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


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.


RSS 2.0

Mining tax spreads wealth to 1% but Bolivia shows different path

By Fred Fuentes - posted Tuesday, 27 March 2012

Australian Treasurer Wayne Swan said on March 20 that his government’s Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) was "central to the government’s plan to spread the benefits of the mining boom to more Australians for generations to come".

Lauding the tax, which had passed through parliament the day before, he said the MRRT was about "ensuring all Australians share in the benefits of the mining boom, not just a fortunate few".

Despite this, Swan could point to only three concrete gains from the expected $10.6 billion that the MRRT is forecast to bring in during its first three years: tax cuts for business, investments in infrastructure in mining areas and improvements to workers’



That is, big business will benefit the most. Corporate Australia will save an estimated $1.6 billion a year in tax cuts. And the government will give back much of the tax to mining companies in the form of mining industry infrastructure.

Mining companies will pay far less tax than they would have if the Gillard-Swan Labor leadership had not caved in to the mining magnates’

campaign against former PM Kevin Rudd’s Resources Super Profits Tax.

As for workers’ superannuation, Treasury estimates show that changes to the rate of superannuation paid will cost the government $250 million in 2013-14 and $500 million in 2014-15, while the abolition of age limits will cost $15 million a year between 2013 and 2015.

This amounts to about 10% of the expected MRRT revenue, hardly evidence of "spreading the benefits".


The government has reassured big business that even this small improvement will not come at the cost of their profits. Instead, it will come from workers’ wages.

Superannuation Minister Bill Shorten told the November 23 Australian:

"Increasing superannuation is not a cost in terms of employers, because what happens is it is offset against real wage increases."

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

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

2 posts so far.

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

About the Author

Fred Fuentes is a member of the Socialist Alliance and an author for Green Left Weekly.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Fred Fuentes

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

Article Tools
Comment 2 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy