Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A fictitious Federal Budget speech

By Gavin Putland - posted Thursday, 23 August 2012


If the necessary contribution to "general revenue" is paid by employers instead of the Superannuation Guarantee, it will not require employers as a class to find any additional income, and will therefore not cause any overall rise in prices. Again, if that contribution is levied on anything but labour, it will preserve the desired reduction in the cost of labour as seen by employers, without reducing the workers' take-home pay.

The third-biggest reverse tariff, and the third-biggest reason why the cost of hiring a worker exceeds the worker's take-home pay, is State payroll tax.

Accordingly, under this Budget, the Commonwealth will use its conditional grants power to compel the abolition of State payroll taxes from 1 July 2013. The States will be compensated by increased grants from the Commonwealth, funded out of general revenue.

Advertisement

Under Australia's constitutional arrangements, the primary responsibility for public investment in infrastructure rests with the States, which delegate some of that responsibility to local councils.

The benefit of a public infrastructure project is manifested in higher property values in locations served by the project. More precisely, it is manifested as uplifts in site values, which are also loosely called land values or unimproved values. So, if the tax system captures a sufficient percentage of each uplift, the project will pay for itself by expanding the revenue base, without increasing tax rates, and without burdening taxpayers who don't share in the benefit.

Accordingly, from 1 July 2013, Commonwealth grants to the States will be subject to the following conditions:

First, the States will require local councils to raise at least 80% of their own-source revenue from general rates on site values, with effect from 1 July 2014. The new rating system won't penalize construction. To ease the transition, year-on-year percentage increases in general rate bills, including any increases that coincide with the change in the rating system, will be capped in real terms.

The caps will be determined by local councils -- not imposed from above. In addition, councils will be given the unfettered right -- if they don't already have it -- to defer rate payments from property owners who are asset-rich but income-poor, until their properties are sold in the normal course of events. No home owner should be forced to sell in order to pay rates.

Second, insurance taxes, emergency service levies, conveyancing stamp duties, betterment levies, infrastructure levies on developers, and the existing land tax (not to be confused with local rates) will be abolished.

Advertisement

Third, in lieu of the abolished taxes, the States will levy a "vendor duty" on all capital gains on property realized after 1 July 2013.

Property owners who have paid the old stamp duty more recently will be automatically compensated because their capital gains will be smaller.

As buildings don't appreciate in value, except by way of capital expenditure which is deductible against capital gains, the vendor duty will automatically avoid penalizing construction. The rate of the vendor duty, and whether that rate is applied to real or nominal capital gains, and whether there are any concessions for the family home or any transitional arrangements for properties purchased before tonight, will be matters for the individual States.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

This article is a non-partisan abridgment of a half-hour speech with two versions - one for a Labor government and one for a conservative government.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

10 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Gavin R. Putland is the director of the Land Values Research Group at Prosper Australia.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Gavin Putland

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Gavin Putland
Article Tools
Comment 10 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy