Dear The Treasury,

Under the Official Information Act 1982, I request the following information.

Background
On 19 March 2026 (reference 20260147), Treasury responded to my OIA request regarding the fiscal analysis of food tax relief for local producers. The response, signed by James Haughton, Unit Manager, Revenue and Economic Development, stated:
"New Zealand's tax system generally follows a 'broad-base, low rate' approach, to minimise complexity and efficiency costs. We have therefore not considered targeted tax relief for local food production, and this analysis has not been requested by Ministers."
the government has implemented or restored the following sector-specific tax concessions for residential property investment:
Full restoration of mortgage interest deductibility for residential rental properties (100% from 1 April 2025 https://www.opespartners.co.nz/tax/inter...), reversing the previous government's interest limitation rules
Reduction of the bright-line test from 10 years to 2 years (effective 1 July 2024)
These are sector-specific interventions that narrow the tax base for a single asset class. I am requesting information regarding the analytical basis for applying the "broad-base, low rate" principle to refuse consideration of food production tax relief while simultaneously implementing targeted tax concessions for residential property investment.
Requests

All internal advice, analysis, or cabinet papers that assessed the fiscal cost of restoring full mortgage interest deductibility for residential rental properties, including the estimated annual revenue foregone.

All internal advice, analysis, or cabinet papers that assessed the fiscal cost of reducing the bright-line test from 10 years to 2 years, including the estimated annual revenue foregone.
Any analysis comparing the social or economic return on investment of property investment tax concessions against potential food price interventions including but not limited to GST reduction or removal on food, producer tax credits, or supply chain cost reductions.

Any internal discussion, advice, or policy rationale explaining how full mortgage interest deductibility and bright-line reduction are consistent with the "broad-base, low rate" principle cited in your response 20260147 as the basis for not considering targeted tax relief for food production.

Any cost-benefit analysis, regulatory impact statement, or social harm modelling conducted prior to the implementation of these property investment tax concessions.
If no such analysis exists for any of the above, please confirm that in writing for each item.

I note that Treasury's stated position in response 20260147 was that the "broad-base, low rate" principle means targeted tax relief for food production has not been considered. These two property investment concessions are targeted tax relief for a single asset class. The question is whether the "broad-base, low rate" principle was applied consistently, or whether it was applied selectively to decline consideration of food production relief while being set aside for residential property investment.

I would appreciate a response within 20 working days as required under the Act.
Nga mihi
Hayden Seager

In a previous FOI request I was informed that the Treasury has never considered or modelled targeted tax relief for food producers. The reason given was: "New Zealand's tax system generally follows a 'broad-base, low rate' approach, to minimise complexity and efficiency costs. We have therefore not considered targeted tax relief for local food production, and this analysis has not been requested by Ministers."

My current request is deliberately broad because the Government has provided special tax relief for landlords and property investors, yet food producers appear to have been completely excluded from any such consideration for the reason quoted above. what its clearly contradictory

I would like all available information related to this matter. As I do not know exactly what documents, advice, briefings, modelling, or internal correspondence exist on the subject, I leave it to you to determine what material should be released.
For clarity, the previous FOI response already contained details of the specific policies and tax relief measures that have been offered to the housing sector.

I am now seeking any and all work the Treasury has done (or not done) on extending similar targeted relief to local food production. In particular, I want to see the reasoning and any analysis that led to the conclusion that modelling such relief was unnecessary or inappropriate.
The provision of tax relief for housing but not for food production is, in my view, an untenable position that will need to be addressed one way or another.
I will not accept any denial that this disparity exists.
Given the serious issues of food insecurity, the health impacts of rising food costs, and the associated social welfare costs, this is a matter of genuine national importance.The tax system is clearly playing favourites.

I would go as far as to say that, under current policy, the tax system harms our ability to produce low-input, low-cost local food. This, in turn, directly impacts the Government’s bottom line for the reasons outlined above. If any analysis on this matter was completed or requested by a Minister, you may find that any benefit gained from the limited tax revenue this system produces from small producers would, in my view, likely be far outweighed by the social benefits of having access to low-input local food.
I think your inability to do any analysis around the social costs of your tax settings is causing significant social harm. (fois support this as your and other departments refuse to model social costs of policy, leaving it to the mps)

As im just a guy im unable to do this analysis, you guys claim to have a reason to not do it, the reason is sus and contradicted by your other policys- im asking for an explanation of this clear double standard

Yours sincerely,
Hayden