Lower income taxes remained a Government priority but only as circumstances permitted, he said.
"In particular, we want to address the higher marginal tax rates faced by low and middle-income earners as their incomes continued to rise.''
However, tax reductions remained dependent on fiscal and economic conditions, he said.
With continuing tight fiscal conditions, there was no explicit provision for tax reductions in the fiscal forecasts.
The Government had made additional debt repayment a priority over setting aside money in Budget 2017 for tax cuts, Mr English said.
Act New Zealand leader David Seymour was disappointed in the Government's refusal to cut taxes this year or in the next Budget, accusing the Government of lacking a spine.
Abolishing corporate welfare would have given the Government an opportunity to cut taxes. Under this Government, corporate welfare had risen to $1.3 billion a year - a cost of $752 per New Zealand household, he said.
"These handouts have included payments for sheep given to a Saudi businessman and a boat-building company owned by the world's seventh-richest man.
"I would rather see that tax given back to households and businesses to decide for themselves what best suits their needs.''
Abolishing corporate welfare would save enough to allow the corporate tax rate to decrease from 28% to 22.5%, or to scrap the top income tax rate of 33%. Either of those was a far better option than continuing to allow politicians to pick winners, Mr Seymour said.
In a speech yesterday to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce, Mr English said although the country's debt levels were not high by international standards, New Zealand could be stretched if another economic shock or natural disaster hit.
To prepare for the future, he was working to get debt down to about 20% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020.
The Government's tax take was driven largely by the size of the nominal GDP and the improved economic outlook would be helpful, he said.
But it came on the back of significant reductions in the Treasury's forecasts of nominal GDP, which had largely been driven by inflation continuing to stay lower for longer than any forecasts expected.
Spending pressures had also changed as a result of higher-than-expected population growth, and further opportunities to invest in better public services.
As a result, the new spending allowances for Budget 2016 and 2017 had been rearranged, Mr English said.
They were previously set at $1 billion this year and $2.5 billion for Budget 2017.
The Finance Minister ended his speech by saying the Government was still committed to cutting personal taxes over time, but the Taxpayers Union was not impressed.
Executive director Jordan Williams said the National Party's low-tax platform was a sham.
"Despite the billboards promising ‘no new taxes', they have introduced four new taxes since the last election. If all that juicy new revenue doesn't justify tax cuts, what the heck does under this high-tax, high-debt, big-spending government?''
At a glance
• No tax cuts in Budget 2017
• Bill English committed to tax cuts, over time
• Extra debt repayment earmarked
• Budget spending rearranged over the next two years
