Pay Equity Challenge Media Release

6 December 2011

Income sharing is fixed in the past

The coalition agreement between National and United Future which puts income sharing back on the parliamentary table is completely out of step with employment trends and with workers and parents’ work preferences.

“Taking the Taxation (Income Sharing for Tax Credit) Bill through a second reading would waste Parliament’s time” said Pay Equity Challenge Coalition spokesperson, Angela McLeod.

“The evidence is clear that the only group benefitting from income sharing is higher earners and in the main, higher earning men. Treasury quoted in the last term of Government that 78 percent of the benefits from income sharing would accrue to families earning over $70,000 per annum.”

“The Coalition is very concerned that with women’s wage levels lower on average, it could result in more women staying at home or reducing their hours in the paid workforce, while for most men it would be business as usual. Income sharing returns us to the past with its stereotypes about women’s roles and reinforces the gendered nature of child caring”.

“Internationally, there is an increasing emphasis on the need to make better use of women's human capital and to close the wage gap. Organisations ranging from the United Nations to the OECD and the World Bank are paying more attention to ways of making the most of female potential.

“Last year, a Goldman Sachs report calculated that eliminating the remaining gap in male and female employment rates could boost GDP in New Zealand by 10%”, said Angela McLeod.

And income sharing doesn’t even begin to address the real issues facing New Zealand; child poverty, raising the income of low and middle income New Zealanders and reducing the gender pay gap.

“It is a waste of time and money for Parliament to debate this bill again. It should be dropped – it is out of step and out-dated,” said Angela McLeod.

ENDS

© Scoop Media