Frequently Asked Questions

For more information on Basic Income and comprehensive answers to common questions regarding Basic Income:

• visit the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) website ( http://www.basicincome.org ),
• especially the BIEN FAQ section.
• Also of value is the Basic Income Ireland FAQs.
• Another useful list of questions with comprehensive answers is provided by Scott Santens ( http://www.scottsantens.com/ ) FAQs.

AIs can enhance our knowledge and understanding in many areas, including Basic Income. These responses include information for those who wish to understand more about Basic Income.

The 2025 responses include some technical details for those who wish to design a workable Basic Income.

• April 2024, ChatGPT answers 63 questions.
• September 2025. Three AIs consider:
  Arguments for and against a Basic Income and how it might be financed and implemented.

A Basic Income is a periodic cash payment unconditionally delivered to all on an individual basis, without means-test or work requirement..

• A Basic Income is often known by other names such as: citizens’ income, citizenship income, citizens’ dividend, public equity dividend, social dividend.
  • Basic Income may have country-specific names, such as the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD), New Zealand Dividend, or New Zealand Income. 
• Examples of Basic Income include New Zealand Superannuation and Child Benefit payments, such as the Child Benefit previously available in New Zealand. 
• A Basic Income may be compared to dividends that companies pay to shareholders – it is a dividend paid to all citizens who are shareholders in the country, recognising the profits that the government makes from the money they have invested on behalf of its citizens.
• For more details on Basic Income and BINZ see our About page.

The following international organisations have made statements or published papers supporting Basic Income? 

• The United Nations
  The Secretary-General of the United Nations and various United Nations organisations support Basic Income.
  See our United Nations page for details. 
• The World Bank.
• The International Monetary Fund (IMF).
• The International Labour Organisation (ILO).

Organisations like GiveDirectly are actively running basic income programs in various countries. The Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) is a key global forum that advocates for and researches basic income concepts. 

BINZ has created this list of benefits.

This list is not exhaustive. There are other benefits.

• A Basic Income promotes the wellbeing of all members of society. 
• A Basic Income will replace much of the present welfare system with a more efficient system. 
• The cost of administering the welfare system will be less ensuring more money is available for those in need. 
• Poverty traps associated with the current welfare system with high abatement rates are eliminated. 
• Money is better targeted to those most in need. 
• Stabilises the economy, taking the peaks off economic cycles allowing a higher-performing economy. 
• Improves the targeting of money to those most in need which will increase the velocity of money. 
• A higher-performing economy and higher velocity of money will both boost government revenue.  
• Improves health outcomes, particularly for those on low incomes. 
• Reduced tax avoidance and evasion. The present welfare system with high abatement rates encourages both. 
• Reduced crime rates. The present welfare system with high abatement rates encourages crime. 
• Simplifies the income tax system, reducing compliance costs. 
• Increased profitability of small firms and increased productivity. 
• Boosts the economies of low-income and regional areas leading to more employment opportunities and increases in government revenues. 
• Plays a significant part in the reduction of poverty and child poverty in particular. 
• Gives people greater independence from an early age, encouraging good life choices. 
• Encourages people to further their education. 
• Assists and encourages those who are innovative or who have entrepreneurial skills. 
• Recognises the work of those who stay home to look after young children, other family members, or the elderly. 
• Voluntary work is recognised. 
• Assists those who are trapped in bad relationships. 
• Allows for more lifestyle choices and assists those who participate in artistic pursuits. 
• Assists those who wish to participate in civil society and politics. 
• Eliminates the stigma of unemployment.

Some of these benefits are further developed in the questions and answers below.

We encourage people to explore these possibilities and others in their own research into Basic Income and in their writing.

All eligible citizens and permanent residents of a country will receive a Basic Income on request. 

• A Basic Income is likely to be paid to all citizens and permanent residents while they are living in the country that is paying the Basic Income.
  • They are likely to cease receiving payments if they are living outside the country that is paying the Basic Income for a predetermined period and have ceased paying taxes in that country.
• A non-citizen and non-permanent resident with a valid work permit may receive a Basic Income while working and receiving income above a specified level, say the minimum wage.
  • Otherwise, they will receive no Basic Income and will be subject to the present tax system.

Yes.

All Basic Income payments received by people of the same age group will be the same regardless of other factors.

It is envisaged that Basic income payments may vary with age in broad bands and possibly with need, but not by area or region. 

• There may be different Basic Income rates for those of less than working age (children), those of working age (adults), and senior citizens over retirement age. 
• The words ‘Basic Income’ used here usually refer to a Basic Income for adults of working age unless otherwise stated. 
• For more detail on Basic Income for children see the section on child’s Basic Income below. 
• For more details on Basic Income for seniors, see the section on New Zealand Superannuation below. 
• With a Basic Income, those with permanent disabilities or ongoing needs may have their payments made up to current levels, or alternatively may be considered for a higher level of Basic Income – a special needs Basic Income. 
• Basic Incomes are usually not varied by region.
  • A uniform Basic Income, regardless of area or region, assists regional development and counters the movement of people to major urban areas where living costs are likely to be higher.
  • Varying Basic Income by region according to living costs may exacerbate urban drift and population accretion in major urban areas, adding to the problems and costs associated with rapid growth in these areas and additional costs per person that occur with depopulation in regional areas.
  • New Zealand Superannuation, a Basic Income payment, does not vary by region. This encourages many retired people to move away from the major centres to regional areas on retirement and thus boosts the economies of regional areas.
  • The possibility of accommodation supplements for working-age people with the lowest incomes that vary with area remains, as happens now with the accommodation supplements for those on jobseeker support.

Yes.

Once introduced it is essential that a Basic Income, whether for a child, adult, or senior, is indexed to inflation to ensure that the payment rates maintain their value.

A Basic Income for children.

A child’s Basic Income is an individual payment paid for all legal resident children as of right and without a means test or other requirements. 

• If a parent is eligible for Basic Income, their children will be eligible for a child’s Basic Income.
• The child rate will either be the same for all children or alternatively varied with age in broad bands according to the measured costs associated with raising children in that age group. 
• The same rate will be paid for all children in the same age group. 
• It is envisaged that a child’s Basic Income will be paid to the child’s principal carer. 
• A child’s Basic Income will replace other benefits and tax credits up to the value of the Child’s Basic Income. 
• When a young person becomes eligible for an adult Basic Income, their child’s Basic Income will cease.

Some history related to New Zealand.

• It is worth remembering that New Zealand previously had a Child Basic Income known as the Child Benefit.
• A means-tested family benefit was introduced in 1926, payable for each child over 2 years old.
• In 1946, means-testing and the age of eligibility were abolished, making the payment, known as the Child Benefit, a Universal Basic Income payment that was simple and inexpensive to maintain and administer.
• In 1985, a degree of targeting was introduced.
• The Child Benefit was abolished in 1991 to reduce expenditure during a period of budget deficits and was eventually replaced with a more targeted but complex child benefit system. However, the cuts led to increased poverty for some families and also reduced government income, because reduced family income led to reduced spending by families, which led to less GST and other tax revenue for the government.
• The new child benefit system, known as “Working for Families”, that was introduced to replace the child benefit, is complex, difficult, and expensive to administer, and full of anomalies such as very high Effective Marginal Tax Rates (EMTRs). The EMTRs may approach and sometimes exceed 100%. The result has been a growth in child poverty. 

None.

• There is no evidence that payment of a Basic Income, either an adult’s or a child’s Basic Income, will influence birth rates.  
• Payment of child benefits, a universal basic income payment, in various countries, including New Zealand, has not been found to increase or decrease Birth rates. 
• During the period that New Zealand had a universal child benefit from 1946 to 1991, the overall birth rate declined. There were, however, some short-term fluctuations in birth rates due to other known factors such as the baby boom in the late 1940s and 1950s and the impact of economic cycles.

No.

A Basic Income is not a total solution for all problems, but it is a very important part of the solution.

• With a Basic Income, other government services, such as education and healthcare, that are essential for the well-being of all members of society, must be maintained. 
• Trials show that a small or modest Basic Income boosts general well-being, encourages job seeking, work participation, and entrepreneurial activity, and to a greater extent than expected from the increase in income. 
• While a Basic Income is not a total solution for all societal problems, it is a critical part of the solution. 
• A Basic Income is not the solution to all the problems associated with low incomes and income inequality, but it makes solving the problems a lot easier.  
• While a Basic Income is not a total solution, it is a very important part of the solution. 

You will still receive the same or greater income.

• Some individuals, such as invalids or those with disabilities and others receiving benefit payments at a higher rate than the present jobseeker support, will receive the Basic Income and additional payments to ensure that their current levels of income are maintained.  
• An alternative is to pay a higher level of Basic Income to those with permanent and ongoing special needs, or while their special needs persist.

No!

Basic Income may be introduced as a voluntary option that co-exists with the present welfare and tax system. 

• With New Zealand Superannuation, all eligible citizens are entitled to apply for superannuation at the age of sixty-five.
  • Applying is not compulsory, and you may continue to work and pay tax without applying for superannuation for as long as you like.
  • Alternatively, you may apply for and receive NZ Superannuation and either continue working or retire.  
• Similarly, a Basic Income may be introduced as an option that you do not have to apply for.
  • However, those who receive a Basic Income will have their total income taxed at appropriate tax rates designed to achieve broad targeting of the Basic Income toward those with low incomes.. 
• Those who do not sign up will continue with the existing progressive tax rates and welfare payments. 
• This dual system allows a Basic Income to be introduced progressively over several years if that is thought desirable.
  • For instance, for the first stage, a Basic Income might be made available to those on welfare payments, extended to those on low incomes for the next stage, and finally made available for all.
•  A dual system also provides a fair alternative tax regime for those who are not eligible for a Basic Income, such as non-New Zealand citizens in New Zealand on temporary work visas.
• With time, most elements of the present welfare system may be found to be little used and may be phased out.

A Basic Income replaces all welfare payments of the same or less value and partially replaces larger payments, reducing welfare payments and administration costs.

The savings achieved lower the total or net cost of a Basic Income scheme, making it affordable.

• Because a Basic Income is paid to individuals, not families or other groups, administration costs are minimised.
  • You do not need an administration system to determine who is in a relationship and who is not. 
• Basic Income eliminates a lot of the present welfare payments and significantly reduces administration costs.  
• Paying a Basic Income generates additional government tax revenue as money circulates, which can then be used to make Basic Income payments.

Between 20% and 30% of GDP per capita.

BINZ does not promote a specific level of Basic Income but provides advice on how an appropriate level of Basic Income may be determined.

• International Basic Income experts recommend Basic Income payment levels in the range of 20% to 30% of GDP per capita. 
• The New Zealand adult jobseeker support rate usually lies within this range. 
• Using the adult jobseeker support rate as the Basic Income rate enables jobseeker support payments to be directly replaced with Basic Income payments of the same value. This preserves existing relativities. 
• If the Basic Income rate is the same as the adult jobseeker support rate, discussion on the size of a Basic Income and the introduction of a Basic Income become separate issues.  
• Several alternatives regarding size have been suggested. They are discussed in more detail on our “How big will a Basic Income be” page. Read more

Yes.

With a Basic Income, people will retain sufficient income from working to make working worthwhile. 

• The present welfare system, with very high abatement rates, results in people on low incomes receiving very little or no additional income or other advantages from working part-time or full-time.
  • Some people may find that for every extra dollar they earn, more than a dollar is deducted from their payments!
  • When transport, clothing and food costs are considered, people are often worse off when they undertake paid employment.
  • This is a poverty trap, a major discouragement to taking up employment.
• With a Basic Income, people will receive sufficient additional income after tax to make working worthwhile. 
• There has long been a debate in New Zealand about what level of income should be given to people receiving income support.
  • Many people worry that if the level of income support is too high, there will be less incentive for people to look for work or to stay in their current jobs.
  • On the other hand, many recognise everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their families including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond their control as set out in Article 25 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

Yes.

Most people want to work and earn income.

• With a Basic Income, people who work will pay tax but will keep most of the money they earn from working, so this encourages them to work to enhance their incomes. 
• In contrast, the existing income support system discourages people on jobseeker support from seeking work by abating their support payments at a very high rate. 
• Both the jobseeker support and the accommodation supplement are abated at such high rates that people often end up with less net income than if they stayed home. In addition, when they work, they incur additional transport, clothing, and other costs. As a consequence, the present welfare system encourages people to actively avoid work and discourages low-paid employment. 
• Because Basic Income stimulates local economies, it creates more employment opportunities in low-income and regional areas. 
• Basic income trials around the world show that almost everyone chooses to work if possible. The few who do not seek work are often mothers choosing to stay at home to look after very young children and students who choose to stay longer at school or go on to higher education. 
• While a few people, such as mothers of young children and students, may leave work when they have a Basic Income, it creates vacancies and job opportunities for others who want to work, so the impact of these people leaving work on total employment rates is neutral. 
• Overall, Basic Income boosts employment rates as it eliminates poverty traps and encourages people to take up employment when they can, and stimulates local economies by creating more employment opportunities.

Yes.

Tax evasion and avoidance are reduced.

With a Basic Income, more people move into legitimate paid employment and out of the cash economy.

• The poverty traps created by the high abatement rates of the existing welfare system result in people actively avoiding regular work and then seeking to enhance their incomes with cash jobs that they do not report. 
• With a Basic Income, people will receive a large enough positive return from regular employment to encourage them to take up employment and move away from the unreported cash economy.

Crime reduces.

Basic Income trials in various countries have consistently shown significant reductions in crime rates. 

• The poverty traps created by the high abatement rates of the existing welfare system result in people actively avoiding regular paid employment and turning to crime to enhance their incomes.  
• With a Basic Income, people will receive a positive return for working in the form of increased net income so take up employment and move away from crime.

A Basic Income is allocated to all citizens and eligible residents regardless of other tests.  

• However, because of the high cost of imprisonment in many countries, some Basic Income advocates suggest that governments may either:
  • charge prisoners for their food and lodgings as the Basic Income gives prisoners an income or,
  • deduct the Basic Income from those in prison to fully or partially offset the cost of their imprisonment.
    
    They argue that people receive a Basic Income to meet basic needs such as food and lodgings, so charging for food and lodgings while in prison is fair and justified, as those who are not in prison must pay for their own food and lodgings.  If people in prison are not charged for food and lodgings, they would be at a financial advantage when compared to those not in prison. 
• An alternative suggestion is that the Basic Income is deducted to pay for any extra welfare costs incurred by members of the prisoner’s family that result from their imprisonment. 
• Note that a discrepancy exists at present:
  • while a loss of liberty causes most prisoners to lose any opportunity to work and earn an income, some wealthy prisoners continue to earn high incomes from salaries, interest, dividends and other sources while in prison and could well afford to pay the cost of their imprisonment from their Basic Income.
• Others earn income while in prison by exploitation of or extortion from their fellow prisoners.

Basic income increases profitability.

• A Basic Income ensures that people living in low-income and rural or regional areas have money to spend. 
• This stimulates local business activity in these areas and increases the profitability of local firms. 
• The general increase in economic activity tends to increase the profitability of all firms. 

A Basic Income has a positive impact on productivity. 

Both local and national productivity will increase.

• Individual firms will see an improvement in productivity as a Basic Income promotes a more flexible labour market by assisting people in finding employment where they can be most productive. 
• A Basic Income will assist the economies of low-income areas and regional areas leading to more employment and the greater profitability of firms in these areas. 
• Because Basic Income simplifies the welfare system, it will increase the productivity of Work and Income New Zealand and lower administrative costs. 
• These factors will increase national productivity by increasing overall national employment. 

A well-designed scheme will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

A Basic Income, coupled with a well-designed tax regime that targets the Basic Income toward those on lower incomes, can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

People may have more time and resources to engage in sustainable activities, reduce consumption of environmentally harmful products, and leave polluting jobs. 

• People with lower incomes tend to spend a larger proportion of their incomes on necessities.
• By providing a guaranteed income, a BI can enable households to reduce their reliance on cheap, carbon-intensive goods and services.
• Financial stability for low-carbon choices: Financial insecurity can push people toward low-cost, high-carbon options for food, transportation, and energy. A BI can reduce this pressure, allowing individuals to make more sustainable choices, such as buying higher-quality, longer-lasting products, which often have a lower lifetime carbon footprint.
• Reduced emissions from essential consumption: A 2020 study in Finland found that a consumption-level carbon footprint corresponding to a BI was significantly lower than the national average. This suggests that providing a Basic Income could normalise consumption patterns with lower emissions, especially for essentials like food and housing.
• Voluntary lifestyle changes: Freed from the need to work long hours to make ends meet, BI recipients may have more time to dedicate to low-carbon activities and projects. This could include spending more time on community gardening, cooking healthy meals, or volunteering, leading to lower-emissions lifestyles.
• Conversely, an increase in disposable income from basic income could also increase consumption and, therefore, GHG emissions, if those resources are spent on carbon-intensive goods and services. 

The final impact depends on how individuals choose to spend their basic income and the availability of green alternatives and sustainable economic policies to channel those funds toward desirable outcomes.  

A Basic Income can reduce CO₂ emissions without increased carbon taxes by empowering individuals to invest in energy efficiency, cleaner transportation, and sustainable choices, which are often out of reach due to financial insecurity.

• By providing financial stability, a basic income allows people to afford energy-efficient homes, low-carbon vehicles, and public transit, indirectly promoting reduced consumption and greater adoption of green technologies. 
• This approach shifts the focus from punitive measures to supportive policies that address the socio-economic barriers to climate action.

Both increase.

The level of increase in GDP and GDP per capita depends on a number of factors

GDP: Aggregate Economic Output

Positive impacts

• Increased Consumption: Basic Income boosts disposable income, especially for lower-income households with high marginal propensities to consume. This stimulates demand and increases GDP.
• Reduced Poverty & Inequality: By stabilizing incomes, a Basic Income can improve health, education, and productivity outcomes—enhancing human capital and long-run growth.
• Entrepreneurship & Labor Flexibility: With a financial safety net, individuals may pursue education, caregiving, or start businesses, potentially increasing innovation and economic dynamism.

GDP Per Capita: Output per Person

• The increase in GDP per capita is sensitive to both the change in GDP and population growth.
• If GDP grows without a significant increase in population, GDP per capita will increase.
• Basic Income also improves productivity through improved work force satisfaction and participation with better health and education outcomes, resulting in a per capita output increase.

Potentially neutral or negative outcome.

• If the GDP growth is modest and population grows too rapidly, perhaps due to excess immigration, GDP per capita may stagnate or fall.
• Population stability is important. Too rapid a rise in population due to immigration, or fall due to emigration, can have a negative impact on GDP per capita and counter the gain in GDP achieved by a Basic Income.

Empirical & Modelled Insights

• OECD & IMF simulations suggest GDP gains in Basic Income scenarios where funding is progressive and labor disincentives are minimal.
• A New Zealand Basic Income simulation suggest that GDP would grow 30% in 10 years.
  • A Basic Income stimulates aggregate demand, especially from lower-income households, leading to a sustained uplift in GDP.
  • Sovereign money issuance can contribute without immediate tax drag, while progressive taxation redistributes without severely dampening high-income productivity.
• GDP per capita will also grow by 30% in 10 years if population growth is limited to reasonable levels.

Interpretation

A hybrid funding model, progressive taxation plus sovereign money, will:

• Sustain economic growth without overheating or triggering inflation (assuming prudent monetary governance).
• Improve equity outcomes without major labour market distortions.
• Offer a politically feasible pathway by preserving partial benefit structures and avoiding full tax-funded redistribution.

Yes.

Yes, it is possible for a Basic Income (BI) to increase GDP and GDP per capita, especially for lower-income individuals, while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

• Achieving both outcomes simultaneously depends on the policy’s design, funding mechanisms, and the resulting economic and behavioural changes.
• Recent research, including a 2024 study, suggests that a basic income funded by carbon emitters could boost GDP while curbing environmental damage.

A Basic Income (BI) can increase GDP and GDP per capita and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions without a carbon tax, but it is more difficult to do so.

• A carbon tax and other similar taxes provide a direct financial incentive to reduce emissions.
• Without it, the emissions-reducing effects of a BI are less certain and rely on more indirect mechanisms.

Equality increases. Inequality decreases.

A Basic Income reduces inequality.

Inequality is measured by the Gini coefficient.

• A coefficient of zero (0) indicates perfect equality,
  • everyone has exactly the same total income.
• A coefficient of one (1) indicates absolute inequality,
  • one person receives all the income.

A New Zealand simulation indicates that with a Basic Income, the Gini coefficient could fall from 0.33 to 0.23 over 10 years.

• This is a significant reduction in inequality when:
  • the Basic Income replaces smaller benefits entirely and
  • partially offsets larger ones, flattening income disparities.
  • The Basic Income is funded by a hybrid progressive tax and sovereign money combination.
• The sovereign money component avoids regressive tax burdens, while progressive taxation targets higher earners.

Yes.

With a Basic Income, other government services will be retained.

Basic government services, such as free education and hospital care, are sometimes known as Universal Basic Services.

• A Basic Income and Basic Services are complementary rather than alternatives.
  • Basic Services tend to be used by those who need them.
  • Without Basic Services, a Basic Income would need to be higher in value, and the targeting of value to those with the greatest need for the services would be reduced.
• A Basic Income is intended to replace all benefit payments of equal or less value and partially replace those of higher value, however, 
• it is essential that all other government services, such as hospitals, government-supported medical services, and free education, are retained at present or greater levels. This will ensure that people continue to receive the full benefit of the government services and receive the full benefits of a Basic Income when it is introduced, and that they are not disadvantaged by the introduction of a Basic Income.

Yes.

With a Basic Income, it is essential that the minimum wage is maintained at current or greater levels, while the living wage will continue and be adjusted as necessary.

• The minimum wage is set by the government and increased annually with inflation. 
• It is essential that the minimum wage is retained at current or greater levels and adjusted annually with inflation to achieve the full benefit of a Basic Income. 
• The payment of a Basic Income is not a justification for unscrupulous employers to cut wages and doing so will have an adverse impact on the economy. 
• People need to have money to spend money and taking money away from those with low incomes by reducing or lowering the minimum wage reduces expenditure and the profits of firms. 
• The living wage is a non-government figure considered the minimum required for a minimal standard of living. This figure is adjusted periodically as living costs change. 

The same results could be achieved with a negative income tax but the administration cost would be significantly higher.

A negative income tax is a welfare system that uses income tax, where people who earn below a certain amount receive supplemental money from the government instead of paying taxes to the government.

• For any particular Basic Income scheme, it is possible to design a negative income tax scheme that achieves the same results, or vice versa. 
• However, a negative income tax scheme requires complex ongoing calculations to determine the size of the payout which may vary from week to week and require annual reconciliation. Consequently, a negative income tax scheme is difficult and expensive to administer. 
• In contrast, the difficulties and costs associated with a Basic Income scheme are negligible. 

Yes, but the administration costs would be significantly higher.

It is possible to achieve a net-to-gross income profile with the current welfare system that closely emulates a Basic Income scheme by significantly lowering welfare abatement rates and eliminating the threshold where the abatements begin.

• For such a scheme the abatement rate plus the tax rate must add to give the same rate as the tax rate used with the Basic Income scheme. This is the Effective Marginal Tax (EMT) rate. 
• However, such a scheme will require all the complex and ongoing calculations of the present welfare scheme to determine the size of the payout which may vary from week to week.
  • Consequently, such a scheme is difficult and expensive to administer. 
• In contrast, the difficulties and costs associated with a Basic Income scheme are negligible. 

A Basic Income stabilises personal incomes.

A Basic Income stabilises an economy by stabilising personal Incomes and consequently stabilises expenditure.

Stabilising income and expenditure reduces the frequency and magnitude of boom-bust cycles.

Stability allows an economy to become more productive and profitable.

A stable economy increases well-being for all in multiple ways.

• Without a Basic Income, a small decline in economic activity will reduce government tax income and may lead to calls for the government to reduce expenditure. 
• Reducing government expenditure leads to less income for many members of the community, who will, of necessity, reduce their expenditure. 
• Less expenditure by the public reduces Goods and Services Tax (GST) collected by the government and reduces tax collected from income tax and profit taxes. 
• Reduced government income leads to further calls to reduce government expenditure. 
• This makes the economic system unstable as a small decline in economic activity is exacerbated by reductions in government expenditure that will, in turn, reduce government income leading to further cuts. 
• With a Basic Income, during an economic downturn, the government continues to pay the Basic Income at a fixed rate using accumulated funds or borrowed money. This will maintain both personal and government incomes at a higher rate. When the economy recovers, the government continues to tax and reduce debt. The system becomes more stable. 
• With a more stable economic system, economies do better, firms maintain or increase their profitability, productivity is enhanced, real wages rise, and overall well-being increases.

Yes, a Basic Income will help.

A state of emergency or severe economic downturn may occur as a result of a natural event, such as an earthquake, tropical cyclone, high winds, flooding, tsunami, or a global pandemic, or be the result of a man-made event, such as a war or global economic disruptions and supply chain problems.

In each case, there is likely to be a severe economic impact on a local area or on the whole country.

• People may lose their employment and livelihood as a result. 
• With a pre-existing Basic Income in place, people will continue to receive the Basic Income which they will be able to spend to receive essential goods and services.
  • They will not have to wait for the government to make a decision to allocate money or to establish a Basic Income, or wait for the government or charities to provide assistance.
  • A Basic Income in place before an event ensures that those who most need help will have money for essentials immediately. 
• A pre-existing Basic Income, or one introduced during or immediately after an event, provides a level of resilience to natural and man-made events and ensures that those most in need have some income.
  • This gives both local, regional, and national economies an improved level of resilience. 
• After natural or man-made events, a Basic Income increases the rate of recovery.  
• A global pandemic is likely to result in a global economic downturn and a collapsing world economy.
  • Apart from the illness, there will be major financial impacts on many people.
  • Paying a Basic Income reduces the financial impacts on individuals, helps businesses, stabilises world economies, reduces economic collapse, and helps economies recover as the pandemic passes.                Read more.

Because money is taxed when it moves, the velocity of money has a significant impact on government revenue.

A large portion of government income comes from taxing money as it moves, with taxes such as GST, income tax, and profit tax.

The faster money moves, the higher the government’s revenue.

Increasing the velocity of money increases government revenue, which allows the government to spend more on a Basic Income or Basic Services.

Basic Income enhances the velocity of money by ensuring that those who are most likely to spend money early receive more. 

.

An increase in artificial intelligence and other workplace changes will increase the need for a Basic Income.

• In the past, there have often been concerns that large-scale unemployment would occur each time changes have been introduced, such as the first introduction of machines, the automation of machines, and the introduction of computers. 
• The reality has always been significantly different. With each major change, work opportunities have increased to absorb the labour released by the changes. Each change has led to overall increases in productivity, living standards, wellbeing, and work conditions. 
• Difficulties have occurred, however, for those displaced from a job that they have trained for, who need to sustain themselves and their families while they retrain and find new work.
  • Some people need to relocate to find work and some will never find employment again.
  • Some people and their families suffer significantly as a result of the changes due to no fault of their own. 
• We can expect the same to occur with the increased use of artificial intelligence in the future. People will be displaced and must find new employment.  
• A Basic Income will help support people during the period from when they are displaced from one field of employment to when they find new employment and help sustain those who may not be able to find new employment. 
• If artificial intelligence or other automation causes a rapid change in employment, there may be a sudden but temporary increase in unemployment that persists while the economy adjusts.  
• It remains to be seen if further deployment of artificial intelligence will cause large-scale unemployment as some predict, but if it does, Basic Income will be an essential means of ensuring the well-being of displaced people and preventing any economic downturn that rapidly rising unemployment may trigger. 
• Basic Income will stimulate demand for services and help to counter any increases in unemployment.

Money trickles up more than it trickles down.

The trickle-down theory is a myth. 

The terms are sometimes used interchangeably but can also have significant differences in meaning.

This leads to confusion.

• The concept of a Basic Income existed long before people began to talk about a Universal Basic Income or “UBI”. The word universal was added to emphasise that a Basic Income of the same value was to be paid to all people. 
• Unfortunately, the extra word led to some confusion. With the use of the abbreviation “UBI”, some wondered if it meant an “unconditional” or a “universal” Basic Income, or both. 
• Others took “UBI” to mean that the same level of Basic Income must be paid to all, regardless of age or need and that it would be the only payment people received.
  • This is wrong as a Basic Income was never intended to result in cuts in income for those with high needs.
  • The intention was that there would be a universal payment paid to all and that this would be made up with additional payments or supplements for those with special needs, so these people received at least their current payment levels.
  • If UBI meant exactly the same payment for all with no additional payments to make the benefits up to present levels, and if the UBI payment was set at the level of jobseeker support, all people on benefits or payments at present that are higher than jobseeker support, such as those with special needs, those on sole parent support, and those receiving superannuation, would have their payments cut to the universal level.
  • This was not the intention of those who first used the term UBI.
  • To introduce cuts so that all beneficiaries receive the same level of payment as the jobseeker support will result in real hardship and poverty for many people with special or additional needs.
  • Nevertheless, the proposal to cut all payments for those with additional or special needs to a lower universal level was lauded by some of those who were generally opposed to welfare as a way to cut total welfare expenditure and because it also boosted the incomes of those on high incomes!
  • Others have argued that a UBI should be set near the maximum payment rates to avoid the need to cut payment rates for those already on higher benefits.
  • Again, this was not the intention of those who first suggested the phrase “Universal Basic Income”. However, some opponents of Basic Income have used this to suggest that the need for a high level of UBI payment for some would necessitate the same payment being paid to all and that this would make a UBI unaffordable!
  • This is a strawman argument. Making false claims to try and discredit a UBI.
  • If a higher UBI payment were paid, it would be seen as unjust by those who are receiving justifiably higher payments at present because of need as they will lose their established margin for need. 
• BINZ holds that the well-established existing payment levels must be maintained when Basic Income is introduced and considers that the use of “Basic Income” rather than “Universal Basic Income” indicates greater flexibility, that different rates may be paid with age, and that additional payments may be appropriate when there is need. 

New Zealand Superannuation and Veterans’ pensions will be retained.

• A Basic Income for people of working age will not replace New Zealand Superannuation (NZS). 
• New Zealand Superannuation is a very efficient Basic Income scheme with almost zero administration costs. 
• New Zealand Superannuation is sustainable. Click on “Read More” for more details.
• With the introduction of a Basic Income for those of working age, those over 65 will not be eligible for both the working-age Basic Income payment and the New Zealand Superannuation.  
• New Zealand Superannuation (NZS) is a series of Basic Income payments available to those over 65 with different payment rates that include different rates for married (each), single (sharing), and single (living alone).  
• The value of NZS payments is higher than that envisaged for a Basic Income payment for a person of working age.  
• New Zealand Superannuation is not compulsory. You must apply for NZS before you receive it. When you sign up for NZS it will replace your working-age Basic Income, which will cease.      

This list may not be exhaustive.

• Perce Harpham: Perce is the author of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) proposal. Visit Perce’s website for more information.
• Iain Middleton is a founding member of BINZ and a member of the steering committee. Iain has written articles and presented papers on Basic Income and has developed a Basic Income calculator for New Zealand use that will model most Basic Income proposals and show the impact on the incomes of individuals when a Basic Income is implemented.
• Susan St John: Susan has investigated the impact of changing New Zealand Superannuation to a Basic Income scheme.
• Mike Goldsmith: “The case for universal basic income in New Zealand & worldwide.”
• Keith Rankin: Keith is a long-standing commentator on Basic Income and UBI. Visit his website and read “Revisiting the UBI: Rival Views of Universal Basic Income or his papers on UBI”. Keith wrote a chapter in Murray and Pateman’s book on BI Worldwide in 2012.
• Prue Hyman: Prue is a BINZ member and a longtime commentator on the UBI. See her articles “Universal Basic Income”, “The UBI Alternative, and Universal Basic Income: What Other Systems, Policies and Attitude Changes are Needed in a UBI Structure?”
• Lowell Manning: Lowell, a former member of the BINZ steering committee, is the author of a low-cost Universal Basic Income (UBI) article, “Guaranteed Minimum Income For NZ”.

Basic Income New Zealand is not aligned with any political parties.

• BINZ is a non-partisan organisation.
• This is because the Basic Income concept can be applied across the political spectrum.
• The level and design of the Basic Income will be decided by our Government in consultation with the public at large.
• We encourage all political parties to adopt Basic Income as a policy.

BINZ is affiliated to Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN).

• BINZ will work with groups and individuals to promote Basic Income but will maintain full independence at all times.

It is BINZ policy not to endorse specific Basic Income proposals.

• It is our policy, however, to publicise as many viable proposals as possible to widen the debate.
• We may also critique proposals, and we encourage people and organisations with a stake in Basic Income to do so as well.
• We reserve the right not to publicise proposals that do not fit our guidelines for a productive proposal.

Past and present organisations include:

• UBINZ (Universal Basic Income New Zealand)
• ANZIUB (Aotearoa New Zealand Initiative for an Unconditional Basic Income)
• UITANZ (Universal  Income Trust of Aotearoa  NZ)