Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Abbott Government

Jump to new
Seems lying is a disease in ranks:

"I never set a target. That was implied by the Labor Party. We're not going to make the same mistakes that the Labor Party made. Trust me we don't do that,"

which is not true considering Hockey did set a target back in the days pre election:


"Based on the numbers presented last Tuesday night we will achieve a surplus in our first year in office and we will achieve a surplus for every year of the first term"

Why can't he just say everything has gone pear shaped and all bets are off?
 
Tisme said:
Seems lying is a disease in ranks:

"I never set a target. That was implied by the Labor Party. We're not going to make the same mistakes that the Labor Party made. Trust me we don't do that,"

which is not true considering Hockey did set a target back in the days pre election:


"Based on the numbers presented last Tuesday night we will achieve a surplus in our first year in office and we will achieve a surplus for every year of the first term"

Why can't he just say everything has gone pear shaped and all bets are off?
Click to expand...

That one ranks up there with Christopher Pyne claiming they could have run a surplus through the GFC.

It's the lie that a budget best effort guestimate is somehow 100% guaranteed to occur.

Prob be better if they followed the RBA with their 70% and 90% estimate ranges, but then that doesn't sound nearly as nice as a very specific number to quote to the punters.
 
surely it's time to start hacking into some of our world beating tax expenditures.

Make the tax system fair, more efficient, less distorting and stop the revenue bleed. Seems like win win win to me.

As for the cost of super, even if the true cost is half the amount forecast by Treasury above, their cost to the Budget would still be a military budget esq $25 billion by 2017-18!

The Capital gains discount forecast to hit over $8B in just a few years, and the GST exemptions also over $20B.
 

Attachments

  • tax exp.PNG
    tax exp.PNG
    56.8 KB · Views: 13
SirRumpole said:
A cool headed analysis of our economic prospects from one of the best PM's we never had.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-15/hewson-myefo-time-to-face-up-to-some-realities/5966680
Click to expand...

It is good and respect Hewson

This is the real killer, absolute damming article

Stephen Koukoulas rips the heart out the Coalition lies.

MYEFO warning fails to curb spending spree

The Abbott Government is undertaking a massive spending spree.


This jus extraordinary

Having been in control of the budget for 15 months, the MYEFO reveals that the Abbott Government has boosted government spending to stunningly high 25.9 per cent of GDP in 2014-15.

Quite extraordinarily, this is just 0.1 per cent of GDP below the 2009-10 level of government spending that incorporated the massive fiscal stimulus measures from the Rudd government, which were implemented to counter the global financial crisis.
Click to expand...


This is why I keep asking why the Coalition doesn't stop Labors wasteful spending thats keeps being claim here.

What is also extraordinary is that the forward estimates for the budget out to 2017-18 confirm government spending remaining above 25 per cent of GDP in each and every year. To put this spending spree in context, in Labor's last three full budgets, government spending was under 25 per cent of GDP in each year.
Click to expand...


On the tax and revenue side, Mr Hockey's MYEFO is projecting a surge of money into the Treasury coffers. From a recent low of 19.9 per cent of GDP in 2010-11, the level of tax will have risen to 22.0 per cent in 2014-15 and is forecast to rise to 23.1 per cent in 2017-18. This is back to the long-run historical average and suggests that the failure to move the budget back to surplus is a spending issue, not so much of a revenue shortage.

The failure to return the budget to surplus is squarely the result of the Abbott Government spending on its pet projects.
Click to expand...


To be sure, the Abbott Government has imposed a range of spending cuts, especially in pensions, education and health over the forward estimates. But rather than using the savings to feed into the bottom line of the budget, the money has been "recycled" into other areas of spending.
Click to expand...


The first 15 months of the Abbott Government has upsized government spending, which is a problem that has been compounded by the consequences of a weaker world economy, a sharp fall in commodity prices and rising unemployment. The budget deficit has jumped as a result and the 2016-17 forecast for a budget surplus contained in the Pre-Election and Fiscal Outlook released during the 2013 election campaign, is no longer attainable. It will not be until 2019-20 that the budget will return to surplus
Click to expand...


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-16/koukoulas-myefo-warning-fails-to-curb-spending-spree/5969364
 
sptrawler said:
That's classic TS.:xyxthumbs
Click to expand...

IFocus does bring up some terse points. John Hewson was the best prime minister we never had because of Mike Willesee and a birthday cake. True.

Unlike NBN and Nation building projects the Libs have to borrow money to pay the interest bill from Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era. ?

Iron ore down 30% over 4 years knocks about 9 billion a year out of revenue.

Crude down to 4 year lows = another 5 billions gone.

Joe Hockey and the South African conman are in the firing line.
 
Just read a story which offered a simple, practical and relatively painless way of fixing the deficit in one go.

This would be a $12 billion a year improvement to the budget...

How ? Tax compulsory superannuation payments as income (which in fact it is after all. ) There is a further twist as well but I suggest it offers much food for thought.

Advice for Hockey: Sting super and fix the budget in one hit

.....What he needs instead is one really big tax hike (spending cuts won't raise enough), but one won't rip money out of wallets and purses. It needs to be easy to justify (attractive to Labor), invisible on a day-to-day basis, and simple. And it needs to raise, say, $12 billion. Per year.

Labor's own tax review has already pointed the way, but at the time Labor was too scared to take any notice.

What Hockey needs to do is to tax compulsory superannuation contributions as income, which is what they are. At the moment after the employer pays them they are taxed from the fund at 15 per cent, which is a very good deal if you are on a marginal tax of 37 per cent, quite a good deal if your rate is 19 per cent, and an appalling deal if you earn so little your tax rate is zero.

Instead of being paid by the fund the tax would be paid by the employee at the same time as all their other tax, in the same way as other tax and at the same rate as other tax. Nothing could be simpler.

The Treasury says the present tax arrangement will cost the budget $17.8 billion this financial year, $19.15 billion next financial year and $20.7 billion the following year. The figures exclude the incredibly generous concessions for the income earned within super funds, which needn't be touched. But they do include the tax concessions on extra contributions made over and above what's compulsory. To the extent that they are made merely to avoid tax they will vanish, cutting the benefit for the government to about $12 billion a year – which happens to be about what's needed.
Click to expand...

The article goes on to show how the government could then boost super income by 25-40% by simply creating real competition amongst fund managers that would reduce their current excess commissions. (In effect taxpayers would get back what they lost in the tax change.)

I think this is a very clever and practical idea.

Thoughts ?

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...ix-the-budget-in-one-hit-20141215-1272tu.html
 
basilio said:
Just read a story which offered a simple, practical and relatively painless way of fixing the deficit in one go.

This would be a $12 billion a year improvement to the budget...

How ? Tax compulsory superannuation payments as income (which in fact it is after all. ) There is a further twist as well but I suggest it offers much food for thought.

The article goes on to show how the government could then boost super income by 25-40% by simply creating real competition amongst fund managers that would reduce their current excess commissions. (In effect taxpayers would get back what they lost in the tax change.)

I think this is a very clever and practical idea.

Thoughts ?

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...ix-the-budget-in-one-hit-20141215-1272tu.html
Click to expand...

It is already taxed at 15%. Can society afford it? Agree on the fund managers being competitive but not sure if taxing the last bastion is the answer?
 
trainspotter said:
It is already taxed at 15%. Can society afford it? Agree on the fund managers being competitive but not sure if taxing the last bastion is the answer?
Click to expand...

But then not taxing it means income and corporate taxes are higher than they otherwise would be.

The states keep their nasty stamp duties as well.

We could remove the $20B in GST exemptions, use some of that money to compensate the poor to limit it's effects.

Cut back on Govt handouts to the states - meanign they can afford to cut corporate and income taxes

This will encourage the states to bring in land taxes to pay for the services they're responsible for.

Helps to resolve the blame game of the states crying poor that the feds ain't helping them enough. Overcomes the fisical imbalances between the feds and states taxing powers.

Just takes a Govt that is willing to be honest with the punters that there is no cost free way to get us out of the deepening budget black hole we're sinking into. Share the pain in a fair way and the public is likely to support you. If the next budget is as unfair as the current one then we can only expect the voters to jack up even more, the senate will be emboldened to block as much as it can, and we can prob say good by to the AAA credit rating, the 2 notches of credit rating increased the banks get from this, and higher interest rates all round.

Hockey's already admitted he can't bring himself to do this, so the question is does the Coalition have anyone competent enough to pull it off? Blaming Labor is wearing thin now. Trying to blame Labor for their forecast a couple of years ago is pretty pathetic, especially when the current Govt's efforts have been just as off the mark.
 
wonder how the Government is going to spin this.

How is the Govt spending the same as what Labor was during the GFC, and most on this forum label as waste and mismanagement?

Seems the Government is spending like the Howard years, only they don't have the revenue to cover up the mismanagement.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-16/koukoulas-myefo-warning-fails-to-curb-spending-spree/5969364

Having been in control of the budget for 15 months, the MYEFO reveals that the Abbott Government has boosted government spending to stunningly high 25.9 per cent of GDP in 2014-15.

Quite extraordinarily, this is just 0.1 per cent of GDP below the 2009-10 level of government spending that incorporated the massive fiscal stimulus measures from the Rudd government, which were implemented to counter the global financial crisis.

What is also extraordinary is that the forward estimates for the budget out to 2017-18 confirm government spending remaining above 25 per cent of GDP in each and every year. To put this spending spree in context, in Labor's last three full budgets, government spending was under 25 per cent of GDP in each year.

The massive boost to spending from the Abbott Government revolves around some high profile signature policies, in particular spending on the paid parental leave scheme, defence, roads, direct action on climate change, border protection and Australia's military involvement in the Middle East. A weak economy has added to spending growth.

On the tax and revenue side, Mr Hockey's MYEFO is projecting a surge of money into the Treasury coffers. From a recent low of 19.9 per cent of GDP in 2010-11, the level of tax will have risen to 22.0 per cent in 2014-15 and is forecast to rise to 23.1 per cent in 2017-18. This is back to the long-run historical average and suggests that the failure to move the budget back to surplus is a spending issue, not so much of a revenue shortage.

The failure to return the budget to surplus is squarely the result of the Abbott Government spending on its pet projects.
Click to expand...
 
sydboy007 said:
wonder how the Government is going to spin this.

How is the Govt spending the same as what Labor was during the GFC, and most on this forum label as waste and mismanagement?

Seems the Government is spending like the Howard years, only they don't have the revenue to cover up the mismanagement.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-16/koukoulas-myefo-warning-fails-to-curb-spending-spree/5969364
Click to expand...

If you actually read other people's posts you may find this has already been raised at #5264.
 
basilio said:
Just read a story which offered a simple, practical and relatively painless way of fixing the deficit in one go.

This would be a $12 billion a year improvement to the budget...

How ? Tax compulsory superannuation payments as income (which in fact it is after all. ) There is a further twist as well but I suggest it offers much food for thought.
Click to expand...

I have a better soln = bring super for public servants back into line with the private sector. The benefits, topups, flex times, stupid positions should be cleaved and the risk taking private sector put back at the top of earning capacity ladder. The public service used to be about jobs for life traded off against modest, but secured wages.
 
Well tisme, going on you're post, they aren't doing too bad.:D

From Syd's post:

The massive boost to spending from the Abbott Government revolves around some high profile signature policies, in particular spending on the paid parental leave scheme, defence, roads, direct action on climate change, border protection and Australia's military involvement in the Middle East. A weak economy has added to spending growth.

So out of your list, they pretty well tick the boxes.:xyxthumbs
 
The true face of the LNP double standards and hypocrisy is revealed.

Just another vote grabbing grandstanding promise backed down on.


Hockey backflips on tax laws to target multinational profit shifters


Labor: MYEFO contains broken promise

Joe Hockey is 'all mouth and no trousers' when it comes to chasing down multinational tax avoidance, alleges Shadow Assistant Treasurer Andrew Leigh.


Treasurer Joe Hockey has broken a pledge to impose tough new tax avoidance rules on multinational companies that shift billions of dollars in profits between Australia and their international subsidiaries.

The practice of global corporations loading up subsidiaries with debt and then claiming relief from the Australian tax man on the interest paid gives an "unfair competitive advantage" over local rivals, Treasury said in 2013.

"When some taxpayers avoid or minimise their tax in a sustained way, the tax burden eventually falls more heavily on other taxpayers," a Treasury issues paper found at the time.

The Gillard government announced the abolition of deductions under section 25-90 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 as part of a package to combat tax minimisation by global corporations, at a projected benefit to the taxpayer of $600 million.


In November last year, Mr Hockey and the then Assistant Treasurer, Arthur Sinodinos, announced they would not legislate Labor's package, saying it would impose "unreasonable compliance costs on Australian companies" with subsidiaries offshore.

The current loophole favours the largest companies operating in Australia. Mining industry sources suggested they include Swiss-based Glencore and Anglo American.

Instead, Mr Hockey – who has trumpeted a global tax crackdown on multinationals through the G20 process – and Mr Sinodinos pledged in November to "introduce a targeted anti‑avoidance provision after detailed consultation with stakeholders".

But in Monday's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, a single line on page 117 revealed: "The government will not proceed with a targeted anti-avoidance provision to address certain conduit arrangements involving foreign multinational enterprises, first announced in the 2013-14 MYEFO."

While companies like IKEA and Apple have been in the news for "offshoring" billions of dollars made in Australia, tax experts told Fairfax Media it was Australia-based global players that will benefit the most from the government's backdown.

Companies with significant operations overseas get a "double bonus" under the existing law, introduced by the Howard government in 2001, because dividends from their international subsidiaries are tax exempt yet the interest on borrowings used to grow overseas operations is tax deductible.

One of the loudest opponents of the plan to abolish deductions was major Liberal Party donor Paul Ramsay, now deceased, who complained it would make it more expensive for his company Ramsay Health Care to use debt to invest in Europe.

On Tuesday, shadow assistant treasurer Andrew Leigh accused Mr Hockey of "sneaking in another giveaway for multinational companies" despite presiding over a near doubling of the deficit in 2014/15.

"Yet again the Treasurer has shown that he is happy to let big companies off the hook while hacking into foreign aid, schools, hospitals and pensions," Mr Leigh said.

Mr Hockey's office referred questions to Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, who took on Mr Sinodinos' portfolio after he stood aside pending upcoming findings by the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.

In a statement, Mr Cormann insisted "No promise was broken" by the announcement in MYEFO on Monday

"Following consultation with stakeholders and the Australian Taxation Office, it became very clear that a targeted anti-avoidance provision would be ineffective," he said.

"It is important to remember that the proposed changes to section 25‑90 were never advocated in isolation, but were part of a broader package to address profit shifting by excessive allocation of debt to the Australian operations of multinationals.

"The government has implemented key elements of this package, including tightening the thin capitalisation safe harbour limits and ensuring the foreign non-portfolio dividend exemption for Australian companies only applies to returns on equity.

"As a result of these changes, all debt used to fund Australian operations, including debt used to fund offshore investments which give rise to 25-90 deductions, is now subject to the binding constraint of the thin capitalisation rules, which provide protection against abuse of section 25‑90 deductions."

John Passant, an outspoken tax expert from the Australian National University, recently wrote about the government's decision not to abolish section 25-90 deductions.

"It is unfortunate in the extreme that the Treasurer and Treasury have listened to a group of rent seekers being unjustly rewarded by not repealing section 25-90. But since this is a government of the 1% that is not surprising and we can conclude in fact that Hockey's bluster about addressing tax avoidance by his rich mates is just that – complete and utter bluster," he wrote.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...national-profit-shifters-20141216-128ebg.html
Click to expand...
 
SirRumpole said:
The true face of the LNP double standards and hypocrisy is revealed.

Just another vote grabbing grandstanding promise backed down on.


"As a result of these changes, all debt used to fund Australian operations, including debt used to fund offshore investments which give rise to 25-90 deductions, is now subject to the binding constraint of the thin capitalisation rules, which provide protection against abuse of section 25‑90 deductions"Mr Cormann
Click to expand...


A Plutocrat with a mouthful of meta words, but no substance.

I'm guessing Newscorp enjoys some taxation minimisation.
 
Top