GST on online

[tazzietiger]

Moves to slap GST on overseas online shopping purchases worth less than $1000 will be on the agenda when Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey meets his state and territory counterparts this week.
The treasurers will meet in Canberra on Wednesday from 8.30am for the Standing Council on Federal Financial Relations, the first since the change of government.
A spokeswoman for Mr Hockey said the meeting will focus on economic growth and ways to increase productivity.

The $1000 threshold at which the GST is collected on goods and services purchased from abroad will be on the agenda.​

The treasurers will consider potential options on collecting the GST on online transactions if the threshold was to be lowered.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/reta...ternet-shopping-purchases-20131125-2y4hn.html

The states will meet with the federal government tomorrow and on the agenda will be lowering the import threshold on what GST can be charged onto. I heard on tv that some are advocating it to be dropped to $30. I know retailers are struggling to compete against online shopping and the GST will give state revenues a boost but having to pay GST on items of over $30 from over-seas would be ridiculous.

 

[RUNVS]

I have heard this proposed before and in theory it is a good idea but I also heard in practice it is so expensive to enforce that it would end up costing the government money rather than making the government money.

 

[tandino]

Idiotic.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Backwards protectionism.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

People need to remember this isn't about revenue, it's about the Bricks and Mortar retailers wrecking the convenience of online.

No OS retailer will agree to charge GST, so it'll have to be collected at the delivery point. It'll mean having to go to the delivery centre to sign for everything, rather than having it delivered straight to your door.

 

[clogged]

People need to remember this isn't about revenue, it's about the Bricks and Mortar retailers wrecking the convenience of online.

No OS retailer will agree to charge GST, so it'll have to be collected at the delivery point. It'll mean having to go to the delivery centre to sign for everything, rather than having it delivered straight to your door.

Yep.

But then Amazon have recently set up an Australian domain and are looking at warehouse space, so retail in this country is screwed regardless.

 

[Pessimistic]

Tax and spend socialists

 

[Ice-Wolf]

"No, no it won't. The GST doesn't change under the Coalition." Tony Abbott

 

[Empire_Persian]

"No, no it won't. The GST doesn't change under the Coalition." Tony Abbott

Technically speaking, they are not really changing the GST. They are putting a mechanism in place to capture what is essentially already in the base.

Nonetheless, Australian retailers are f##ked. If they think tinkering with the GST will save them, they are kidding themsleves.

The push for this is primarily coming from state governments who are fiscally desperate and would sell their own grandmothers for a million dollars.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Technically speaking, they are not really changing the GST. They are putting a mechanism in place to capture what is essentially already in the base.

Nonetheless, Australian retailers are f##ked. If they think tinkering with the GST will save them, they are kidding themsleves. The push for this is primarily coming from state governments who are fiscally desperate.

Technically speaking they are as imports under a $1000 don't attract GST.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I have no objection to it in principle. Taxing consumption is taxing consumption. The only reason these purchases were exempt is because it was thought the cost of administration would be more than the revenue raised. If technology has changed in the decade or so since the GST was introduced, or if Treasury has come up with a new model, such that it lowers the cost of administration and makes a lower threshold workable, then I have no objection. It was a threshold chosen by practical considerations not based on any higher principle, so we should review it every so often to see if circumstances have changed.

 

[Moo]

There is a tipping point where collection costs > tax collected .....find it and enforce it.

Personally I'd rather tackle making religious organisations pay tax & trying to find a way to stop multinationals rorting the intellectual subsidy payments to avoid tax here.

 

[kimp]

The attractiveness of buying online will decrease as the dollar loses value. That's been the real driver to people ordering stuff online from OS. The savings have been signifiantly more than 10% so adjusting the GST level will have little impact in the grand scheme of things.
Also for companies that don't handle the GST the courier company does it on their behalf and it can be done over the phone with credit card.

Bricks and Mortar need to be worried about the convenience factor and improve their customer experience.

 

[Cap]

Just another push by people to avoid the glaring issues in Australia.

How about the unions focus on improving productivity and teaching their members how to be in customer facing roles. And the retailers do the same.

 

[tazzietiger]

Just another push by people to avoid the glaring issues in Australia.

How about the unions focus on improving productivity and teaching their members how to be in customer facing roles. And the retailers do the same.

Its actually sad we can't have a civil debate around this issue. Last night on skynews one of the commentators mentioned the overhead costs that effects shops rent, utilities and wages compared to the internet stores and Tony Sheldon(TWU) response was to go on the attack over the conservative commentator mentioning wages and how people will only earn $2 a day and have no rights if conservatives got their way. Do people truly believe that will happen if there was IR reform E.G if penalty rates was looked at. I have seen no push from the coalition to do away with the minimum wage.

 

[Cap]

Its an easy scare campaign. Fortunately change is inevitable so they can keep their heads in the sand until someone cuts it off or they can effect change in their own way.

 

[RUNVS]

Its actually sad we can't have a civil debate around this issue. Last night on skynews one of the commentators mentioned the overhead costs that effects shops rent, utilities and wages compared to the internet stores and Tony Sheldon(TWU) response was to go on the attack over the conservative commentator mentioning wages and how people will only earn $2 a day and have no rights if conservatives got their way. Do people truly believe that will happen if there was IR reform E.G if penalty rates was looked at. I have seen no push from the coalition to do away with the minimum wage.

Gina Rinehart is in favour of it and she has a way of getting what she wants within the coalition.

 

[Docker Clint]

FU Gerry Harvey.

 

[tazzietiger]

Gina Rinehart is in favour of it and she has a way of getting what she wants within the coalition.

I don't think they will put Gina's $2 a day idea over being in government. If they pushed to have wages at $2 a day they wouldn't win a election again. Gina doesn't control/write the coalition policy's.

[USER]Cap[/USER] I can see why the unions use the line as people(RUNVS just proved it) actually believe it will happen.

 

[The_Reaper]

Gina Rinehart is in favour of it and she has a way of getting what she wants within the coalition.

source?

Also the $2 a day comparison was an extremly poor attempt at illustratring how high wages in Western Australian mining are.

It's like how my mother always used to go on about starving children in Africa when I didn't eat broccoli.

Anyone interprating otherwise is doing so to push their agenda.

 

[RUNVS]

source?

Also the $2 a day comparison was an extremly poor attempt at illustratring how high wages in Western Australian mining are.

It's like how my mother always used to go on about starving children in Africa when I didn't eat broccoli.

Anyone interprating otherwise is doing so to push their agenda.

In a 10-minute video posted on the Sydney Mining Club website, Ms Rinehart said despite wanting to create sustainable jobs in Australia, she and others are being forced to “make a different” choice.

“People who know what it is to hire people…understand better than most what could prevent them from doing so,” she said.

Overseas competitors, such as in Africa, can offer much cheaper investment opportunities, she said.
"Furthermore, Africans want to work and its workers are willing to work for less than $2 per day,'' Ms Rinehart says in the video.

"Such statistics make me worry for this country's future.''

http://www.news.com.au/business/com...usiness-rinehart/story-fnda1bsz-1226465315817

Watching the full video of Rinehart it is clear she is saying that she doesn't want to invest in Australia as she can get workers a lot cheaper in Africa. She then goes on to talk about Australia needing to become more competitive and in the same breath mentioning how she only has to pay Africans $2 a day.

 

[The_Reaper]

http://www.news.com.au/business/com...usiness-rinehart/story-fnda1bsz-1226465315817

Watching the full video of Rinehart it is clear she is saying that she doesn't want to invest in Australia as she can get workers a lot cheaper in Africa. She then goes on to talk about Australia needing to become more competitive and in the same breath mentioning how she only has to pay Africans $2 a day.

Yes. A very poor way to argue against the reality that costs in the industry are too high. Even Gary Gray admits that.

 

[Cap]

I dont think we need to change the minimum wage.

 

[Power Raid]

either gst has to be removed of australian items or gst applied to imports (under the threshold)

the cost argument is ludicrous as it could be achieved with very little cost

 

[samFFC]

Useful article: http://theconversation.com/states-push-for-gst-on-online-shopping-is-just-small-change-20755

Agree with this sentiment:

In principle, the argument for neutral taxation of all consumption goods – whether produced domestically, imported in packages valued at more than $1000, or imported in less than $1000 packages – is impeccable.

Later mention of the high cost.

But if the cost is able to be minimised, why the strong opposition to it?

Personally, I feel that broadening the base, and/or increase the rate from 10%, are worse options, given the regressive nature of the tax. I know this is likely to occur in the future, but this can and should only be done with a clear knowledge of the likely impact it will have, if we start to apply the GST to fresh food, water, health etc., or increase the rate to 12.5 or 15% (or more?). I'm not necessarily opposed to this idea full stop, just that I see it as a far bigger topic to work through than taxing online items. Why should they be exempt, if goods sold in Australian shopping centres are not?