Home‎ > ‎The Fight‎ > ‎

NEWS: Things are moving

The Swiss take on the fight - the EU awakens
NEW PAGE - 03 November 2017

It is high time to update you on a few issues surrounding the fight against the confiscation of employer/employee-funded overseas superannuations in New Zealand.

As we have a new government under the new Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand, there is a shimmer of hope that there will be changes to Section 70.

Time to remind Jacinda Ardern of her promise to review the unfair treatment of pensioners with employer/employee-funded overseas superannuations, and NZ First and the Greens of their policies which clearly state that the deduction of contributory overseas pensions should stop.

  • The EU talks about New Zealand
We are delighted to report that at the International Forum in Brussels on 05 October 2017 the German representative of the Ministry of Work and Social Affairs (Ministerium für Arbeit und Soziales) told the EU member states that it would be a good opportunity to revisit the issue of Section 70 with New Zealand and demand change.

  • The Swiss give a shining example
We have been in touch with the Swiss Embassy in Wellington and have been assured that they are working hard on the issue and don't tire to discuss it at the highest political level.

Due to deduction of contributory Swiss superannuations from NZ Super, the first chamber of the Swiss Parliament (Nationalrat) has rejected an agreement about the automatic information exchange about bank accounts (AIA) with New Zealand. During the debate in September New Zealand's attitude of funding NZ Super by abusing Swiss pensions was discussed prominently. Bravo Switzerland!

A last obstacle needs to be taken in December when the second chamber (Ständerat) needs to vote on the exchange of information. If they reject it, too, the Bundesrat would be forced to start negotiations with New Zealand regarding a Social Security Agreement.

We should encourage more foreign embassies, high commissions and consulates in New Zealand to follow suit and take Switzerland as a shining example.

  • Deceiving the UN
On a separate page you'll find the dissection of Crown Law's response to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations (UN), which followed a complaint of a group of pensioners to the UN about the discriminatory deduction of contributory overseas superannuations by the New Zealand government.

The UN had rejected the complaint, lodged in 2014, after receiving this document full of misrepresentations and omissions without going into any detail. We wonder if they have even had a close look at the content of the complaints.

The New Zealand government's response, written by Crown Law, had been signed by then Social Development Minister Anne Tolley who probably didn't know or suspect that the document was such a compilation of dishonesty.

One of our community of anti-Section-70 fighters took on the huge task of dissecting Crown Law's response, and sent an appeal to the UN - which never even acknowledged that it had received the couriered letter. We wonder if this is the way the UN works in other fields, too.

Find the documentation here (click link).

  • Fight against Spousal Provision
There is an ongoing fight against the policy of Spousal Provision. New Zealand's Human Rights Commission has accepted the complaints of a group of pensioners who have sued the Ministry of Social Development - which used their usual delaying tactics to hold up the process. But the Human Rights Review Tribunal has finally rejected further delays. After endless exchanges of documents the case will go to court in early 2018. After that we need to wait a few months for a verdict - or up to two years... 

  • Revelation about Chinese pensions
One pensioner has made the effort to read up the history of Chinese pensions which are not deducted from NZ Super. He has found out that, despite being called enterprise pensions, the Chinese pensions are - despite MSD's claims of the contrary - social security pensions and administered by or behalf of the government. In economically poor rural areas the Chinese government even tops up these enterprise pensions. More details about this topic soon.

Anyway, this pensioner now has an even better case in claiming that he is discriminated, as he is not treated the same as Chinese pensioners, and even more so as no Social Security Agreement between New Zealand and China exists which would exclude the Chinese pensions from the application of Section 70. Good luck!

Read more about the nature and history of Chinese pensions on this page: