Tax Exceptionalism: A View From New Zealand
Keywords:
Tax Exceptionalism, New ZealandAbstract
This paper provides a perspective on the phenomenon of tax exceptionalism in New Zealand administrative law. Tax exceptionalism is broadly defined as the perception that tax law is so different or special when compared to other areas of law that relevant developments in other areas of the law are not applied or applied inconsistently. However, there has not yet, to our knowledge, been any investigation into tax exceptionalism in New Zealand. This article aims to fill this gap. First, it argues that tax exceptionalism is evident in the New Zealand Supreme Court’s judicial review judgment in Tannadyce v Commissioner of Inland Revenue (Tannadyce) and, in particular, the Supreme Court’s approach to privative clauses. It then argues that New Zealand’s particular brand of tax exceptionalism represents a concerning departure from its constitutional norms and this cannot be justified by public policy. In doing so, the article not only sheds light on something that has not received attention in New Zealand, but further contributes to the broader international understanding of the phenomenon while recognising that the precise manifestation of the phenomenon is a reflection of the particular environment in which it occurs.
References
Bagehot, W. (with Crossman, RHS). (1963). The English Constitution. Collins. (Original work published 1867).
Blanchard. G. (2005). The case for a simplified tax disputes process. New Zealand Journal of Taxation Law and Policy, 11(4), 417–440.
Caron, P. L. (1994). Tax myopia, or mamas don’t let your babies grow up to be tax lawyers. Virginia Tax Review, 13(3), 517–590.
Clews, G. (2013, September 5). Remedies Against the Commissioner of Inland Revenue Considered Through a Constitutional Lens [Conference presentation], 203–216. New Zealand Law Society Tax Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
Daly, S. (2017). Tax exceptionalism: A UK perspective. The Journal of Tax Administration, 3(1), 95–108.
de Cogan, D. (2015). A changing role for the administrative law of taxation. Social & Legal Studies, 24(2), 251–270. https://doi-org.uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0964663915572
Elias, S. (2014). Righting environmental justice. Resource Management Theory & Practice, 10, 47–67.
Elias, S. (2018). The unity of public law? In M. Elliott, J. N. E. Varuhas, & S. Wilson Stark (Eds.), The unity of public law?: Doctrinal, theoretical and comparative perspectives (pp. 15–36). Hart Publishing.
Freedman, J. (2016, June 01). Restoring trust. Tax Adviser Magazine. https://www.taxadvisermagazine.com/article/restoring-trust
Glazebrook, S. (2015, November 19). Tax and the courts [Conference presentation]. Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand Tax Conference 2015, Auckland, New Zealand.
Griffiths, S. (2011). Tax as public law. In A. Maples & A. Sawyer (Eds.), Taxation issues: Existing and emerging (pp. 215–233). Christchurch, New Zealand: Centre for Commercial and Corporate Law.
Griffiths, S. (2012, 12 October). Resolving New Zealand tax disputes: finding the balance between judicial determination and administrative process [Conference presentation]. Australasian Tax Teachers Association Conference, Sydney, Australia.
Griffiths, S. (2017). Inaugural professional lecture: Tax as law. Otago Law Review, 15(1), 49–66.
Griffiths, S. (2021). Is tax administration “ectopic”? Assessment, interpretation, adjudication and application: The roles of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue and the courts. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 52(4), 813–836.
Handford, M. (2023). Tax update. New Zealand Law Journal, 178, 144–146.
Hickman, K. E. (2006). The need for Mead: Rejecting tax exceptionalism in judicial deference. Minnesota Law Review, 90(6), 1537–1619.
Hickman, K. E. (2019). Administrative law’s growing influence on U.S. tax administration. The Journal of Tax Administration, 3(1), 82–94.
Income Tax Codification Committee (1936). Report and Appendices (vol.1) (Cmnd. 5131). HM Stationery Office.
Johnson, S. R. (2012). Preserving fairness in tax administration in the Mayo era. Virginia Tax Review, 32(2), 269–325.
Joseph, P. (2021). Joseph on constitutional and administrative law (5th ed.). Thompson Reuters.
Keating, M. (2012). Tax disputes in New Zealand: A practical guide. CCH New Zealand.
Lord Bingham. (2007). The rule of law. The Cambridge Law Journal, 66(1), 67–85.
Lord Woolf, Jowell, J., Donnelly, C., & Hare, I. (2018). De Smith’s judicial review (8th edn.). Sweet & Maxwell.
Murphy, R. (2014). Pragmatic administrative law and tax exceptionalism. Duke Law Journal Online, 64, 21–35.
Prebble KC, J. (1995). Philosophical and design problems that arise from the ectopic nature of income tax law and their impact on the taxation of international trade and investment. Chinese Yearbook of International Affairs, 13, 111–139.
Prebble KC, J. ( 2002). Address: Income taxation: A structure built in sand: Sydney University Law School, Parson’s Lecture, 14 June 2001. Sydney Law Review, 23(3), 301–318.
Richardson, I. (1995). Launch of journals by Sir Ivor Richardson. New Zealand Journal of Taxation Law and Policy, 1, 196–199.
Richardson, I., Jenkin QC, P., Henry, D., Park QC, A., & Harley, G. (1993). Tax law: How can the system generate the cash needs of government, and still be fair to the ordinary taxpayer? [Panel discussion]. In New Zealand Law Society, New Zealand Law Conference “The Law and Politics”, 2–5 March 1993, Conference Papers (Vol. 2), 200–209.
Richardson, I. (2012). Simplicity in legislative drafting and rewriting tax legislation. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 43(3), 517–530. https://doi.org/10.26686/vuwlr.v43i3.5032
Shewan, J. (2002, October 11–12). Protecting the integrity of the tax act: The practitioner’s perspective [Conference presentation]. Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand Tax Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Taggart, M. (2008). ‘Australian exceptionalism’ in judicial review. Federal Law Review, 36(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.22145/flr.36.1.1
Tax Committee of the New Zealand Law Society and the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants. (2008) Joint Submission: the Disputes Resolution Procedures in Part IVA of the Tax Administration Act 1994. (Tax Committee of the New Zealand Law Society and the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants).
Tax Working Group. (2018, July 13). Report on the suitability of establishing a tax ombudsman and a tax advocate: Third party report. Tax Working Group.
Vanistendael, F. (1996). Legal framework for taxation. In V. Thuronyi (Ed.), Tax law design and drafting (Vol. 1, pp. 15–70). International Monetary Fund.
Walker, C. J. (2017, January 20). The stages of administrative law exceptionalism. The Surly Subgroup. https://surlysubgroup.com/2017/01/20/the-stages-of-administrative-law-exceptionalism/
Young, W. (2011). Foreword. In A. Maples & A. Sawyer (Eds.), Taxation issues: Existing and emerging (pp. v–vi). Centre for Commercial & Corporate Law, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Shelley Griffiths, Matthew Handford
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our open access status means that authors retain the copyright of their work. However, all papers published in JOTA are done so under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY). This means that others can share and/or adapt your work without your permission as long as they follow certain rules, including attributing your work correctly.
You can learn more about this on our Open Access, Licensing, and Copyright Policies page.
