Latest news with #GrahamAllpress
Scoop
14-06-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Do I Have To Pay For My Partner's Care?
RNZ's money correspondent answers your questions. Send your questions to If one person in a de facto relationship needs permanent medical care, does the Government require the other partner to pay for the care once the unwell patient's funds run out? The basic answer to your question is that when your partner is being assessed for their ability to pay for their care, your income and assets will usually be taken into account. If you're referring to medical care in a rest home setting, your assets and personal income affect whether your partner will qualify for a residential care subsidy. 'People who need residential care are required to pay for it themselves, if they can afford to do so. If they cannot afford it, they may be eligible for a residential care subsidy, which Health New Zealand pays directly to the care provider,' said Ministry of Social Development group general manager for client service delivery Graham Allpress. 'MSD's role is to check whether people qualify for this subsidy by performing a 'financial means assessment'. 'To get the subsidy, a person's income and assets must be under a certain amount. If they are in a relationship, the combined income and assets of both parties must be under a certain amount.' People can qualify for the subsidy if they are 50 to 64, single and without dependent children, or over 65 and meet the income and means test. That means, even if your partner's funds have run out, your assets could still be taken into account. If only one partner needs care, the couple combined need to have assets of no more than $155,873 not including the family home and car, or $284,636 if you do want the home and car in the assessment. If it's other types of care that you're thinking of, it could be a good idea to contact Health NZ for a needs assessment. There are options such as the supported living payment but eligibility for this is assessed on a household income basis, too. I'm currently a NZ tax resident living in NZ, but previously lived in Australia (over a decade ago) and purchased shares on the ASX that I continue to own and receive dividends for (which I declare as part of my income). If I sold these shares now, worth about $150,000, what taxes would they be subject to? Specifically, would I have to pay a capital gains tax on the increased share value (as I would if I were an Australian tax resident). This is probably a question for an accountant with expertise in Australian tax. Based on information available online, it seems that you potentially should have paid tax on the shares in Australia when you stopped being an Australian resident. Assuming that didn't happen, the Australian Tax Office is likely to be expecting capital gains tax to be paid on them when they are sold. You aren't likely to have any New Zealand tax obligations. Tax experts tell me that the authorities have access to a lot of data these days so it's possible that the Australian Tax Office will find out about any share sale and might get in touch with you. I am 78 years of age and still work part time and also still contribute to my KiwiSaver. Am I eligible for the government contribution? Sorry, no. While the government said it was going to start making contributions to 16 and 17-year-olds' accounts, it hasn't budged on the upper limit of 65.
Scoop
14-06-2025
- Health
- Scoop
Do I Have To Pay For My Partner's Care?
Send your questions to If one person in a de facto relationship needs permanent medical care, does the Government require the other partner to pay for the care once the unwell patient's funds run out? The basic answer to your question is that when your partner is being assessed for their ability to pay for their care, your income and assets will usually be taken into account. If you're referring to medical care in a rest home setting, your assets and personal income affect whether your partner will qualify for a residential care subsidy. "People who need residential care are required to pay for it themselves, if they can afford to do so. If they cannot afford it, they may be eligible for a residential care subsidy, which Health New Zealand pays directly to the care provider," said Ministry of Social Development group general manager for client service delivery Graham Allpress. "MSD's role is to check whether people qualify for this subsidy by performing a 'financial means assessment'. "To get the subsidy, a person's income and assets must be under a certain amount. If they are in a relationship, the combined income and assets of both parties must be under a certain amount." People can qualify for the subsidy if they are 50 to 64, single and without dependent children, or over 65 and meet the income and means test. That means, even if your partner's funds have run out, your assets could still be taken into account. If only one partner needs care, the couple combined need to have assets of no more than $155,873 not including the family home and car, or $284,636 if you do want the home and car in the assessment. If it's other types of care that you're thinking of, it could be a good idea to contact Health NZ for a needs assessment. There are options such as the supported living payment but eligibility for this is assessed on a household income basis, too. I'm currently a NZ tax resident living in NZ, but previously lived in Australia (over a decade ago) and purchased shares on the ASX that I continue to own and receive dividends for (which I declare as part of my income). If I sold these shares now, worth about $150,000, what taxes would they be subject to? Specifically, would I have to pay a capital gains tax on the increased share value (as I would if I were an Australian tax resident). This is probably a question for an accountant with expertise in Australian tax. Based on information available online, it seems that you potentially should have paid tax on the shares in Australia when you stopped being an Australian resident. Assuming that didn't happen, the Australian Tax Office is likely to be expecting capital gains tax to be paid on them when they are sold. You aren't likely to have any New Zealand tax obligations. Tax experts tell me that the authorities have access to a lot of data these days so it's possible that the Australian Tax Office will find out about any share sale and might get in touch with you. I am 78 years of age and still work part time and also still contribute to my KiwiSaver. Am I eligible for the government contribution? Sorry, no. While the government said it was going to start making contributions to 16 and 17-year-olds' accounts, it hasn't budged on the upper limit of 65.
RNZ News
13-06-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Do I have to pay for my partner's care?
Photo: RNZ Send your questions to If one person in a de facto relationship needs permanent medical care, does the Government require the other partner to pay for the care once the unwell patient's funds run out? The basic answer to your question is that when your partner is being assessed for their ability to pay for their care, your income and assets will usually be taken into account. If you're referring to medical care in a rest home setting, your assets and personal income affect whether your partner will qualify for a residential care subsidy. "People who need residential care are required to pay for it themselves, if they can afford to do so. If they cannot afford it, they may be eligible for a residential care subsidy, which Health New Zealand pays directly to the care provider," said Ministry of Social Development group general manager for client service delivery Graham Allpress. "MSD's role is to check whether people qualify for this subsidy by performing a 'financial means assessment'. "To get the subsidy, a person's income and assets must be under a certain amount. If they are in a relationship, the combined income and assets of both parties must be under a certain amount." People can qualify for the subsidy if they are 50 to 64, single and without dependent children, or over 65 and meet the income and means test. That means, even if your partner's funds have run out, your assets could still be taken into account. If only one partner needs care, the couple combined need to have assets of no more than $155,873 not including the family home and car, or $284,636 if you do want the home and car in the assessment. If it's other types of care that you're thinking of, it could be a good idea to contact Health NZ for a needs assessment. There are options such as the supported living payment but eligibility for this is assessed on a household income basis, too. I'm currently a NZ tax resident living in NZ, but previously lived in Australia (over a decade ago) and purchased shares on the ASX that I continue to own and receive dividends for (which I declare as part of my income). If I sold these shares now, worth about $150,000, what taxes would they be subject to? Specifically, would I have to pay a capital gains tax on the increased share value (as I would if I were an Australian tax resident). This is probably a question for an accountant with expertise in Australian tax. Based on information available online, it seems that you potentially should have paid tax on the shares in Australia when you stopped being an Australian resident. Assuming that didn't happen, the Australian Tax Office is likely to be expecting capital gains tax to be paid on them when they are sold. You aren't likely to have any New Zealand tax obligations. Tax experts tell me that the authorities have access to a lot of data these days so it's possible that the Australian Tax Office will find out about any share sale and might get in touch with you. I am 78 years of age and still work part time and also still contribute to my KiwiSaver. Am I eligible for the government contribution? Sorry, no. While the government said it was going to start making contributions to 16 and 17-year-olds' accounts, it hasn't budged on the upper limit of 65. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
NZ Herald
05-05-2025
- Business
- NZ Herald
MSD sanctions double, impact on employment unclear
Data released to RNZ after an Official Information Act request shows that there were 3015 times that a client was sanctioned, then recomplied with their obligations and then left the benefit to work. There were 210 times when a client was sanctioned and then left for work, then recomplied with their obligations. That could include people who found work and then ended up back on the benefit. Graham Allpress, group general manager of client service delivery, said sanctions and obligations were one part of a broader picture that could contribute to a jobseeker finding work. He said MSD could not provide data about sanctions that led to someone re-engaging and then finding work because it could not link the sanction and the person finding a job. 'People get jobs because they apply for them, and because they take steps to become ready for work. 'We use sanctions as a last resort if someone is not meeting their obligations, to encourage them to engage with us and get back on track by re-complying their obligations. 'In 2024, 92.8% of sanctions were lifted after the client re-complied with their obligations and got back on track. That is the purpose we use them for. 'If someone gets a benefit and they have work obligations, one of the main things they agree to do is regularly apply for suitable jobs. By meeting their obligations, they maximise their own opportunity to get a job and 'exit to work'. 'We are engaging with more jobseekers more frequently through proactive appointments and Kōrero Mahi seminars. Our support for jobseekers includes training, work assessments or work experience, and help with CVs and applying for jobs.' In 2018, the then-Labour Government produced a paper on the effects of work-related sanctions. 'Real barriers' It said that regimes less severe than New Zealand's were effective in increasing movement from benefits to work. But evidence from the UK and US was that very harsh sanctions could have adverse effects that drove people away from employment. Isaac Gunson, spokesperson for the Child Poverty Action Group, said it was unlikely that so many more people had started missing appointments. 'What seems more likely is that MSD has become quicker to cut people off, despite the very real barriers many face in attending. 'These are people doing their best in tough circumstances. They may not have access to childcare, a working phone, or may simply be confused by the system. 'Pushing people off income support doesn't make the job market fairer or more accessible. It just assumes success is possible while unemployment rises and support systems become harder to navigate.' Economist Shamubeel Eaqub said there should be clearer ways to determine whether sanctions were having the effect intended. 'How can we be confident they are doing their job? 'I have no problem with them pulling these levers if they're effective. If they're creating a better outcome then of course we should be doing it. But we shouldn't just punish people.'
RNZ News
05-05-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
MSD doesn't know if benefit sanctions leading people into work, says aim is compliance
New data reveals the number of benefit sanctions for missed MSD appointments rose to 9042 in the March 2025 quarter - more than twice the 4356 in the same quarter last year. Photo: RNZ / Quin Tauetau The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) cannot say whether an increased level of benefit sanctions is leading to more people going into work. The agency says sanctions are designed to ensure compliance with benefit obligations, which then should help people find work, rather than directly helping people into employment. The number of benefit sanctions for missed MSD appointments rose to 9042 in the March 2025 quarter - more than twice the 4356 in the same quarter last year. There were a total of 13,485 sanctions in the quarter this year, up 79.6 percent year-on-year. Data released to RNZ after an Official Information Act request shows that in 2024, there were 3015 times that a client was sanctioned, then recomplied with their obligations and then left the benefit to work. There were 210 times when a client was sanctioned and then left for work, then recomplied with their obligations. That could include people who found work and then ended up back on the benefit. Graham Allpress, group general manager of client service delivery, said sanctions and obligations were one part of a broader picture that could contribute to a jobseeker finding work. He said MSD could not provide data about sanctions that led to someone re-engaging and then finding work because they could not link the sanction and the person finding a job. "People get jobs because they apply for them, and because they take steps to become ready for work. "We use sanctions as a last resort if someone is not meeting their obligations, to encourage them to engage with us and get back on track by re-complying their obligations. "In 2024, 92.8 percent of sanctions were lifted after the client re-complied with their obligations and got back on track. That is the purpose we use them for. "If someone gets a benefit and they have work obligations, one of the main things they agree to do is regularly apply for suitable jobs. By meeting their obligations, they maximise their own opportunity to get a job and 'exit to work'. "We are engaging with more jobseekers more frequently through proactive appointments and Kōrero Mahi seminars. Our support for jobseekers includes training, work assessments or work experience, and help with CVs and applying for jobs." In 2018, the then-Labour government produced a paper on the effects of work-related sanctions. It said that regimes less severe than New Zealand's were effective in increasing movement from benefits to work. But evidence from the UK and US was that very harsh sanctions could have adverse affects that drove people away from employment. Isaac Gunson, spokesperson for the Child Poverty Action Group, said it was unlikely that so many more people had started missing appointments. "What seems more likely is that MSD has become quicker to cut people off, despite the very real barriers many face in attending. "These are people doing their best in tough circumstances. They may not have access to childcare, a working phone, or may simply be confused by the system. "Pushing people off income support doesn't make the job market fairer or more accessible. It just assumes success is possible while unemployment rises and support systems become harder to navigate." Shamubeel Eaqub said there should be clearer ways to determine whether sanctions were having the effect intended. "How can we be confident they are doing their job? "I have no problem with them pulling these levers if they're effective. If they're creating a better outcome then of course we should be doing it. But we shouldn't just punish people." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
