasions never thought to try ringing his valid contact number or contacting his tax agent! On a much later occasion I had IRD staff ask me where he was and when I told them Japan at that moment, they demanded that I tell them his overseas address which I refused to tell them because I knew that was a sure way for mail to go missing as he was in transit. They told me that they could not send mail to his NZ contact address because he did not live at that address! It was very clear the priority was spying on him because he had they did not know if he was resident in NZ or not (despite notifications), whereas if they had written to him or his tax agent the question would have been answered and his record would have been corrected!

Do you agree with this comment?

  • agree6
  • disagree6
8 months ago
Greg
It is absolutely necessary and relevant that the necessary and relevant requirement is retained. The standards the IRD should use must be very clear.

Do you agree with this comment?

  • agree5
  • disagree8
8 months ago
Barb Jeffery
We are very trusting in New Zealand....Is this really a question that we would not say of course this is important. But no general person using an electronic devise could really say how many have access or view information we provide on a daily basis. If we posed that question would it be answered with an approximate guess. Compliance both ways is only as good as the values placed on it by the imputters of the information on financial conviancing

Do you agree with this comment?

  • agree6
  • disagree7
7 months ago
Scroll To Top