Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

tax forum « Previous | |Next »
October 5, 2011

What will come of the Canberra tax reform summit? Will it be similar to what happened to the Henry review of the Australian tax system? Will the Gillard Government ensure that nothing much will result from the talk-fest so that it doesn't become a political issue.

The Gillard Government has enough on its hands with respect to tax reform, namely the mining tax, and the pricing of carbon that many continue to call a tax. One of the ground rules Wayne Swan, the federal Treasurer, laid down was that all proposals for tax reform had to be ''revenue neutral'' - if you cut one tax you have to increase another by the same amount. Talking down expectations is the way Labor governs these days.


I don't expect much to come out of the tax forum because the Australian political system has been struggling to secure reform over the past decade with little success. What would be of benefit is a way to institutionalize the process of tax reform so that it is taken out of the hands of vested interests preaching their standard ideas to further their own interests.

Economic inequalities in Australia are growing and without significant tax reform on income tax we can expect growing economic and social imbalance--ie., increasing private affluence and public squalor.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 10:38 AM | | Comments (4)


Bond uni are calling it a tax to the tune of 2 million bucks a year that it will cost them.

Just goes to show how a private university prefers to live in a world of illusions and ideology. You can see this by looking at its submission to the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Clean Energy Future Legislation Bond states:

With regard to the actual cost of the proposed carbon tax to Bond we are expecting this to be about $2 million per year after 3 or 4 years and rising each year thereafter. This is comprised of indirect costs ($1.3 million) and direct costs ($0.7million). Indirect costs are the additional costs that everyone will have to pay under the proposed carbon tax. They are the flow-on price rises through the supply chain and through the CPI impact to all operating costs.

What they call a Carbon "tax" is the flow on price rises through the supply chain. These are costs to the organization, just like increased price of electricity due to investment in the transmissions lines infrastructure, or the high Australian dollar.

Bond University also says that it is not one of the top 500 CO2 emitters (polluters) who will have to pay the $23 per tonne carbon charge (the word tax is not used here), as it does not exceed the threshold of producing 25,000 tonnes of carbon per year. If it does so in the future, then it will be required to change its behaviour to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions if it is to avoid:

(1) increasing its revenue by raising fees or
(2) reducing costs by reduction of staff.

That change in behaviour is what the reforms are designed to do.

If pricing carbon is off the agenda, then removing fossil fuel subsidies should be put on the agenda.

Regardless of what is right or wrong this government certainly is a mob that needs suggestions. The jobs summit is next and thats