Now what we have is every other class of asset where the rule still applies—deemed intent. If I purchase shares intending to get a profit from dividends, I could hold those shares for 10 years. They could appreciate significantly in value on the stock market, but the increase in that value is not taxable. I could buy my plumbing firm with the intention of selling plumbing services to the good people of Dunedin, and if I'm that good at it, and the value of the capital asset appreciates to the point where there is a capital gain, because my intent is to earn income, that capital gain is not subject to a tax. What we're now being asked to accept is that there is somehow a co-relation between what the National Party did over two years and extrapolating that out over 10 years—and Treasury wanted it 20—to say that regardless of the stated deemed intent that the taxpayer has on purchase, he or she has to hold that asset for more than 10 years to prove to IRD that their deemed intent was not sale for capital gain. 