If you run a charity, club or community organisation, election promises can leave you asking a fairly simple question: “What would this actually mean for us?” More reliable funding, less paperwork and enough people to do the work would probably be a good start.
With the forthcoming election on 7 November, and with considerable help from our AI program, we’ve looked at what the parties are saying about charitable giving, community funding and the way not-for-profits operate (Electoral Commission). This is a snapshot as at 22 October 2026 … it’s not a recommendation on how to vote!
First, a quick word about donations
One important change is already law. From 1 April 2027, individual donors’ tax credits will be limited to gifts totalling the lower of $100,000 or their taxable income, giving a maximum annual credit of $33,333.33 (Inland Revenue, Deloitte’s explanation).
People can still give more; they just won’t receive an individual donation tax credit on the excess (Deloitte). That distinction matters when comparing the parties’ promises.
All 17 parties on the confirmed party-vote list as at this date are included, in alphabetical order, below (Electoral Commission). Some have specific proposals; others offer broader positions, and “not located” means we didn’t find a clear commitment in the material reviewed, not that the party necessarily has no policy.
| Party | What’s on offer or on the record? | The point to watch |
| ACT | Promises to remove the donation tax-credit cap and encourage major philanthropic gifts (ACT release). | A clear repeal pledge, but not a promise of more operating grants. |
| Alliance | Emphasises public services, workers’ rights and local democratic control (party platform). | No specific charity-regulation or donation-credit commitment located. |
| Animal Justice Party | Its Budget submission seeks $5 million annually in baseline funding for animal rescues (party release). | A funding proposal, not money already allocated. |
| Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party | Focuses on cannabis regulation and reducing prohibition-related harm (party platform). | No specific community-provider funding or charity-regulation commitment located. |
| Conservative Party NZ | Promotes smaller government, reduced regulation and family responsibility (policy overview). | Broad principles rather than a specific charity-funding package in the material reviewed. |
| Free Palestine | Focuses on Palestine and international-law obligations (RNZ election profile). | No domestic charity-specific commitment located. |
| Greens | Standing policy supports multi-year funding, fair overhead contributions, proportionate reporting and independent advocacy (full policy). | Relevant to everyday operations, but not every measure has a separately costed 2026 programme. |
| Labour | Proposes a $950 million community-housing bond guarantee, a $4-an-hour rise for care and support workers, and extra community-sport funding (housing, pay equity, sport). | The housing figure is a guarantee, not a cash grant; providers should perhaps ask how wage funding would reach them. |
| National | Promotes the Government’s charities tax package, including the donation-credit cap, and community-led, outcomes-focused commissioning (tax statement, commissioning statement). | These include existing government measures, not a new funding entitlement for every charity. |
| New Zealand First | Proposes another $12 million annually for Coastguard and reviews of support for other charitable emergency services (party policy). | A proposed emergency-response capital fund would be investigated, not automatically established. |
| New Zealand Loyal | Emphasises decentralisation, tax-system change and reduced government intervention (RNZ election profile). | No specific charity-funding or donation-credit measure located. |
| NZ Outdoors & Freedom Party | Emphasises direct democracy and stronger protection of rights (RNZ election profile). | No charity-specific funding or regulatory commitment located. |
| Opportunity | Promises cap repeal and an independent Law Commission review of charitable regulation, including public benefit, donor control and distributions (party policy). | Easier giving comes alongside a potentially substantial regulatory review. |
| Te Pāti Māori | Proposes a $100 million Community Kai Fund for home gardens, marae māra kai and community food farms (party release). | Relevant to food-security work; application and delivery details still matter. |
| Te Tai Tokerau Party | Proposes marae civil-defence hubs, community food hubs and funding pathways for hapū-led rehabilitation trusts (party policies). | Some funding amounts and eligibility details remain unspecified. |
| Vision New Zealand | Proposes funding established grassroots groups to deliver round-the-clock family support (party policies). | The relevant section does not specify a funding total or selection process. |
| Women’s Rights Party | Advocates pay equity, Fair Pay Agreements and sex-based provision in services including refuges and rape-crisis centres (party policy). | Relevant to affected employers and providers, rather than a general charity-funding package. |
What should we take from this?
There isn’t one policy that will suit every organisation. A rescue service buying equipment, a community trust employing carers and a charity relying on major donors will have quite different priorities.
On the donation cap, ACT and Opportunity make explicit repeal promises (ACT, Opportunity). Don’t assume that criticism by another party amounts to the same commitment.
On day-to-day sustainability, the Greens’ standing policy directly addresses contract length, overheads and advocacy, while National’s published approach emphasises outcomes-focused community commissioning (Greens, National). Our suggestion is to ask both the funding question and the workload question: will the arrangement cover what it costs to deliver and report on the work?
Three questions worth asking candidates
- What will you actually fund? Ask about wages, overheads, insurance and administration, not just new projects.
- How will it work? Who qualifies, when would it start, and what paperwork will be required?
- What can we rely on? Is it a firm, funded commitment, an idea for investigation or something still to be negotiated?
You don’t have to stay silent because you’re a charity. Charities Services says organisations can publish objective comparisons and advocate on issues connected to their charitable purposes, while remaining independent and not supporting or opposing a party or candidate (Charities Services guidance).
Perhaps the best use of this election period is a short board conversation: which proposals would genuinely help our organisation, and what do we still need to ask? Compare the detail, keep the discussion non-partisan and don’t be afraid to request a straight answer.
Note: This is general information gathered by use of AI with some comment added, it is not legal or tax advice. Policies can change, and delivery may depend on legislation, Budgets and coalition agreements; check the linked material before relying on the summary above.