Latest news with #healthtax
RNZ News
09-07-2025
- Health
- RNZ News
No evidence to show reduction in gambling harm from $81m industry tax
The Ministry of Health hasn't produced evidence to show a reduction in gambling harm from the $81 million in tax on the industry, which includes Lotto. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly The government has decided not to increase a problem gambling tax on the industry following a critical report from the Gambling Commission. The independent regulator says there's no evidence from the Ministry of Health the money from the levy is actually reducing gambling harm. It's the second time the commission has asked the ministry to front up with evidence of the effectiveness of the programme. The Minister for Mental Health Matt Doocey said it was concerning it had taken the ministry so long to show its strategy was working. The Ministry of Health said it was undertaking a review of the programme, and was now funding a research programme that would provide evidence for decision-making. The Ministry of Health had suggested increasing the 2025-2028 problem gambling levy by 20.6 percent, to $92 million, but Cabinet instead decided last month it would be kept at $81 million over three years. The levy was imposed on casinos, sports betting, pokie machine operators and Lotto to fund public health and addiction services to minimise gambling harm. Online gambling operators were not included in the levy. The Gambling Commission said in a report issued earlier this year that the ministry had not provided evidence the money from the levy was actually reducing gambling harm. Chief Gambling Commissioner, Susan Hughes, KC, wrote that the commission was "very clear" in 2022 the ministry needed to undertake a major strategic review of its strategy, and it was "disappointed" it had not done so. "The ministry has spent hundreds of millions over a prolonged period of time but there is no evidence that the strategy has had a substantial impact on the level of gambling harm in New Zealand." The commission was also critical of the way the levy was going to be allocated, saying the Ministry of Health's agency costs were budgeted to double, while funding for research and evaluation, and new services, were budgeted to decrease significantly. "The ministry should be exercising restraint, consistent with the entire New Zealand Public Service, and should be imposing the minimum levy necessary, rather than increasing it in a manner that is inconsistent with the current financial climate." Hughes said there was no monitoring or reporting framework to analyse the ministry's strategy and what aspects were working or not. The commission also said the number of presentations to problem gambling services was declining significantly, from 6525 in 2013-2014 to 3615 in 2023-2024, but noted a growing use and concern about online gambling. Minister of Mental Health Matt Doocey. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii The commission noted that numbers of people presenting to gambling services did not fully capture the harm caused by gambling. Doocey said it was worrying the Ministry of Health was taking so long to provide evidence its gambling harm strategy was working. "I think that it's concerning that it's taken so long to see what changes are being delivered as a result. Doocey said the ministry was conducting a review of its strategy and Cabinet would reconsider the levy next year in light of that evaluation. "We want the money that is being invested to be making a real difference on the ground and deliver a return on investment. "Our focus is on delivering timely, effective support to individuals, families, and communities affected by gambling harm. "We will be making sure that New Zealanders are seeing that material difference," Doocey said. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Health said its gambling harm strategy for 2025-2028 was informed by international and local research, and drew on a range of public health services. The spokesperson said the ministry listened to a range of views during its consultation on the levy and said there was "strong support" for new priorities to prevent gambling harm. "The revised strategy reflects the feedback we received and includes new investment in treatment and support, improving prevention and early intervention initiatives, and improving the effectiveness of support for those experiencing gambling harm." In response to criticism from the commission on the agency's operating costs, the spokesperson said operating costs at the ministry had risen from $3.5 million to $5.2m under the new levy period, and that the Gambling Act required that some part of the levy was used to implement its strategy. Hughes said several problem gambling organisations supported an increase in the levy, with The Problem Gambling Foundation's chief executive Melissa Thompson telling the commission the increase was relatively modest in relation to the growth in spending from gambling products. The Problem Gambling Foundation could not be reached for comment. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
CBC
06-07-2025
- Health
- CBC
WHO pitches health tax on sugar; Dating apps are downsizing: CBC's Marketplace cheat sheet
Social Sharing Miss something this week? Don't panic. CBC's Marketplace rounds up the consumer and health news you need. Want this in your inbox? Get the Marketplace newsletter every Friday. Raise prices on sugary drinks, alcohol and tobacco by 50%, WHO suggests The World Health Organization is pushing countries to raise the prices of sugary drinks, alcohol and tobacco by 50 per cent over the next 10 years through taxation, its strongest backing yet for taxes to help tackle chronic public health problems. The United Nations health agency said the move would help cut consumption of the products, which contribute to diseases like diabetes and some cancers, as well as raising money at a time when development aid is shrinking and public debt rising. "Health taxes are one of the most efficient tools we have," said Jeremy Farrar, WHO assistant-director general of health promotion and disease prevention and control. "It's time to act." WATCH | Shocking amounts of sugar in popular coffee chain drinks: Sugar Shock: Coffee Chains / Buzzkill: Carbonated Drinks 4 years ago Duration 22:30 Shocking amounts of sugar in some popular coffee chain drinks, even ones that seem healthier; lab tests show which sparkling water drinks could harm your launched the push, billed as the " 3 by 35" initiative, at the UN Finance for Development conference in Seville, Spain. WHO said that its tax plan could raise $1 trillion US by 2035, based on evidence from health taxes in countries such as Colombia and South Africa. WHO has backed tobacco taxes and price increases for decades and has called for taxes on alcohol and sugary drinks in recent years. But this is the first time it has suggested a target price increase for all three products. Read more. Is the romance with dating apps over? Big cuts at Bumble, Match raise questions Mass layoffs at dating app provider Bumble are the latest sign that more people are splitting from the high-tech way of making connections. The Texas-based online dating platform disclosed in a securities filing last week that it plans to lay off about one-third of its workforce, amounting to some 240 employees, with an anticipated savings of about $40 million US. Bumble reported a total revenue of about $247 million in its most recent first-quarter earnings, down almost eight per cent from the same period a year ago. "Bumble, like the online dating industry itself, is at an inflection point," Bumble CEO and founder Whitney Wolfe Herd said in a note to employees. The company has been "rebuilding" in recent months, which "requires hard decisions," the note said. A month earlier, Texas-based Match Group — which owns the dating apps Tinder, Hinge and OKCupid — announced plans to cut 13 per cent of its workforce, the company's first big move since CEO Spencer Rascoff took over in February. Read more from CBC's Kevin Maimann. New supply management law won't save the system from Trump, experts say A new law meant to protect supply management might not be enough to shield the system in trade talks with a Trump administration bent on eliminating it, trade experts say. The Bloc Québécois's recently passed Bill C-202 essentially forbids supply management from being used as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations by preventing the foreign affairs minister from making certain commitments. "It's certainly more difficult to strike a deal with the United States now with the passage of this bill that basically forces Canada to negotiate with one hand tied behind its back," said William Pellerin, a trade lawyer and partner at the firm McMillan LLP. "Now that we've removed the digital service tax, dairy and supply management is probably the No. 1 trade irritant that we have with the United States. That remains very much unresolved." When U.S. President Donald Trump briefly paused trade talks with Canada on June 27 over the digital services tax — shortly before Ottawa capitulated by dropping the tax — he zeroed in on Canada's system of supply management. In a social media post, Trump called Canada a "very difficult country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products." Canada can charge about 250 per cent tariffs on U.S. dairy imports over a set quota established by the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). The International Dairy Foods Association, which represents the U.S. dairy industry, said in March that the U.S. has never come close to reaching those quotas, though the association also said that's because of other barriers Canada has erected. Read more. What else is going on? 139-year-old company blames economy and consumers' changing diet habits. Marketplace needs your help! We're working on all-new investigations for our upcoming season and we want to hear from you. Got something you think we should investigate? Email us at marketplace@
ABC News
24-06-2025
- Business
- ABC News
What cost of living crisis? Barr government goes for broke with revenue grab
Every Canberran could sense in February the abject implosion of the ACT's finances that apparently only dawned on the Barr Labor government sometime after its re-election in October. Only now, in the sheer breadth, size, and audacity of its lunge for new revenue, coupled with persistent deficits for another four years, can we truly appreciate the extent of its fiscal desperation. How else to explain the head-spinning array of higher fees, levies, and taxes the new ACT Treasurer, Chris Steel, has conjured in his first budget? Hiking land rates, business taxes, parking fees, and vehicle regos, while painful, are standard and obvious 'go-to' targets for cash-strapped treasurers peering at oceans of red ink on the books. Showing a flair for creativity, Mr Steel has gone so much further in his 2025/26 debut. False fire alarm activations? Ka-ching. Volunteers helping coach kids' sporting teams? A new fee. Dumping an old tyre? Up by more than 200 per cent. These charges will be annoying to many, but they pale in policy significance when compared to the novel 'health tax' every household in the territory is about to be hit with. Not that any government would use or accept the term 'health tax'; the Barr government has opted for the more banal "levy to support the public health system". Whatever Canberrans might feel about paying it — some may see it as an entirely reasonable contribution — this non-means-tested annual $250 impost is a most 'un-Labor' thing to do. It challenges our federation's compact that Medicare and federal health funding grants funnelled back to the states and territories — even if inadequate — are the bedrock guarantee of universal, fee-free access to health care in public hospitals. For ACT residents forced to pay it, the new 'tax' is akin to a compulsory 'co-payment' for hospital services. A 'co-payment' charged whether they use public hospital services or not, applied to a population already more likely to pay out-of-pocket fees if they visit a GP, with nationally lagging bulk-billing rates. Where were ACT Labor MLAs between January and the May 10 federal election when Anthony Albanese pulled out his own Medicare card, extolling Australia's unique health-funding system as "a declaration of Australian values" and railing against anything that resembled an extra payment to access services? The Barr government argues the $205 million 'tax' (the total to be collected) is temporary, conveniently expiring in the fiscal year in which the next territory election is held, in 2028/29. This assumes several entrenched flaws in the ACT's health services are resolved by then — that demand stabilises, growth in costs slows, and, most importantly, that the Albanese government succumbs to pressure from all states and territories and generously expands total national hospital funding of $34 billion per year. Chris Steel would be supremely, perhaps dangerously, optimistic if he banked on the Commonwealth suddenly coming to the rescue at a time when it's running its combined deficits of almost $180 billion through to 2028/29. The ACT's tax' also has the potential to disadvantage Andrew Barr in crucial negotiations at federal cabinet. Having uniquely and unilaterally taken the plunge into what's called 'own source' hospital revenue for the first time, why wouldn't the feds then discount the $200 million the territory's raising from whatever future offer it makes to the chief minister? In this respect, the ACT is isolated because it's unlikely any of the six states would create their own version of a hospital tax, in view of the constitutional questions it could create. An equity argument arises with NSW, too. Unless there's to be a matching increase in cross-border payments for its residents using the Canberra Hospital, aren't territory residents doing more of the heavy-lifting relative to those coming from elsewhere for treatment? If, as is likely, none of these underlying problems are resolved when we reach fiscal year 2028-29, what then? Would the next territory government have to extend the charge? Index it? Increase it? Stepping back from the Steel budget's biggest surprise on hospital funding, under the heading 'sustainable revenue,' this budget scrapes together more than half a billion dollars in new or higher taxes and charges over four years. Not all of them are applied directly onto individuals, as is the case with land rates; some go via employers (payroll tax) or companies, including telcos and electricity networks. Either way, a significant proportion of the tax hikes could find their way onto residents' bills. This budget effectively signals that we've passed 'peak cost-of-living' thinking among the politicians and treasury officials who wrote it. While inflation was sitting in the seven per cent range a couple of years back, as much as they reasonably could, governments across the land deliberately shied away from politically unpalatable revenue increases that might have pushed indebted households to the brink. In the steely resolve to go so hard in his inaugural budget, the ACT treasurer seems to be suggesting those days are over.
