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

The Henry Tax Review: pearls before swine?

By Bryan Kavanagh - posted Friday, 28 February 2014


Now Qantas. Who's next?

Australian business doesn't deserve to survive. It's beyond repair. Some sections want tariffs to protect them against cheap imports. Others want to drive down wages (apparently so they can match those of the Chinese) in order to keep turning a profit.

Yes, and while we're at it, why don't we also remove all those fences at the top of cliffs and put ambulances down at the bottom? That might keep people in jobs at the expense of all other Australians, too.

Advertisement

The collapse of Australian industry and business is rarely correctly sheeted home to the perversity of the 125 taxes that make up the Australian tax regime at local, state and federal levels. Australia's Future Tax System (AFTS) found that 115 of these were inefficient, raising only 10% of our revenue, and could easily be abolished, together with their collection costs and deadweight.

 

Australian business ignores a truism: when you continue to tax products and services, you will have less of them. Surely then, with Australian manufacturing and other businesses in their death throes, abolishing the 115 taxes suggested by the Henry Tax Review has something to recommend it as a good starting point?

The relative silence greeting this recommendation might be explained in terms of not meeting business expectations that favoured tariffs, or a labour relations program that would abolish penalty rates, or otherwise reduce wages.

In noting the mobility of international capital and the increasing mobility of labour, the Henry Tax Review also recommended greater use of Australia's land and natural resources as a tax base, as these are unable to flee to tax havens.

Secondary, but important, considerations were that capture of the economic rents of Australia's resources will not create any less of them, nor can they be passed on in prices like taxes on incomes, services and products.

Advertisement

This proposal was also greeted by a yawn from business, if not antagonism in certain quarters. Perhaps a perceived need to remove Kevin Rudd and the Labor government from office had come to override genuine discussion of tax reform?

For example, the exceptionally hostile response from the big mining companies when the Rudd government tried to implement the Henry Tax Review's proposed 40% resource super profits tax (RSPT) on mining was largely supported by business. The mining lobby spent $22 million in a successful advertising campaign to scrap the tax and this played an integral role in Kevin Rudd's removal from the prime ministership.

Rudd's replacement, Julia Gillard, cobbled together the minerals resource rent tax (MRRT) to replace the far sounder RSPT in a backroom deal with selected big miners. As the MRRT has delivered little revenue, it seems the miners have won another round at the expense of most Australians.

So, let's investigate the practical merits of the original mining tax, the RSPT, at 40% of net profit before tax. (It has commercial parallels when a going concern business is leased out to tenants on the basis of a 50:50 split of net profit before tax.)

 

KPMG-Econtech modelled Australian taxes and found the existing 40% petroleum resource rent tax had no welfare loss for each additional dollar of revenue raised, none at all; therefore, in attempting to "sell" the RSPT mining tax, the Rudd government failed to educate Australians that this would simply bring mining into line with the petroleum tax which has proved in application to have zero social cost.

At the other end of the KPMG-Econtech modelling scale were royalties and crude oil excises: these show a welfare loss of 70 cents for each additional dollar collected, and are the mining taxes to which prime minister Abbott and treasurer Hockey are wedded once the MRRT, an admittedly poor tax itself, is removed.

Therefore, Labor having been scared out of tax reform by the mining lobby, and the lobby having captured the ear of the new Liberal government, where lies any hope of implementing any tax reform at all from the recommendations of the Henry Tax Review, arguably the most comprehensive analysis of taxation produced anywhere in the world?

Business did not support the mining tax for its efficiency, nor has it supported the other leg, reform of state land taxes. It interesting to note that municipal rates and land taxes, at a welfare cost of less than 10 cents in the dollar, are the next most efficient to the RSPT and petrol resource rent tax. These compare with conveyancing stamp duties at a social cost of about 35% and corporate and payroll taxes around 40%.

As it seems business has not been won over by the relative efficiency argument, one is entitled to inquire what it actually takes to get business up in arms against a tax regime that is slowly but surely strangling it?

Now that Labor is out of its way, if it refuses to acknowledge the obvious benefits of the tax reforms outlined in the Henry Tax Review, one is left to conclude that Australian business doesn't deserve to be saved, and that it's all downhill from here.

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


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

16 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

Bryan Kavanagh is a real estate valuer and associate of the Land Values Research Group.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Bryan Kavanagh

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

Photo of Bryan Kavanagh
Article Tools
Comment 16 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy