This table summarises our impact assessment of the options. Does it meet the Impacts Options objectives (a, b, c , Administration Compliance Environmental , social Fiscal d, e)? Risks Net impacts and cultural a, e No change. No change. No change. Lack of support for Time to process Neutral. Does not Option one quo –status borrowers who are applications undermines address the problem volunteering for an policy intent. definition. overseas charitable organisation. a, b, c, d, e Negative. Overall expected to Reduction in Increase support to Potentially some time Overall positive, as Option two delegate – decrease. compliance costs for borrowers volunteering delays if organisations allows better access to the authority for the Expected to result charitable organisations for an overseas that are not interest write-off in line approval of charitable Reduce administration costs in more those already charitable organisation. automatically approved with the policy intent. organisations to the – for Inland Revenue in applications for registered with are slow to provide Reduction in Commissioner of Inland processing applications. interest write-off Charities Services or necessary information. administrative costs Revenue being accepted, approved by Inland mitigates, and potentially There will be a small with interest Revenue for income tax outweighs, small fiscal administrative cost for foregone of exemption are cost. Inland Revenue in moving approximately automatically accepted. from a non-disputable to a $1,000 per student disputable decision. per year. Reduce administration cost Estimated to be for Cabinet and reduce use $30,000 interest of Cabinet time. forgone per year. Objectives: (a) provide an interest write-off to borrowers who are volunteering overseas for charitable purposes (b) have an efficient and timely process for approving a charitable organisation applying for charitable status (c) reduce administration costs for Inland Revenue (d) reduce compliance costs for charitable organisations (e) ensure integrity of the process and mitigate abuse of the interest write-off provision Does it meet the Impacts Options objectives (a, b, c , Environmental , social d, e)? Fiscal Administration Compliance Risks Net impacts and cultural
This table summarises our impact assessment of the options. Options Does it meet the objectives (a, b, c , d, e)? Impacts Fiscal Administration Compliance Environmental , social and cultural Risks Net impacts Option one –status quo a, e No change. No change. No change. Lack of support for borrowers who are volunteering for an overseas charitable organisation. Time to process applications undermines policy intent. Neutral. Does not address the problem definition. Option two – delegate the authority for the approval of charitable organisations to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue a, b, c, d, e Negative. Expected to result in more applications for interest write-off being accepted, with interest foregone of approximately $1,000 per student per year. Estimated to be $30,000 interest forgone per year. Overall expected to decrease. Reduce administration costs for Inland Revenue in processing applications. There will be a small administrative cost for Inland Revenue in moving from a non-disputable to a disputable decision. Reduce administration cost for Cabinet and reduce use of Cabinet time. Reduction in compliance costs for charitable organisations – those already registered with Charities Services or approved by Inland Revenue for income tax exemption are automatically accepted. Increase support to borrowers volunteering for an overseas charitable organisation. Potentially some time delays if organisations that are not automatically approved are slow to provide necessary information. Overall positive, as allows better access to interest write-off in line with the policy intent. Reduction in administrative costs mitigates, and potentially outweighs, small fiscal cost. Objectives: (a) provide an interest write-off to borrowers who are volunteering overseas for charitable purposes (b) have an efficient and timely process for approving a charitable organisation applying for charitable status (c) reduce administration costs for Inland Revenue (d) reduce compliance costs for charitable organisations (e) ensure integrity of the process and mitigate abuse of the interest write-off provision Options Does it meet the objectives (a, b, c , d, e)? Impacts Fiscal Administration Compliance Environmental , social and cultural Risks Net impacts
2015-ris-rlwtgstossl-bill-2.docx