New Zealand is one of the few jurisdictions globally to implement an ex ante wealth tax on capital; that is, the government taxes risky assets before actual returns are known. Parliament introduced this system in 2007 to tax foreign portfolio holdings. The current treatment of illiquid holdings under the system deters certain desirable migrants from becoming New Zealand tax residents. That treatment also distorts the market through a double lock-in effect. I illustrate how the rules result in a windfall for either the government or the taxpayer at the expense of the other party when applied to illiquid offshore equities. Based on theoretical work by Alan Auerbach and Louis Kaplow, I propose a retrospective realisation method to replace the cost method which currently applies to illiquid and hard-to-value securities. Additionally, I critique other tax planning opportunities encouraged by the current rules. Ultimately, I argue that the ex ante tax rate should follow the short-term risk-free rate and the government should disallow taxpayers to elect accrual taxation in years of low or negative economic return.

In Accident Compensation Corporation v AZ, the Court of Appeal held that a woman with spina bifida has ACC cover, finding that the failure to diagnose the condition in utero constitutes a "treatment injury", when the mother would have elected to terminate the pregnancy. This article examines what the judgment reveals about the legal narrative within which ACC is interpreted by the courts. The author points out different potential characterisations of ACC, arguing that the decision is underpinned by a "tort replacement" characterisation, which prioritises cover for those who could pursue a claim in tort. The dominance of this characterisation, the author contends, neglects critical lenses that would inform a more balanced interpretation of the treatment injury provisions. The article highlights the social and legal issues that arise from the current narrative and suggests that ACC's focus on compensating those who fit common law definitions of injury undermines the deeper themes behind the Woodhouse Report. It concludes with a call for reform, advocating a shift away from the relational framework of tort law towards a more compassionate and inclusive model of compensation, preferably in the form of an expanded ACC scheme that covers all forms of incapacity.