Calls to change inheritance laws

Australia is one of only seven OECD countries without any inheritance, estate or gift taxes.

Calls to change inheritance laws

There are calls to introduce an inheritance tax in Australia after research revealed that current legislation actively subsidises inheritances.

As part of the Grattan Institute research on how the younger generations are falling behind financially, which we presented on Monday, there were also findings related to the size of inheritances, and who was benefiting most.

Owain Emslie and Danielle Wood from the Grattan Institute found that 80 per cent of money passed down from parents goes to people aged 50 or over, not people who are saving for a house or trying to raise a young family.

The most common age bracket in which people receive an inheritance from parents is 55-59. This is largely due to Australia’s growing life expectancy.

The Grattan Institute report argues that this will mean inheritances increasingly supplement the retirement savings of middle-aged Australians rather than helping young people.

Australia is one of only seven OECD countries without any inheritance, estate or gift taxes, but the problem goes beyond that, according to the report.

Mr Emslie and Ms Wood found that Australia’s taxation system actively subsidises inheritances.

Superannuation tax breaks that were intended to encourage people to save for their retirement and to take pressure off the Age Pension system are largely being passed down to the next generation through bequests, because there are many retired Australians who do not draw down on their capital.

There is a 15 per cent super death benefits tax, which aims to claw back some of the superannuation tax breaks when the money is passed on, but the Grattan Institute argues it is too low and can be easily avoided.

As well as recommending a higher tax on super bequests, the Grattan Institute is calling for the cap on post-tax super contributions to be lowered and for at least part of the family home to be included in the Age Pension assets test.

It also suggests that older Australians with higher-value properties should be allowed to borrow against their home using the Pension Loans Scheme. The aim would be to allow most people to stay in their home, while ensuring that some of their wealth is used to fund the Age Pension.

What do you think? Should Australia introduce an inheritance tax? Should the tax on super bequests be higher than 15 per cent? What do you think about including part of the family home in the assets test?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    9:52am
    It's been taxed and paid for already - why tax it again? Each and every asset purchased out of post-tax income, and which garners no income, should not be considered in any asset test, and ONLY capital gain etc should be considered on an asset passed on.

    I understand that is the case already with property .... those who inherit have to kick in something...
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    9:53am
    Perhaps I'd make an exception of those fat cats who have generated assets after using tax dodges already - different story... and shows the need for genuine tax reform right there...

    Naturally - any business asset such as a serial house as investment is fully taxable.. it's a business being passed on and thus incurs costs.....
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    9:57am
    I repeat - if I own a Windbag and a boat - these cost money - they do not garner any income - why are they included in assets test? If they are sold, I pay tax on income earned from any cash from the sale, and also it can affect pension if kept as a lump sum.

    Meantime Joe Business doesn't own anything, gets full pension, and when the Windbag or boat is sold off, it is written down as a business thing ....and since business interests are not his personal interests, nothing affect his pension...

    Pensioner is hit every which way. Grand Theft Canberra....
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    10:03am
    They're after the family home Trebor. You correctly mention that tax is paid on investments anyway and that should not change.
    The biggest dishonesty in the system now is CAPITAL GAINS TAX and how the bastards want it calculated. Unless the REAL rate of inflation is locked in, it isn't, then the increase in value of a taxable asset is unfair because the buying power of a dollar diminishes with inflation. You may have made a capital gain of 100% on a property which cost you $500,000 on sale but this needs to be adjusted for the loss in value of money like it used to be. The intent is to equate the nominal gain as a real gain. Totally crooked!
    Rosret
    21st Aug 2019
    11:05am
    ...and the younger generation won't benefit at all if inheritance is taxed.
    If its not the nursing home industry fleecing children's inheritance its the some Grattan Institute employee who has been reading the communist manifesto.

    Inheritance takes the burden off the welfare system. Inheritance allows children to build upon their parent's hard toil. Inheritance tax causes a huge burden on families.

    Watch the Greens. They are into abortion, euthanasia and inheritance tax. People think they are into saving trees - they need to read the fine print. Changing their policy to get votes for the 2018 election doesn't change their ideology it just adds to the list of deceptive behaviour.
    Rae
    21st Aug 2019
    2:56pm
    Yes MICK I thought when Howard made that change there was something sneaky about it all. Depreciation was a much better option and fairer.

    If they keep upping the gains tax and make it on $$$ value without adjustments they can cream off most of the wealth from the past 20 years house price gains.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    5:50pm
    Rosret - We have to realise The Greens are a political party of millennials who think they are hard done by and seek to blame their parents for the hardship of life. Guess who they'd like to scalp? And as you rightly say THEY will then get a zero inheritance. Some poetic justice perhaps given the bank of mum and dad is the ninth largest bank in the country...and still we are the bad guys.

    Rae - correct. Just consider what will happen with CGT on assets, including the family home should the current crooked government get it through, if we have rampant inflation for a couple of decades. Effectively the government will end up with almost HALF of the inheritance under current CGT rules because the value (=selling price) will end up being many multiples of the purchase price. Its a ticking time bomb where the casino has worked out how to steal everything from its citizens.
    If that comes about we're out of this country and will leave those who voted for this sort of corruption here to get what they truly deserve. Hopefully we will see the back of this lot despite the Murdoch and Stokes media campaigning for their private government giving them their much called for tax cuts. Not a wonderful future if it happens. We'll see of course and perhaps common sense will see this lot kicked out. I live in hope.
    MJM
    21st Aug 2019
    9:55am
    Here we go again tax tax tax...... sick to death ( no pun intended) of this!!!! But it will happen no matter what majority want .... starting to worry about democratic world.... too many rules and too many taxes!!
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    10:05am
    This is just the next tax being worked out by crooked government which refuses to be accountable for how it spends our money and then cooks the books for more. It will not be content until it gets all income and we're all living in poverty.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:08pm
    it's not just this government looking at estate duties. The only countries that do not have these taxes besides Australia are Austria, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Estonia, Honk Kong, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macau, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden.

    https://nomadcapitalist.com/2018/05/17/how-to-avoid-estate-taxes/
    Rae
    21st Aug 2019
    2:57pm
    Yes but those countries don't have Johnny Howards crazy Capital Gain without taking inflation into account nonsense that means it's better to buy and flog than to buy and hold.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:25pm
    Farside - hang on a minute mate.

    In Australia holiday homes are NOT tax deductible. They are in some other countries.
    Other countries do NOT have an assets or even income test to push retirees off a pension. We do.
    Other countries have generous tax regimes if you live in certain states. We do not.

    You may want to compare apples with apples rather than cherry pick Farside. Australians are paying a high amount of tax and I find it obscene that a destitute government which has wasted hundreds of billions of OUR dollars is now sniffing around to find a way to hit us again. That's where this argument is at and anybody who sees a Grattan Report as anything other than propaganda straight from Canberra is fooling themselves. This is softening us up for what the bastards in power are going to do. Make no mistake about that.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    9:58am
    Ben - your article is promoting the blatant dishonesty of the far right wing Grattan Institute. This crap comes straight from Liberal Party HQ softening us up for what they intend to do in the future when the free money runs out and they have no more taxpayer money to waste.
    You may want to do several things to put this so called 'report' into the rubbish bin where it belongs:

    1. discuss the pension system in other first world countries. You won't find an assets test and you will find that out system pays a lot less than other comparable first world countries.
    2. discuss the fact that family homes as well as holiday homes are tax deductible in some countries. Not here. That makes a huge difference during a working lifetime!
    3. discuss that there are tax breaks in countries like America depending on which state you live in.
    4. discuss our high personal tax rates compared to countries like America.

    The problem with your spiel is you are regurgitating propaganda from a government funded outlet and you fail to discuss the lies in the report or indeed issue like big tax cuts for the top end of society. Australia should NEVER adopt some of the measures in this report and the top end of town will sidestep any such legislation anyway, so the calls for a Death Tax (remember that the government claimed Labor was bringing one in during the election?) will only be borne by the working and middle class. As intended!
    Anonymous
    21st Aug 2019
    10:44am
    Your 4 points are spot on. I have lived and worked in places Mick describes - low tax countries have impositions we do not: compulsory health insurance, TV and Radio licences, memberships for usage of council libraries. No deductions for public transport, no rego help and a lower tax threshold and an asset tax as well.Thanks Mick for above input. We are better off by far than our mates in the often admired northern countries in Europe.
    Rosret
    21st Aug 2019
    11:09am
    I think you will find its not the LNP at all. Take a good look at the other parties ideologies - especially the Greens who are controlling the the Labor party at the moment.
    mogo51
    21st Aug 2019
    12:02pm
    The Grattan Institute was introduced by Labor!!!
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:05pm
    Melbourne Mercer Global Pension Index reveals Australia is the only country outside North-Western Europe countries in the top five countries with world class pension systems. The Netherlands, with an overall score of 80.3, beat Denmark to first place, a spot held by Denmark for six years, by 0.1. Finland bumped Australia (72.6) out of third place with an overall score of 74.5 and Sweden (72.5) coming in fifth place.

    Seems the Australian system, ranked 4th in 2018, is not that bad, especially since it took a hit the previous year with the changes to the assets means test, that would otherwise have seen it ranked second.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:34pm
    Rosret - it appears you are posting party BS again. I acknowledge what The Greens would do if in power but they are a minor party and Labor made it crystal clear they would not govern in partnership with The Greens.
    As a mater of interest you may wish to listen to Di Natalie when he get s (very) rare airing. He tells the truth about the corruption in Canberra and whose interests are being served in the country. Whilst I hate some of the twisted behaviour of senators like Hanson-Young I applaud honesty. Both our current government and Labor have little of that and the only thing which sets these parties apart is Labor will not act corruptly against the national interest whilst this government will and does all the time.

    Be careful who you vote for. Those of us who voted for their bank accounts recently may at some time wake up to the fact they have bullet holes in both feet. Its the classic lobster in the (cold water) pot where the temperature rises gradually until we're done for. Enjoy the misery if you were one of the above folk. I was prepared to burn my franking credits and stand with my head high. Many in this community could not say the same and that is really sad for the future.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    4:28pm
    There is no right to property residing in the population, no right to privacy ... well... no rights...

    Elsewhere today I drew a comparison with SloMo's attack on GetUp - an organisation that has been 'cleared by the AEC of any connection with Labor or Greens - as being comparable to a Hitlerite/Stalinist style of governance. I added the state of the unions and workers, and a few other things... and referred the reader to "Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich" (again) by William L Shirer (a non-Jewish German American).

    I seriously think everyone needs to read that book - especially the chapters that deal with social and economic and industrial relations policy and a few other things...

    I had the great fortune to read such books at a comparatively early age, along with a few others of great interest - Mao's Little Red Book; Mao and Guevara on Guerilla Warfare; Intervention and Revolution by Richard K Barnet....

    I advise some serious reading if we are to save the nation from itself....

    As for the sellout across the board to foreign interests - what ARE these politicians smoking before they get out of bed in the morning? Bet it comes in brown paper bags....
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    5:55pm
    Trebor - what you need to do is save voters from their own ignorance, greed and stupidity. The issue is of course the propaganda right wing media. It sold the electorate Morrison on a 'Scotty's a good bloke' campaign and the electorate voted in a party which had self destructed and had no policies other than tax cuts for those who were already wealthy and attacks on unions and any media outlet which dared to speak against the most dishonest and corrupt government we have seen in our lifetime.

    The issue is voters and their own shortcomings. Had we had level minded people this lot could never have gotten in again.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:19pm
    While I am forced to agree on fact, Mick - it saddens me that modern Labor is the only alternative...

    We, the people, simply MUST get a genuine party going..... like you, if certain things come to pass in this nation, I will be looking to live somewhere else.... or marching on Canberra in a new form of Coo-ee March ....
    bartpcb
    21st Aug 2019
    10:14am
    You can twist and interpret 'research results' any which way you want, in the same way that 'stats' are reported to reflect the bias of those quoting the stats. The fact remains that the 'inheritance' has already been taxed and who it is left to is entirely up to the person leaving the inheritance. If the receivers of that 'inheritance' wish to share that inheritance with their children, so be it. It's no ones business but their own. This 'poor bugger me' card from the 'we are suffering because of the oldies' mob, is the biggest load of bollocks since bottled water.
    sunnyOz
    21st Aug 2019
    11:11am
    I know of far too many younger people, not the slightest bit interested in saving or buying a house because they 'will get mum/dad's goodies when they pop off'. I was appalled to hear this conversation at a recent social do, one guy almost rubbing his hands, saying it wouldn't be long till he no longer needed to pay rent. Why? - because his mum has terminal cancer, dad has deceased, and he is only child. I actually fronted him saying he showed more happiness in what he would be inheriting rather than sadness for his mum's plight. And his mum does own a beautiful big home on land.
    People should be able to leave what ever they have to whom ever they want. It should NOT automatically go to children. Oh yes, you can write a will that way, but guarantee they will contest it - as I myself have been through. I am single, have worked bloody hard to have what little I have, and I am sick to bloody death of the govt constantly trying to work out ways to get their hands on MY assets and money. What little I have is mine.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    4:32pm
    As I said yesterday - it is indeed true that Muslims carry out a minority of terror attacks within the continental US - it's just that they are 2% of the population and carry out 26% of such attacks - a minority to be sure.....

    Lies, more lies, and damned statistics ....Robert Duvall is related to Abraham Lincoln? So am I .. distantly of course... VERY distantly .....
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:14am
    Sorry - Robert Duvall is related to Robert E Lee - not Abe...
    rtrish
    21st Aug 2019
    10:14am
    I have to confess, don’t really understand these issues, however - I got a small inheritance on my father’s death. I was in my late 60’s and had been on the pension (Newstart, Disability, Aged) for a long while. This inheritance was a a life-saver for me. I now have 2 adult children, one of whom is a student after Newstart, she won’t have 2 pennies to rub together. Don’t know how long until I pop my clogs, but she will need every cent of the inheritance from me. Leave the inheritance alone!
    Rosret
    21st Aug 2019
    11:11am
    Agreed rtrish. - and every cent has already been taxed.
    fred
    21st Aug 2019
    11:48am
    Agreed with rtish and Rosret . I am sick of the socialists wanting to tax bloody everything . We are overtaxed now Be satisfied with the Government pension and stop complainingand wanting more handouts Why didnt people tax you save more for your retirement independence instead of trimming their capacity to earn income by going on multiple cruises and os holidays ?
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:20pm
    Got it in one, Rosret... exactly what I said in post 1 ....
    Meg
    21st Aug 2019
    10:31am
    Australia is the only country that has an assets/income test for the pension. So NO, let's not add to that by taxing inheritance. Besides, who's going to have anything to leave? Many who are not on a pension will have to use up their entire resources to support themselves in their old age and/or pay for aged care facilities - too bad if they have disabled or sick children...no inheritance for them.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:14pm
    if you have no estate to leave then the discussion and possibility of inheritance tax is irrelevant ... unless you might be a beneficiary
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:22pm
    Again - under this kind of rule, ONLY the wealthy who have the hidey-holes for everything will be able to give an inheritance.

    We raise our children and pour gold into doing so - and we all want to see our children and grand-children prosper...... why should any 'right' to give an inheritance only adhere to the wealthy?

    I say to government - get your hands off it!!
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:24pm
    ... and the social and economic divides increasingly apparent in this once-great nation will get worse and worse until there is only the company store and the master/servant relationship left..... hundreds of years of upward social movement for the many lost in two generations.... and all turned back to the Dark Ages....

    Who wants to sign up for that?

    21st Aug 2019
    10:37am
    Prefer an inheritance tax to the inclusion of the family home in the asset test. Give everyone a just pension without income and asset test and let everyone pay taxes on their income and assets. Too many pensioners here scrimp and save just to leave an inheritance behind. With an inheritance tax people might be less inclined to save a lot of money and so helping the economy with increased spending. I know it is not the Aussie way, but that is the way of a lot of other countries.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:28pm
    Lock in C, Eddie - neither.....yes... lock it in... no.. no.. lock in D.. yes D...."No inheritance tax, no family home asset test, and a fair pension for all"..

    Your final answer? I mean... for a millyun dullahs.... you went C... then.. well.. then you went D. WHY would you choose .. D?? I mean...(shakes head).... D??? You cannot be serious, surely... D?? One final chance... for a millyun dullahs... want me to go back to C?

    No, Eddie... I'll stick with D....

    Well - it's your Millyun Dullahs (shakes head).... and the answer is... right after this ad break.....

    (later)

    You've won Wun MillYun Dullahs!!!!
    ollie
    21st Aug 2019
    10:53am
    This cant be only Labour would introduce a death tax is this another lie
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:29pm
    Never trust the bastards... any of them .....
    VeryCaringBigBear
    21st Aug 2019
    10:54am
    Easy fixed. Just make any old age pension received a debt on the person's estate.
    marls
    21st Aug 2019
    11:05am
    Very caringBigBear
    What a great idea to encourage everyone not to work and scrounge of the system never working a day in their life’s I know a few of those they are sitting back all laughing in dept of housing some on their own with 3 bedrooms
    VeryCaringBigBear
    21st Aug 2019
    11:09am
    It won't change the behaviour of those people but will help those who struggle now just because they have saved.
    Rosret
    21st Aug 2019
    11:13am
    Well that should hit the poor harder than any other group in the community!
    VeryCaringBigBear
    21st Aug 2019
    11:19am
    It wont hit the poor at all as they will leave nothing to pay it back. It will however acknowledge those who fund their own retirement rather than the current system that discourages people to fund their own retirement and to hide assets in their own home.
    Triss
    21st Aug 2019
    11:45am
    You are violating the Human Rights of a section of people, Uncaring Bear, if you are penalising age pensioners but not any other age pensioners. Remember the majority of people on a pension will be accessing it because of their age. That raises the shadows of Hitler’s Germany.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:30pm
    It seems the Actuaries Institute essentially agrees with you. It has published a research paper that includes a proposal for everyone to be given a full age pension, but would “require retirees to use a proportion of all their financial assets to ‘buy’ that proportion of the Age Pension to which they are not entitled, and then pay the full amount to everyone”.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:32pm
    A paid for already pension is already a form of annuity... we don't 'buy' what we've already paid for, Farsie ... ... we're not going to go further down that track...

    Simpler to simply pay a universal pension and tax all income etc over and above..
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:39am
    @TREBOR, the AI green paper advocates a universal pension. The report says "For example, if the Age Pension is worth $800,000 for a couple, then a couple with $1 million of assets at retirement would use $800,000 to buy a full Age Pension. Those with lower assets would have part-pensions, which would be topped up to full pensions, by a similar purchase at retirement. Those with few assets would have full pensions fully provided by the government.”

    https://actuaries.asn.au/Library/Miscellaneous/2019/RetirementIncomesGreenPaperFinal.pdf
    Mondo
    21st Aug 2019
    11:05am
    My question is will the solution be used to fix the problem that's been identified? That is will any death tax be used to ease mortgage stress amongst the young or is this just another tax grab for consolidated revenue? I suspect the latter.
    We have international treaties to stop double taxation. However you look at it, a tax on peoples wealth, either while they are alive or dead, that has already been taxed is double taxation.
    If money is being left to seniors it surely helps to reduce the demands on the pension system so the government still wins in any case.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:33pm
    Of course not - consolidated revenue will put paid to any such fantasies ..... all CR requires is to frequently topped up after being spread aro0und like chaff in a high wind...
    marls
    21st Aug 2019
    11:09am
    There’s no means test in most European countries no inheritance tax either little old New Zealand no meanstest they can continue to work our politicians are a pack of greedy people and non stop access to fund their age of entitlement that never ends
    Rosret
    21st Aug 2019
    11:16am
    There is no political party in Australia advocating death taxes in 2019. The Greens were but changed their policy to get votes in the 2018 election. This article is a media beat up to stir the oldies.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:36pm
    The only European countries without an inheritance tax are Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. By my calculation that means most European countries do have an inheritance tax.
    marls
    21st Aug 2019
    1:17pm
    Farside
    I inherited something of my brothers in Italy theres was no inheritance tax
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:46am
    @Maris, there is an Italian inheritance tax calculated at three different rates (4% over €1M, 6% over €100K and 8%) depending on the degree of kinship between the decedent and the beneficiary. A spouse, parents and/or children, pay 4% on amounts exceeding € 1,000,000 for each individual beneficiary, below this amount, there is no inheritance tax liability. The 6% rate applies to siblings and 8% to remaining relatives.
    CathinHobart
    21st Aug 2019
    11:18am
    Call it what it is. It’s a Death Tax - not a namby pamby ‘inheritance tax’. Personally, I am sick of feeling threatened once again by stupid ideas that impact on life decisions I made 50 years ago made to purchase a house and to go without holidays and food to pay the mortgage.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:43pm
    why feel threatened about what happens to your house after you have shuffled off this mortal coil? It is an issue for the living.
    Pisces
    21st Aug 2019
    11:28am
    More rubbish to stir everybody into a frenzy and take their eyes off what is really going on in Canberra
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:44pm
    Grattan Institute is in Melbourne
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:39pm
    Spot on Pisces. Its been going on since 2012 and getting more and more brazen by the year. Readers may want to look at the flavour of the month legislation where everything bad is put through under the guise of 'National Security' when in fact it is about controlling the population.
    I often wonder if the slow witted will recognise the issue when our dictatorship in forming starts following us around everywhere with cameras to rates us according to everything we say and do. They call that a 'social license' in China.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:34pm
    We're gonna need a bigger guillotine....
    Oldchick
    21st Aug 2019
    11:40am
    If a tax is put on inheritance it will NEVER go to younger people. Do these so called experts realise that when we were younger and buying our homes, we went without everything to pay for it - no huge smart TV, no dinners out, we had secondhand everything, sheets up at the window until we could afford curtains, no air conditioning just a pedestal fan and a bar heater that you moved from room to room. Add to that we were paying up to 17.5% interest on our loans. The generation they’re talking about what new everything, great social life, name brands, the latest big screen, the newest SUV...... and the Government want the tax for their perks!
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:41pm
    I've written about that a number of times.
    Young people who'll pump the 'getting of boomers' fail to stand back and see THEY will be left with nothing other than a funeral bill when mum and dad pass on. Perhaps a fair outcome for a generation of often malignant children.
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:51am
    "Give me a child until he is seven and I will show you the man." – St. Ignatius Loyola

    Bless their little hearts, the younger generations are just how we made them. Blame lies in the mirror.
    Horace Cope
    21st Aug 2019
    11:51am
    Whether it's called an inheritance tax or death duties is irrelevant, it should not be introduced. It's a red herring to produce statistics that show that those receiving a legacy are nearly at age pension eligibility. As has been pointed out, assets have been purchased by after tax income so, in essence, tax has already been paid on those assets. I do not agree with the family home being included in the asset test because property prices in Australia vary so much depending on where they are that formulating a policy on such a move would be nigh impossible.

    Perhaps a bit of lateral thinking on this topic could produce more income for government. Allow the threshold on gifts to be scrapped which will mean that children/grandchildren could be given money to assist with home purchases which will attract stamp duty and GST on furnishings and PC items. Maybe there will be an increase in the age pension but overall money which is not being used will be freed up and any use of that money will attract some sort of government tax.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:44pm
    This is just greed at work from a destitute government which has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars of our money and which now needs to find new ways to keep spending.
    There are only two options:

    1. rob people on their death.
    2. raid the Future Fund which is returning a huge windfall to our country every year.

    The bastards will take the easiest option: death duties. The future Fund is in a tax haven and cannot be accessed by a piece of legislation. Estates can be. That's what Grattan is promoting for its political master.
    Tanker
    21st Aug 2019
    12:00pm
    Wow talk about stirring up a hornets nest. There are a lot of statements being made that are not borne out by the facts. Age pensions in countries like the UK, at least for as long as that is going to last now, are paid to everyone BUT there is an additional payment made throughout your working life, a bit like our Medicare levy, that contributes to that. It was started here way back but Bob Menzies took all the accumulated funds into consolidated revenue.
    The super system was being manipulated to accumulate wealth by means of the reduction in tax paid on contributions. It meant wealthy people were really building up a big nest egg at taxpayers expense.
    A lot of the cries about "it has already been taxed" are really crocodile tears largely from those better off than the rest of them.
    I await a deluge of irate comments now.
    Horace Cope
    21st Aug 2019
    12:51pm
    Not an irate comment, Tanker, but a part of the introduction of compulsory super was that workers gave up a pay rise in lieu of the compulsory super payment so I suppose that workers have contributed. As to wealthy people having a bigger nest egg, that's just plain and simple mathematics. The compulsory super is based on a percentage of income so it's obvious that if you earn twice as much as me you will have twice as much super.
    Rae
    21st Aug 2019
    3:04pm
    Unless it's defined benefit in which full tax was paid on contributions and the employer's bit is taxed when received in income stream after retirement. No tax concessions there.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:40pm
    I'm no better off than anyone, fella.... but I know truth when I see it... and I say assets such as home etc have already been taxed, having been bought out of post-tax income and having well and truly paid their dues.

    Easy to work out - on an average 30 year mortgage (which most will not reach due to divorce and other financial stresses, so the market will remain buoyant - good scheme that - make divorce easy and make women discontented, and away she goes), the original mortgage doubles or so - so you need to be increasing 3% a year just to keep up with repayments, then there are rates taxes and such, maintenance, and the reality that the house will be a dump in 30 years time without refurbishment....

    Win/win for the parasite politician and his mates...
    Tanker
    21st Aug 2019
    12:00pm
    Wow talk about stirring up a hornets nest. There are a lot of statements being made that are not borne out by the facts. Age pensions in countries like the UK, at least for as long as that is going to last now, are paid to everyone BUT there is an additional payment made throughout your working life, a bit like our Medicare levy, that contributes to that. It was started here way back but Bob Menzies took all the accumulated funds into consolidated revenue.
    The super system was being manipulated to accumulate wealth by means of the reduction in tax paid on contributions. It meant wealthy people were really building up a big nest egg at taxpayers expense.
    A lot of the cries about "it has already been taxed" are really crocodile tears largely from those better off than the rest of them.
    I await a deluge of irate comments now.
    mogo51
    21st Aug 2019
    12:00pm
    This is a total bs suggestion. It is up to the government to choose who they want to get my inheritence. I worked and saved for it (not much) but it is for my partner irregardless of how old she is!!! Stay out of our way private lives.
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    12:56pm
    "It is up to the government to choose who they want to get my inheritence."
    Rae
    21st Aug 2019
    3:06pm
    At a certain point chopping all their heads off actually makes a lot of sense. The French only have to put yellow vests on now and turn up and stupid tax ideas end immediately.
    TREBOR
    21st Aug 2019
    8:42pm
    We're gonna need a bigger guillotine...
    Curious
    21st Aug 2019
    12:30pm
    I just can't believe Grattan Institute's recent releases of their research's finding: yesterday's report on baby boomers' burden on the younger generations and today's release on the boomer's inheritance by past the young ones. Has Grattan Institute holistically looked at the Australian total tax system and why the inheritance tax has been exempted?

    Firstly, based on November 2015 statistics, the Federal Government collected the following: -
    'individual income tax at $170 billion or 39.3% of all revenue collected in Australia, income tax on enterprises at $77 billion or 17.7% of all revenue, GST at $55.5 billion or 12.8% of all revenue, and. excise taxes at $26.4 billion or 6.1% of all revenue'.

    Individual income tax paid to the government is more than twice the amount of tax paid by corporate enterprises. This is on the top of individual payment of GST and excise on personal purchases. An individual pays stamp duties for purchase of a home and pays taxes on their investments and capital gains.If this individual works, he/she with the employer have to pay payroll tax as well. Nothing is free for our law-abiding citizen. In this democratic society I believe we should protect this law-abiding citizen anf his/her property. Yet, the Grattan Institute suggested that we should tax everyone even when they are six-foot under.

    Let look at the corporate sector in Australia. According to the ATO's report in 2017: -

    The tax office has released its fourth tax transparency report, revealing key details of 2,109 of the largest companies with operations in Australia for the 2016-17 financial year.

    Corporate tax increased by 20% between 2015-16 and 2016-17, rising $7.5bn to $45.7bn, driven by surging commodity prices.

    Only ten companies are paying 45% of all corporate tax in Australia, demonstrating how reliant the federal government is on the fortunes of the big banks, miners and supermarket giants.

    But the report has kicked off another debate about tax transparency and avoidance.

    The data shows 722 of the largest corporations paid no corporate tax in Australia in 2016-17, including 100 firms that reported more than $1bn in total income.

    In view of the above-mentioned position, don't you think, we need a tax reform to ensure everyone including enterprises paying their share? Please don't blungeon our poor senior citizens to get every cent out of them. Your think tank needs a good shake up!!???
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    1:04pm
    Complex legislation and dependence upon direct taxation are widely recognised as weaknesses of the Australian tax system. A little research will show there is plenty of support for moving to indirect taxation and property taxes and cracking down on transfer pricing and other profit shifting schemes adopted by multinationals.
    Curious
    21st Aug 2019
    3:40pm
    Farside, what irks me is that the introduction of the capital gain tax is the reason for the withdrawal of inheritance tax. Yet, the Grattan Institute wants to advocate the return of inheritance tax on a false pretense of younger generation receiving no benefits from it without addressing the issue of capital gain tax. If the Grattan Institute can't grape the elementary of the tax set-up, how are they be an advocate of the public issue like the tax system?
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    1:01am
    @Curious, Grattan has long advocated against capital gains tax arguing "negative gearing distorts investment decisions, makes housing markets more volatile and reduces home ownership". You would need to get closer to the models used in order to understand the context in which their research is published. I think you will find that the tax system is a central component in the models adopted by each of the main think tanks, including Grattan.
    Anonymous
    22nd Aug 2019
    9:31am
    Why don't we just ignore the Grattan Institute? Seems to me that all they do is annoying the hell out of retired people. Do they really want people to spend all their money on expensive holidays and world cruises. Just look at the Seniors publications in various states offering travel to the tune of $30'000 per person to far corners of the world. If people feel that they lose their savings they might as well spend them before the Govts get their hands on them.
    Curious
    22nd Aug 2019
    10:00am
    Bravo, Cowboy Jim. Let spend it all and we all go on OAP. There will be no inheritance issues. Let's be selfish for a change.
    Curious
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:52pm
    @Farside, the model of most think tanks, like Grattan, is based on a laissez-faire economic system. The supremacy of entrepreneurial power similar to the dark age of slavery, which is worse than the Middle-age of feudalism. In that era, the peasants at least (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labour, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection. In the era of globalization, the powerful entrepreneurs are the winners, who take no prisoners and as winners, take all and no protection for the slaves. I hope, I am terribly wrong.
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    3:03pm
    @Curious, I suspect you and the economic modellers are at cross purposes. The economists are trying to predict the behaviour of the economy using their models whereas you seem more interested in subverting the economy in favour of something less like feudalism. I also hope you are wrong if you think we are heading back to the dark ages.
    Curious
    22nd Aug 2019
    3:55pm
    @Farside, there are a number of economic systems at play. The globalized model is pushing the Laissez-faire model, which is defined (according to Google) as follows: -

    ' laissez-faire is an economic system in which transactions between private parties are free from any form of government intervention such as regulation, privileges, imperialism, tariffs, and subsidies'.

    If Australia allows this type of economic system to take place, we will not have OAP at all. Remember what Joe Hockey said when he was the Treasurer? The age of entitlements is over. They perceive any social benefits are privileges. Australia, as a nation, has never been a Laissez-faire society. On the contrary, we are a nation of people looking after our mates! These economists you mentioned are trying to brainwash us to accept what they think is inevitable. Remember 5% of the population already control 71.6% of the world wealth and 95% of us control 28.4% of the remainder. If your economists succeed with their model, God helps us, 5% of these rich people will control 100% of the world wealth. A "French Revolution" with a size of 95% world population uprise will be worse than a Tsunami. I don't know about you. I am sacared.
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    7:19pm
    @Curious, I understand where you are coming from however I think the risks of global uprising are less than you fear. We do not have a laissez faire economy and I am yet to see even the most fervent free-marketeer say no to subsidies, tariffs and regulations when these go begging. The Nats are probably the most hypocritical of all parties when it comes to liking a hand out.

    I don't think the economists from the progressive groups like the Australia or Grattan Institutes or Per Capita are trying to brainwash the us. Rather I think they are trying to wake the population to question values and challenge the conservative views that have traction with the government.
    Curious
    22nd Aug 2019
    9:37pm
    @Farside, I hope you are right. However, the contents of their recent articles are not very clear about their intent and purposes.
    ozirules
    21st Aug 2019
    12:32pm
    mmmm inheritance tax, well that will only be for us mere mortals who cant shift the dosh into an offshore tax haven. Our head of state HRH sets the ultimate example regarding inheritance whereby any power, wealth or position is passed on down the family chain with no restraints. If it's good enough for that lot then we should all be able to pass on what little we have without the Rsoles in Canberra holding their greedy hands out. Beware, the pollies are developing a nose meter so they can tax the air we breathe.
    invisible sock
    21st Aug 2019
    12:47pm
    Why would anyone vote for this?
    Baby Boomers certainly wouldn't. And, the generations following, who would benefit from an inheritance, would be crazy to support it.
    Also, it would be political suicide to implement it during the current parliamentary term.
    KSS
    21st Aug 2019
    12:56pm
    "Owain Emslie and Danielle Wood from the Grattan Institute found that 80 per cent of money passed down from parents goes to people aged 50 or over, not people who are saving for a house or trying to raise a young family."

    Well then why don't we start knocking off the grandparents earlier so they don't reach 80+ and dictate that any assetts cannot be left to children - you MUST leave it to the grandkids! That way the inheritors will likely be under 50. Problem solved and no need to tax the proceeds.

    What a load of nonsense. If they want an inheritance tax then have one but don't use the excuse that it is needed because the over 50s are doing the inheriting!

    BTW how many of those over 50s beneficiaries are using the loot to pay off their mortgage and ease household debt? And how many of those over 50s kids will do the same when their turn comes?
    KSS
    21st Aug 2019
    1:03pm
    Oh and "As well as recommending a higher tax on super bequests" weell then take the money out of super as soon as you can and stash it elsewhere! Heypresto, no super bequests to tax!
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:21am
    "80 per cent of money passed down from parents goes to people aged 50 or over,"

    Very exciting.... I'm happy to see my children and grand-children benefit in any way.... ho-hum to Owain Emslie and Danielle Wood from the Grattan Institute ...

    Who were they again? Anyone ever heard of them or give a damn? That have they achieved that gives them such god-like omniscience?

    Totally Wrong about Everything Real and Pertinent to Society = TWERPS.
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:22am
    Where was that guillotine again?
    tams
    21st Aug 2019
    1:03pm
    Mick oh Mick,

    Re Grattan Institute
    In April 2008, Commonwealth and Victorian Governments announced matching funding, along with support in kind from the University of Melbourne. Commitments followed soon after from BHP Billiton and National Australia Bank. Grattan receives money from its endowment supporters and affiliates, which include The Myer Foundation, National Australia Bank, Susan McKinnon Foundation, Medibank Private, Susan McKinnon Foundation, Google, Maddocks, PwC, McKinsey & Company, The Scanlon Foundation, Wesfarmers, Ashurst, Corrs, Deloitte, GE ANZ, Jemena, Urbis, Westpac and Woodside. The Higher Education Program was established with funding from the Myer Foundation.[4]

    Federal Prime Minister was Kevin Rudd, Victorian Premier was John Brumby

    These leaders were Labor not Liberal and they help fund this right wing organisation, did they.

    Just straight political bias
    Farside
    21st Aug 2019
    1:12pm
    to be fair, key steps along the journey to establishing Grattan Institute included a conversation between Steve Bracks and that old lefty Lib Treasurer Peter Costello, as well as a report from that noted left wing institution McKinsey and Co.
    tams
    21st Aug 2019
    1:03pm
    Mick oh Mick,

    Re Grattan Institute
    In April 2008, Commonwealth and Victorian Governments announced matching funding, along with support in kind from the University of Melbourne. Commitments followed soon after from BHP Billiton and National Australia Bank. Grattan receives money from its endowment supporters and affiliates, which include The Myer Foundation, National Australia Bank, Susan McKinnon Foundation, Medibank Private, Susan McKinnon Foundation, Google, Maddocks, PwC, McKinsey & Company, The Scanlon Foundation, Wesfarmers, Ashurst, Corrs, Deloitte, GE ANZ, Jemena, Urbis, Westpac and Woodside. The Higher Education Program was established with funding from the Myer Foundation.[4]

    Federal Prime Minister was Kevin Rudd, Victorian Premier was John Brumby

    These leaders were Labor not Liberal and they help fund this right wing organisation, did they.

    Just straight political bias
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    6:05pm
    Thanks for the history lesson tams.
    I simply consider the bias from Grattan which mostly runs the BS from the current government. The fact that big business pays its bills tells me whose interests are being met and it matters not who kicked this so called think tank off. Rather its a matter of whose agenda is pushed....and that is nearly always the destitute government we had to have.
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    9:47pm
    Tams, MICK is a dyed in the wool red, he won't change.
    Katie
    21st Aug 2019
    10:15pm
    Thanks Tams for sharing this. Any chance of a link so I can post it on Facebook!
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:24am
    Pardon me, roy - is Mick the cat that chewed your Lib views?

    "The greatest threat to Parliament is Democracy".... think on it, Grasshopper....
    Shorty
    21st Aug 2019
    1:09pm
    Just another money grab from retirees who have already paid tax on monies earned to fund their retirement and not rely on the aged pension. Why is it as soon as the government needs funds they try and introduce another way to steal our hard earned dollars. What does it matter who you leave your inheritance to, it is no one else’s business and no part of your home should be asset tested. I wonder how much money was paid to research this, maybe better spent helping those in need. I know many people like to help their young families but why is it more important to leave inheritances to them rather than older benificeries. We never received anything to help us along when we were young and we had to pay off our houses and live from day to day.
    fred
    21st Aug 2019
    2:19pm
    thanks Shorty You must have worked hard and saved , no one else's business what we do with our inheritance and certainly not those who bludge on welfare
    Thinker
    21st Aug 2019
    1:18pm
    If a person works hard, shr/he pays full tax on receipt
    if a person makes a capital gain, then only yax on half
    If person inherits not tax
    Therefore recepient should pay tax at say 10% on excess over $1million
    rina1213
    21st Aug 2019
    1:37pm
    We are already passed 65 have already helped our kids with deposits for their homes and now would like to help our grandkids. We are not highly educated and low income people so need to help our family now as life is very different from when we were young. In my youth people could still get ahead if they worked hard but now its a struggle to just survive. A death tax would mean more life struggles for our young family members that are already struggling to survive. NO ONE SHOULD PAY TAX AFTER THEY DIE !!!!!! Australians are now in the land of the working poor in a wealthy country.
    Sundays
    21st Aug 2019
    1:49pm
    Talk about Back to the Future. We used to have Death Duties in the 70s and they were abolished because they were so unpopular, not to mention unfair. So what if those who inherit are in their 50s and 60s. It doesn’t mean that they don’t need the money. We won’t have any money to leave our kids, but I like to think they could share the proceeds of the house.
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:27am
    As I said about my divorce settlement, where I made a massively generous gift to the ex and the kids - it all goes to the kids anyway some day...

    Think the long game - especially when your government is destroying your country and all that supports its people...
    CoogeeGuy
    21st Aug 2019
    2:45pm
    It would be unethical and immoral to again tax and grab money yet again from the older generation, for the sole purpose of giving it to the entitled younger generations. We baby boomers have paid taxes and fees all our working lives, and during our working lives we never received any of the entitlements the younger generation receive today, like money for pregnancy, money for maternity leave, money for child care, and list goes on. We even paid off our mortgages when interest rates were high. The older generation have paid their dues, so any government should keep their hands off and stop gauging we baby boomers. The government created the generation of entitlement, so they should fix the problem without gauging the older generation
    Eddy
    21st Aug 2019
    3:09pm
    From what I recall Death Duty was a state tax, not a federal one, and was only applied to the more affluent in the community, small (in value) estates were unaffected and the rate depended on the state in which you were resident. In the early 1970s Queensland abolished Death Duties, allegedly to try and attract wealthy retirees to Queensland (I remember the timeframe as I was based in Queensland at the time) . Every other state soon followed suit, not wanting a mass migration of their wealthy elderly citizens to Queensland. The fact that the biggest beneficiaries were the wealthy and the underworked, overpaid politicians was incidental. If anyone wants to put up a proposal I am willing to at least consider it.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:47pm
    When you talk about Estate Duties then think about The Assets Test. You'll see where this is going from there so don't kid yourself it will be a tax for the wealthy. I'll go so far to say the wealthy will remove their money from the financial system and avoid any taxes. The rest of us will be raped.
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    5:15pm
    MICK, dear oh dear oh dear. You are so down trodden.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    6:05pm
    Fact right wing roy!
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    9:37pm
    Such a poor loser Comrade MICK.
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    9:45pm
    I wonder if Shifty Shorten will dodge inheritance tax and Jackie Trad, the Champagne Socialists, what d you think MICK?
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:29am
    They're not the Government, roy.. only the Opposition...
    Eddy
    22nd Aug 2019
    8:49am
    My next question would be does the Constitution allow the Federal Government to levy death duties? I believe the High Court ruled some years ago that states could not levy a petrol tax as it was an excise not a tax and only the Commonwealth could apply an excise. The Federal Government only has income tax powers as those powers were 'referred' from the states to the Commonwealth during the second world war and the Federal Government has not given those powers back. Any learned suggestions?
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    3:18pm
    @Eddy, historically there have been estate duties at both state and federal level until relatively recently. They had been withdrawn at all levels by 1984. Qld withdrew in 1977 and the Commonwealth in 1979.
    Life experience
    21st Aug 2019
    3:14pm
    Pathetic suggestions. Just another tax grab. Tax me when I live and tax me when I die.
    Uk system effects most people as they never lift the inheritance tax level . Was supposed to hit the rich but now hits most people.
    Keep it out of Australia. So angry at this next tax grab. Keep your hands off my money Ive paid tax on again and again.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    3:48pm
    Maybe do not vote LNP in future. If you do be happy with what we all get.
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    5:13pm
    If we had voted ALP we would be living in a country flowing with milk and honey.
    MICK
    21st Aug 2019
    6:09pm
    What we would not have is a government trying to shut down the ABC, GetUp and ANY other media outlet which is not pushing the LNP government agenda.
    Milk and honey? The current government has insured the country will do it tough for decades to come. The debt it has run up and will continue to ramp up is already at levels where the country is in trouble.
    Plug your party as you will roy but the facts are the facts and no amount of right wing BS can wash away the facts.
    Life experience
    21st Aug 2019
    7:05pm
    Mick the Labour Party were the ones that brought it up during the last election. Less likely to happen with the liberals.
    roy
    21st Aug 2019
    9:36pm
    Older lady, hear hear. Comrade won't believe us.
    OnlyDaughter
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:07pm
    The story that the Labor Party introduced the topic of Inheritance Tax at the last election is completely untrue. This was one of the dirty tricks played on the electorate by the LNPs Dirty Tricks Department. It was fake news actively promoted in social media and passed on by misled people in their conversations.
    Unikat
    21st Aug 2019
    3:15pm
    What happens when there is no money and the next generation has also been living in the family home? Would a forced sale ensue?

    There are a lot of abandoned mansions in places that impose death duties because the beneficiaries cannot afford to claim the property.
    jimbojnr1
    21st Aug 2019
    4:23pm
    Tax has already been paid Why does anybody think that it should be taxed again. Should not happen until the those in power pay tax twice on their income.
    gecko50
    21st Aug 2019
    5:08pm
    Simple answer - NO, NO and NO!
    Tzuki
    21st Aug 2019
    5:19pm
    OMG I am executor to my father's will who is leaving most to his GRANDSON and all his problems financially are driving me to an earliter grave just to get this job done! Now they want to go after the children of the deceased???? F*S this is ridiculous!
    Dot
    21st Aug 2019
    7:58pm
    NO DAMN END TO GET THEIR GRUBBY HANDS ON WHAT IS LEGALLY OURS SO THEY MAY SQUANDER IT ON THEMSELVES.
    Eddy
    21st Aug 2019
    8:22pm
    Dot what do you mean by 'LEGALLY OURS'. It is only 'legally ours' until some legislature passes a law to make it other than 'legally ours', ie 'legally theirs'. That's the basis of taxation.
    Eddy
    21st Aug 2019
    8:24pm
    And Dot as we all know there are only two certainties in life, and taxes are one of them.
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:32am
    That's why law and legislation must be made to accord with the Rule of Law, Eddy...

    You HAVE been reading my learned dissertations elsewhere!!
    Eddy
    22nd Aug 2019
    9:15am
    Sorry Trebor, I see a 'chicken and egg' issue in your comment. 'Rule of Law", what is that? Surely 'law and legislation' determines the 'Rule of Law'. My understanding is that, political considerations aside, the States virtually have unfettered power to make any law they wish as long as they do not stray into areas conferred by the Constitution to the Commonwealth (ie Defence, foreign affairs, aboriginal affairs, corporations etc). The Commonwealth's powers to make laws are limited by the Constitution (and this is what makes some lawyers so rich).
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    3:27pm
    Eddy, which is chicken and which is egg in your metaphor? So far as the chicken and egg question goes that is answered - it was the egg.
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    7:27pm
    Not so, Eddy - the Rule of Law as circumscribed by Magna Carta is essentially a constitutional framework upon which legislation and law (note the difference between Law and law) must be based.

    Under the proper Rule of Law, for example, it is impossible for any legislature to install legislation that does not guarantee the rights etc defined under Rule of Law as laid down this nation. For example, legislators cannot pass a law that removes the right to innocence until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.... but, of course, anyone with their eye on things knows full well that in the past 25 or so years, certain pieces of legislation have been permitted to take over in the courts that do just that. generally speaking - these are the 'rule by emotion' kind of thing - the ones in which anyone can claim to feel something, and thus have the sanction of the courts applied to another....

    Ergo - it is not possible for legislation to alter or define Rule of Law - but the other way around is the reality, though the Rule of Law is and has been undermined by just the kind of thing above - rule of emotion etc.

    The undeniable fact that certain pieces of legislation have been passed, and have then passed into law, does not make them Law.... ergo- a group of self-interested or ideologically driven legislators are breaking the Law by voting for illegal legislation, and thus the raising of their hands to do so is meaningless.

    There is a more sinister side to 'rule of emotion' - it works to reduce the power of the individual and to create 'Untermenschen' who are now artificially created criminals and thus have no rights, in much the same way as Jews were created criminals purely by their existence in Nazi Germany... their existence was a crime against the German Volk...... thus no German could be guilty of an illegal act against a Jew.... (there yet? seeing the modern comparisons?)

    Let Right Be Done!
    Tricky
    21st Aug 2019
    8:22pm
    I must of missed the Grattan Institute Report on the hypocrisy of the current government concerning 'Deeming Rates' on cash deposits.
    RobTas
    21st Aug 2019
    8:54pm
    Next the government will be taxing the air we breathe, less the amount of carbon dioxide that increases every year until humans can no longer breathe it and we all die off.
    Then NO Taxes
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:32am
    They already tax your water.....
    Finni
    21st Aug 2019
    9:54pm
    GOvernments of all parties only want us old people not to have any thing and all they want is for us as a country is for the pensioners to be dependent on them

    They want us to be a 3rd world country where we own nothing
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:32am
    Got it!!
    Katie
    21st Aug 2019
    10:01pm
    Here's the email of one of the two people that wrote the article.
    Email him and let him know exactly what the Grattan Institute can do with their recommendation. I did. owain.emslie@grattan.edu.au Got the address off the website.

    My daugher who has an intellectual disability will inherit my house in trust and she will have no money to pay inheritance tax and why should she. Also their statistics are wrong. In the next 20-30 years those in their 50s will still be raising kids, paying mortgages well into their 60s or maybe even 70s if they even got into the property market at all; living through homeless-threatening events eg illness, divorce, financial stresses etc. This Govt needs to target corporations instead of low-average income earners. Anyone who doesn't have a partner will be unlikely to ever get into the property market ever. So inheritance will become crucial for many; and it will also become rarer.
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:33am
    Forget the address - get the asshole off the website......
    'Chelle03
    21st Aug 2019
    10:49pm
    Every other day there is another report with the Govt trying to add another TAX to our lives. For goodness sake we are one of the highest taxed countries yet they still want more. Perhaps they should look at the amount of money they waste (in particular the money they waste on themselves) and they wouldn't be chasing more and more every other day. Inheritance is money /assets made by the person who is leaving it to family or whoever and is money which has already been taxed - bit of a double dip taxing it again when it's GIFTED to someone else!
    Why can't they just put some thought and effort into making our tax system fairer by taxing a percentage of money earned i.e. the more you earn the more you pay and applying it across the board without any "tax breaks' you can get from a clever lawyer. Make the big end of town and business pay their fair share and they won't have to keep chasing the worker, retiree or pensioners with more tax than we can deal with. AND LEAVE INHERITANCES ALONE!!!!!!!
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    12:11am
    Jeez -and the catch-cry over Labor is that they tax you to death... now it seems the LNP want to tax you even longer... (as long as it doesn't affect them, of course)...

    What's the difference between government and a whore? A whore stops f**king you when you die.... and at least a whore has a vested interest in keeping you alive....
    Fuzzy
    22nd Aug 2019
    9:39am
    If Australian politicians are serious about saving our taxes for the sake of the economy then start considering your position as this. You put your hand up for the job. You were lucky enough to get the job you wanted because there were very few applicants. You were elected by Australians. It is a job. Once you have departed that job you are once again a member of society. You should not have any parliamentary privileges bestowed upon you. You should not be eligible for an outlandish pension and there should be no ongoing benefits funded by taxpayers. Once you depart politics you should resume your place in society. Get another job, or retire with the same entitlements of every other worker leaving the workforce. This would certainly improve the coffers. Capital Gains Tax should also be considered in conjunction with Superannuation. Older Australians did not have Superannuation and some hold very small amounts to bolster retirement. They may however had made good investments which they considered to be their retirement funds. The amount of Superannuation held should be taken into account and the Capital Gains Tax
    levied should be instead be mandatorily paid into that person or persons Superannuation
    account which would in turn reduce pension payments.
    Farside
    22nd Aug 2019
    3:32pm
    interesting idea to redirect Capital Gains Tax into that person or persons Superannuation
    account, but why should CGT be treated differently to other taxes?
    Fuzzy
    22nd Aug 2019
    9:39am
    If Australian politicians are serious about saving our taxes for the sake of the economy then start considering your position as this. You put your hand up for the job. You were lucky enough to get the job you wanted because there were very few applicants. You were elected by Australians. It is a job. Once you have departed that job you are once again a member of society. You should not have any parliamentary privileges bestowed upon you. You should not be eligible for an outlandish pension and there should be no ongoing benefits funded by taxpayers. Once you depart politics you should resume your place in society. Get another job, or retire with the same entitlements of every other worker leaving the workforce. This would certainly improve the coffers. Capital Gains Tax should also be considered in conjunction with Superannuation. Older Australians did not have Superannuation and some hold very small amounts to bolster retirement. They may however had made good investments which they considered to be their retirement funds. The amount of Superannuation held should be taken into account and the Capital Gains Tax
    levied should be instead be mandatorily paid into that person or persons Superannuation
    account which would in turn reduce pension payments.
    jaycee1
    22nd Aug 2019
    10:45am
    They complain about people getting pensions and now they are complaining about people getting an inheritance that would quite possibly stop them needing to be paid a pension!!!!
    Seems like you just can't win!!!!!
    TREBOR
    22nd Aug 2019
    7:33pm
    That's the aim ....
    Oma
    22nd Aug 2019
    10:53am
    Inheritance does not belong to a government or the country. It belongs to the family that has acquired it during their lifetime. Taxes have already been paid and will probably be paid again at some stage so leave it alone. Do the people who have researched this not have anything to inherit? I am sure that if they have they would not be encouraging the government to create an inheritance tax. I for one would be very sad if my children aged between 48 and 39 would have to pay tax on what is morally theirs, earned by their parents. Besides the governments do not spend the money that we supply them well anyway so why give them more of our hard earned cash, Try not giving those who sit on their arse with their hand out to collect welfare so much for doing nothing.
    OnlyDaughter
    22nd Aug 2019
    11:59am
    How damn well dare they suggest this. Put forward by this greedy loony political party toe dipper to see how we oldies react.The answer is no, no, no, no, no. I shall give everything away to my sole child before I die rather than give one cent to any government. Inheritance tax was removed decades ago in this country and any political party that produces its reintroduction should be destroyed at the polls. Any inheritance monies have been earned and tax paid upon.
    BillF2
    23rd Aug 2019
    11:27am
    This report is music to the government's ears. Instead of finding ways to create wealth and make the country richer and healthier, these poor deluded researchers at the Grattan Institute can only think of ways to increase tax. They obviously don't understand that the less money in circulation and available for spending, the weaker the economy and the greater unemployment. Putting everything in the hands of government leads down the path to totalitarianism. And who wants that? Maybe the Grattan Institute.
    Florgan
    26th Aug 2019
    4:14pm
    No inheritance tax
    we are already taxed enough
    Snowflake
    29th Aug 2019
    10:35am
    I don't see how having an inheritenace tax will help young home buyers. Does the government intend to pass that tax onto young people in some way? I don't think so, just another grab by governments for money that isn't theirs.