Skip to main content

Planned system outage - 12 September 2026 | Our online services including myIR, self service phone lines and gateway services will be unavailable on Saturday 12 September, 2026 from 1pm to approximately 10.30pm while we complete a planned system update. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.

Media releases

Spared prison for the sake of her children

An Auckland woman has been spared imprisonment because of the special needs of her children, but her husband was sentenced to 26 months behind bars for 9 years of tax offending.
 
While Judge Alofivae found the husband and wife equally culpable she sentenced Faalili Vaa to 26 months imprisonment but his wife Belinda Heilupe Vaa to home detention, saying their children were her ‘saving grace’.
 
They faced representative charges of evading income tax and GST and using a document to dishonestly obtain income tax advantages and a Small Business Cashflow Scheme loan between 2015 and 2024.
 
Both benefited from all business profits and knew that the GST and income tax returns that were filed contained incorrect information, with sales under-stated, and the expenses inflated.
 
Once their tax affairs started being reviewed by Inland Revenue in 2018, they then deliberately chose not to file GST and income tax returns for their kitchen installation work. In total, over 9 years the evasion/fraud of income tax, GST and a Small Business Cashflow Scheme loan amounted to $554,998.68
 
Her Honour set a starting point of 44 months imprisonment for both before allowing discounts for guilty pleas, remorse and the difficult personal home circumstances with their autistic children.
 
Those discounts reduced the sentence to 26 months imprisonment for both. Judge Alofivae reduced Belinda Vaa’s sentence further to 24 months and converted it to 12 months home detention.
 
Her Honour said that was strictly on humanitarian grounds as the effect on having both parents in prison would just be too great on their high needs children.
 
Judge Alofivae was also concerned that Faalili was still working as a self-employed worker, given these charges. She considered that the 9 years of offending was absolutely unacceptable and that it appeared he had caused his wife to be involved.
 
She considered that ignorance was not a defence and was also concerned from the PAC report that it did not appear that he comprehended the full gravity of the offending.
Last updated: 10 Sep 2026
Jump back to the top of the page