Election 2016: Labor plans to scrap business tax cut unpopular

Would denying big business a tax cut endanger our economy?

Labor to refuse big business tax cuts

The Business Council of Australia (BCA) has accused Labor of playing ‘fast and loose’ with Australia’s economy, claiming its election campaign is anti-business and dangerous.

By announcing in Budget 2016/17 that the business tax rate would be reduced to 25 per cent over the next 10 years, the Government secured the support of business leaders across the country. And in return, by denouncing this proposal, Bill Shorten has put them completely offside.

Speaking to Sky News yesterday, chief executive of the BCA, Jennifer Westacott said, “It’s gobsmacking, it’s very dangerous ... for our reputation and it’s dangerous to set us on the course that we are not going to improve our competitiveness.”

Noting that anyone who did not support business in Australia was endangering not only the jobs and future of 10 million people working in business, but also the ability to create more jobs, Ms Westacott stated, “I think people are bewildered by this attack. How are we going to grow our economy when 80 per cent of our economic output is dependent on business?”

Of concern to the BCA is the tight election result and the possibility of a hung parliament that the opinion polls are indicating. On the likelihood of this happening or an obstructive senate occurring, the BCA would, Ms Westacott said, “be arguing very hard to the Senate that it has stifled public policy in this country for too long.” [unclear where quote starts]

The BCA intends to run its own campaign in the lead up to Election 2016, with Ms Westacott stating, “If we head down the path of ... more spending, a spending plan without a growth plan will just lead to crippling rates of taxation and more and more deficits and a very, very fragile and non-resilient economy.”

Read more at TheGuardian.com

Opinion: Time for big business to chip in

With its mantra of ‘Jobs and Growth’, the Government has certainly caught the imagination of Australian big business, but what about the needs of ordinary Australians?

There’s no denying that Australia needs a strong business community in order to grow, but it also needs a business community that is willing to pay its way. No longer should businesses be allowed to flout tax laws by sending most of their profits overseas rather than back into the Australian economy. And to then offer such businesses a tax cut is simply adding insult to injury.

Years of giving grants and paying levies to overseas companies have done little to stop the rot in our manufacturing industry. Our natural resources have been pillaged, with the only benefactors the shareholders in large multinational companies. And we have very recently seen the contempt with which big business have treated our dairy farmers – bleeding them dry, yet still wanting more.

Big business does not need a tax cut over the next 10 years. The $50 billion it will cost to keep the big end of town happy is money that could be better spent on health, education, the environment and fairer social security payments for those most in need.

Do you agree that big business should not be receiving a tax cut? How would you like to see the $50 billion better spent? Or do you think that more should be done to appease big businesses trading in Australia? 

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Happy Jack
    6th Jun 2016
    10:02am
    The reality of what the party policies are: the LIEberal party will give a tax cut to all business's including large corporations. The Labor party will give small business a tax cut. The decision the voters will make is do they believe that the likes of the big banks, mining companies and overseas corporations deserve billions of dollars in tax cuts or will that money be spent on education, health and a decent pension system. IT"S AS CLEAR AS THAT!
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:07am
    Spot on Happy Jack!
    JOHN T
    6th Jun 2016
    10:15am
    i agree completely with your comments happy jack it is a shame common sence is in short supply when sensible solutions are needed
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:32am
    Well written Jack.
    Scrivener
    6th Jun 2016
    11:36am
    Spot on - let me copy exactly the comments of a velcroed-on Coalition voter, "More people got higher education under crudd/gillard and less under Abbott/turnbull !! That's because they started under little johnny and finished under crudd. And fewer started under Gillard therefore less finished under Abbott."
    Think I'll cut him out of the Will. He gave no response - went totally dumb and mute when I replied, "I’d really like to do a fact check on that. Where can I find and verify those numbers on how most graduates started under John Howard and Tony Abbott and graduated under Gillard and Rudd? If you can supply those facts. What are your checkable sources.
    My direct experience is that I, and most people I know with higher qualifications, started and graduated under Labor higher education programs. I started under the Whitlam program. That start, leveraged nine further degrees. My two kids also got their degrees under Labor HED programs. Still it is an interesting claim and I am surprised if that is the case that Turnbull and the Coalition electoral machine are not using that information to refute the claims of the Labor electoral platform whose main thrust seems to be health and education."
    I thought they were fair questions - I'm still open to denying my own experience if it can be established that I'm wrong.
    Oh, the person getting cut out of the Will owns five properties and uses the receipts I pay for as a tax loss on his income for essential improvements to the property he is making us pay full rent for.
    Just another self-interested Coalition voter.
    Eats all the ice-cream in the fridge when he comes to visit as well!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:27pm
    That person sounds like the one who would look after your money well.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:01pm
    And shoot your dog at the same time, Bonny.
    libsareliars
    6th Jun 2016
    1:43pm
    Spot on Happy Jack
    Bes
    6th Jun 2016
    2:12pm
    If there ever was a time to make a sound protest vote then THIS is the time!
    Labor emptied the till, let in 50,000 welfare dependents and gave us TWO Prime Ministers.
    And is promising to SPEND BIG yet again!
    The Coalition won the next election and proclaimed "Australia is open for business!" Then let the car companies go without any thought of negotiation. (A lot of people in work and spending 10% GST) for a few subsidies, instead of paying unemployment.
    Then they proceeded to let Australia be sold in large LAND packages and attempted to crack down on the tax paying electorate telling us the days of entitlement were over (not for politicians) and using health as a tax raiser and intimating that pensions would end.
    Then they gave us TWO Prime Ministers!
    The Greens want to bring in 50,000 welfare dependents per year without mentioning Australia's aged pensioners ONCE!
    IF WE KEEP ON VOTING THEM BACK IN TURNS THEN WE DESERVE WHAT WE GET!
    And what have we got to lose with a protest vote?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:21pm
    You are printing LNP lies Bes as most of what you say is contentious at very best.
    Labor kept your family EMPLOYED during the GFC. That cost!

    The current government has NOT stopped farming land sales to foreign governments either! Both sides should do so immediately.

    The current government also gave us 2 PMs and did what Abbott claimed Liberals never do: knifed a sitting LNP PM.

    Your view of the Greens may be correct but Labor has stated on many occasions that there will be no change in our border security arrangements. It knows that this cost them the last election and that they would be in the cold for over a decade if they tried it on again.

    You are correct about the protest vote. Just make sure that your preferences do not flow to this worst of all governments as that would be the real tragedy.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:45pm
    Labor just panicked and spent money they didn't have during the GFC. We would be in a far better situation if they had kept their cool instead but no we are now burdened with big debts.
    Aussie
    6th Jun 2016
    3:20pm
    Mate you hit the nail ..... and save your finger ....... well say mate spot on.
    There is so much we can do and we only have seat warmers in parliament waiting to collect a big pension ....wowowowo

    Congrats mate well say spot on
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    3:50pm
    You and your LNP employer would have been happy to throw a million Australians out of work Bronny...with the loss of their homes then coming. You are such a bourgeois piece of work.
    Scrivener
    6th Jun 2016
    3:52pm
    Bonny, you do understand the difference between saving and investment don't you? The Coalition saves, Labor invests. There is a difference.
    FM
    6th Jun 2016
    3:55pm
    You can now check who the candidates for the Federal Election in your electorate will be on
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//Candidates_of_the_Australian_federal_election,_2016.
    There is time to check them out and ask them where they stand on superannuation assets tests, the taper rate, pensions, defined benefit deductions, providing adequate funding for aged care and other matters
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    4:36pm
    Just choked on the idea that Labor invests. Invests in what? An investment gives a return on investment and Labor has a nil return on their spending so it can't be an investment.

    Yes I see the difference very clearly.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    7:24pm
    Medibank Private? Making good money for investors who bought the shares. NBN will likely be flogged off when it settles in. That'll make a return for taxpayers.
    I put it to you: WHAT HAS A COALITION GOVERNMENT EVER DONE TO EARN MONEY FOR TAXPAYERS?
    The Carbon Tax repeal costs taxpayers $8 billion a year in lost revenue. Corporate tax cuts will cost taxpayers $50 billion. Nothing much of anything from the coalition other than money shovelled into rich peoples bank accounts and rorts from the top end of town ignored year in and year out.
    Do tell about which side of politics has produced returns on investments. That one is simple!
    Robin7
    7th Jun 2016
    9:19am
    a few facts the LIEberals wont tell you.

    The latest national accounts show that living standards have slumped 4 per cent SINCE THE LAST ELECTION.
    Wage growth is at a 30-year low.
    The home ownership rate is at a 60-year low.
    Inequality is at a 75-year high.
    In the past generation, the top 1 per cent have doubled their share of income.
    But one in eight Australians say that they cannot afford dental care.

    So THATS what have the LIEberals done for taxpayers!
    Anonymous
    9th Jun 2016
    8:18am
    And over half a million retirees who SHOULD be self-sufficient and very comfortable in retirement, but suffered massive loss of investment returns due to bad economic management by governments, have been deprived of a part-pension they BOUGHT AND PAID FOR and genuinely need to sustain a lifestyle equal to that most full pensioners enjoy without sacrificing everything they worked and saved for over up to 5 decades.

    And taxpayers are going to have to shoulder a much bigger burden to pay pensions to twice as many retirees getting much bigger pensions because they have been urged to stop saving and start manipulating to avoid unfair treatment. And when the bill starts to rise, the IDIOTS who claimed it would fall will slash ALL pensions further and grind more old folk into abject poverty, LYING to claim that it's unavoidable (after having created the problem by their idiotic and selfish notions!)

    Yep, that the the LIEberals have done for taxpayers. Kill initiative. Kill opportunity. Punish endeavour. Line the coffers of the rich exploiters and abusers.
    DC
    6th Jun 2016
    10:04am
    Hi Debbie,
    I am very disappointed at the comments you have made here. I expected a bit more real comment on the substance rather than just mouthing off the crap argument perpetuated by Labour. As far as I understand the tax concession are meant for SMALL Businesses, not the "Big End" of town, as so frequently thrown about. Yes, the big boys should pay their way but the small businesses are the ones that employ millions of Aussies more and it is they who are supposed to get the Tax reductions, over a 10 year period of all things. To stupidly claim that 50 Billion dollars are willy nilly available now for the all the other issues that matter to us, is simply irresponsible.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:11am
    True in one sense that initially only small business will get the Tax Cut. Labor also supports that. What they don't support is that Big Business will get that cut going forward. Labor argues that the money should be spent on essentials like health and education. That's the argument. I don't think regardless of the rhetoric people can't see the difference, that is, those who can give a ---- about the debate
    Kaz
    6th Jun 2016
    11:07am
    DC
    You also should tell the whole story - LNP initially discussed tax cuts for big business as well as small (2-10mil) but they later tried to play it down by only mentioning small business. Labor is telling it like it is - LNP is there for big business in the not too distant future, and will consider they have a mandate if voted in. Then they can decide the timing - which you can bet will be sooner rather than later. Business has its own agenda, sure we want more employment, but profits will come first.
    Labor is becoming more popular because average Australians care about each other.
    Hasbeen
    6th Jun 2016
    11:13am
    Debbie, perhaps you should go back to school, & brush up your language skills. Handouts are what is given to people who did not earn them. Tax cuts are a reduction in the amount taken in tax from those who earned it. Perhaps indulging in the politics of envy has made you forget this.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:36am
    DC: your comment is the "irresponsible" one:
    Year 1 - 0 - $10 million gets the tax cut.
    Year 2 - to $25 million gets the tax cut.
    Year 3 - to $50 million gets the tax cut.
    Year 4 - to $100 million gets the tax cut.
    Really.....do you consider a turnover of $10 million as 'small business'?

    After year 3 we have arrived at big business. And expect big business to 'restructure' itself into smaller stand alone entities to get these much sooner.

    Your post appears more in the nature of pro Liberal Party spiels.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:58am
    Mick $100 million turnover is a small business with small margins.
    Robin7
    6th Jun 2016
    12:15pm
    LIEberal party have redefined the term "small business" - used to be a turnover of $2million was a small business, - with the changes entities like Coles will be able to define each store as a separate small business and get the tax cut.

    $100million turnover is a small business? $400k taking each day is a small business?? No Way.

    AND $400Billion of turnover shared among some 600 companies is totally ignored by the tax office. Those companies pay no tax.

    If they all paid their fare share the budget would be overflowing with spare $$$'s and we could afford to give the 5% tax cut to EVERY SINGLE BUSINESS Australia Wide.
    (and a tax cut for the ordinary taxpayers as well)
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:17pm
    But what about the sanctification by Turning Bull of $10Bn turnover companies into 'small businesses'?

    Which planet is he on?
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:20pm
    DC, how about this?
    Multi-national corporations and the banking sector are the only ones who benefit from LNP policies, because they buy those policies and fully expect a return on investment.
    There will be little to no growth under the LNP, because the only growth will be in profits, with little to no tax paid in Oz.
    True jobs and growth comes from having a strong and cash fluid middle class, something the LNP, Labor and Greens are all dead against for differing reasons.
    Consumption drives growth, not corporate profits, yet the economically insane big end of town is hell bent on maximising short term profit, while deliberately destroying the cash flow of the middle class, which destroys their future growth!
    KSS
    6th Jun 2016
    12:20pm
    Sounds to me Bonny that Mick and others do not understand the difference between 'turnover' and 'profit'.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:23pm
    I agree KSS. I wish all my turnover was profit.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:33pm
    Sorry - lower figure.. but it seems such a company might just be a Mal company.... funny that.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:09pm
    KSS: read my post below. I have been in business before and fully understand what turnover and profit are. Please don't insult my intelligence on such an obvious point.
    My post above was simply to highlight the ludicrous redefinition of 'small business' made by Turnbull and his Treasurer. Of course this was for no other reason other than gilding the lily for his wealthy mates.
    Aussie
    6th Jun 2016
    3:27pm
    DC ...are you in this planet ????? maybe you are using the new LNP fiber optic cable internet from Mars ..... Mate learn before you comment please do not embarrass yourself in from of this group of intelligent pensioner and open the door to nasty comments to you .... maybe just keep it to yourself ..... safe
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    3:53pm
    Come on Aussie. Fair crack of the whip.
    The Turnbull tax cuts ARE aimed at the rich and dressed up as small business stimulation. Only a fool or a LNP stoolie could think that they were anything else.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:53pm
    Don't let them stop you from commenting DC. That's seems to be the tactic they use for anyone who disagrees with their mantra.
    DC
    6th Jun 2016
    4:33pm
    Mick and others of the same ilk. I am sorry for you. I did not expect anything less from you about my comment made. 'Commies' just live in La la land. Where you guys get some of the details/data/figures from you claim it is the LNP's real aim simply baffles me. I must have missed them in my wheaties box. Oh, I can hardly wait for the next set of silly abuse from even more irrelevant commentators like Mick's.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    7:19pm
    Your post defies logic DC.
    The tax cuts for the rich was costed at $50 billion. Not by me! I gave you the timeline above. What part of that do you fail to understand?
    DC
    7th Jun 2016
    12:18am
    Like I said - BS info from you, Mick. You think you are the cleverest man on this site so why the bloody hell don't you stand up and be counted - for a Senate seat, if not parliament?! Then you could show us all how to govern fair and square. Mind you, I bet you would be just as eager to feed off the trough like all the others. (I had choicer words for you but restrained myself !! )
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:44am
    Tut, tut - interpersonal dispute... children... children!!
    Theo1943
    7th Jun 2016
    9:45am
    Bonny, work for wages. All your turnover is profit and you are taxed on all of it, even if you have several disasters and you have to borrow to keep afloat. Unlike business, where such a situation would not only have you pay no tax but you would get a credit for next years tax return.
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    11:01am
    I worked that out back in my 20's that everything I earned as a wage earner was taxed but worse still I made my employer many times more than my wages in profit. So I worked as a contract worker for awhile but my employer was still making many times my wages.

    So I decided I had had enough and worked for myself instead. Best decision I ever made. I could work half the time and make a lot more than my wages. Best of all I could write off all my expenses before I paid any tax. Those tax free coffees tasted great.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:14pm
    DC: Run as much government BS as you wish but but let's not poo poo scrutiny. Talk to Morrison. His figures from Treasury. Worse than that the real cost to taxpayers of tax cuts for the rich is likely to be a lot lot higher.
    I gave the Budget talk summary above. THAT IS WHAT WAS PROPOSED!
    You can run but you can't hide....and I will not let you get away with misleading readers. Sorry!
    DC
    8th Jun 2016
    10:00am
    Well, Mick, here we go. Exactly what I was expecting from you. if anyone has any doubt about YOUR political sympathies one does not need to look any further than your one-sided comments. No-one runs Labor crap like you. Head in the sand as usual. You are the one being a paid-up stooge - I am not. I am misleading the readers? You must be joking. A blind fool can see who here is misleading!!!!
    JOHN T
    6th Jun 2016
    10:09am
    The concept of giving big business a 5% tax cut is rediculos in the extreme name one large company that has done anything to benefit the economy without expecting material gains.
    Big business need inventive help and Government contracts to increase job growth not stupid gifts
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:21am
    Agreed, despite the rhetoric about supporting innovation and growth, the LNP has done very little and offers very little incentive for productivity growth. A whole new paradigm needs to be developed to enourage productivity in the secondary industry area away from mining. New industries, such as in the renewable energy sector needs immediate support as does many small enterprises through ongoing complete time capped tax concessions, grants, loans, free marketing support, etc. Many now wealthy countries engaged in these incentives so developing their manufacturing bases as their mining industries died while very successfully competing against cheap imports from developing countries. We have to follow those examples if we are to meet our fiscal aims.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:38am
    If Ceos and directors were doing it tough they might have a leg to stand on. The reality is that CEOs and directors have their snouts deeper than ever into the feeding trough with more asked for every year. Tell me that companies are 'poor' and in need of a tax cut!
    andromeda143
    6th Jun 2016
    10:33am
    Labor have said they support tax cuts for SMALL business. As usual BCA are scaremongering to help the Liberals and their big business mates. Really the only debate should be around what size of businesses should be cut out. If small business is anyone under say $4mill or $5mill then this should be where the cuts cut out.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:41am
    I agree with your sentiments. The LNP are redefining small business by including medium to large businesses in the small category. It is the ultra small business that makes up the largest group, particularly Mum & Dad businesses and small partnerships. These self-employed people contribute enormously to our country in many almost invisible ways, particularly through tax commitments and relieving the burden on our social security system. Supporting these businesses ensures our social security system does not become unsustainable. Neither of the major parties have articulated policies to help these businesses grow.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:43am
    Crowd funding has done more for these businesses than any government incentive or policy and very soon crowd funding will be regulated making it more difficult for this form of fundraising for small business ventures.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    10:46am
    I'm waiting for at least one political party to make crowd funding easier and more attractive by, for instance, making crowd funding tax deductable.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:39am
    Yes andromeda, the top end of town is a club. Big business, the media and the BCA are all members who have banded together to get what the rich want: more money.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:46am
    Does anyone in Realityland actually give any credibility to the utterances of the Business Council of Australia with their obviously biased and often stupid comments?

    Sure - they can post a view - but they are a tiny minority group and deserve to be shouted down for stupidity. Who ever said they could wag the dog?
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:54am
    The trouble is that they get prime time media coverage from the so called 'free Press'. That on top of the normal Liberal Party propaganda which is routinely broadcast via different organisations is enough to convince the feeble minded to vote for exactly the wrong candidate.
    There should be a law against grooming the public with lies.
    Ronin
    6th Jun 2016
    10:54am
    AS a small business owner, I do see the benefit of tax cuts for small business, say turnover up to $20 million (turnover is very different from profit!). For some years in the past, my two co-owners and myself took virtually nothing out of our business, to ensure its survival and that we could continue to pay the wages of our staff (12).

    That multinationals and corporates need reduced tax I do not see. They often pay very little tax anyway. For them a transaction tax based on turnover would be a better way to go (harder to avoid).
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:40am
    Turnover to $20 million IS NOT SMALL BUSINESS. I would support up to $4 million max. Anything more is just unwarranted.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:45am
    It all depends on what you re turning over and the margins on that business. $20 million can be a small business on small margins.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:11pm
    I agree with that but let's not hijack the debate. A tradie splits roughly 50% material, 30% business costs and 20% return for owner. On those figures a $2 million turnover earns the owner of the business around $400,000 pa.


    If employees involved that figure is more like 40% materials (better buying power), 40% business costs (including employees) and 10% return for owner. On those figures a $4 million turnover earns the owner of the business around $400,000 pa.

    The figures above are of course variable according to industry and efficiency of the business but are a pretty close estimate of the realities. Tell me about how a turnover of $4 million pa gives you are "small margin".
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:21pm
    Petrol retails only earn a couple of cents on each litre so their turnover has to be big to make a profit let alone a decent profit. Telecommunication retailers are not on much better margins.

    I know all about tradies and the way they run their businesses and I put them in a worse category than some of those big businesses. A tradie buy materials at trades prices, charges a customer retail prices plus a margin and charges labour out at many times what he pays his worker to do the job. That's why it cost less to buy a new appliance than get an old one fixed. Such a waste of resources.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:38pm
    No problem - categorise business (as the ABS does) under different names according to its profit level, and review each one separately.

    The concern here is that large corporations will be getting away with paying no tax due to tax dodges and generating more profit without actively contributing to this country .. and KSS.. the issues is HOW the books are cooked in order to arrive at net profit - not just turnover.

    There are businesses that run at a loss year after year, yet their 'ceo' etc still reap a fine reward.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:52pm
    Bonny, I wouldn't put tradies in the category you define them.
    They have zero job security, because very few companies want to pay a tradie as an employee.
    They all want tradies to be sub-contractors.
    As a sole trader, they have to pay all the taxes, workcover, superannuation, trade registrations, plant and equipment, plus wages for their apprentices (if any) or other workers such as trades assistants, plus try to put money aside for holidays and sick leave!
    They work damned hard and most of them really do need those extra margins you complain about!
    KSS
    6th Jun 2016
    1:05pm
    probins01, so in your world only those who wear a suit to work 'qualify' as wealthy, rich or the "big end of town", whilst those wearing King Gees and fleuro shirts earning six figure salaries are "damned hard workers" who deserve the 'extra margins'.

    You know sole traders in ANY field have just about all the same overheads you mention whether they be consultants, hairdressers, motor mechanics, GPs, dentists, plumbers, electricians etc but only those with steel capped boots get your stamp of approval?
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:09pm
    Hear, hear, a tradies' life is anything but easy and I'm glad they now make a reasonable living these days. Not so long ago,they were bottom of heap and were treated like worms. Plumbers who used to literally wallow in ---- and have some of the dirtiest jobs are now some the highest paid tradies in the business. I don't begrudge them a thing!
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    1:12pm
    KSS, I was responding to a direct reference to tradies, from Bonny.
    Or is that unclear?
    Nowhere did I say tradies were the only people in this situation.
    Once again, people read what they WANT to understand, not what is actually written, nor the context!
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:56pm
    Bronny: you have very limited understanding about tradies or their operating costs. Better to find out the facts first.

    KSS: methinks you are protecting your patch. You claim that tradies have the same costs as other contractors has some merit but is so far wrong in many areas so as to best be not made.
    Example: Plumbers. Before we even get into employees and the costs before these workers even get to the job site let's have a look at capital outlays and insurance.
    Insurance - costs are significantly higher as the damage which can be done are huge. Even worker's comp. make higher. For the obvious reasons.
    Operating costs - vehicles as per other contractors. Then add on hand tools (many + expensive bits of hardware), machinery (drain cleaning gear, excavators, jackhammers, and many more). And you wonder why plumbers charge like a wounded bull?
    Other trades have their own costs and these are often more than contractors. Also equipment does not last as long and often has high maintenance costs.
    Methinks you have gotten your position wrong here.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:06pm
    Mick unfortunately I know a lot about tradies so no facts needed here.
    KSS
    6th Jun 2016
    3:20pm
    Mick have you bothered to check the cost of medical and professional indemnity insurance for GPs and dentists? They can kill people. I would suggest that that incurs a heavy responsibility even before the first patient is seen.

    This is not a tit for tat as you seem to be making it. Just that ALL sole traders and small employees face similar expenses in just running their businesses not only the tradies. In addition it is these small and medium businesses that employ most Australians and not the multinationals (who have to wait at least 10 years to see any reductions).
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    3:57pm
    You have scored a point on that one KSS. I agree in principle but the problem is how 'small business' is classified. As with all things in life there are always the outliers who defy the pack. But you have to concede that the sheer number of tradies you make zilch are the ones who need help....not the small operators doing very nicely thank you very much. These people will thrive in their own right as long as governments put in a fair set of competition rules which lock out third world countries from destroying our enterprises so easily.
    Thanks for the observation.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    3:57pm
    You have scored a point on that one KSS. I agree in principle but the problem is how 'small business' is classified. As with all things in life there are always the outliers who defy the pack. But you have to concede that the sheer number of tradies you make zilch are the ones who need help....not the small operators doing very nicely thank you very much. These people will thrive in their own right as long as governments put in a fair set of competition rules which lock out third world countries from destroying our enterprises so easily.
    Thanks for the observation.
    Theo1943
    6th Jun 2016
    8:36pm
    Ronin, if you and your partners are not able to take any profit out of the $20 million business, how much tax are you paying? Most smal businesses, which to me is under $5M pay IIttle or no tax at all.
    Poppa Bear
    6th Jun 2016
    11:00am
    As a totally uncommitted voter, I fail to see how people can be sucked in by either party. Their rhetoric has become total crap, and we have one side wanting to send us to the cleaners financially, and the other is looking after the wealthy.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:44am
    For what it's worth here is how I propose to vote to bring down the current wretched current government intent on class warfare:

    The Lower House

    Preferences will still be exchanged according to who the particular candidate gives their preference to. I will be asking at the polling booth WHO the preference is going to. If unknown then I will not be voting for that candidate.

    1. Independent
    2. Independent
    3. Greens
    4. Labor
    5. Liberal (last spot)

    The Senate

    Whilst I will be voting for 12 candidates below the line the system works just as well for above the line votes (only 6 choices needed).

    1. Independent (Xenophon Party)
    2. Independent (Lambie)
    3. Independent (Lazarus)
    4. Independent (Zang)
    5. Independent (Madigan)
    6. Labor
    7. Greens, etc.

    These candidates are in my opinion the best chances of winning a seat (and my vote stays alive), rewards those who have already shown responsible government and avoids those put into the parliament by vested (big business) interests.

    Australia needs real politicians, not stooges doing the bidding of those who bankrolled them into politics. A few of the above may not be the sharpest tools in the shed but they are not vandals owned by the big end of town doing the bidding of their (funding) masters. They will be getting my vote. Good luck whatever way you go.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:48am
    Good heavens Mick I don't want any of those independents in parliament. We need a parliament that will govern not like we have had for the last 10 years...an absolute disaster where the government has not been allowed to govern. But it won't be a worry as the LNP will have to number to govern in both houses comes July 2.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:52am
    Good heavens Bronny, of course you don't.
    Yeah....we need a parliament which can freely send more and more money to its rich owners.
    You are fighting a losing battle. No matter how much dirty money runs dishonest and malicious advertising the LNP is on the way out. The desperation was clear last night when I got a flyer from Malcolm Turnbull which was about his relationship with his father. The LNP is out and Turnbull knows it. So troll all you like!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:57am
    No as much money as the Labor will spend thanks to their union mates. Labor will spend a lot more on advertising the LNP over the course of this election. What grubby ads they are too. Talk about stretching the truth.

    The betting agencies have the LNP to win at much shorter odds than Labor.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:00pm
    Really??? I heard it said that the LNP had a huge war chest. Also, the fossil fuel industry is contributing over $2.4 million to this war chest and that is only the amount which comes in through the front door.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:23pm
    Mick, I like your voting pattern, however me MUST leave LNP, Labor and Greens totally out of our above and below the line preferences, otherwise they will receive those preferences in many cases!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:28pm
    They will receive your preferences no matter how you vote.
    Robin7
    6th Jun 2016
    12:44pm
    MICK - and everybody for that matter, in Federal Parliament:-
    preference deals ONLY EXIST for the SENATE.

    For the lower house (representatives) you MUST number every box on the ballot,
    OTHERWISE your vote is exhausted after the first count - if you number only 1 box, and that candidate gets knocked out, then your ballot paper goes in the bin. That's a FACT.

    Preferences deals Do Not Exist in the lower house - ONLY the numbers you PUT on your ballot paper are counted,
    Number EVERY Box.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:57pm
    Robin7, I'm sorry, but I must disagree totally with your assessment of the Lower House.
    I have stood for several state and federal elections for a minor party (not the current election though), and I can tell you with 100% absolute certainty that preference deals are made very seriously for the Lower House!
    The major parties will horse trade Senate preferences which are only marginally positively in favour of minor parties and independents, in exchange for much more positive (for them) preference flows in the Lower House.
    I have seen it first hand many times, so I don't know where you're getting the idea there are no deals for the Lower House, but it's incorrect.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:15pm
    Despite the unsettled nature of Labor during the Julia/Kevin years, that hung parliament did a better job than the previous 3 and the last one without a shadow of a doubt. I want a hung parliament and a Senate unruled by one party. This way we'll get real change. In particular, I would like a Senate where it's illegal for a minister to be appointed from it's ranks. It's a house of review, goddammit, not an arm of the lower house!
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    1:18pm
    Bonny, under the new Senate voting laws, if you exclude a party, they get ZERO in the way of preferences.
    Please stop spouting absolute nonsense!
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:47pm
    probins01: you are correct.
    In the Lower House you still get horse trading in preferences. That is why you HAVE TO ASK before you vote.
    In the Upper House (Senate) the system has been changed so that voters get to choose.
    The only place I need to differ is where you do or do not put Labor and the Greens. Whilst these parties are not my parties of choice I would like my vote to count and I understand (???) that should one of my next choices not get up then my vote will end there. Can you clarify if I have that wrong.
    Robin7
    6th Jun 2016
    2:31pm
    probins01
    if you had stood for a representative house then you would know the people counting those ballots do NOT assign the preferences using preference deals when they count them. (see link below)
    The deals made between parties are ONLY for what is printed on the how to vote cards that your volunteers hand out.

    Once again the people counting the ballot papers for representative seats do NOT put ballots with blank boxes into preference piles,
    they ONLY read the numbers YOU PUT IN THE BOXES.
    Leave ANY box blank and that is where your vote is exhausted and put in the bin.
    Number Every Box.

    FROM
    http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/counting/hor_count.htm
    >>First, all of the number '1' votes are counted for each candidate. If a candidate gets more than half the total first preference votes, that candidate will be elected.

    If no candidate has more than half of the votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is excluded. This candidate's votes are transferred to the other candidates according to the second preferences of voters ON THE BALLOT PAPERS for the excluded candidate.

    If still no candidate has more than half the votes, the candidate who now has the fewest votes is excluded and the votes are transferred according to THE NEXT PREFERENCE SHOWN. This process continues until one candidate has more than half the total number of formal votes and is elected.
    << (emphasis added)
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:40pm
    I don't think that probins01 was saying that. Your information is correct in that this is how it is done.
    You need to realise that if you vote for somebody who is knocked out then your preference may not count. It will NOT however go to somebody you have not listed on your ballot paper.
    Sceptic
    6th Jun 2016
    3:39pm
    Take advice from MICK on a senate vote as he has found a way to vote in numerous states.

    Then again, as he shows himself to be so politically, electorally and economically illiterate, maybe his is not the best advice to follow
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:51pm
    No way I'm taking any notice of Mick as I want a government that can govern not get knocked back on everything they try to do. We have already had enough with 3 terms of that nonsense.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:02pm
    The last 3 years are about the most nonsense you would ever get Bronny.
    Thanks for the lesson Sceptic.
    Robin7
    6th Jun 2016
    4:17pm
    seems that quite a few of you intend to vote for the fascists...

    and if you don't know which party I am referring to then go and research what laws the fascist parties were making from 1930 onwards, compare that to the ideological positions of our major parties here in Oz, and the similarity will be obvious.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    9:24pm
    robin7, how do you define fascists?
    ex PS
    9th Jun 2016
    8:38am
    You are dead right Bonny, the LNP will not spend a lot of its own money on election advertising, it will put out a lot of so called public information" propaganda and charge it to the taxpayer.
    Part of governing a country is the ability to negotiate and reach agreement with the opposition in order to have controversial legislation passed.
    Julia Gillard had to do it against one of the most negative oppositions ever and managed to get most of her bills through. We have had two PM's from this current government who could not do the same, so in my opinion they have not demonstrated the skills required for the job. So I intend to sack the current job holder for incompetence, as I would with any employee that could not meet the position criteria.
    DaveL
    6th Jun 2016
    11:03am
    Most Australians would go along with a Tax Review that analaysises all forms and structures of tax. No one is talking about reviewing tax structures, so the already ingrained avoidance will continue. Anyone earning more than $180,000 would have some type of structure (trust, SMF and others) to avoid paying the tax that would required to be paid for income earned.

    So off the cluff changes like the asset test are knee jerk reaction that should be cover in any tasx review.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:45am
    Yes. A closed shop...to benefit those with big incomes.
    Capn Dan
    6th Jun 2016
    11:49am
    Correct DaveL - a full review of the entire tax system is needed. Except for the Liberal Democrat Senator David Leyonhjelm I have not heard any party go near this basic but central issue.
    KSS
    6th Jun 2016
    12:52pm
    DaveL there is nothing wrong with tax minimisation and using anything and everything within the law to do so. Every tax payer who has ever claimed the <$300 un-receipted work related deduction on their tax return had done exactly that.

    Tax avoidance is a very different matter and is punishable in law. To say that anyone earning over $180,000 (an arbitrary amount in itself) is breaking the law is quite simply drawing a very long bow. Unless of course you actually have evidence that those say using SMF are in fact all breaking the law. In which case I suggest you take that evidence to the tax office and the police.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:42pm
    There is a very thin line between tax minimisation and tax avoidance. Most businesses use the terms synonymously.
    The tax laws need to be overhauled so that 'deductions' are a fair cop rather than open slather.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:09pm
    Every business has to be able to write off there costs of doing business before paying any tax Mick. Tax minimisation is legal tax avoidance is not.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:36pm
    Tax minimisation is not the same as tax evasion. The rules about what is deductible need to be significantly tightened and compliance needs to be reintroduced with significant penalties to those who clearly set out to cheat the system.
    Your 4WD Bronny, which you claim on your tax, is not a work car at all is it? Neither is it for most business. Sometimes these are more than one car, and vehicles are the tip of a large iceberg.
    "Costs" indeed. As usual you pervert the truth by coming up with one of those innocuous statements.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:05pm
    It is cheaper for me to have my 4WD as a private vehicle and not claim it on my tax so no problem there for me Mick. I don't even claim my caravan as living away from home expenses either.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:04pm
    Retired MPs do not own caravans Bronny. They get paid first class accommodation compliments of taxpayers.
    Robin7
    6th Jun 2016
    4:38pm
    it is very common for businesses of all sorts to write off their personal 4WD's as additional work cars needed for visiting remote or construction sites for various purposes.
    Like a department store manager really needs a 4WD to visit the store being built inside Carindale Shopping Centre, and a telecommunications executive really needs a 4WD to visit the public phone booths in Brisbane, the list goes on and on and on, lawyers, coffee vendors, real estate agents, even indoor gardeners I have seen claiming their 4WD's as a work vehicle,
    and with accelerated depreciation you can write the thing off in 1 tax return,
    that's $15k~$25k of tax you are NOT paying this year, (purchase price of ~$45k-$75K - & write off a third)
    Keep the car pristine and sell it 2 years down the track, then buy a new one... write that off on tax and you have a nice little rort.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    4:39pm
    Thanks for reminding me Mick but I prefer the luxury of my caravan away from those sterile motel rooms.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:53am
    KSS - that's precisely why the laws on tax concessions need to be reviewed and modified.

    NOBODY enters into a trust fund etc unless there are pecuniary benefits, primarily tax evasion, in doing so. It's time that all such things were slated home to those who benefit from them directly and 'deeming' of an income from them be employed.

    Pensioners cop 'deeming' on everything - wait until these fools in Cambra get their mitts on the family home as an asset - they'll 'deem' that a 90 year old living in a home bought 68 years ago now means that home will generate income if used differently, and thus is 'deemed' to create income that reduces pension.

    Never give one inch with these scum in Cambra and elsewhere.
    TJ
    6th Jun 2016
    11:11am
    The BCA is only interested in the big end of town and not the greater wellbeing of the broader community. Too many companies don't pay enough of their share of tax as it is. The Libs proposed business tax cuts with have disproprortionate benefit to overseas interests.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:48am
    That is the truth which is not getting out. Most dividends go to overseas investors because Australians do not own their own too much of their own country. Tax cuts will make overseas investors very happy and is the most stupid policy around. But what do the greedy wealthy care about their own country other than maintaining their own immediate lifestyle.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:50am
    They care a lot more than those that depend on welfare otherwise why do they invest in Australia?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:58am
    Ha, ha, ha. You crack me up Bronny.
    If it were up to this government then driving down wages to nil would only be the start and Australians with cups on street corners would be the norm.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:02pm
    Wages are too high in the country compared to the rest of the world. Haven't you noticed all the foreign workers we now have employed here? I wonder why?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:14pm
    Wages will always be "too high". Even in America when the minimum wage was increased from $7 an hour to the now $10 an hour employers cried the same BS.
    If the top end of town were all going broke then there would be a case, but the top end is doing very nicely thank you very much. Please tell me about CEOs not getting huge remuneration deals every year!
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:31pm
    Bonny, have you noticed all the foreign workers we have here? Mostly on 457 visas, employed by the big end of town at wage levels only slightly better than they can make in their own countries!
    Yet the big end of town want them so they don't have to pay Australian wage levels. This is yet another example of corporations insanely destroying their own markets by forcing wages down. Those Australians they put out of work or reduce wages for, cannot then consume corporate goods or services to drive growth.
    You are economically insane if you think the corporate and banking sector cares for anything other than short term profit, which all goes to shareholders and executive bonuses. They don't even pay tax!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:46pm
    Yes I know about all those foreign workers and off shore call centres. Why are they here? Australian wages are way too high. It all started with our big companies not employing young people as apprentices etc so that's why the LNP has come up with the $4 wage idea to train our young people. That's a great idea as it gets young people off the dole and into work.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:58pm
    I can hear you saying that Australian needs 'Work Choices' Bronny. But of course the huge salaries of bosses need to be preserved.
    Your $4 wage idea is a way of getting free labor...which is intended to flow on to the rest of the workforce in time. The next game plan!
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    1:03pm
    Oh Bonny, please!
    The corporate sector has been needling away at this for many years!
    They have deliberately destroyed the apprentice schemes so they can bring in cheap foreign workers, for no other reason than to bolster their bottom line!
    They are driving down wages in as many business sectors as possible, such that there has been increased personal debt levels for many years, to enable consumers to consume goods and services, without the correlating income fluidity!
    If business wants to operate in a high profit market, with increased growth, they MUST be prepared to pay high wages in order to maintain this market's ability to consume!
    However it is obvious they care zero for Australia, yet as I said previously, they are happy to destroy their market here in exchange for short term profit.
    Absolute economic insanity!
    KSS
    6th Jun 2016
    1:20pm
    probins01, you really are out of touch aren't you. There are literally thousands of 457 visa holders in jobs such as cleaning, restaurant/hospitality, painting and decorating, construction work even taxi driving who are employed by non-English speaking small business owners.
    Whether they should have the 457 visa or not is a different question completely.

    By the way, in 2013 it was cooks who headed the list for the highest number of 457 visas.

    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/06/27/glance-457-visa-holders-australia
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:21pm
    None the less he was quite right KSS.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    1:25pm
    Out of touch KSS?
    Business has been doing this for years, as I said!
    I have addressed 457 visas elsewhere on this stream.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:36pm
    KSS: you are telling the story of business wanting cheaper labour and using the 457 visa loophole to get it. Meanwhile the current government looks the other way. Sounds like another crack at Work Choices to me.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:56am
    Minority group - they've had their say - now let's dismiss them and get to the real issues.

    Who do they think they are? An alternative or second or shadow government? This same pack of clowns who reckon widowed Jo Bloggs with three kids can live on sixpence scream the house down over Union influence on Labor - yet think nothing of pontificating over what should and should not be the norm in this country and then blithely influence LNP - as long as it suits them.

    Pack of twerps.

    **dusts off hands** I guess THAT sums the BCA up pretty well!
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:57am
    How did this tiny minority group ever get a say in the Fair Work Commission over penalty rates etc?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:31am
    So here it is. The BCA wanting its greedy snouts deeper in the feeding trough and using the same 'jobs will be lost' scare tactic it does every time low paid workers get thrown a crumb. Never a word about CEO's, directors or the rich.
    To add insult to injury the BCA (crying poor) is now going to fund Liberal Party promotion advertising. As though this group does not already contribute enough money into Liberal Party coffers.
    We are involved in CLASS WARFARE. Make no mistake about that. The greedy mongrels at the top end of town want their tax cuts despite already doing very very nicely. Time to send a message back to these pariahs Australia.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:27pm
    I'd call it greed warfare, Mick. The top end of town have no class under this government. Class is when you act for the benefit of your fellows above yourself. Rotaries four way test is the best mark of good government and good corporate behaviour.
    It States:
    1 Is it the truth?
    2. Is it fair to all concerned
    3. Will it build goodwill and better friendships/
    4. Will it be beneficial to all concerned.
    I don't think our present government lives up to those ideals by any measure and dare I say it - neither does the IPA and their supporters and the bulk of the multinationals.
    Crashbang
    6th Jun 2016
    11:38am
    Big business has had it too good for too long. their should be a tax increase. they pay their senior manages way toooo much money. even Gerry Harvey agrees. look at the salaries of the bank CEO's Telstra, the Post office, as an example. money could be used as article suggested.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:49am
    You are correct.
    The BCA and the government will never mention these. They are forbidden discussion topics.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    11:42am
    If businesses don't make enough money they will not employ people it is as simple as that. With Australian wages the dearest I the world then they deserve a tax cut so they can pay those high wages. If you want jobs then businesses have to be able to pay them. One way is to lower taxes the other two being higher price to lower wages. No one wants higher prices or lower wages so tax cuts are the best way of getting jobs and growth.

    One reason why Labor opposes tax cuts to big business because it will have less money to spend on our very inefficient health and education systems. The amount of money already spent on them we should be the healthiest and best educated people in the world. But we are not so it's not going to be more money that fixes them.

    More money for childcare. Good heavens why have kids and let someone else bring them up? Mothers or fathers need to stay home and look after and educate their kids as that it she best way to teach small kids. This childcare idea is not a good idea at all.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    11:57am
    Businesses DO MAKE ENOUGH MONEY. That is why CEOs and their directors are getting huge (annual) increases in their salaries. The game is in full swing.
    "More money for childcare"? Is that like the Abbott's Paid Parental Leave Scheme? The lie of the election, one of many.
    You can play it any way you like Bronny. The fact is that this government is gone after July 2. Good riddance to bad rubbish!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:14pm
    Betting agencies have much shorter odds for LNP than Labor so looks like you will have to put up with them for another term Mick.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:15pm
    The odds are Shorten....ing.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:21pm
    Yes for the LNP to win both houses.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:51pm
    It's 2016, Bonny - they aren't employing people. You just gave us a rant about 457s on lower wages and how our wages are too high..... then with the next breath you want to tell us these businesses are crying out to employ the over 700,000 out of work, plus upgrade those who are part-timers on a pittance.

    Wages are never too high when they want to employ a mate in a sweet ride, are they? Then the sky's the limit.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:56pm
    Always well paid jobs for the top end of town. And when none available make up a fictitious committee and invent one.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    5:59am
    Labor are not exempt there, Mick - always a job for a failed mate suddenly thrust back into the job they came out of to enter politics. Plenty of QANGOs around to fill with Party hacks who've failed the electorate test.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:16pm
    No argument with that. Both sides milk us...but only one side tries to skin us all the time.
    ex PS
    9th Jun 2016
    8:54am
    When you talk about reducing wages it is important to think about actions and reactions.
    We take action by reducing wages, this means less money to spend, the money that is available goes to housing, food, utilities and health. We don't spend or reduce the spend on electronic goods, restaurants, buying houses, new cars, home improvements etc.
    So can any one tell me how this helps the economy?
    Please don't try and tell me that lower wages will result in lower prices to goods and services, we are all adults on this site and don't need to listen to fairy tales.
    ex PS
    9th Jun 2016
    8:54am
    When you talk about reducing wages it is important to think about actions and reactions.
    We take action by reducing wages, this means less money to spend, the money that is available goes to housing, food, utilities and health. We don't spend or reduce the spend on electronic goods, restaurants, buying houses, new cars, home improvements etc.
    So can any one tell me how this helps the economy?
    Please don't try and tell me that lower wages will result in lower prices to goods and services, we are all adults on this site and don't need to listen to fairy tales.
    maelcolium
    6th Jun 2016
    12:00pm
    A full examination of these tax cuts has revealed that the majority of benefits will flow to overseas investors of the large international corporates.

    The benefits in any case as modelled by Treasury are staggeringly simplistic. The modelling is based on the full employment, no external deficit, a balanced budget, demand and supply in equilibrium and inflation around the RBA target circa 3% and GDP at 3.5%. In other words the model is based on the economy of Mars.

    This is where the public need to be informed that these models are an economists petri dish with little real world logic. They are simply put - guesses!

    The key point about federal taxation though, is that in a fiat sovereign economy with a floating exchange rate, taxation is designed to remove currency from the economy to control inflation and demand for the intrinsically worthless paper money. It isn't collected to be spent later which is where many people misunderstand the mechanics of government spending.

    So in a nutshell this purely neoliberal logic of distorting the taxation system to produce something which it will not is just ridiculous.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:16pm
    Nice to read a post from somebody who has some understanding of what is.
    Retired
    6th Jun 2016
    12:04pm
    I don't agree the big businesses should receive a massive tax cuts without them giving guarantees such tax cuts will be recycled back into the Australian eceonomy. I am afraid without such guarantees, the massive tax cuts would go into a black hole overseas and neither the Australian economy nor the Australian tax payers will benefit from such tax cuts. In this case it will better to spend the money for the benefit of the Australian tax payers....
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:06pm
    There is no growth or jobs in more welfare that's a certainty whereas there are jobs and growth in company tax cuts.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:19pm
    Jobs and growth, jobs and growth, jobs and growth.....
    Learn and earn, learn and earn, earn and earn..........
    Stop the boats, stop the boats, stop the boats...........

    If you think that company tax cuts are about jobs then thanks for the laugh of the day. Needed that.

    Thanks for the message from your sponsor Bronny. Time to book the next helicopter ride.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    12:32pm
    Yes you are right Mick I'm currently flooded in so I'll need to get out he helicopter to go into town. One just can't risk the getting the 4WD wet and muddy now can I?
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    2:17pm
    You obviously didn't understand the previous post, Bonny.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    2:39pm
    Bonny, you are totally out of touch, once again. You wouldn't know which way is up.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:41pm
    What is there not to understand?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:53pm
    How much the government is paying you to post proaganda.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:55pm
    Not a brass razoo as it's not government propaganda.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:06pm
    The comments are self explanatory.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    6:02am
    There is no growth in jobs PERIOD, Bonny. Hasn't been for decades now. All that is happening is that more and more people are forced onto non-viable part-time incomes for life, and will one day require full Pension.

    The Trebor Party defines a job as catching a fair rat in return for a fair feed and a warm spot by the fire..... not chasing a string across the floor and eating it.

    6th Jun 2016
    12:09pm
    As many times before - company tax is 30% of PROFIT, not gross - not a bad deal compared to the tax rate paid by the majority of Australians lucky enough to have a job, who pay income tax on gross.

    At the same time we occasionally see the laughable spectre of companies demanding a vote in Council etc elections, under the premise that they should be treated the same as every other 'separate legal entity' - yet when it comes to tax, they don;t wish to be treated the same at all.

    Concerns that high company tax will drive them offshore or absurd - they already offshore most of their profit in most cases anyway, and end up paying a pittance here, and then we have the awful spectre of the Deus Ex Taxhavenae - where their head office in The Faraway Islands, a notorious pirate's den of tax haveners and other thieves, loans them the total cost of their running here, so they have to pay it back before net profit is realised = zero = zero tax.

    What is needed for these Pirates of The Current Aeon is an inclusion or participation tax of the equivalent of company tax - they can work out the deduction in The Faraway Islands, their corporate home....(LMAO
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:23pm
    We often hear the voices of CEOs demanding pay parity with their US counterparts.
    The US corporate tax rate is 35% and CEOs from the top end of town who have gotten their parity now need to have their companies pay the same tax rate as the US: 35%. Then their huge remuneration packages may fall...as they should.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:56pm
    That's the same argument as the remuneration for academic staff... some would suggest that because a professor of medicine gets $XXXk a year, a professor of home cooking should also get $XXXk.... utter nonsense.

    It's a work value case, and often dependent on the size of operation of a company. You don't pay the ceo of a local book store $10m + - you may well do so for the ceo of a major oil company.....
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    12:14pm
    Debbie is spot on! The stupid 3 word slogans the LNP so cynically pound our sensibilities with are patronising and meaningless!
    The only growth the LNP will foster is that of the corporate and banking sectors' bottom line, on which they will pay little to no tax!
    We MUST endeavour to have a strong and diverse Senate, and hopefully a reduced quota of both LNP, Labor and Greens in the House of Rep's, which will force a hung parliament to actually do their jobs and debate issues fully and openly in both houses!
    Seriously folks, have you seen a 'normal' legislative reading / debate session in parliament? You could swing 100 cats in the chamber! There's almost nobody listening to the debates. The Speaker rings the Division Bell, and all pollies come running in and vote along party lines! Then they leave again while the next bill is 'debated'. They take us for complete and utter fools!
    We need true representative democracy back, and the 2 party system must be broken down completely!
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    12:24pm
    Yes. I agree.
    Read my post above for a suggested way to vote.
    Heleno
    6th Jun 2016
    12:56pm
    It's a pity that the BCA can't explain why so many businesses manage to pay no tax and why ordinary PAYE workers have to shoulder the burden of paying for the infrastructure these businesses require (like roads, rail, telecommunications and educated workers.)
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    12:57pm
    Spot on....
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:31pm
    Ditto.
    Rae
    6th Jun 2016
    3:20pm
    My business is paying no tax today Heleno.

    Every time we have a lot of rain the Telstra pit fills up with water and the phone doesn't work.

    Today driving out I actually felt like this was a third world country.

    The road looks third world, the phone don't work in the rain, the garbage hasn't been collected as the contractors are on strike because the council has been taken over in a coup.

    Sigh!!!

    May as well have corrupt businesses not paying tax as well.

    And no welfare as the distribution of wealth only works one way.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:28pm
    Rae we had similar problems and Telstra used to transfer all my calls to my mobile free of charge.
    Rae
    6th Jun 2016
    3:42pm
    Apple was out also and Amazon. I couldn't get onto Telstra on the mobile as there was a delay of 18 minutes and I simply gave up.

    Telstra has known about this pit's water problems for over 10 years. Not sure what they plan to do to connect the NBN from the node through it. Good luck to them with that.

    Personally I think the infrastructure is crashing far too often. You have to wonder if the businesses are doing any repairs or maintaining infrastructure properly.

    There is no coverage out in rural NSW.

    If business owners put as much effort into running their business as they did into buying a fancy SUV or Porche I might happily say give them a tax break. Right now I don't think they deserve it.

    Especially not the multinationals and foreign governments running or owning much of our current businesses.

    Workers have been tightening belts for decades and we are living way beyond our means.

    I wish the LNP and the ALP would just stop changing things and spend some time and effort on sorting out the problems two ineffectual terms of government have created.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    4:21pm
    My NBN wireless network is separate from my landline phone. I also have a mobile that is separate again. So if the NBN goes out we still have a couple of phones that work. Not sure why Amazon and Apple were also out.

    What amazes me is that 90% of people who buy cars borrow to buy them. This is a sign they are living beyond their means.

    I'd like to see some stability in the government and a government that can govern without all the problems of the last 3 terms.
    Rae
    6th Jun 2016
    4:52pm
    Your right Bonny. It has been three terms now of very poor economic decision making.

    Perhaps financial education needs a big boost if we are to have a majority of people living within their means. A lot certainly aren't right now.

    I'm pretty amazed at people using leverage to buy unproductive assets as well. It isn't rocket science to have a vehicle saving account so that when you need that new car you can actually pay for it.

    You would think the country was rolling in money though judging by the porches, new VWs, BMWs and mercs out there on the roads. Not to mention every second vehicle being a huge fuel guzzling SUV.

    My little hyundai does as more off road driving than most of them haha.

    On topic I suppose it is worth a gamble that business tax cuts may increase national income if businesses use the money to increase export revenue rather than squander it on foibles.

    I imagine when the NBN finally arrives I'll get a dedicated line too. I'll need some convincing though that it will work in wet weather.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    5:15pm
    MY NBN is wireless NBN with no cables outside the house. I have an aerial on my roof that wirelessly connects to a NBN tower across the valley on top of the next hill. It normally works very well but it was out with everyone else about a week or so ago. I just hooked up my computer to my mobile phone to do what I needed to do.

    I too have a Hyundai that I use for quick trips into town.

    I was asked to evaluate a series of videos put out by a semi government organisation showing people how to save money. I was disgusted when they advised people to use their credit card for emergencies. I pointed this out and suggested they advise people to save money for emergencies instead because some people seem to have an emergency twice a week. They refused to change their videos.

    I didn't realise that it was as high as 90% of people borrow to buy a car until I went looking for my Hyundai and was given a certificate to show it had nothing owing on it by a dealer. Normally it is up to the buyer to get one of these themselves.
    Sundays
    6th Jun 2016
    1:07pm
    I support a tax cut for small businesses, but there is no impediment for big business to grow at the moment. They do not need a tax cut to increase profits. I am certain that banks for example will not hire more staff, their greed will continue to see them cut back n services
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:32pm
    Small being small. Both the business and the tax cut.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:29pm
    I'd call it greed warfare, Mick. The top end of town have no class under this government. Class is when you act for the benefit of your fellows above yourself. Rotaries four way test is the best mark of good government and good corporate behaviour.
    It States:
    1 Is it the truth?
    2. Is it fair to all concerned
    3. Will it build goodwill and better friendships/
    4. Will it be beneficial to all concerned.
    I don't think our present government lives up to those ideals by any measure and dare I say it - neither does the IPA and their supporters and the bulk of the multinationals.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    1:33pm
    I am sort of thinking around the ruling class want it all and the working class are meant to be the servants. Kept poor and dependent on the masters.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:39pm
    Yea I know Mick, I agree with you, but in Australia's egalitarian society where yobbos sit down with politicians on an equal footing, class has a whole new meaning :)
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    1:40pm
    They do want that Mick, but I don't think one of them has yet considered who will continue to purchase their goods and services to perpetuate their profits?
    As I've said many times, economically insane!
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:56pm
    The born to rule syndrome is alive and well in every society, particularly ours as we haven't understood the concept of good governance. Our businesses are still too secretive, as is our government. Good corporate behaviour brings the workforce into the confidences of the company. They become part of the decisionmaking process. If this develops on a broad scale, it changes the culture of the entire country as is does in many advanced European countries. Our culture promotes the huge divide between the haves and the have nots as it does in the UK and US. Greed thrives in this environment.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    1:57pm
    Bonny is a good example.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:31pm
    probins01: you are on the money. That essentially is what the greedy idiots at the top are incapable of understanding. Money doing the rounds is good. Money sitting in bank accounts (and not being lent) is useless.
    If citizens do not earn money then the game eventually stops for all.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:47pm
    Top end of town love your lazy money just sitting in accounts as they can borrow it cheaply and make the money you should be from your money.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:55pm
    Spoken like a true imbecile with zero understanding of how money works. Reminds me of Marie Antoinette said "let them eat cake". Same intelligence!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:08pm
    Obviously Mick by that comment I do doubt your understanding of how to make money. Taking a haircut is one of the best ways.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:40pm
    We'll all get one of those under the current leadership Bronny.

    6th Jun 2016
    2:04pm
    The LNP's big tax cut to big business is so big business can contribute bigGER to the LNP. It is called COLLUSION.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    2:10pm
    It starts with secretive donations to the LNP by developers and other vested interests. Some are revealed after an election, but never before. We know unions donate to Labor. It's anything but secretive. Labor was formed by unions so it's no surprise to anyone, but the LNP acts secretively because they know the stench becomes stronger when the sewer is opened. This is why they get away with so much. Poor old Labor haven't a hope of keeping a secret so they hardly try and when they do all their dirty linen gets aired in public. I prefer that actually.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:27pm
    Certainly the bigger the business is the more cash it can use for getting what it wants.
    Investing a million dollars into bribing governments is small change when you think of it. By removing the Carbon Tax the fossil fuel industry made a windfall of $8 BILLION A YEAR, every year after the repeal. So it has cost taxpayers around $24 billion so far with more to come. That is half of the cost of the NBN.
    VJ
    6th Jun 2016
    2:06pm
    Big business should not be receiving a tax cut from the public purse. They have the capacity to raise funds while the people on pensions do not. If they do, then they are in the sad situation of having their pension reduced.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:12pm
    Without businesses we would have no welfare. It is as simple as that.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:24pm
    Without citizens we would have no business! And without citizens earning MONEY businesses would go broke!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:53pm
    All right back to the caves we all go then Mick.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    2:55pm
    Bonny, have you never visited countries where there is no welfare?
    People carry on varying sizes of business every day.
    How is it the business drives welfare, or is that more of your LNP smoke and mirrors?
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:56pm
    What came first, the chicken or the egg? Blah, blah, blah....
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    3:24pm
    There was no welfare when I was growing up so I have lived in a country without welfare.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    5:41pm
    Ditto.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    6:09am
    Without people buying there will be no business. I've done for yez before the utter foolishness of moving productive industries to cheap labour countries - all that means is that the residents of the cheap labour countries can't buy the product and neither can those in the countries the industry fled any more.

    It's called cutting your own market to shreds in the eternal hope that somehow you can continue to make a profit long enough to get to the next Great Collapse and retain enough to survive that while your opposition goes under.

    My WW IV book series is based partly on the changes in the world due to The Greatest Depression of the 2030's. I may be around then to see this happen.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    6:14am
    You mean Vinnies and the Salvos weren't around when you were a kid, Bonny? Are you from Antarctica? Welfare is when you are short and ask for help for food etc - Social Security is your government fulfilling its contract and paying you enough to get by on when its policies have thrown you on the scrapheap, or when you retire and accept your paid-for Pension.

    We don't have 'government welfare' here - we have bought and paid for out of taxes Social Security.

    Do try to keep up..... if you grew up here and not some crazed Third World nut-house, we've had Pensions here since the early 20th Century and unemployment benefits as a right since the 1940's at least.

    How many times need you be shown that Menzies comment on unemployment benefits etc?

    You'd have to be ninety years old or more not to have seen Unemployment Benefits as a Right, or you come from some Third World Excreta Repository.
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    12:44pm
    No Vinnies or Salvos where I came from. When things got tough we caught rabbits and went fishing. We also milked a cow and grew lots of vegetables etc. People swapped clothes when their kids grew out of them and borrowed formal wear for weddings etc. Went barefoot and only wore shoes when we went to town about once a month. Hated town as much more fun fishing and catching bunnies. We never needed to ask for help everyone helped each other out. A swaggie was fed and give a bed for the night if he chopped a bit of wood. No one had much but what we did was shared. No modern toilets and a swim in the creek was as good as a bath but much more fun.

    Never knew anyone on the pension as it wasn't talked about. Welfare was frowned upon and no one admitted getting the pension or any benefits. Have you tried to get unemployment today Trebor? It is not easy if you have a bit of cash and a decent car.
    jamesmn
    6th Jun 2016
    2:08pm
    spot on give a tax break to all small businesses but not to large business or corporations (turnballs mates) this is how it should be.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:13pm
    Define a small business? You certainly can't define one on turnover.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:15pm
    Currency traders turn over millions a day and they are just people working at home on their computers.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:23pm
    Always wonderful when you pick the outliers and ignore the bulk of other who fall within the guidelines.
    Currency traders can also make million of dollars and some do.
    Paulodapotter
    6th Jun 2016
    2:25pm
    Try common sense Bonny when defining a small business. It has been defined in the past bilaterally and is now redefined by the present government and it just doesn't even meet the pub test.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    2:36pm
    Bonny, no matter how you define a small business, someone will disagree with the definition, however at the end of the day, someone has to decide, and that's what a democratic government should do, reach a decision based on logical debate in the 2 houses of parliament.
    For my 2 cents worth, I feel it should be any business with under 25 employees, with medium sized business defined between 26 and 50 employees.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    2:38pm
    Bonny, you have identified a good source of tax revenue.
    If all trades, currency and stock and bonds, were taxed at 1% of trade value, it would rake in billions per year.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:49pm
    And the whole market system would stop. That's why they won't bring in such a tax.
    probins01
    6th Jun 2016
    2:54pm
    No it wouldn't stop Bonny, that's just LNP scare tactics.
    The global economy is a naked emperor, has been for years!
    It's all based on smoke and mirrors, with perceived values ruling fluctuations.
    Isn't it amazing how a statement from a leader somewhere, or a war somewhere, can cause prices to rise or fall.
    Nothing real actually happens, but someone who holds stocks etc perceives there might be an issue, so they buy or sell accordingly.
    Also, there is nothing to back up the system. No gold reserves other than by private investment holdings, certainly no gold standard against the market!
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    2:57pm
    Bonny reciting the normal retort from the big end of town when workers get a few crumbs: "we'll be ruined"!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    2:59pm
    Good thing they all trade on overseas platforms out of sight of our government then.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:41pm
    YOUR government turns a blind eye. Mates looking after mates.
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    6:17am
    That's why we need a participation tax, Bonny - you trade here - you pay your way regardless of where you syphon your money off to. Put simply - we need to put a stop to the thieves who are robbing this country blind.
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    12:28pm
    Trebor we now live I a world market not our very tiny corner of the world. People can operate where ever they like in the world now. A transaction tax would do more harm than good. Do you want to pay a tax every time you move your money from one bank account to another? I certainly don't especially in this low interest rate environment.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:23pm
    You avoid mention of competing with the third world Bronny. Turnbull and his cronies as well as their well to do election funding owners are not smart enough to understand that the first world cannot compete with third world labour rates. It's a game we cannot win no matter how much of the BS is spun. Sadly Australia has been a disaster on the international stage and cannot compete in business. That's why we have the leaders and failed big business we have.
    We need leaders who look after the interests of the nation. Not the interests of the big end of town seeking handouts because it is failing us.
    Rodent
    6th Jun 2016
    2:47pm
    Just my 10c worth

    Small Business definition

    Small business-what is small business


    ‘Small business’ is defined differently by regulators in Australia depending on the laws they administer.

    For example, ASIC regulates many businesses that are 'small proprietary companies', which means a company with two out of these three characteristics:
    •an annual revenue of less than $25 million


    •fewer than 50 employees at the end of the financial year, and


    •consolidated gross assets of less than $12.5 million at the end of the financial year.


    The Australian Taxation Office defines a small business as one that has annual revenue turnover (excluding GST) of less than $2 million. Fair Work Australia defines a small business as one that has less than 15 employees.

    Despite these differences, many regulators have informally adopted the definition of ‘small business’ used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), which is a business that employs fewer than 20 people.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    3:03pm
    The ATO is on the money. Many of the above are mid tiered businesses. Referring to a business with a turnover of more than $25 million is a nonsense.
    Ask the man in the street and he will tell you that a small business is one where the owner lives in the house next door to him, has a Mercedes of BMW, a swimming pool and goes to Bali on holidays when he can. And of course works 7 days a week...........in most cases.
    The above refer to people who are better off without being multi millionaires.
    The ABS is wanking if it thinks that turnovers of $25 is small business.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    4:58pm
    I have had small businesses that turned over many times $2 million and the ATO still treated them as small businesses.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    5:40pm
    Really? None of your posts seem to indicate a lot of knowledge about business.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    6:08pm
    You are right the only important thing I need to know about a business is does it make money? All the rest is irrelevant.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    6:51pm
    A small business is one whose proprietor is an under-achiever.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    7:13pm
    Not necessarily Eddie. As in all walks of life there are many flavours. Some just want to make a comfortable living.
    HarrysOpinion
    6th Jun 2016
    7:45pm
    So, Bonny seems to be an oligarch.Retired long time ago, she stated. Owns nothing but controls everything, she stated. No wonder she makes irrelevant selfish comments.
    Anonymous
    6th Jun 2016
    7:57pm
    Mick, hard work may pay off in the future, but laziness pays off now.

    HS, who really cares who or what she/he is?
    FM
    6th Jun 2016
    3:56pm
    You can now check who the candidates for the Federal Election in your electorate will be on
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//Candidates_of_the_Australian_federal_election,_2016.
    There is time to check them out and ask them where they stand on superannuation assets tests, the taper rate, pensions, defined benefit deductions, providing adequate funding for aged care and other matters.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    4:42pm
    No independents in my electorate so it's the major parties or nothing.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    4:42pm
    Thanks for the link FM.
    HarrysOpinion
    6th Jun 2016
    7:40pm
    And; where they stand on their preferences. 6 June today!
    Hairy
    6th Jun 2016
    3:57pm
    Happy you got it right it 21st century and it's a big bloody mess with rorts payback donations graft money in banks overseas.The people who helped build this country sold to Islam.fodced to support the buying of bullets to kill our own soldiers.pensioners forced to live on just over half the minimum wage that according to the goverment and fair work is the least amount you need to live.Time for a change because it's still the same as it was ten years ago.except big business and pollies get more payment for doing the same old same old nothing just ripping off Australian citizens year after year.angry and voting for anybody other than crazy greens, lieing labour or liberal liability.
    Not Senile Yet!
    6th Jun 2016
    6:04pm
    Big business doesn't need a tax cut cos they avoid paying it anyway!
    As for Business tax rate being 25% minmum.....tie that to only Small Business......and then make the Big Corporates pay yheir tax ny removing the loopholes that alloy avoidance!
    Labor is right.....Health, Education, and Pension funding are More important than Big Business tax cuts!
    Medicare.....is another NO GO ZONE!
    We are not USA.....and never want to be!
    MEDICARE IS IMPORTANT TO ALL AUSTRALIANS....and the Libs need to Stop trying to Privatise it or Sell it!
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    6:09pm
    LNP is not going to privatise or sell Medicare. That's just another Labor furphy dreamed up for this election.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    7:11pm
    Would if they could. Schools the same.
    HarrysOpinion
    6th Jun 2016
    7:38pm
    Actually, LNP do have a plan to privatise the Administration of Medicare, first. Then they will sell it off completely.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:25pm
    The game plan is clear: get everything 'public' off the books and subsidise everything 'private' (= top end of town). Medicare is the start. More to come if the bastards win the election. Hold onto your seats.........
    ex PS
    9th Jun 2016
    5:33pm
    The main reason governments privatize is to dodge responsibility for bad outcomes. They also save money by not regulating or supervising the companies who take over. An example is Manus Island, the government does not have to take responsibility for any atrocities committed by the security staff.
    HarrysOpinion
    6th Jun 2016
    7:32pm
    2015/2016 total estimated tax revenue $388.03 billion. Individual withholding tax contribution to this revenue is 42.5% but the Company tax contribution was 16.7%.
    A 26.7% Company tax revenue contribution would've brought another $38.8 billion to the tax revenue table and in that sense would wipe out the deficit of $37 billion that's been doubled under Abbott and Turnbull since they took over from Labor. Clearly, companies do not pay enough tax and all governments past and present are gutless to implement a higher tax on companies, so they screw the individual tax payers. There is no substantial evidence that company tax cuts create more jobs. Higher company tax is the answer not tax cuts!
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    8:12pm
    I would think that actually COLLECTING the right amount of tax from those who contest with teams of lawyers might be the way forward. Called water tight legislation, gone through with a fine tooth comb.
    I suggest that Labor should go after multinationals with a vengeance to get back taxes + penalties. If it can stand up to the court challenges and legislate away the right to have the courts determine national policy then it will send a message which will reverberate around the world and push other governments into doing likewise. There will be screams of poverty from the big end of town as CEOs have to contend with smaller pay packets.
    HarrysOpinion
    6th Jun 2016
    8:33pm
    "from those who contest with teams of lawyers" ? It's just another cost the company treats as a tax deduction!

    "I suggest that Labor should go after multinationals with a vengeance to get back taxes + penalties."? So what did Labor do about it when it was in government? Carbon tax was a joke!

    "water tight legislation, gone through with a fine tooth comb"? We've been saying this for last 40 years, Mick. What has been achieved? - Zilch!-

    "There will be screams of poverty from the big end of town"? No louder than the screams today from the lower end of town that has fallen on deaf ears.

    Now how come a little country like Switzerland can become so rich, without mineral resources, yet be able to propose that it can pay the unemployed and the poor pensioners, each $2,500 per month in welfare? Yet, in Australia, supposedly a rich country, the government is struggling to afford aged pensions to its elder citizens. Is it a case of affordability or a case of mindless selfish oligarchy?
    Anonymous
    7th Jun 2016
    6:21am
    So Joe Bloggs, accused of a traffic matter... should be able to take his costs of defending the case as a deduction against any potential fine?

    Hmm .. never thought of that one.....

    You see where I'm going with these different rules for some?
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:30pm
    Of course HS. Multinationals first.
    As far as making legislation watertight that is the problem. Contracts and the like often have 'escape' clauses in them. Came across this once in an Articles of Association for a home unit company. When I took the issue up with a lawyer to try and close the loopholes he informed me that these 'outs' were intentionally put there in case an issue came up which had not been anticipated.
    The trouble with Tax Law is that those at the top can benefit from the outs and have no intention of making it bullet proof. Plenty of talk, perhaps lip service, but the game is not wanting to be ended.
    I guess I have a negative view of the top end of society.
    Happy Jack
    6th Jun 2016
    8:46pm
    What a profound disappointment- after, for years, holding Ross Greenwood in such high esteem as an impartial economic commentator I've just tuned into Sydney's 2GB and bugger me dead he's been engaged as a shock joke on what can only be described as a radio station that's poorly disguised as front for the LIEberal party.
    Who do these wackers- Jones, Hadley, and the rest of the motely crew including greenwood think they are? The Australian people are more clued up and are not the pliable dunces this biased radio station takes them for. What make them think that they have a monopoly on political wisdom to the point that they should be telling the Australian people who they should vote for. The latest, Geobels like propaganda, is a take off of a song on Julia Gillard telling a lie - one lie. Well, why don't they, if they are impartial compose one on the mad abbortt and his little fibs-
    NO CHANGES TO PENSIONS, NO CHANGES TO MEDICARE, NO CUTS TO THE ABC, etc, etc.
    Greenwood, was tonight carrying on about the cost of Labor's child care funding. Well the Australian voter will remember how Abbortt thought it was such a priority that he made it, to use his words, he's "SIGNATURE POLICY". Remember that, Ross?
    And yet now you decry the Labor party policy which goes nowhere near the cost of that proposed by Abbortt.
    Goes to show you, some people will stoop as low as you can go to make a dollar and thrust themselves into the lime light.
    MICK
    6th Jun 2016
    9:09pm
    I only ever listen to radio when I drive somewhere and then only occasionally. I had the misfortune to tune in one day (think it was 2SM) and had to listen to complete one sided Liberal Party propaganda. It was pretty sickening and my thoughts went out to the feeble minded who might actually believe this sort of politic spew.
    There should be 'Propaganda laws' which prohibit the broadcast of material which is demonstrably wrong or intentionally politically biased. Otherwise we get those behind the propaganda controlling populations and that is NOT a democracy and it is wrong.
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    5:06pm
    I agree get rid of all advertising as it is so annoying. No advertising no radio, no TV sounds awesome.

    6th Jun 2016
    9:29pm
    I disagree with the sweeping statements that suggest that there is a large number of businesses flouting tax laws and sending most of their profits overseas. The number of businesses that do this is quite small in proportion to all businesses in Australia. Those businesses are paying tax in accordance with our tax laws but are minimising profits because of the way they are structured worldwide. The fact that this way of doing business was going on under a Labor as well seems to have escaped your notice.

    Years of giving grants to overseas companies is basically the now collapsed car industry,
    protected under a tariff scheme which was dismantled under the Hawke/Keating government. The tariff reduction was replaced by grants and was done to allow Australia to set up trade agreements with other countries which agreed to reduce tariffs on Australian imports.

    The dairy industry is in crisis at the moment because of two dairy companies in Victoria but other dairies around the country are still paying satisfactory prices to farmers for milk. This has been blown up by the media as being the responsibility of Coles and Woolworths but has nothing to do with those companies. The problem is the two Victorian dairies trying to compete on the international market. Incidentally, the reason the big two only had cheap milk on display was because good people bought out all of the dearer milk to support farmers.

    Now comes the good bit. Because I have dared to suggest that Australia's problems can't be sheeted home to Turnbull et al, I will be bombarded with personal abuse, name calling and a host of arguments which will have nothing to do with the subject. Go your hardest all you Labor trolls under the leadership of MICK (I vote Independent), I will not rise to your bait.
    LiveItUp
    6th Jun 2016
    9:50pm
    Old Man I was in NZ earlier this year and their dairy farmers were having similar problem due to world wide low milk prices. What was interesting was that milk costs 50% to 100% more in NZ supermarkets than in Australian ones.

    One can also see that ASX listed companies paying dividends pay fully franked dividends which tell me they have paid tax of 30% on their profits to be able to pay it on with their dividends. It is only those big multinational companies with their writing off of intellectual property rights etc that are not paying their taxes in Australia.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    10:53am
    You are a case Old Man. Probably a Party hack more correctly.
    I'll take your issue in turn:

    1. Car industry - sure we are paying subsidies but you fail to mention that closing the industry down altogether in this country will lead to thousands of Australians now accessing unemployment benefits. Which is greater? I think I know the answer to that but await your government resources for an answer.
    2. The Dairy Industry - agreed. So why allow monopolies? And why flog off our dairy farms to THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT? Hundreds of them. Freehold (=gone forever!) land.

    You can print the government misinformation as much as you like but WHERE ARE YOUR SOLUTIONS to the problems you employer is creating? Never a proper solution. Only ever lies, slurs and slogans!
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    12:24pm
    Mick I think you are being very rude to Old Man. If you want to have a decent conversation with people you need to treat them with respect otherwise you will be ignored.

    I'll add that the car industry was subsidised for decades far too long and the government should have pulled the pin on it years ago.

    The dairy industry like many other industries is now exposed to the world markets and our costs of production make our dairies uncompetitive. The Chinese government cannot be blamed for that.

    Our problem is that our wages and thus costs are uncompetitive compared to those of the rest of the world. Things are going to get a lot tougher before they take a turn for the better.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:35pm
    Sounds like another avatar to me Bronny. How many does Frank have???
    Read what I said about the car industry. AS always you ignore the reality of what closing this industry down is going to cause. On the one hand we save subsidies. On the other we have a long long unemployment queue including the tens of thousands of satellite industries which manufactured for the car industry.
    Get Malcolm to do the sums. Not rocket science you know!
    ANd it keeps coming back to the cries from business wanting to turn average AUstralians into the destitute poor that America has.
    If there were a genuine emergency then CEOs and directors would not be raking in the $ they do year in and year out with huge increases every year. Your post is a right wing crock which ignore the facts. As per normal!
    FM
    7th Jun 2016
    12:31pm
    I believe a Change.org petition will be circulated tomorrow trying to put funding of retirement and pensions on the election agenda along the lines indicated below. Can you look out for it and sign it as so far no party has given any thought to seniors.

    Put your future on the election agenda. DON’T LET POLITICIANS STEAL ALL YOUR RETIREMENT.
    They have stolen most of it don’t let them steal the rest.
    Sign this petition to insist that the Political Parties: -

    1. Disclose their long term plan for funding retirement and aged care before the election.
    2. Do not raise the retirement age.
    3. Do not change the indexation of pensions.
    4. Reverse the changes to the assets test and taper rates.
    5. Restore the deductible amount of defined benefit pensions.
    6. Restore funding for aged care.
    7. Review the proposed cap on final contributions to allow people on low incomes to make greater catch up contributions as they approach retirement.

    Recessions are used as a pretext to cut back on the provision of services to the most vulnerable.
    When the economy recovers these services are not restored.
    LiveItUp
    7th Jun 2016
    5:04pm
    The only one I agree with is no 7. But I believe that is already being done.

    All the rest I want the government to keep.

    It still doesn't address the most inequitable part of the pension system. The house need to be included in the assets test as soon as possible.
    MICK
    7th Jun 2016
    9:36pm
    Another message from the government Bronny? Cash for comment?
    Happy Jack
    9th Jun 2016
    11:00am
    To me, Bill Shorten's honesty on budget strategy is like a breath of fresh air through this long, long election campaign.
    Labor's target for a budget in surplus, 2021 remains the same as the lieberal party's yet appears to be more likely achievable despite the warmongering by the conservatives ably assisted by their array of shock jock stooges in the media. Just tune into 2GB and have a listen to Alan jones, ray hadley, ross greenwood and the rest of the LIEberal party cohorts spewing out the vitriol on a daily basis. Easy to imagine bolt falling into line and delivering the bucket of proverbial at every convenience.
    Yes, to me the Labor policy, which over time will bring in more revenue will bring the budget back to surplus without driving our economy into recession whereas the LIEberals billions of dollars in tax breaks for large companies including mining and banks will do little for economic growth. And not to forget that those tax reductions will be partly paid for by shareholders imputations on share holding's being reduced, less funding for Education and cut backs in spending on health. This on top of their savage cuts in the age pension.
    LIEberals!!! NOT FOR ME.

    9th Jun 2016
    4:21pm
    Businesses create the jobs not government; Governments they are there to create the environment to make it worthwhile for businesses to employ people.

    If that is not done what are we left with...boarded up buildings and higher unemployment.
    ex PS
    9th Jun 2016
    5:42pm
    The only way to be fair about tax cuts to business is to look at each businesses structure. What has to be examined is, how much is the business making in Australia, how much tax is it paying to the Australian government, how many Australians does it actually employ and is it involved in operating off shore in order to avoid taxes?
    If the company in question is not paying its fair share or avoiding tax, it should get nothing in the way of a tax break. I can't see why this incompetent government is incapable of reigning in serial tax avoiders.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles
    you might also be interested in...

    Retirement Planning

    When retirement planning becomes life planning it is a challenging, fun and fulfilling task.

    Age pension explained

    Anne explains whether you will qualify for an Age Pension and simplifies some of the more complex scenarios you may encounter dealing with Centrelink.

    Cruising

    Got the travel bug or need a break? Take a look at our latest Seniors travel discounts and deals.

    Meal Ideas

    Be inspired by our easy meal ideas. Search through hundreds of recipes to find the perfect one for any occasion.

    Trivia

    Have some fun and keep your mind active with our Daily Crossword, Trivia, Word Search and Sudoku Games.