Coalition shifts tax burden from businesses to the individual

Parliamentary Budget Office report shows that the nation’s tax burden is now on you.

Coalition shifts tax burden from businesses to the individual

The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) released its 2017-18 Budget: medium-term projections report, which reveals how the Coalition plans to get the nation’s economy back into surplus.

The report shows that the Coalition has shifted the nation’s tax burden away from businesses and onto the individual.

The Government’s projected return to surplus relies on huge increases in personal income tax to make up for lost revenue incurred by the income lost as a result of the Coalition’s $65.4 billion company tax cuts announced in the May 2017 Budget.

The PBO predicts that the average personal income tax rate will rise from 22.7 per cent in 2016-17 to 25.9 per cent in 10 years’ time.

Whereas company tax receipts will increase from 3.9 per cent of the GDP in 2016-17 to just 4.2 per cent in 2027-28.

The PBO also projects that the rise in income tax is reliant on significant wages growth over the next 10 years, which will drive workers into higher tax brackets. The report makes this claim just five days since the phasing in of penalty rate cuts which began on 1 July, as well as a two per cent pay rise to politicians and the abolition of the temporary budget repair levy, which is equivalent to a two per cent tax cut for the wealthy.

The return to surplus will also be funded by the planned 0.5 per cent increase to the Medicare levy to be paid by all Australians.

Because of the Budget change that increases the rate at which the pension is reduced in the asset test threshold, the cost of the Age Pension is expected to remain stagnant – despite our ageing population.

Are you surprised that the Coalition has shifted the nation’s tax burden away from businesses and onto the individual? Is this something with which you agree? Is this shift, along with making the individual fund the NDIS and Medicare a sign of a lazy government? Or is it a sign of the times?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    pedro the swift
    6th Jul 2017
    10:19am
    Surprise, surprise.
    Typical of this gov. to slug individuals and favour their business mates and overseas owned companies. When will Aussies wake up and get rid of theses bloodsuckers.
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    10:31am
    Overseas companies have to pay tax from July 1.
    Gra
    6th Jul 2017
    10:43am
    Old Geezer - watch them find loop holes to avoid doing so.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    11:31am
    I agree with you Gra. Also, loopholes are rarely found but rather left there to find. It is no accident and lawyer once described this to me in detail with regard to home unit companies.

    The bigger issue is that which I have been writing about for some time and that is the shifting of money into the bank accounts of rich Australians and their big business interests. There are 2 sides to this:

    1. more and new taxes for workers
    2. tax cuts for the rich.

    Both are now well advanced with more to come. Whilst we have supporters on this website crowing 'lefties', 'Labor' and 'pink batts & school halls' who will defend what is happening in our country intelligent readers will already be aware of the above. It is what it is and no amount of BS and trolling can deflect attention from the game this government is playing on the country: wealth transfer on a massive scale.

    Be careful who you vote for folks as what you get will be your call.
    Pass the Ductape
    6th Jul 2017
    11:56am
    Dead right Gra. The only people who pay these taxes will be the consumer. What a pity the common worker doesn't have the ability to pass on their tax rises like businesses do!
    GeorgeM
    6th Jul 2017
    1:04pm
    You are right, Gra, the loopholes are the problem - both Overseas and Local large companies are avoiding paying reasonable taxes by exploiting these loopholes and will continue to do so.

    Also, rich individuals have also been avoiding taxes using weak tax rules, such as reported in the article link below:
    http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/meet-the-48-millionaires-who-pay-no-income-tax-not-even-the-medicare-levy-20170419-gvnkxh.html

    Only real solution is to impose a Minimum Tax, similar to Buffet's rule - say 35% tax on Gross income for Individuals, and say 20% on Gross Income for companies.
    arbee
    6th Jul 2017
    3:01pm
    Mick, we know from which side of politics you are coming from, you must be a close friend of Della Bosca
    Sceptic
    6th Jul 2017
    3:38pm
    What a farce, Coalition shifts tax burden onto you, is the click bait for this subject. Just how many subscribers to this sight actually pay any tax?

    The biggest earners pay the greater percentage of income tax, with more than 50% at the bottom end pay no net tax.

    Further the planned 0.5% increase in the medicare levy is for the NDIS. The I stands for insurance, and what other insurance do you have that you get the premiums for free?
    Retired Knowall
    6th Jul 2017
    6:59pm
    Site.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:23pm
    Don't vote for either side arbee but call it like it is.
    How about you argue the facts rather than play the man.

    The post below yours arbee makes me break into laughter. Whilst the rich do pay most of the tax their tax as a percentage of their earnings is much less....and now their 'companies' have gained a tax cut AGAIN. The ongoing game from the corporate sector And then there is creative accounting and offshore tax shelters. The PM has one and so do many many of our tax dodging countrymen.
    It is well understood that the DIVIDE between rich and poor has been growing for some time in this country but the rich continue to demand more. Enter the current government.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    8:30pm
    "Just how many subscribers to this sight actually pay any tax?"

    Every last one of them - you seem fixated on income tax as the only taxation strand.... get with the program.
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:19am
    Sceptic it will be the new land tax and increased GST and we will all pay it except those with company structures that can tax deduct it all.
    ex PS
    7th Jul 2017
    9:23am
    Your'e probably right TREBOR, most of us don't pay tax. But by increasing the tax on those who still work, the government is sending a message to them that there are a whole lot of Retirees out there who aren't paying their share. So yet again we will be targeted and those who are carrying the burden of the extra taxes will love them for it.
    It is all about this governments strategy of divide and conquer. While we fight amongst ourselves they get away with criminal mismanagement and corruption unnoticed.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    11:16am
    Sounds like a touch of confusion - I said everyone pays taxes - it's not just income tax... so the never-ending seeking by a few to split income tax payers and others with no taxable income (from real strands such as pension etc) is just a misleading attempt to divert discussion.

    Once again - for those who whine that the fattest cats pay the fattest tax - those fattest cats are always welcome to dump much of their income package so as to not have to endure paying their share.

    Let's see how many leap at that opportunity - and until they do - let them shut up about how they 'carry' the country.
    Anonymous
    8th Jul 2017
    4:04am
    It seems to me that poorer self-funded retirees - particularly those targeted in the recent assets test changes - are bearing a massively unfair share of the burden. I'm sure other groups are also being unfairly slugged - but while pensioners with a few hundred thousand in the bank received a small increase in their income, those hit by the assets test change:

    - lost up to $20,000 a year in pension income
    - lost up to $4000 a year in pension benefits (maybe will be restored to SOME of them in October, but that's an unknown)
    - will lose franking credits
    - will probably suffer loss due to the bank tax
    - possibly suffered due to reductions in rental income

    The notion that they have assets and can simply spend their capital is absurdly unfair because it suggests they should forfeit the benefits those savings were accrued for and simply hand their wealth back to the populace, while richer retirees retain the massive gains they made thanks to superannuation tax, CGT, negative gearing and other tax concessions - all of which add up to far more than the aged pension; and those who spent freely during their working lives are supported by the taxpayer.

    I have highlighted one group, but there are others suffering unfairly. This is just one sector that I see the government hitting very unfairly at this point in time. There is clearly a ''divide and conquer'' strategy in the government. They are pitting groups against each other in order to stop a popular revolt that would force them to change their policies.

    What we need to do is to unite the people in a popular revolt. Stop allowing the government to create division and work together for the benefit of society as a whole. We need an end to inequality. We need an end to unfairness. We need greater opportunity and incentive for people to improve their lifestyle, better education for people who don't yet know how, and better support for those who simply cannot. And we need to achieve debt reduction by ensuring that those who can most afford to pay - those whose lifestyle will be least affected by paying more - bear the burden. That's simple common sense. You cannot heal a sick society by attacking the victims. Nor can you heal it by attacking those who, despite the sickness, managed to achieve a position of modest affluence and have the capacity - if allowed to enjoy fair reward - to inspire others and show them how. The middle class must prosper in order that the lower classes can. The upper class will regardless, so it's the upper class who should sacrifice when things get tough. In the end, it's the upper class who benefit most from fixing the problem, and who have the most to lose in the long term by letting things get worse. So it's time for a united demand that the unfairness end NOW, and the rich be made to do what is ultimately in their best interests - carry the load.
    AutumnOz
    8th Jul 2017
    8:11am
    Good comment Rainey, especially the last paragraph.
    Let's hope everyone listens to the meaning not just the words.
    ex PS
    8th Jul 2017
    8:43am
    You are right TREBOR, I misinterpreted your statement on paying tax. Apologies.
    Well said Rainey.
    Old Geezer
    10th Jul 2017
    10:29am
    Rainey what a lot of rubbish those people who are no longer eligible for the OAP because of the assets test should never have been given the OAP in the first place. They have more than enough even with the cuts to their welfare to live very well indeed. If they are struggling then you don't have any idea what struggling really is at all. These people can afford to buy a new fridge if it breaks down whereas many people not on welfare but only just make ends meet each week can not.

    Good of the government for changing the assets test but a big negative for reinstating those benefits to these people. The only people that should get the benefits are those on the full OAP. There are many people worse off in society who get no benefits but have to pay full price plus extra to cover the benefits given to those who simply don't need them.

    You are right it is not a fair society at all where those who can afford it get welfare but those who can't stuggle instead.
    musicveg
    11th Jul 2017
    3:03am
    OG , my mum cannot afford to buy a new fridge, she may own her small house, but cannot afford maintenance. She lives very frugal, knocks back invitations to go out for dinner, does not go on holidays, and never even goes to a hairdresser. My dad was not educated enough to invest money for the future, and he never had superannuation because in those days most of the construction jobs he had,did not have super. He worked hard all his life and paid his taxes, coming from poverty as a child where their was not enough food on the table and managed to bring us kids up in middle class, but their was not enough money for retirement. So is my 80 yo mum supposed to sell her $350,000 house and live in insecure rental accommodation?
    The pension has to rise to lift pensioners out of a stressful life.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    4:00am
    My mum is dead now, musicveg, but her story was much like your mum's except that she was widowed very young. She had no education so struggled doing cleaning jobs all her life.

    I dragged myself out of poverty by working hard and saving, and I'm still working well after retirement age, but if I were not I'd be looking at trying to stretch well under $1 million to last me through up to 35 years of inflation. Not possible! Of course as my assets fell, I'd qualify for a part pension. And that's the problem OG is too shallow to even try to understand. It's NOT ABOUT AFFORDING A FRIDGE. It's about the economic consequences of dumb, short-sighted decisions that will further increase the cost of pensions.

    You would have to be half-witted to think that people are going to work hard and live frugally to gift their money to others and be worse off, in income terms, than pensioners until they blow their hard-won savings either enjoying a luxury cruise or benefiting strangers who didn't try as hard!

    Tens of thousands of retirees are spending on world cruises and bigger houses and millions of workers are saving LESS because there is no longer any benefit from acquiring assets unless you can achieve high wealth. Having $900,000 (for a home-owner couple) simply means you have to spend your savings for the benefit of others until your wealth shrinks enough to get the benefits someone with only $500,000 gets. So why bother to save $900,000? It's pointless. Therefore, the cost of pensions rises.

    Every financial adviser in the nation is telling the government and their clients that there will be more pensioners qualifying for higher pensions because of the assets test change. It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD. It's about economic management. And only a totally ignorant fool rants on as OG does about fridges and people having too much.

    In a fair society, those who work and save are allowed to enjoy the benefit. In our society, the rich are allowed to benefit. The poor are looked after - though inadequately. And the middle class are being stripped of everything they worked for - just because some stupid idiot dreamed up this ridiculous notion that it would be smart to take from one group of hard working savers and give to another group who are also more affluent by far than musicveg's mother, but don't have quite as much as the losers. Sadly, they didn't give musicveg's mother - who is genuinely needy - a cent extra. They gave $30 a week that was EARNED by 92,000 hard workers to people who already had $300,000 or more - and could very comfortably afford fridges. It was nothing more than an ill-advised redistribution of wealth that will drive the total cost of aged pensions higher.

    OG, I feel sorry for someone so shallow and ignorant that they can't grasp a simple concept - but it's because our politicians are equally dumb that we have an economic crisis. Abolishing the assets test would be the smartest money-saving move our government could make. Or at least sensibly gearing it to current investment return rates so that those who save are not worse off in income terms than those who don't. It would ensure people SAVE AS MUCH AS THEY CAN for their retirement, and pass on wealth to the next generation to ensure increasing national prosperity that will reduce the need for welfare.

    On the one hand you whine about people not wanting to work and on the other you claim those who do should give up all their earnings. Make up your mind, Old Fool! You make no sense at all.
    LiveItUp
    11th Jul 2017
    8:38am
    Rainey it is obvious that you continue to work past retirement age because the chsnge in the assets test disallowed you from getting the OAP and rightly so. If you have that sort of money you can look after yourself without welfare like the rest of us self funded retirees do. Everything you say shows your greed in trying to getwelfare not becauce you need it but because you think you are entitled to it becuase you worked and paid taxes etc. Well the rest if us self funded retirees worked and paid lots of tax too but we are not greedy enough to want the taxpayer to fund our retirement when we can do so ourselves.

    Every agrument you put forward shows your greed and nofhing more. So get yourself a Seniors Card and enjoy life instead of wasting it trying to get something that you don't need.
    musicveg
    11th Jul 2017
    3:20pm
    Bonny that is not what Rainey is saying at all. You just read into it what you want, he said everyone should have an incentive to save and pass on to the next generation. If everything they work hard for has to be spent before they die there is nothing left for the next generation to prosper and it keeps everyone in poverty. Rich get richer, middle class get poorer, the poor get poorer and then finally the rich will get poor to because no one can afford anything they make their money off. Every argument that Rainey says is correct and nothing to do with his greed quite the opposite.
    I feel sad for my mum who worked hard all her life and now cannot enjoy a little retirement, she feels it is so hard paying rates (just increased again) paying high electricity (she has to keep warm but never puts heating on in the day time, same goes in summer with air con), and can only afford her food (just) and a little petrol for her car. She has not been on a holiday in over 20 years. Wonder why so many pensioners get depressed.
    Anonymous
    15th Jul 2017
    1:30pm
    Thank you musicveg. I am so sorry for your poor mother - and the hundreds of thousands like her.

    Bonny, you are making a total ASS of yourself with your STUPID NASTY ASSUMPTIONS. Who the hell are you to assume that you know why I work. You could not be more wrong. I do NOT work because the assets test disqualified me from getting the OAP. I would not qualify under the old rules, and I work for the love of it. I would work if I were not paid. I am not wasting life. I'm enjoying work and the comforts the pay provides, but I am concerned that the assets test is wrongly hurting people who saved and many of whom DO genuinely need a part pension, and certainly deserve it. The assets test is driving welfare costs and taxes up, and only the very ignorant and dumb fail to understand the harm it's doing. Stop your simplistic nonsense and wake up to reality! Only the very dumb and the green-eyed justify an unjustifiable and economically unsustainable policy that is destroying our society.
    Charlie
    6th Jul 2017
    10:34am
    There's only two choices with our political parties and their both bad ones.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    12:00pm
    Only 2 chices because voters only vote one of 2 ways. So who is to blame?
    GeorgeM
    6th Jul 2017
    1:10pm
    Why do people remain blind to the power of their voting preferences?
    See below a suggestion which I have posted before to shake up the system even of you can't get your candidate to win:

    In view of the preferential voting system, after voting one for your "retiree supporting candidate", the NEXT PREFERENCE should go to the candidate most likely to challenge the sitting candidate, and the last to the sitting candidate - to make sure the latter loses. That should get rid of all sitting leeches also prevent / limit getting their fat pensions for life, then maybe they will start listening. The retiree group is large enough to make such a difference, especially in all marginal seats.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    2:16pm
    The best way to change the political system is to NOT vote for the same despots on either side of politics.
    When the bastards see that even their media propaganda machine is failing they will have a clear choice: change the way they behave or be kicked out....kicking, screaming and blaming all the way.
    Batara
    6th Jul 2017
    3:17pm
    Charlie, there might be only two viable choices (likely to form a government), but one is far worse than the other. Any senior person in our society who votes for the Liberals or the Nationals would have to have rocks in their heads. Labor might not be perfect, but it is streets ahead of the crooks in the regressive conservative coalition of big business coat tail hangers.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:25pm
    People have the right to vote for serfdom Batara. Some are too stupid to do the research preferring to believe the blatant lies and propaganda dished out to them at election time.
    The nation will get the government it truly deserves and we will all have to live with the fallout.
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:19pm
    Yes, I agree with you, George, put the sitting MP last.
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:22pm
    You're right, Mick. Let's all make a resolution to ignore the papers and carefully read all the parties' policies before voting.
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:22pm
    You're right, Mick. Let's all make a resolution to ignore the papers and carefully read all the parties' policies before voting.
    ex PS
    8th Jul 2017
    8:45am
    Good idea Triss, but do you actually think people will do this, even with the best intentions.
    Hobbit
    6th Jul 2017
    10:36am
    It's about time Multinationals started paying the amount of tax they are supposed to. Corporate greed is what caused the global financial crisis in the first place.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:27pm
    It will never happen under a coalition government Hobbit. This is rich man's government governing for the rich and taxing everybody else. Sadly some of us on this website are either unable or unwilling to confront the facts.
    Paicey58
    6th Jul 2017
    10:36am
    I noticed that you did not mention the company tax rate just the amount it will contribute to the gross domestic product (GDP). That is a bit deceptive if you are comparing each of them. Show us either both of their tax rates or both of their contribution to the GDP. Not one of each.
    arbee
    6th Jul 2017
    3:04pm
    This whole Life Choices newsletter is deceptive in the way in the way they describe most issues. They are very much slanted to the left of politics and always have been.
    arbee
    6th Jul 2017
    3:04pm
    This whole Life Choices newsletter is deceptive in the way in the way they describe most issues. They are very much slanted to the left of politics and always have been.
    Batara
    6th Jul 2017
    3:19pm
    arbee, I do not follow how you arrive at your conclusion of bias. It became no clearer the second time you posted your baseless accusation.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:29pm
    Deceptive arbee? Your posts are full of that as you have a preconceived idea and ignore the facts. Handy for the current batch but will drag down the country and in time turn it into a copy of the Land of the (not) Free complete with poverty. That sort of infuriates in a country like Australia.
    Gra
    6th Jul 2017
    10:42am
    It's just the same old same old - the jerks in power looking after their buddies in the big end of town, feathering their nest for when the electorate have had a gut full of their incompetence and lack of empathy and finally give them the boot. If only we could find some politicians with intelligence, morals and a backbone.
    grounded
    6th Jul 2017
    10:59am
    How easy it must be to judge 'Gra'....I don't see them as 'jerks' Gra.....just everyday Australians who possess an interest in wanting to serve, an offer something to their country....be they of whatever persuasion.

    I fully believe they are incredible....to offer themselves for public service, knowing Australians to be the whinging, whining back stabbing judgemental mob they are.

    You should jump up yourself Gra...and show them how it is done....anyone can do it!
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:19am
    None so blind as he who will not see....
    Anonymous
    6th Jul 2017
    11:58am
    More like (for the most part) privileged Australians with no conscience who have seen and seized an opportunity to feather their own nests at the expense of the rest of the nation, Grounded. Please don't try to defend them. There are simple, sensible fixes for our economic woes but these greedy, self-serving pollies just refuse to consider them. It's far too easy to screw the powerless!
    Pass the Ductape
    6th Jul 2017
    12:02pm
    'Just everyday Australians who possess an interest in wanting to serve'.

    Serve who 'grounded' - the public? Surely you jest! Most of us are awake to this nonsense.

    Trebor is so right!
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    12:04pm
    The name nobody dares use is the correct one: CLASS WARFARE.
    ghoti
    6th Jul 2017
    12:28pm
    grounded:

    "just everyday Australians who possess an interest in wanting to serve" - really? Some are, but others are corrupt, self-serving, and in it for the attention, money, perks etc. They are doing a job, like we all do or did. How is working as an MHR, say, or a Senator, "serving" any more than someone working as a nurse, teacher, paramedic or fish and chip shop worker? This notion of "service" is put about by pollies anxious to keep, even increase, their sense of entitlement.

    I agree with Gra's description of "jerks in power looking after their buddies in the big end of town, feathering their nest for when the electorate have had a gut full …" Not all of them are jerks, of course, but the LNP as a whole has zero observable empathy for low-paid workers and pensioners. It is not part of their ideology. Why else would they cut penalty rates and give themselves a pay-rise at a time of record company profits and low wages growth at the same time removing the budget repair levy on wealthy Australians? Now we find that the $65B tax break for businesses is being paid for by increased income tax paid by ordinary Australians - incredible! Why do we let them get away with it??
    Patriot
    6th Jul 2017
    1:28pm
    gothi,
    I agree with grounded that these Public Servants are Australians who "Want to Serve".
    It is WHO they want to SERVE where the problems start!!
    We - the Aust tax payer - are funding their "Desire to Serve" whilst they are SERVING the FATCATs who are part of the "Invisible Government".
    So, in effect, rather than "serving us" our representatives are ENSLAVING us!
    Your general discussion is indeed correct and "Grounded" is just NOT WANTING TO SEE as suggested by TREBOR.
    OR is he/she from "Troll Land"?
    arbee
    6th Jul 2017
    3:08pm
    Tell us Mick, were you previously a union organiser hell bent on creating strikes to create better wages for workers that would eventually leave them unemployed after their jobs went overseas. You certainly come across as that type.
    grounded
    6th Jul 2017
    3:42pm
    Well...that stoked along a bit of debate....which is a good thing. Regards to all.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:33pm
    Your postcode arbee? You job description? Refusal to comply? No surprise.
    Your ignorance avoids mention of the fact that I support NEITHER SIDE OF POLITICS. Whilst I share some ideals on the Labor side of the divide and try to argue the facts which are avoided by those who post pro coalition propaganda I AM NOT A LABOR SUPPORTER.
    Unions? Yes and no. No when they behave badly and yes when they stick up for workers being done over by the rich man's system.
    Before you post any more crap you might want to take a job in the hospitality industry. I'd like to see you survive for even a week....but what do you care when class warfare rolls over its victims.
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:28pm
    Can't agree with you, grounded. Think of the recent cut in pensions and almost immediately a large salary increase for federal MPs and bureaucrats.
    arbee
    7th Jul 2017
    12:32am
    Mick, at my age now I may not survive a week in hospitality, but when I was a lot younger I came to the city dead broke, uneducated, but with a strong will to work. Many weeks I worked in excess of 100 hours per week, sometimes 36 hours at a time. In time I built up a transport business that employed up to 30 people. It was a good solid business when I sold it quite a few years ago. So don't ever try to imply I wouldn't know what hard work was. Oh yes before coming to the city I came from a rural background where 16 hour days, 7 days a week was the norm. Back then this was a lot better country because if you were prepared to work and take a chance you could achieve success, now the odds are stacked against it happening.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    11:24am
    Not questioning your work, arbee - but how do you come to the conclusion that unions created strikes to get better wages that ended up sending jobs offshore?

    Don't you know from your own personal experience that incomes for the majority always trail cost of living increases and the whole discussion of wages is about catching up all the time? Can you argue that the current costs of living are not forever accelerating out of the reach of most incomes, with privatised roads, power and such shooting through the roof to feed government cronies and mates? And that therefore there is a never-ending NEED in this country to, firstly, stop cost of living increases, secondly, block offshoring of work and incomes for the excess profit to companies etc, and thirdly, properly tax companies and corporations that wish to operate here.

    If left unchecked, the current situation is crying out for a controlled economy of either 'right' or 'left' - neither of which anyone wants - but while ever the robber barons are permitted to run free and rob at will from a helpless populace, it is inevitable that one day that populace will rise in its righteous wrath and smite those very usurers. That is a clear lesson from history.

    And yes - above is correct that this nonsense is about governments continuing to play the old 'divide and conquer' - setting one social group against another all the time while slinking away with the goods.

    Only 36 hours? My longest unbroken stint was 72 or more.... you lazy git....
    thommo
    6th Jul 2017
    10:50am
    Let's get rid of this govt asap....
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    11:09am
    Why? Nothing to replace them with so better the mob you know.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:19am
    Get rid of the lot and start again at grassroots...
    Anonymous
    6th Jul 2017
    11:59am
    Boot them out. At least that will send a message to whoever replaces them that they can't continue abusing their power forever.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    12:05pm
    Wow thommo...and I always thought you were a disciple.
    GeorgeM
    6th Jul 2017
    1:11pm
    Agree, thommo, have indicated a method for achieving this in another comment above.
    Oldman Roo
    6th Jul 2017
    2:17pm
    O.G. None of the alternatives could be any worse and let me tell you , our present LNP Government are the most incompetent charlatans in history .
    Anonymous
    7th Jul 2017
    11:21am
    You got that right, Oldman Roo. It's hard to imagine how we could possibly do any worse!
    Old Geezer
    10th Jul 2017
    2:58pm
    Rainey we could do a whole lot worse especially with a Labor government in power. Debt will go into overdrive for a start. High debt is a bigger enough burden now without what Labor will do to it.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    4:06am
    The LNP has driven far greater debt increases than Labor ever did, AND caused greater poverty and social problems as well.

    I dislike both parties, but the LNP is by far the worst at economic management - as recent spiralling debt proves.
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    11:01am
    Good far too many people claiming dedications that they should not be.
    Anonymous
    6th Jul 2017
    12:00pm
    Yes - all the fat cats and multinational corporations dodging their obligations, but they are the ones this government is favouring, rewarding their criminal greed.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    10:56pm
    I'd like to dedicate this Oscar for Best Performer of 2017 to my anti-mentor and dog end in my beer can, the stone in my left shoe ..... Old Geezer....

    Without him I could not possibly shine as THE finest example of a contributor to YLC and other fora.. and it is entirely due to his mentoring at every step of the way that I have achieved the heights I have... take a bow, OG..... and here... YOU keep the Oscar!

    Now THAT's a dedication.......
    disillusioned
    6th Jul 2017
    11:15am
    How can these pollies slug US while ramping up their own "nest feathering" through wage rises and increased perks? THEY should be setting an example and donating some of their humungous salaries to charity or some welfare services. And what about all those offshore companies who benefit from Australia's natural resources but pay little or no tax? SHAME on the whole lot of them!!
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:30pm
    They are setting an example, disillusioned...a bad one.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:18am
    It is symptomatic of government not only lazy but run by lobby groups and donors...

    Like everyone else, I wouldn't mind be asked to help the nation out - but that load - dare one say that Lifting - needs to be shared evenly and not just on the majority with the least. As an old guy once said to me - if instead of using National Servicemen, the government had asked for recruits to go to Vietnam the same as Korea, the enlistment offices would have been flooded. Just another lazy option to go NS.

    That includes politicians exercising a little austerity for themselves and recognising that their pay package is already the second highest in the civilised world - and that doesn't include all their perks as well.

    Enough of the Atlas imitation by the poorest - let's see a little lifting from the fat cats - or you may see Atlas shrug here.... and the mighty toppled....
    Old Man
    6th Jul 2017
    11:33am
    Lies, damned lies and statistics. This article suggests that PAYE workers are going to pay a higher tax rate when, in fact, they will be paying the same rate as before but because of wage rises some will move into a higher tax bracket. Just to clarify that, these are the tax rates for PAYE so if a person earns between $37001 and $87000, there will be no change and this is the group where the average employee sits.
    Financial year 2017–18
    Taxable income Tax on this income Effective tax rate
    $1 – $18,200 Nil 0%
    $18,201 – $37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200 0 – 9.65%
    $37,001 – $87,000 $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000 9.65 – 22.78%
    $87,001 – $180,000 $19,822 plus 37c for each $1 over $87,000 22.78 – 30.13%

    I heard on the ABC that PAYE workers will soon be paying half their income in tax and this could not be further from the truth. Even if someone is earning over $180,000pa the portion of income above that figure will only attract a tax rate of 45¢ for each $1. We also hear that people are loath to work overtime because "it all goes in tax". Again, this is wrong as a worker would have to earn $3461pw to attract the 45¢ rate which means that even then more than half of the pay returns to the worker.
    Anonymous
    6th Jul 2017
    12:03pm
    Yes, well, the LIE about paying half their income in tax came from none other than an inept self-serving treasurer and was used as an excuse to bash pensioners.

    The reality is that not changing the tax rate as inflation drives wages up IS a tax increase. To avoid an increase, taxes need to be indexed to match wage rises. Thus, the article is absolutely correct.
    Kathleen
    6th Jul 2017
    12:07pm
    That is still a lot of tax for people on the lower wages. It probably is easier for wealthier people to have claims that would lessen tax as well. Good that you put the rates up though as it can be seen how much people pay. The more take home pay the lower income workers earn is good for the economy because they distribute all their money back into necessities especially. Lower income families do get a top up from the government nowadays which is not a waste because they spend it rather than saving.
    Middle income families who get no top up from the government are probably struggling. We were in this position and we found it very hard especially in the early eighties.
    Old Man
    6th Jul 2017
    12:57pm
    Thanks Rainey, I have never heard the Treasurer make that statement nor have I seen it in print but if you say so then it must be true. When you say that tax rates need to change as wages rise, do you perhaps mean that the threshold for tax rates needs to be adjusted to cover "bracket creep"?
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    1:11pm
    The simple reality is that a person on the top marginal rate can afford it and still have massively more discretionary income.

    I said it yesterday - tax Harry Fudger $2Bn out of his $5Bn abnd he's still got $3bn to play with - tax Jo Bloggs on $45k $2Bn and she's in debt for generations and climbing...

    Get used to it.... let those who benefit most pay most - it certainly does them no harm, unlike tax rises for the lowest paid....
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    2:48pm
    You forgot to mention that with the low income tax rebate you don't pay any tax until your income is approx. $21,000 pa even more for those over pension age with the seniors rebate. So a couple doesn't pay any tax until their income is well over $40,000 and a lot more if they get the seniors tax rebate as well. A family will get more welfare money from the government than they pay in tax until their is income is over $60,000 too.

    So you have to earn a good income before you pay tax in this country.
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    2:51pm
    Rainey add in 10% GST plus stamp duty on such things as insurance and people are paying over 50% in tax and that's half their wages.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    8:35pm
    Be sure you separate income tax from the overall taxation, OG - as I've said many a time - EVERYBODY pays taxes, so don't whine to me that the people whose incomes are way over the top have to pay a higher rate on their income tax. They still have far greater discretionary income than anyone else, so they can't whine about being given that kind of sweet ride within this nation and economy.

    When you add up GST and other taxes out of a Pension, for example - the rate is MUCH higher than company tax.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:38pm
    Be fair Old Man.
    The tax scale masks the fact that not many average citizens will get anywhere near it and that those who do find themselves in this tax bracket pay a fair bit to set up all sorts of schemes of arrangement to get their money out of it. This is not exactly new news.
    Not sure where your allegation of PAYE taxpayers paying half of their salaries in tax comes from. Do you have a link as I think you do not have this right?
    Old Man
    6th Jul 2017
    9:58pm
    Sorry MICK, if I knew what I know now I would have taped the ABC, converted it to an MP3 and set it up for all to hear. Seems Rainey has heard it as he has made the claim that it was the Treasurer, perhaps the ABC quoted the Treasurer.

    I can't remember the program but it was also said that the reason for shark attacks becoming so commonplace on the north coast of NSW was that global warming had killed off the Great Barrier Reef and the sharks had to move south to follow the fish which could no longer live on the reef.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:02pm
    Nah, nah - it's the offshore business people who go swimming that are carrying out all the shark attacks.. not content with being land sharks and gutter snakes, they insist on using the water as another medium for getting their pound of flesh and blood... watch out for the deadly attacks of sea snakes increasing...

    Amazes me - just reading a book on the Battle of Santa Cruz, in which the USS Hornet was lost in late 1942 - even way out to sea the sharks seem to know there is easy meat to be had... they were attacking bodies put into the sea in sea burials straight away.. and in numbers... must have a kind of bush telegraph rather than random attacks taking place. There are countless other examples of shark pack attacks on survivors in the ocean... the USS Juneau, the USS Indianapolis... both in the deep ocean... makes you wonder what the hey all those sharks could be doing out there...

    Anyway - the word must have gotten around in the shark community that local surfers are easy meat...
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:04pm
    .. same as the word has gotten around that local residents are easy meat.....
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:29am
    Yes I agree Old Man. And if they saved the maximum into super that is only taxed at 15%. There are other ways of lowering tax available to PAYG workers. Most people simply don't want to work. Any excuse will be grabbed to convince themselves that they are better off not working.
    Anonymous
    7th Jul 2017
    11:19am
    Poor OG! Totally deluded and incapable of doing even simple math.
    First, the LOW INCOME folk also pay GST and stamp duty, and as they have to spend 100% of their income, it represents a huge tax for them. There are no concessions for seniors or low income earners that reduce that burden.

    Secondly, NOBODY on a high income pays anywhere near half their income in tax. They have to earn over $180,000 a year before the 47c rate cuts in, and it ONLY applies to income in excess of $180,000 - and ONLY taxable income, so they can claim all their CGT and negative-gearing concessions and business expenses and grey area expenses they can make look like business costs and a bunch of other concessions. Effectively, most would have the earn over $300K a year to pay 47c on the dollar on ANY of their income, and then only on a tiny portion unless their income is astronomical.

    GST and stamp duty impact only on the tiny percentage of the income that the rich have to spend on taxable or dutiable items, and since people on those high incomes don't NEED to spend any more than people on the basic wage, and invariably save a huge portion of their income, the GST and stamp duty hit is very minimal indeed.

    Oh, and then there's the exceedingly generous superannuation tax concession that costs the nation a fortune, loads the retirement income of the rich, and gives battlers NIL benefit for saving for retirement - sometimes even taxing them more on their retirement savings than they would pay on it if they were allowed to keep the extra money.

    Really, OG, you are showing gross ignorance or deliberate argumentative stupidity for political purpose.

    The rich are leeches - sucking the blood out of the working class and greedily demanding more and more and ever more, while condemning the rest of us to economic slavery. SCUM!
    Anonymous
    7th Jul 2017
    11:35am
    Rae, low income earners get no tax concession at all on contributions to super because their marginal rate is only 15% anyway. Many are actually penalized with HIGHER tax rates on what goes into super. The GST burden is much higher for those who have to spend all their income, and stamp duty and similar charges hit the lower income earners hardest.

    I don't believe there are more than a handful of folk who just don't want to work. I believe the system is stacked so heavily against the disadvantaged that all incentive is deliberately wiped out. Are you aware that the welfare system is specifically designed to discourage any effort to move out of it? We punish people very harshly for trying, and then wonder why they don't! It would be so easy to restructure the system to give people a hand up rather than a hand out, but our government has no desire to do that.

    I understand how it seems to those who have never really walked in the shoes of the down and out, but the usual judgments are dead wrong - and I speak from first hand experience of one who has walked the walk and DID pull myself up and reach almost middle class status - with kids in well-paid professions.

    Just one example few people know about: So-called ''child welfare'' workers were trained to understand that the more kids in the welfare system, the more staff Child Services need, so the more job opportunity and income available for employees. Thus, through the 50s to early 80s, and maybe beyond, they were told to find any excuse at all to remove kids from homes where parents lacked the resources to fight injustice. And they did! And those kids were abused and deprived and denied contact with loved ones and kicked out to fend for themselves at age 15 with nobody to give a damn what happened to them and nobody to turn to for help. And you wonder why SOME of them have no incentive to work and pay taxes?

    This is just one example. There are countless others I could quote if I had the time. And there are countless thousands of victims of these cruel and destructive policies and the greed and lack of integrity of those applying them. And it isn't the victims who should carry the blame for their status. Yes, some of them have given up - for good reason. Nobody who knows their story could possibly blame them.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    3:42pm
    Not only that - but this current insanity (I wouldn't label it nonsense) of 'use up your assets in retirement' and 'no right accrues of leaving an inheritance to your children etc' - leads us to a future society of only one thing - the rich will own everything and the poor will lick the crumbs off their boots as in days past.

    Anyone ever look at my analysis of the long term results of the Anti-Irish Laws around 1850? Forcing Catholics to pass on property equally to all sons instead of exercising primogeniture, meant that rapidly the landholding of the Catholics would be come small earn a less sustainable with each generation, and would thus inevitably fall into the hands of the rich Protestant minority.

    Same thing applies here.... force the many into a 'zero inheritance' mode and all property will end up owned by the rich with the money to buy. Add to that the current near-inability of ANY low earner to even consider buying property etc..... and you have a recipe for total dominance of the market by the rich.
    Anonymous
    8th Jul 2017
    8:21am
    Yes, Trebor. And if the government doesn't snatch your estate, then the lazy, greedy lawyers who cooked up disgusting ''Family Provisions'' laws that enable greedy and malicious relatives to challenge wills get it. One way or another, this government is determined to ensure that the working and lower middle class do not get to benefit from their enterprise and frugal living. Got to maintain and grow that class divide! Got to ensure economic slavery benefits the rich and keeps the poor firmly In their place.
    ex PS
    8th Jul 2017
    8:49am
    Just another strategy of the entitled to breed a new batch of poor who can be moulded into a slave class that will provide services for the rich foe slave wages.
    jackyd
    6th Jul 2017
    11:35am
    Higher tax burden, low wage increase, higher cost of living, greater public spending, 50% of the population on the government teat, high real unemployment, industry closing down, energy costs through the roof, lower education outcomes. .........hard to find anything positive happening at all.
    Oh yes...our political establishment and public service give themselves a healthy pay rise, in contrast that's something to feel good about.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:39pm
    So who voted for this government? The solution to all our problems or the creator of class warfare?
    Triss
    6th Jul 2017
    9:34pm
    Honest, Mick, I didn't.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    3:44pm
    I can safely say I didn't.
    Paulo
    6th Jul 2017
    11:43am
    Yet another poor qualty report from Mr Della Bosca
    The revenue from personal income tax has been about 3 times higher than that from company tax for some considerable time. The ATO report shows this. It also explains that the increase in revenue will be from increased wages. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT THE TAX RATE IS INCREASING
    ONLY THAT THE REVENUE FROM PERSONAL TAX WILL INCREASE. But never mind, stir up the ferals with false news and poor reporting and see their knee jerk reaction!
    Tom Tank
    6th Jul 2017
    11:52am
    This is classic right wing politics at play a la British Conservative Party's austerity drive.
    Cuts to the lower income while maintaining or even increasing the higher incomes.
    Blind Freddy can see the inevitable outcome of a slowing economy as the disposable income of the average person is reduced.
    Australia is facing a major challenge with so much of our wealth producing industry being shut down and only mining and agriculture left to carry that burden.
    We are being hoist on the petard of a political ideology that is blind to the real world and driven by people in protected positions remote from the harshness of the effects of their policies.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:40pm
    = Class Warfare whilst telling the troops about the problems of the country. Some born every minute.
    Kathleen
    6th Jul 2017
    12:11pm
    Did anyone watch the Press Club a few days ago when the Tax Commisisoner was the guest? WHat did you think of what he had to say about companies paying taxes in that 94% did actually pay tax? He said that was a good outcome!
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    1:12pm
    Question is - how much and what percentage?
    GeorgeM
    6th Jul 2017
    1:16pm
    Remember the ATO wants to praise themselves, and their yardstick is how much water they can collect using a bucket full of holes.
    They should be recommending the holes to be plugged / an alternative strategy such as a Minimum Tax as per Buffet's rule.

    However, I suspect their political masters don't want such smart suggestions so the only option is to vote them all out - see my earlier comment above how to do that.
    Kathleen
    6th Jul 2017
    2:05pm
    I am guessing no one actually watched it. I did not watch it all. My response was maybe he was counting those who submitted tax returns but were able to utilise the loopholes as he said they paid their legitimate taxes. I believe it is about the laws and how they favour big companies and super rich individuals. An example would be being able to cite one million dollars for an individual having their tax affairs managed.
    Patriot
    6th Jul 2017
    2:47pm
    I suggest the 6% that do NOT pay taxes are the FatCat-Corporations who divert all their profits to countries like Luxembourg where they pay just a smidgen of tax.
    Corporations like IKEA who manufacture in "Low Wage" countries, sell (on paper) their goods to Luxembourg and thip (after selling from Luxembourg to Aust) sell the wares to countries like Australia at highly inflated prices ensuring the profit margins is the "Absolute Minimum" so that no tax is attracted in our country!!!
    So they pay a Smidgen of tax on their huge profits in small countries like Luxembourg who - due to their size prosper enormously by such actions.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:42pm
    The tax commissioner NEVER said anything I can recall about multinationals and he NEVER said anything about companies paying the correct rate of tax. I suspect he knows and his lips have been sealed.
    AutumnOz
    6th Jul 2017
    12:30pm
    No I am not surprised that tax has been shifted to the individual and away from companies.
    I don't know enough about the tax system in all other countries of the world to be able to make a sensible comment as to whether this is a sign of the times.
    I believe this is a result of our lazy government measures as none of the ministers seem to be able to think clearly or foresee the results of any of their policies.
    floss
    6th Jul 2017
    12:32pm
    Right on the money Gra.You had the chance to vote out these lunatics at the last election and you blew it, the damage to Australia will take years to repair and it will never be the same for our kids.
    dstark
    6th Jul 2017
    1:01pm
    How many of you wingers have started a business by borrowing funds secured by your house, and then lost the lot because of ever increasing wage demands by those who think they are owed a job?
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    1:13pm
    None - next question........ if you picked the wrong business that's the chance you take, and wages to employees are but one factor. Many a one or two person business goes belly-up.....
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:46pm
    I have. I understand how tough it is. I understand about workers who do not value the job or what in some cases the boss has to do to keep them employed.
    What I do not enjoy is those who do very very well milking the system with their government. It is not new news that since the GFC remuneration of the top has been exponential. At the same the the same bastards have milked the system further with dubious deductions, schemes of arrangement, superannuation and offshore tax shelters.
    There are 2 side to every story dstark and you need to be fair and look at BOTH sides of this ledger rather than your own bank account. And if you cannot run your business at a profit you get out of business. When has it been other than that?
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:37am
    I have but it wasn't the workers demanding more money that got me. It was the 24% business rates the banks ended up charging.

    I think it will happen again to those who have borrowed against their home for an investment property loan.
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:23am
    I have, but it was corruption in government and bureaucracy that made life tough for me. The workers? I paid them much more than I had to and they rewarded me with loyalty and hard work that boosted productivity.
    Rodent
    6th Jul 2017
    1:26pm
    Wow OG is back !!

    Some early comments re this. Guardian published this story, so has Peter Martin in the Age, and Main article in The Australian. Its interesting to read the differences in slants. Scott Morrisson has commented basically saying Labor would be worse, at least that's what I think he said, but who would know? Facts sometimes get meddled up with emotions and also people who have a particular Polotical slant. Watch for people like PWC to comment.

    May have something more useful to say later re this
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:48pm
    The debt under this government? No GFC in sight? No mention of debt any more. That leads us to the 'fake news'....better known as propaganda.
    Rodent
    6th Jul 2017
    1:38pm
    Some related comments from a reader of The Guardian-- right up OG's alley

    As a person trying to fund my own retirement, I have just been handed a 3.6% cut in income as a result of the company tax rate dropping from 30% to 27.5%, with more to come, on a day when politicians give themselves another 2%. It might sound like much, but when the cash rate is 1.50% it is nearly twice the income from cash has been taken from me while the Productivity Commission says no more jobs will result from cutting company tax.

    Not enough people, particularly those relying on franked dividends, understand this cut. Suppose my NAB shares return $644. I used to get the paid company tax back as a credit of $276, but now I will get $245, a drop of $31 in round terms. An overall decrease of 3.6%. It comes as no surprise to me that, as your article states, the tax burden is being shafted oops shifted to the individuals including retirees.
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    5:55pm
    If NAB keeps same pay out ratio then you will get more in dividends which will more than offset your loss in franking credits.
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    6:02pm
    Besides NAB's pay out ratio is less than 100% so there will be lots of franking credits available to keep the franking rate at 30% for many years to come.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:50pm
    ???? Are you kidding Rodent? Tax cuts on INCOME is a windfall for the well to do. Yeah, franking credits are down and you are not alone.
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:42am
    One thing I've noticed is that neither government party seems to be good at predicting consequences. It will be another shock when the dust settles on the past three years policies.
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    2:48pm
    Your should be more concerned about new banking tax on NAB as it is not a fair tax on people than the lower company tax giving you bigger dividends.
    Rodent
    6th Jul 2017
    1:46pm
    Opportunities abound Reposted NOT my words, but certainly the views of a Majority of Voters?

    Tax evasion is a known $100+ billion a year problem in Australia and yet the LNP claims that the alleged $4 billion a year welfare fraud problem is the cause of all our economic woes.

    Australia's $100+ billion a year tax evasion problem that the Liberals are too gutless to tackle:
    - Aggressive corporate tax minimisation costs Australia $50 billion a year
    - Costello's tax rorts for the wealthy cost the Australian Budget $56 billion a year
    - Same gas quantity: Qatar gets $26.6 billion in royalties and Australia gets $800 million
    - Five alcohol companies paid no corporate tax for two years, analysis reveals
    - Meet the 56 millionaires who pay next to no income tax
    - Whatever you do, don't mention the trusts
    - The $1.8 billion tax lurk that benefits the few at the expense of the majority

    If all paid their fair share of tax we wouldn't have a budget deficit and government services would be properly funded.
    Captain
    6th Jul 2017
    2:40pm
    Rodent, as I have said in this forum and others, a complete shake-up of Australia's taxation system needs to be done. that , A review of the entire taxation system, even at a cost at a cost of several billion dollars and over several years, with the following criteria:

    Call for submissions from interested parties
    Gather all relevant information
    DO NOT LET ANY POLITICIAN HAVE ANY INPUT ONCE THE REVIEW IS SET-UP.

    When the review is complete, Parliament is to implement all recommendations without change.

    I believe that if all companies and individuals were to pay tax on all gross income (with no allowable deductions) the tax rate for all would be between 15% to 20%. I may be wrong, however we need to start making the system better for all not just the lucky few.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    6:13pm
    Tax evasion is illegal. Tax minimisation, which you highlight, schemes are not.

    The black market where cash is exchanged for services provided is tax evasion. So this is an area that needs to be investigated more and stamped out.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    8:47pm
    My thought on offshore corporations intruding into this nationspace to earn a quick profit while paying next to nothing into this nation - is that they pay a set amount of tax on turnover. If that is wrong, and they can prove it - they may lodge a return to seek some back....

    When such a corporation sets up here - they do not invest in this nation - they invest in the opportunity to generate profit out of this nation - and they utilise offshore management, accounting, and so forth, they often import their own people thus cutting out local employment, they offshore their repayments to (most often) a sibling or parent company, and the only real avenue for gaining any tax revenue from them is via the income tax from the left-over Australian employees, who have no choice in the matter.

    Let me try again - when considering buying a hotel in Asia - the first obstacle is that you must have a 50% local owner partnership and must employ local labour... now I balk at the idea of getting some sweet Asian lady as a partner (attractive as the idea may sound) since to do so is virtually putting your head into the lion's mouth... and she can run the show and you may never know what is actually happening to your capital, cashflow and profits.... though I'm sure her family would be doing well out of it.

    Now if Australia enforced a 50% partnership with locals and enforced local employment including for management structures etc plus a requirement to raise funds from local institutions first, this nation would be assured of at least some return over and above the paltry amount recouped from income tax on local employees.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    8:52pm
    For those nay-sayers - a few months ago there was an international conference in Paris over international tax avoidance and its cost to the fifty odd nations attending...

    Haven't heard much about any results from that talkfest (nothing new there), but eventually any realistic nation is going to have to take steps to stop this massive haemmorhaging of its national wealth into the hands of corporate vultures established offshore... and such moves as this are very much on the cards - along with an outright ban on such corporation 'investing' in nations.

    The gates MUST be closed and locked and these vultures brought under control - or the developed world, which is the main cash cow for this 'global economy' due to its relative prosperity, will be bankrupt, and who can tell what the dire outcomes from that will be.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:53pm
    niemakawa: come on mate, are you that naive? Loopholes are not there by mistake. Most are left there intentionally as legislators are pretty bright people. If I were writing legislation there would be no loopholes.
    This is not about legal or illegal. It is about the intention of certain schemes and it is about time governments introduced terminology stating that if on all probabilities and scheme of arrangement was set up to defraud the Commonwealth then it should be disallowed. No appeal! Fixed!
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:12pm
    A challenge in the appropriate court should cost no more than $25 to apply and be heard... I've long said the same about defamation and such, with the rash of filthy reporting going on in the gutter TV news like ACA and TT.. and the only criterion should be truth in that case, and in the case of bad legislation, balance of probabilities as to real effect.

    As for 'privatisation' - no more government guaranteeing of those who 'buy' up public utilities such as roads, power etc - if they buy they operate on their own with no guarantee that the same 'government' that sold out to them will bail them out... you buy a business, you're on your own and the former owner doesn't have any responsibility to bail you out... unless you are one of the mates in on the 'privatisation' scam.

    Get thinking, people - beeziness eez good in El Granda Republica Da San Austrador.... Third World republic with an established group running it and controlling its finances and even robbing its treasury for themselves...

    How much do you have to see to understand that this is what we ARE - not what we are becoming...
    niemakawa
    7th Jul 2017
    2:52am
    MICK. I accept what you say. No I am not naive but was just pointing out facts. The laws obviously need changing so such schemes which are currently within the tax laws are abolished.

    The political will to make amends is not there , at the moment.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    3:46pm
    niemie - your position above shows the need to change the rules.... to lessen tax avoidance.... good to see you know that.
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    2:50pm
    20% tax on gross income would put the majority of companies in Australia out of business as most have margins less than 20%.
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:45am
    Only because they manipulate profits by taking personal drawings, raising directors' and executives' salaries and expense accounts, and buying things that are actually for personal use but claimed as business expenses, Bonny. Their true profits are well above 20%, but they manipulate to avoid tax. A tax on gross income would be harsh, but eliminate the manipulation that is making the tax system so unfair.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2017
    5:00pm
    Rainey the margin on petrol sales is lucky to be 5% and the trucking industry is not much better. 20% tax on them would stop the trucks and where are you going to fill your car?
    Anonymous
    15th Jul 2017
    1:36pm
    Petrol is a loss leader, DUNCE. Service stations use it to bring in customers who buy high profit items - like fast food, for example. You really do show your stupidity, OG.
    arbee
    6th Jul 2017
    2:58pm
    How critical was Leon Della Bosca when Labor was in power and giving away taxpayers money to everyone and running up huge deficits that were a major cause of of our current budget problems. You are so blatantly pro Labor in most of your articles. One day you might open your eyes and see what damage they have done to our country. Too many people expect a free lunch and then scream like hell when taxes have to be increased to pay for it. Yes I agree that politicians perks need to be cut as well, I think the wage they get is in line for what we expect them to do. Don't forget if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.
    Kathleen
    6th Jul 2017
    3:48pm
    You do know how much the deficit is now compared to when Labor was in? You do know that money saved us suffering the fate of other countries. People spent that money and that was important.
    I do not have a problem with paying politicians properly. They have long hours and they are away from family a lot so sacrifices are involved. If they are hardworking and honest there is no issue. Compared to CEOs and others in private enterprise they are not the highest paid people. They should however declare all their wealth and where it is etc. Some dodginess exists there!
    Where I do have a problem with LNP is touching our Medicare, underfunding some schools and overfunding others, not prioritising the environment by ensuring solar is installed, allowing suffering in Manus especially children, etc. they need to have a heart and compassion.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:58pm
    Come off the grass arbee. Della Bosca was a state MP. You are clearly smearing federal Labor which gave you the NBN, now destroyed by the current government. Labor gave you Gonski now partly agreed to by the current government to deflect attention from its implosion....but it did manage to give rich schools more money again. No surprise. Last of all Labor DID government during the GFC and was getting the economy back in the black. Look at the figures for yourself.

    What happened after Abbott got into office? The borrowing ceiling was removed and the last 2 coalition governments have more than double the debt.

    By all means throw mud at Labor with the facts...something you seem to delight in avoiding.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    9:14pm
    Grandma (my grandmother was named Kathleen, too) - if everybody who spent long hours and says away from family etc was paid like a politician, they'd be happy. Those poor darlings are NOT ceos of any business and government is not a business, they are public servants working to service, and their total salary package of around $2.5M a year is pretty adequate, thanks....

    I used to be on call 24/7/365 and often gone for days and weeks at a time... my kid's mother was in film and often started at 4 am and worked into the night six days a week.

    Don't talk to me about how hard politicians get it.... their life is easy and no harder than many others who don't get the sweet ride they do, and the $2.5m a year it costs for each one to provide all the wherewithal to do the job without drawing on salary - something nobody else gets - is more than adequate.
    KB
    6th Jul 2017
    3:11pm
    It is the the responsibility of the government to fund essential services such as health and NDISI am sure they could find the money elsewhere.
    MICK
    6th Jul 2017
    8:59pm
    If this government has its way and controlled both houses it would cut every service which affected average citizens and give even more money to the rich and their services. Is that not obvious?
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:51am
    Health and NDIS is just another way to give government sponsored tax dollars to private businesses.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    3:12pm
    “ as well as a two per cent pay rise to politicians and the abolition of the temporary budget repair levy, which is equivalent to a two per cent tax cut for the wealthy.”

    Strange it’s a levy when taken but a tax cut when the levy is abolished!!!

    “The return to surplus will also be funded by the planned 0.5 per cent increase to the Medicare levy to be paid by all Australians”

    Not all Australians will pay the levy, although they should regardless of income.
    The NDIS was not needed in the first place, now that it has been introduced of course the individual must pay for it. Services demanded by the public come at a cost . Expect the costs of this scheme to balloon substantially over the next few years. Most will go towards the administration of the scheme, that’s for certain.

    Australia is broke brought about by successive Governments providing far too many services (sweetners), which should be the sole responsibility of the individual. They made promises which they knew they could not keep, yet kept spending, spending, spending. Very irresponsible . The end result has now come home to roost and the remedy is not going to be very nice.

    I do not agree with targeting pensioners , whether self-funded retirees or not. Most have done the hard yards and deserve to be treated with respect. The pension is a right for all those that qualify , not welfare. Assets nor income should never be considered in the equation.

    Businesses support the whole tax system, without them people would not have any income. Businesses need investment so in some way tax incentives help.

    Yes the whole tax system needs an overhaul from head to toe. Services need to be reduced and streamlined to achieve better outcomes for the Nation. Neither businesses nor individuals should have more burden than the other. This is a job for our elected employees (Governments) to take on board. Do they have the political will to do so, that is the burning question?


    I vote for none of the 3 main political parties.
    Kathleen
    6th Jul 2017
    4:52pm
    Australia is not broke!
    Old Geezer
    6th Jul 2017
    6:08pm
    It will be soon if something is not done.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    6:19pm
    GrandmaKathleen22. Um!!
    AutumnOz
    6th Jul 2017
    6:44pm
    GrandmaKathleen22, our country is so close to broke it is no longer able to function properly. It is frightening.
    To help fix this lack of money more so called refugees were brought in to spend money and drive up the economy - instead of that most went onto welfare making the problem worse.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    7:17pm
    AutumnOZ. Yes our kindness to "refugees"has back-fired and we are now seeing the result. The economy has no chance of recovery or the increasing deficit reducing until this unrelenting immigration policy is abandoned. The masses always pay for failed policies of any Government and Australia is no different.

    Disaster is taking place in Europe and the so-called leaders are floundering, have no real answer to the problem that they have forced upon the citizens of Europe. As sure as night follows day civil unrest is beckoning and not too far away. This is the intended outcome of the Globalist EU and likewise Australia .

    All this talk about fixing the economy/deficit is to distract us from what is really happening to this Country.
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    8:56am
    It pretty much is broke. It's not the half trillion the public owes but the 2 trillion of private debt that is the killer. That and businesses fast off shoring jobs and a very scary current account deficit each month.

    We don't own our resources anymore so there is only tax now. Surely this was always going to be the consequence of selling everything that created dividends for Treasury.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    4:00pm
    Compare Singapore to Australia.

    https://www.guidemesingapore.com/business-guides/taxation-and-accounting/introduction-to-taxation/singapore-tax-system-and-tax-rates
    ex PS
    6th Jul 2017
    4:10pm
    Why, we are two totally different countries with two totally different cultures. comparing the two would be a waste of time and energy. How can you compare a country that's economy is based on digging things up and planting crops to a major financial center?
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    4:20pm
    Really what a surprise!!

    For you it may be a waste of time. Try to think laterally .That's your choice.
    Anonymous
    6th Jul 2017
    6:22pm
    Also Singapore doesn't have ridiculous welfare programs and ridiculous minimum wage legislation, union thugs that stifle productivity, make business uncompetitive, and encourages the socialist handout mentality
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    6:28pm
    Raphael, thank you for pointing out the differences, which ex PS failed to acknowledge.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    9:17pm
    No Rafe - it just has a massive divided between rich and poor..... largely because it has none of those things you mention.....
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:17pm
    Just an aside here - HOW do unions get to do anything in a business/financial economy? What Union are you discussing here... the Call Centre Union? The Cash Clerk Union? The Merchant Banker Guild? The Level-Entry Clerk Union?

    What The Fork are you talking about? You can't compare lemons (Singapore the failed economy due to economic division to the max) to gold purses (Australia - a nation of hard working, genuine souls whose only concern is a fair go for self and family and friends)...?
    ex PS
    7th Jul 2017
    9:28am
    N, R, thanks for proving my case. Best own goal on your part ever.

    6th Jul 2017
    6:09pm
    Well the increase in tax take will be as people move to higher earning tax brackets

    You socialists should be happy with that, right up your alley.

    Take from the higher earners to support welfare handouts , so why are you whinging
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    6:14pm
    The old favourite "Bracket"creep.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    9:18pm
    The higher earners benefit from there being lower earners to make their dividend, and they can afford it as above.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:21pm
    Let us explore this a little further...

    The higher earners generally employ people on lower earning in order to earn their higher earnings.... so without those lower earners there would be no higher earners.....

    I many years ago said I was happy to pay tax - in return for it I got Defence, warships, F-111s and such, and a heap of other things including pensions for my grandparents etc ... and it was only right that I pay my way like everyone else...

    Now the name of the game is that the more you earn, the less you feel you are obliged to pay in return for that golden opportunity..... it's called GREED.... and greed is NOT good.
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    9:01am
    Anyone paying much tax at all is doing very well in Australia now. That 40% at the top think they are badly done by but if they were trying to live on the median wage or less they would know what struggle was.
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    8:31am
    If you live within your means it does not matter how much you earn. If you have to borrow money for personal expenses then you are not living within your means. It is as simple as that. Most people themselves are ghier own worst enemy but blame society instead..
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:19am
    What utter rubbish, Bonny! People's needs vary enormously. Those who have sick children, suffer injury in an accident, have disabled children, suffer loss in a bushfire or flood, etc. often CANNOT AVOID debt. It's not their fault. When life thrown curved balls, some folk are simply not in a position to survive the crisis without going into debt. You are far too quick to blame people for their misfortune and that makes you a very cruel and nasty individual.
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    10:04am
    And goodness, anyone claiming ''it doesn't matter what you earn'' would have to be ignorant and selfish in the extreme. Living within your means is sensible, but if you earn a very low wage it may well be impossible. Food and rent prices continue to challenge low income-earners. Costs of many essentials are pretty much fixed regardless of your income. If you don't earn enough to cover the costs of those essentials. you have every right to blame society for your situation. Bonny, it's only simple for the fortunate. True, a lot of the relatively well-off live beyond their means and are their own worst enemies, but stop generalizing to condemn them disadvantaged. Our society will continue to deteriorate while nasty, self-opinionated people pretend hardship is the fault of the victims of a cruel world.
    Rosret
    6th Jul 2017
    8:55pm
    I don't think this is based on political party policy rather than who is Prime Minister. When Abbott was in the top job he flew the Catholic flag and so many of his policies reflected his background. Turnbull has a business background and his bent is to favour industry and has little empathy for the poor.
    Julia Gillard had a feminist slant, Bob Hawke a unionist bias etc etc.
    The key, I have decided in my later years is not to form an allegiance to any party but rather lobby your local parliamentarian to achieve your wants.
    For the last few decades they have adopted the USA electoral vote catching technique of trying to please the minorities to gain votes in marginal seats. Turn the tables and play their games - i.e. "What will you do for us to secure our vote in the next election?"
    Numbers do matter.
    musicveg
    6th Jul 2017
    11:15pm
    Organizations like GetUp and Market Forces are fighting for a fairer economy, we need a revolution of some kind.
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    11:27pm
    It's coming but it won't be nice. Politicians generally have betrayed the trust of the people and ignored us.
    TREBOR
    6th Jul 2017
    11:27pm
    I prefer the voting booth.... but if the worst comes to the worst..... choose your side carefully.... only one will win...

    What always struck me as interesting was that the police etc in Germany supported the Hitlerite revolution, and never said a word.... but at the same time they actively suppressed any similar movement from the majority at the bottom end - or the 'socialists'....

    IF Australians revolt - which side will the police etc be on? I get the feeling they are leaning more and more towards not actively oppressing the ordinary people (as they used to do here in NSW and elsewhere as a matter or course - any man on his own driving at night was fair game for ANYTHING - never forget that), because they have realised that there is enough crime out there to actively combat - REAL crime - so there was no need to go out and stop someone for not wearing a seat belt, and then accusing them of 'resisting arrest' or 'assaulting police' just to get the books up...

    Which way will they go? The police are one of the most Unionised organisations in this country.... will they beat on their own?
    niemakawa
    6th Jul 2017
    11:33pm
    TREBOR , a tough one. But hopefully they will also see through all the BS and support the people. As you have said there are 2 sides and whichever one is chosen by the indivdual then that person must take the consequences. I do not believe in sitting on the fence.
    musicveg
    7th Jul 2017
    12:03am
    I live in a small town and our local police found out about a young homeless man,the only homeless man in our town mind you,(only 25 yo with mental issues) so they went with overkill to pick him up from the bush. Helicopter, 5 police cars, more than 10 police plus 4 swat type police and a police dog. What a waste of resources for a harmless unarmed man. Was very sad but and heaps of people came to watch because nothing much happens in our town. So not sure about at least some of the police force, sure can't handle anyone with mental illness how will they be with a huge mob of angry rioters, use pepper spray or gas I guess.
    Rae
    7th Jul 2017
    9:04am
    No we are too apathetic and while fluoride is good for teeth it actually increases apathy. That's why Hitler used it in WW11.
    TREBOR
    7th Jul 2017
    3:55pm
    Sounds like you live in NSW Deep North, music... but of course that section runs on into southern Queensland as well.... out there they still have redneck magistrates who rob the poor as a matter of course and any 'new guy in town without a job' is a danger to society and is harassed and often fitted up or simply forced to leave.
    musicveg
    7th Jul 2017
    4:21pm
    Rae, I agree that fluoride is not good for the brain, a lot of research has been done, I filter it out of my water and use fluoride free toothpaste, have done for years.

    Trebor, no not NSW but Victoria, obviously they were using it as a drill practice or the like. He had family in town too, very bizarre incident.
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    8:26am
    Fluoride they put in our water is a big con to get rid of a toxic waste product which is not even good for our teeth.
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:17am
    My kids never had fluoride in their water nor in their toothpaste and now in their 40s, they all have perfect teeth.
    niemakawa
    7th Jul 2017
    12:03am
    Maybe the PM can follow the lead of President Trump and forego his parliamentary salary.

    Despite what one thinks of President Trump he believes in his Country and works for his Country. For me he is the Man of our Times , the start of a new beginning for the West.

    I support President Trump.
    ex PS
    7th Jul 2017
    9:30am
    Absolutely no surprises there.
    Anonymous
    7th Jul 2017
    11:01am
    Sorry niemakawa, but you've been deceived. I might have sympathized with your views until I visited the US and spoke with Americans and learned the truth about Trump.
    niemakawa
    7th Jul 2017
    8:10pm
    Rainey and what is the truth pray tell?
    niemakawa
    7th Jul 2017
    8:14pm
    ex PS you seem to enjoy making pathetic comments. By your name I assume you were a Public Servant in another life. What did you really achieve apart from sitting down all day twiddling your thumbs?
    GeorgeM
    7th Jul 2017
    9:53pm
    On this and several other things, Trump is clearly seeing the needs of people today better than Turnbull, hence his victory in the US elections. For example, today's Sky News says:

    "Mr Turnbull wants a strong statement from the G20 on free and open trade, as Mr Trump brings with him an 'America first' stance.", and
    even Kevin Rudd, the pretend "Labor" ex-PM said:
    "Former PM Kevin Rudd told the BBC there were 'deep pressures' on global free trade.
    'If we end up in a trade war through tariff action and counter-tariff action , that spells bad news for growth and bad news for jobs,' Mr Rudd said.

    Our leaders have been oblivious to how jobs have been destroyed here by Outsourcing to low-wage countries, shutting down of manufacturing, and 457 visas helping foreigners get the jobs here - all to help companies make fat profits. BOTH LIBERAL and LABOR.

    We need a Trump-like force here with AUSTRALIA FIRST as the overriding policy, e.g. Tax all Outsourcing of jobs, give preference to local Products, stop 457 visas unless absolutely proven as necessary!
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:15am
    niemakawa, before you applaud Trump, look closely at his health care bill. It will make health care a luxury that only the richest Americans can afford. It enables insurance companies to deny cover to - for example - a woman who had ever been pregnant, because having used your reproductive system means you have a pre-existing condition that makes you potentially a poor risk!

    Parents who give birth to a disabled or sick baby or whose child is struck down with a serious illness simply go bankrupt if they are not rich. Similarly anyone struck down with cancer or heart disease. I met an American who was billed $10 million for a 2 month stay in hospital to treat cancer.

    There are thousands of similar exemptions. Health care in America has always been unaffordable, but Obama did improve it with Obama-care. Trump is hell-bent on reversing the improvements and making it less accessible than ever before.

    I will say that Trump's proposed tax reforms are probably beneficial, but they will never get through because if he were to explain how they actually work, the wealthy would reject them. The poor are currently rejecting them because they don't understand the benefits for them, and Trump can't explain them because the rich would revolt if the truth were clear.

    We DO need an AUSTRALIA FIRST policy. That part of Trump's policy I'll agree with, but the implementation is the issue.
    Mutley
    7th Jul 2017
    6:11am
    What we need is another "Committee" to investigate LOOPHOLES in the tax system. Maybe even a "ROYAL COMMISSION".( LOL) No matter how you slice it, the individual taxpayer will always carry the burden.
    niemakawa
    7th Jul 2017
    8:15pm
    What we need is real action. Gabfest time is over.
    Captain
    8th Jul 2017
    10:03am
    Forget the Royal Commission, they are generally very expensive and any findings are not binding.

    What we need is a complete overhaul of our tax system (as written in an above comment) and we need it to be a completely independent panel with input invited from all AND with no input from politicans and the privisio that all recommendations be implemented with no govt changes to be allowed for at least 10 years.
    Rodent
    7th Jul 2017
    8:17am
    Dear Mick

    I refer to your post on 6/7 as follows- ???? Are you kidding Rodent? Tax cuts on INCOME is a windfall for the well to do. Yeah, franking credits are down and you are not alone.

    The Item I posted was not written by me, it was from a comment in a Guardian Article.

    It was a tease to see what OG thought about it, and he did comment, twice
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    2:45pm
    OG is right you only told half the story whereas if you get paid dividends you will be better off not worse off with lower company tax rates.
    Anonymous
    10th Jul 2017
    9:08am
    Keep dreaming, Bonny. You probably also believe companies will employ more people What an idiotic notion! Struggling small businesses with small profits and proprietors working hard need more staff, but a tax cut won't help them because they don't make profit so they don't pay tax! Profitable companies that benefit from a tax cut already hire as many workers as they need to produce and service their customers. They will NOT hire one more than they need - tax cut or none. The whole flawed theory is peddled to gullible fools as an excuse for what was never conceived as an economic stimulus - but rather as yet another step in social engineering to suppress the masses and boost the coffers of the rich.
    Old Geezer
    10th Jul 2017
    1:52pm
    Rainey I can't see anywhere that Bonny mentioned anything about more jobs. If companies pay less tax then they make more money and more money is then returned to their shareholders. A lot of these shareholders are retired people who will have more money to spend in their old age which helps stimulate the economy. So it does not matter if the extra money goes into more jobs or big dividends for shareholders it will stimulate the economy one way or another.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    4:04am
    Spoken by the greedy investor whose only concern is his own wealth! OG, your selfish character is showing.

    The GOVERNMENT said the tax cut was to create more jobs. Of course you are right. It won't. It MIGHT create more dividends for the well-to-do. I WILL create higher incomes for the greedy overpaid directors and senior executives. It therefore WILL increase inequity, social problems, and economic demise. Well done for recognizing that impact - but please stop trying to justify further indulgence of the rich.
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    10:36am
    Rainey I am neither greedy or rich but thankfully I do know my financial stuff.
    Rodent
    8th Jul 2017
    4:21pm
    Dear Bonny earlier today you said this in reply to comments I posted, and reposted further comments to Mick -you said "OG is right you only told half the story whereas if you get paid dividends you will be better off not worse off with lower company tax rates.

    Firstly what I posted using the NAB Example was NOT created by me- go back and read again

    IF and ONLY WHEN the Company tax rate for BANKS changes from the CURRENT 30% down to 25% then the total income for each $1000 dividend paid will be REDUCED as follows

    30% Tax Rate Dividend =$1000 - Franking Credit =$428.57 Total Income = $1428.57
    27.5% Tax Rate Dividend =$1000- Franking Credit =$379.31 Total Income = $1379.31
    25% Tax Rate -Dividend = $1000 - Franking Credit = $333.33 Total Income = $1333.33

    The Nett effect (as detailed SPECIFICALLY in the examples above show) is that REDUCING Company Tax Rates from 30% down to 25% , as proposed, will result in the A LOSS of 7.14% of their Total Income for a Person holding Bank Shares .

    This is what will ACTUALLY happen with the Reduction in the Company Tax Rate NOT what you believe, or have said in your post. The Liberal Party are pushing out the BS that says Dividends will increase because the Company Tax rates are being reduced- All the other facts simply don't support this statement, in fact many other factors indicate the Bank dividends are more likely to either stay about current levels, or more likely reduce slightly
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    7:38pm
    If a company pays less tax than it's profit increases so if a company plays out 80% of it's profits then the dividend will increase if the payout ratio is the same. Hence increase in dividend not just a decrease in franking credits. Also if a company has been paying out less than 100% of profits they will have franking credits available to continue paying out dividends with 30% franking for a few years. Companies rarely decrease their payout ratios because the market see it as a negative and punishes their share price. Many companies with have higher dividends and 30% franking for many years.

    So a lower company tax will be a good thing for shareholders especially in short to medium term.

    I'm looking forward to a better income from my shareholdings not a reduced one with decrease in company tax.
    LiveItUp
    8th Jul 2017
    7:44pm
    I will also have a good look at company accounts looking for stocks that have large excess franking credits on their books. They will continue to pay 30% franking and may also offer opportunities for low income tax payers to make money from these franking credits.
    niemakawa
    8th Jul 2017
    7:55pm
    Some interesting articles ( for me anyway). You may care to read them.

    http://theconversation.com/what-economists-and-tax-experts-think-of-the-company-tax-cut-72198

    http://www.investors.asn.au/education/shares/understanding-shares/franking-credits/
    Adrianus
    9th Jul 2017
    8:28am
    Rodent, it's back to the drawing board for you mate.....and the dentist to extract that gold tooth. lol
    Alexii
    9th Jul 2017
    11:22am
    I'm not at all surprised. Businesses, especially big businesses, are friends of government. They will continue to pay minimal tax or no tax as there will always be loopholes for them to legitimately avoid paying tax. Of course it's completely different for the typical low and middle income people who just have to pay their income tax and GST. The latter is also unavoidable for people on the lowest of incomes - pensioners, part pensioners, self-hundred retirees, unemployed, disabled and so on - none of these, even if they pay no income tax can avoid paying GST on goods and services, unless they live solely on fresh fruit and veggies, never buy clothes nor any processed foods.

    10th Jul 2017
    10:29am
    The bottom line here is that it doesn't matter who pays what portion of the total national tax take. What matters is that everyone pays their share. If you earn an income higher than the average, then you enjoy a greater than average share of national wealth and should therefore pay a greater than average contribution to the society that endows you so generously. If your earnings are minimal, you should not pay tax. If you are disadvantaged significantly, the taxes others pay should support you to overcome that disadvantage - not necessarily to receive continuing cash handouts, but to receive health care, education, counselling, support, and cash sustenance until you can overcome your difficulties. The aged should receive a guaranteed generous income in recognition of their contribution to society over the years of their youth. The sick and disabled who cannot be cured should receive a guaranteed generous income paid simply because humans should have empathy. But everyone who can should be required to demonstrate a reasonable contribution to society - made in a manner that fits their personality, capabilities and personal circumstances.

    The problem we have at present is that people refuse to recognize the benefits society provides and refuse to accept any obligation to pay fairly for those benefits. The rich are quick to condemn the disadvantaged and assume they are lazy, but they are much quicker to claim entitlement to dodge their own obligations.

    People who enjoy benefit well above their level of need should pay tax accordingly. Until we adopt the notion that tax is a fee for enjoying social and community benefit and it must be paid in proportion to the benefit you enjoy - and thus in fair proportion to your income and overall wealth - social and economic health will continue to decline.

    Welfare is a component of social health and it should be paid for willingly by all who can afford to contribute. Likewise education, health care, aged care, community services... these are all essentials for a healthy society and those who benefit most from a healthy society - the richest - should pay according to the benefit they reap. They would not be able to enjoy their high income and liberal assets if social health deteriorated to where crime, mental illness, abuse, etc. was common. They seem to forget that. The greedy want it all ways. They want to enslave the underprivileged, but then implement cruel and inhuman conditions to protect their safety from civil revolt or other consequences of a sick society.

    We have an economic and social crisis. The rich will benefit most, in the long run, from improving the situation. The rich will suffer the least loss of lifestyle from an increase in taxes. Therefore, the rich should pay the cost of restoring economic and social health. That's plain common sense. Taking more from the poor can only exacerbate the problems. It will reduce spending power and circulation and thus stifle economic growth. It will increase sickness and thus health care costs. It will reduce the capacity of those most in need of education to access it. It will drive greater frustration and thus mental illness, addictions, and ultimately violence and crime. It boggles the mind that the privileged are so selfish that their greed-addled brains can't comprehend these obvious realities.
    Old Geezer
    10th Jul 2017
    10:38am
    Complete rubbish Rainey. The more you tax the rich the more they will hide their income and employ accountants to find loop holes for them. The more you give the "needy" as you call them the more they will want because enough will never be enough. We have a economic and social crisis because people are no prepared to work but simply pick and choose what they do. I know of one young fellow that works in a job that no one else wants to do and he now names his price. There are backpackers everywhere doing the work our young kids should be doing but they feel that such work is beneath them and collect welfare instead. There are lost of jobs but very few are prepared to do what it takes to do these jobs.
    musicveg
    11th Jul 2017
    2:54am
    Backpackers only work so they can extend their visas. They are paid slave labour wages, abused and used, have to travel huge distances and live in substandard accommodation in very seasonal jobs. There are not enough jobs for those who want to work, so OG stop mentioning that there are lots of jobs, when so many manufacturers have gone overseas etc. Those on welfare spend all their money and keep the rich earning money. Think about it, they pay rent, they buy food, and very little is left over to improve ones life.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    3:40am
    OG can't think past his own greed and selfishness, musicveg. He has no empathy and no comprehension.

    Fact is there are over 800,000 unemployed and only 125,000 vacant positions, and add to that over 1 million underemployed. But because OG knows someone who gets a job, he assumes everyone can. He just can't grasp the FACTS.

    Sure, there are some jobs people don't want to take, because in an environment of ultra-high unemployment, employers are able to exploit and enslave - and they do. And sure there are some who reject job opportunities - generally for very good reason, because they are physically, psychologically or practically incapable of performing that particular work. It has nothing to do with thinking the work is beneath them. It's about wanting a JOB, not a life sentence in hell.

    We sure do have a social crisis, because disgusting greedy, self-serving, ''I'm all right Jack, bugger you'' privileged pigs want to pretend the victims of the social problems the rich have created are to blame for everything. OG is typical of those who are destroying everything that used to be good in this society. Greed and arrogance ensures the problems won't be solved until it gets so bad that the victims revolt - and then heaven help any of the OGs who are still living!
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    10:15am
    As I have already said the majority of those 800,000 unemployed do not want jobs at all. Why work when the government will look after you? Yes we are now a welfare society which none of us should be proud of at all.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    10:43am
    List 800,000 vacant jobs, OG. Come on. Be specific. Place, nature of work, pay rate, conditions, contact phone numbers. Then list 1,000,000 opportunities for the underemployed to work longer hours. Let's see how many opportunities you can identify for these people you choose to slander.

    I'll monitor to see how many people apply and how long the jobs take to fill.

    Come on. We are waiting. Until you can, shut up and stop telling LIES to slander good, decent people who are suffering.

    Hardly anybody would want to live on unemployment benefits. Most don't want to live on a pension if they can avoid it. Welfare in this country is way too little for a comfortable lifestyle. But the jobs don't exist. The statistics verify that. The people you slander are decent, honest folk who just want an opportunity to work and earn a decent living.
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    11:18am
    Not too sure what you are talking about Rainey as those 800,000 unemployed don't want jobs so it's a good thing they are not available for them. Many people want to live on welfare as why work when you simply don't have to? Costs more to go to work in some cases then collect welfare. Just ask a mothers with a couple of kids needing childcare or someone that has to travel and pay tolls every day. Welfare is just too generous.

    Also I actually live on very little money for the basics of life myself so I people can live quite comfortably on welfare.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    11:41am
    Okay, names and contact details of all the unemployed you claim don't want to work, OG, so I can investigate their background, circumstances and true desires. Come on. FACTS instead of your vile, nasty, cruel, dishonest ASSUMPTIONS about people you don't know. List the phone numbers or email addresses of those 800,000 and let's see how many of them want to work and how many are living well on welfare. I'll assemble a book detailing their stories (without names) so everyone can get the true facts.

    Yes, it costs more to go to work than collect welfare in some cases. And then there's the cruel deprivation people suffer when they have worked all their lives and saved well and are expected to then fund the lifestyles of people who didn't try as hard. Our society has its priorities all wrong, but the solution isn't plunging more people into poverty. It's ensuring that people have better opportunities, better education, better support. It's building incentive and reward and mutual respect and empathy.

    So you live on little money. So what? That doesn't mean that someone with a chronic health condition or a disabled child or a wife with major allergies and special diet needs can live comfortably on welfare. That doesn't mean that someone with a large family can live comfortably on welfare when they have to pay high rent. That doesn't mean that someone paying a high mortgage on a house that needs major maintenance can live comfortably on welfare. Nor does it mean that someone living in a remote area and unable to afford to run a car can afford to live comfortably on welfare - let alone that people can afford the cost of job hunting when struggling on unemployment benefits.

    Intelligent people don't base assumptions on their personal situation or that of people they know. They deal in FACTS. Unintelligent people like you are destroying our society.

    Give me those names and phone numbers or emails so I can expose the FACTS.
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    12:04pm
    Unfortunately the Privacy Act does not allow me to give you any of those details unless I can get written consent from them for me to give them to you.
    Anonymous
    15th Jul 2017
    1:33pm
    How convenient that you have an excuse for refusing me information YOU DO NOT HAVE. You arrogant idiot! You don't know anything about the 800,000 unemployed. You just work on vile, nasty, idiotic, self-serving assumptions.

    The fact is that we have a massive unemployment problem in this country and only the most vile and disgusting would claim the disadvantaged don't want to work.
    niemakawa
    10th Jul 2017
    3:25pm
    Deficits are here to stay. Libs/Lab/Greens flying a false flag even to talk about surpluses. Get used to it with these 3 Globalist parties.
    Old Geezer
    10th Jul 2017
    4:36pm
    They wont have a surplus until they cut the welfare budget down to size. Far too many now on welfare in this country.
    niemakawa
    10th Jul 2017
    4:58pm
    OG that is the intention of Globalist governments not only in Australia, but in most Western societies. Surpluses will never return and such regimes.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    3:30am
    Yes OG, far too much welfare to the wealthy via a stupidly structured system that hands out to the wrong people, kills incentive, bashes those who work hardest, and locks people out of opportunity deliberately in order to keep wealth in the hands of the silver-spooners who then whinge about the cost of supporting the victims of their greed and corruption.

    What we need is a properly structured tax system that taxes those who can afford to pay, provides generously for the disadvantaged, and ensures those who strive are properly rewarded and can enjoy the benefits they earn. But that will never happen because the greed of the rich prevails.
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    10:14am
    Rainey the wealthy don't get welfare from the taxpayer at all.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    10:31am
    You poor naïve fool, OG! Are you really that ignorant?
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    10:35am
    Nope but I think some others are.
    Anonymous
    11th Jul 2017
    11:42am
    So you are not that ignorant? So you DO know the wealthy get welfare from the taxpayer? You were just peddling BS as usual?
    Old Geezer
    11th Jul 2017
    12:00pm
    Rainey the wealthy get NO welfare form the taxpayer at all.
    musicveg
    11th Jul 2017
    3:31pm
    Welfare recipients spend all their money keeping the rich. If they stopped eating and stopped paying rent, it effects those invested in food and housing.
    Anonymous
    15th Jul 2017
    1:20pm
    What a stupid assertion, OG. The rich avoid tax, but they drive on the roads, ship goods thru our ports, send their kids to schools, expect police to keep them safe, use our courts to sue people... it goes on and on and on. All these services have to be paid for and the rich refuse to contribute but expect the working class to pay the costs for these services. That is WELFARE. As are the rebates and concessions and grants that the rich seem to believe are an entitlement. All of these WELFARE benefits are paid for by TAXPAYERS. But of course the arrogant selfish will never recognize how they and their cronies STEAL from the public purse.
    musicveg
    15th Jul 2017
    9:07pm
    You might want to check out Michael West's investigations at:
    www.michaelwest.com.au
    shows how bad the tax rort is and that our Government is doing all it can to cover it up and actually say they are dealing with it when they are not.
    niemakawa
    11th Jul 2017
    3:23pm
    This topic has been doing the rounds for 6 days now, are we back in surplus, yet??
    disillusioned
    14th Jul 2017
    4:06am
    Well obviously the pollies aren't sharing "our" burden - they who created this mess - as they spend on themselves and their wealthy mates like drunken sailors (apologies to the sailors!), feathering their own nests at taxpayers' expense, while Mr and Mrs "Everyman" (the "peasants") struggle with rising costs of electricity, gas, rates, food, medical care, etc. Great to be a "pollie" in Oz in this day and age!! (Not so crash hot for the rest of us!)


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles