National's 2026 Tax Policy: What 'No New Taxes' Means

This is an election commitment, not current law. National announced its no-new-taxes position on 23 August 2026, ahead of the 7 November 2026 general election. Like every party’s platform, it binds nothing unless the party forms a government and legislates. New Zealand’s tax settings remain as they are today either way.

National’s tax platform is unusual among the 2026 offerings in that its central content is a negative: a commitment not to introduce new taxes, rather than a set of rates and thresholds. That makes it harder to compare with Labour’s capital gains tax or the Green and Te Pāti Māori wealth taxes, and easier to misread. This page sets out what the commitment actually says, what it names, and — just as importantly — what it leaves open.

The commitment

From National’s own announcement, headed 23 August 2026:

“National is committing to no new taxes if re-elected on November 7.”

The party’s policy page frames the same pledge as a contrast: “Between Labour, the Greens, Te Pati Maori and TOP, at least 9 new taxes are on the table to help pay for Labour’s $18 billion of spending promises.” That count is National’s characterisation of its opponents’ platforms, not an independent tally — the underlying proposals are set out party by party in every party’s 2026 tax policy compared.

What it explicitly rules out

The 23 August announcement names two taxes:

“That includes no accommodation levy or bank tax. We determined there is no way to do an accommodation levy without increasing costs on Kiwis booking a weekend away, so we’ll look at how existing mechanisms could be used to support councils.”

Both are notable because they were live possibilities rather than straw men. An accommodation levy — a “bed tax” on short-term stays — had been under consideration as a way to fund councils carrying tourism costs, and the announcement drops it. A bank tax had already been ruled out earlier.

The second half of that quote is the part that points at actual policy: “we’ll look at how existing mechanisms could be used to support councils.”

The International Visitor Levy reset

That existing mechanism turned out to be the International Visitor Levy, and National published the policy on its own site as an Economy policy titled “International Visitor Levy reset to keep taxes low”. The commitments are:

• $100 million a year to the Department of Conservation, “to keep investing in the conservation estate that underpins New Zealand’s visitor experience”.
• A Tourism Priorities Fund created by “ring-fencing $50 million per annum to support tourism growth and resilience, including international marketing, visitor attraction, tourism data, and the tourism workforce”.
• All remaining IVL revenue distributed to councils, “based on their share of international visitor guest nights”.
• No increase in the levy for at least three years — the policy commits “that there will be no increase in the International Visitor Levy for at least the next three years”.

The policy is explicit that this is the substitute for a new charge: councils get “a direct and growing financial return from the visitors they host, without a new bed tax”.

Whether this counts as a tax policy at all depends on what you are measuring. No rate changes and no charge is created — it is a reallocation of money already collected. But it is the only published, numbered fiscal commitment in National’s 2026 tax-adjacent platform, and it exists specifically because a new tax was rejected.

Income tax: no cuts in the plan

National’s fiscal plan, published on 12 October 2026, settles the question this page previously left open. It contains no income-tax cuts:

“While National’s fiscal plan shows a pathway to potential tax relief for working New Zealanders, now is not the time to cut taxes. The responsible thing to do now is reduce debt and invest in frontline services, especially health and infrastructure.”

The plan makes relief conditional on the surplus rather than dating it:

“Once the books are back in the black and surpluses are growing, a National Government will be in a position to consider tax relief.”

The same document forecasts the return to surplus in 2028/29, the year the Treasury’s Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update also gives. In the plan’s list of what a re-elected National Government will do, the first line is that it will “not impose new taxes”.

The plan also names the problem it is not yet fixing. It says the median full-time wage and salary earner “is now earning $82,000 a year, which puts them in the second-highest, 33 per cent, income tax bracket”. That is bracket creep: with no threshold change, rising wages lift the share of income paid in tax every year. National’s plan acknowledges it and still sets no new thresholds, so under this plan existing rates and thresholds stay as they are and the creep continues until a later decision.

How to read a “no new taxes” pledge

A promise not to introduce new taxes is narrower than a promise that tax will not change. Three things sit outside it as published:

• Rates and thresholds of existing taxes. Adjusting income tax brackets, whether up or down, does not create a new tax. This is the space the bracket-creep discussion occupies.
• Levies and charges that already exist. The IVL reset is the worked example: the levy is redistributed, and the pledge to hold its rate is made separately and explicitly, precisely because the pledge itself would not have covered a rate rise.
• Thresholds that move by doing nothing. Bracket creep is a real increase in the average tax rate that requires no legislation at all. A no-new-taxes government that never adjusts thresholds collects a rising share of income over time.

None of that makes the commitment empty — it rules out specific, named, live proposals. It means the commitment answers a different question from the one a voter comparing take-home pay across parties is usually asking.

Where this sits in the campaign

National enters the election as the governing party, having delivered income-tax relief during the current term. Its 2026 platform asks to be judged on not adding to the tax system and on paying down debt before cutting tax, rather than on restructuring the system. ACT and New Zealand First contest the same no-new-taxes ground.

For the parties proposing new taxes, see Labour’s capital gains tax explained, the Green Party’s 2026 tax plan, and TOP’s land value tax. For all seven parties side by side, see every party’s 2026 tax policy compared.