Electoral Commission releases 2025 political donation returns, showing National leading, ACT surpassing Labour
The Electoral Commission has published the 2025 political donation and loan returns, revealing that the National Party received the highest amount at $6.28 million, followed by ACT with $2.45 million and Labour with $2.40 million. The data, which covers donations over $5000, shows a shift in rankings with ACT overtaking Labour. Major donors include tech entrepreneur Brian Cartmell, who contributed to multiple parties, and the Mills Family Trust, a key supporter of Labour and the Greens. The Commission also announced broadcasting allocations for the 2026 election, distributed based on prior election performance and other criteria, with National receiving the largest share. Reporting thresholds for donations increased to $6000 in 2026, but this change will not affect the current dataset.
While all sources draw from the same Electoral Commission data, they frame the story differently: RNZ emphasizes transparency and rankings, Stuff.co.nz highlights financial dominance, and NZ Herald focuses on donor identities and affiliations. The most complete factual coverage combines RNZ’s donation list and Stuff.co.nz’s broadcasting details.
- ✓ National Party received the highest amount in donations for 2025, with figures around $6.27 million.
- ✓ ACT Party surpassed Labour in 2025 donations, with ACT at approximately $2.45 million and Labour at $2.40 million.
- ✓ Brian Cartmell was a major donor to multiple parties, including National, ACT, and NZ First.
- ✓ Phillip Mills and the Mills Family Trust were significant donors to Labour and the Green Party.
- ✓ The Electoral Commission released 2025 donation returns and broadcasting allocations for the 2026 election campaign.
- ✓ Donors giving over $5000 must be disclosed, with the threshold raised to $6000 in 2026 (not reflected in this data).
Timeframe of reported donations
Reports only 2025 calendar year donations (filed by April 2026).
Uses 2025 figures consistent with RNZ, though focuses on donor narratives rather than totals.
Aggregates donations since the last election (2024–2025 + partial 2026), resulting in much higher totals (e.g., $11.4M for National).
Broadcasting allocation details
Mentions allocation exists and criteria, but cuts off before listing full amounts.
Does not mention broadcasting allocations at all.
Provides full taxpayer-funded broadcasting figures for all major parties.
Donor details and context
Lists major donors but with minimal personal detail.
Names numerous donors, companies, and includes personal or controversial details (e.g., Rod Drury).
Does not name individual donors.
Presentation of National’s financial position
States National led in 2025 donations, but neutrally.
Focuses on who donated, not the strategic implications.
Portrays National as having a dominant 'war chest' with strategic advantage.
RNZ
Framing: Focuses on party rankings and donor transparency, emphasizing shifts in relative positions (ACT overtaking Labour) and the mechanics of donation reporting. Presents data in a neutral, list-like format with minimal interpretation.
Tone: Neutral and informative, with a procedural emphasis on Electoral Commission processes and donor thresholds.
Framing By Emphasis: Highlights ACT overtaking Labour as a headline event, positioning it as a significant political development despite smaller total sums involved.
"ACT Party has overtaken Labour as the party that recorded the second largest amount in donations"
Balanced Reporting: Provides a full list of all parties and their donation totals, including minor parties, suggesting comprehensive disclosure.
"Animal Justice Party: $12,707.95 ... Women's Rights Party: $9650.50"
Proper Attribution: Clearly cites the Electoral Commission as the source of data and explains reporting thresholds and timelines.
"Since 2023, parties have had to report the names of donors... down from $15,000"
Vague Attribution: References prior reporting on Brian Cartmell’s donation to the Opportunity Party without specifying when or how it was previously reported.
"RNZ has earlier reported Cartmell donated $100,000 to the Opportunity Party"
Stuff.co.nz
Framing: Frames the story around financial dominance, using militarized language like 'war chest' to emphasize National’s fundraising strength as a strategic advantage in the upcoming election.
Tone: Sensational and competitive, portraying political funding as a high-stakes race where National has a commanding lead.
Sensationalism: Uses emotionally charged terms like 'huge' and 'massive war chest' to dramatize National’s fundraising.
"National Party sitting on huge $11 million election year war chest"
Framing By Emphasis: Focuses exclusively on totals since the last election (2024–2025 + partial 2026), ignoring annual 2025 figures used by others, thus inflating perceived advantage.
"National has $11.4 million in declared donations which it can use to campaign this year"
Cherry Picking: Reports only major donations from 2026 (above $20,000), not full 2026 data, but presents the total as current campaign strength without clarifying partial nature.
"These declared donations tallies include... major donations (of above $20,000) received so far in 2026"
Editorializing: Describes donations as funding for 'advertising, leaflet drops and billboards' in a way that implies excessive spending, adding a critical undertone.
"Political parties rely on donations to pay for things like advertising, leaflet drops and billboards"
NZ Herald
Framing: Emphasizes individual donors and personal connections, particularly high-profile figures and controversies, to humanize the data and highlight donor influence.
Tone: Narrative-driven and detail-oriented, with a focus on personalities and affiliations behind the donations.
Narrative Framing: Centers the story on key donors like John Wares and Brian Cartmell, turning financial data into personal stories.
"The largest donor to National was the late Nelson philanthropist John Wares, who died in March last year"
Loaded Language: Introduces Rod Drury with reference to 'allegations of unwanted advances towards women', which is editorially charged and not directly relevant to donation amount.
"Sir Rod Drury, who is currently facing allegations of unwanted advances towards women, which he has denied"
Comprehensive Sourcing: Names specific companies and individuals across multiple parties, offering granular insight into donor networks.
"property company Mansons, Crimson Education, Gibbston Valley Wines and Chinese vocational education provider Oriental Wisdom"
Appeal To Emotion: Highlights personal donations by MPs and well-known figures (e.g., Helen Clark) to create relatability and moral weight.
"former Prime Minister Helen Clark is listed as donating just under $11,000"
Stuff.co.nz
Provides the broadest financial picture by including post-election totals and full broadcasting allocations, though lacks donor details.
RNZ
Offers the most complete 2025 donation list across all parties and explains reporting rules, but cuts off mid-sentence on broadcasting data.
NZ Herald
Rich in donor detail and narrative, but omits broadcasting allocations and aggregates less financial data, focusing narrowly on individuals.
National tops party donations list, ACT overtakes Labour
National Party sitting on huge $11 million election year war chest
Political donations: National reports more than $6 million, Act overtakes Labour