GST revisited - Who will be the winners (and more important, the losers)

Remove this Banner Ad

You must not have had any work carried out on your home.
I can't remember the last time a tradesman sent me an invoice or accepted cheques.

At least we will collect 10% and possibly 15% off these guys as they spend it
 
I believe Mike Bairds GST proposal is something like this;

All additional revenue to the Commonwealth until 2020 when it will be re-negotiated;

Increase GST from 10% to 15% with no broadening; increasing revenue by $32 billion per year.
Cut company tax rate to 25%
Cut all income tax rates by 7%; so
$0-$18,200 tax free;
$18,201-$37,000 12%
$37,001-$80,000 = 25.5%
$80,001 – $180,000 = 30%
$180,001 and over = 38%

An additional $1.8 billion per year to the states for spending on health and education.
$8 billion in compensation to low income families

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/nsw-proposes-100b-gst-hike-to-mostly-fund-tax-cuts-20160130-gmhuu5
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I sense we have to look at our govt spending along with the review of increasing taxes. Its a shame we wasted so much and racked up so much debt during the GFC and afterward.

Yes it was a shame we invested money to keep the economy out of recession & people in work & able to pay their bills & mortgages. Maybe we should have allowed the economy to have taken a more 'natural' course into recession, like Spain for instance. Who cares about causing misery to those who had no part in causing the GFC.

Maybe if we do look at Gument waste, inefficiency & overspending. Why has our military budget ballooned out so much. Why do we need things like the over priced pile of shyte like the F35. Why has private school funding gone up at an average 3.5% whilst Gument schools funding has fallen way below the private school increases.
 
Increasing private school funding saves governments money.

I'm no expert on defence spending. I don't see how fighter planes meet our local region objectives (happy to have that explained to me), but NZ have no Air Force safe in the knowledge Australia will have their backs if the shut ever huts the fun.

Deficit was arguably advisable during the downturn period but we're through that and our fiscal position hasn't returned to sustainability. Generally revenue is down as a % of GDP compared to pre-2008 figures, but spending using the same metric is way up.
 
Yes it was a shame we invested money to keep the economy out of recession & people in work & able to pay their bills & mortgages. Maybe we should have allowed the economy to have taken a more 'natural' course into recession, like Spain for instance. Who cares about causing misery to those who had no part in causing the GFC.

Maybe if we do look at Gument waste, inefficiency & overspending. Why has our military budget ballooned out so much. Why do we need things like the over priced pile of shyte like the F35. Why has private school funding gone up at an average 3.5% whilst Gument schools funding has fallen way below the private school increases.

I think you've miss understood the GFC.

It was caused by debt in places like the US and those hit hardest were places like Spain, Italy, Greece etc living off debt and no productivity.

We chose long term pain for no gain.
 
There was clearly gain; Rudd and Henry avoided the recession and many kept their jobs. Compare this to Keating's recession of the early 1990s, when, according to Ken Henry, around 50% of those who lost their jobs never worked again. And plenty lost their jobs.

It was actually when stimulus was tied in to other objectives (infrastructure, environmental) that it spiraled out of control.
 
I don't see the point of reducing tax rates for those earning over, say, $500,000 per year. Keep them at 45%.
Raise the rate. What better incentive can you give someone? It will encourage the rich to get up some pluck, work harder and earn more money to maintain their lifestyles.
 
There was clearly gain; Rudd and Henry avoided the recession and many kept their jobs. Compare this to Keating's recession of the early 1990s, when, according to Ken Henry, around 50% of those who lost their jobs never worked again. And plenty lost their jobs.

It was actually when stimulus was tied in to other objectives (infrastructure, environmental) that it spiraled out of control.

I'm not sure the first home owners worked other than lining the pockets of property developers.

Take your own view on the wheel of fortune cash give away (aka Harvey Norman), the set top box, insulation and school halls.

Perhaps forcing the RBA to act with high interest rates to counter the overcooked economy and killing industries like refining and manufacturing was worth it. I disagree as blue collar work is extremely valuable and a real shame that we have lost it through poor power and fiscal policy.
 
I think you've miss understood the GFC.

It was caused by debt in places like the US and those hit hardest were places like Spain, Italy, Greece etc living off debt and no productivity.

We chose long term pain for no gain.

I think most people misunderstood the GFC. Especially 99% of economists & politicians who are good at gabbing off about it after the event & had no idea it was even coming before hand.

Most economists believed some fiscal stimulus was a good thing. It stopped the misery & pain a lot of families would have felt. I'm not arguing that it couldnt have been done better. But that would have been wise after the event.

The cheap abuse meted out by the LNP over the issue was just cheap political shots. They carried on without any admission that the GFC actually occurred & was the reason for the spending.

'Long term pain for no gain' is also a cheap & unhelpful shot. Because its not true. Its too easy to say this or that after the event. You can argue to a degree it could have been done differently.

You could do better addressing the level & expediency of Gument spending now. That would help, perhaps.
 
I think most people misunderstood the GFC. Especially 99% of economists & politicians who are good at gabbing off about it after the event & had no idea it was even coming before hand.

Most economists believed some fiscal stimulus was a good thing. It stopped the misery & pain a lot of families would have felt. I'm not arguing that it couldnt have been done better. But that would have been wise after the event.

The cheap abuse meted out by the LNP over the issue was just cheap political shots. They carried on without any admission that the GFC actually occurred & was the reason for the spending.

'Long term pain for no gain' is also a cheap & unhelpful shot. Because its not true. Its too easy to say this or that after the event. You can argue to a degree it could have been done differently.

You could do better addressing the level & expediency of Gument spending now. That would help, perhaps.

The stimulus helped the wealthy and the masses will pay for it. Yet the masses like that......go figure
 
I sense we have to look at our govt spending along with the review of increasing taxes. Its a shame we wasted so much and racked up so much debt during the GFC and afterward.

You're too kind to Howard and Costello again for some reason.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You're too kind to Howard and Costello again for some reason.
I don't think Costello and Howard wasted so much money on consumption based projects like the School Halls and Pink Batts now. If they started raising debt for projects at their interest rate then I would consider them incredibly stupid (6%+ interest rates? seriously?)

The main crux of the argument is that when we were low in the cycle, we raised debt (like any smart government would do in a low interest rate environment) then you spend it on building infrastructure for the next boom. Victoria, WA and QLD are prime examples of states that are doing that at the moment.

However, what happened is we spent it on a stimulus which went to mostly consumption but in someways built infrastructure (by people who saved/invested) then we went onto the School Halls/Pink batts which were also consumption based. The NBN is the only infrastructure project that I can actually think of that was of any use and of coruse it was managed abysmally which made it even worse.
 
Family payments through Centrelink are "middle class welfare".

Cutting taxes is cutting taxes. It's not welfare if the government never receives the money.

There's no point having "blue collar work" for its own sake. We must make things to be sure, but to survive at the pay rates Australians have come to expect, we need to make things that are better than everyone else. It would have been cheaper for the Australian government to employ every worker at Ford, Holden and Toyota as APS4 level than it did to maintain a car manufacturing industry.
 
Forgive me an exaggeration. I admit fault.

Workers at Toyota were only subsidized $50,000 per year. I would have thought that money would have been better spent getting those people to build roads or train tracks.
 
It appears Turnbull has turned tail & run from any meaningful taxation & spending reforms. I await the use of 3 word slogans to explain his about face.

Will the states have to return to more inefficient taxes to bridge the growing health & education gap. ??

The cheap comments about better efficiencies will only go so far. In the end the ageing population will want services. What do we do. Have people dying in the streets? Condemn kids to lower education outcomes? Both are poor outcomes for a so called wealthy, knowledge & services based 1st world economy.

Have our politicians let us down again? More interested in fighting each other than working for the nation?????
 
As someone on a fixed income (superannuation pension) I would be against increasing the GST by 50% as has been proposed; unless of course they increase my pension by the same percentage.
 
Increasing private school funding saves governments money.

That's why so many other OECD nations follow suit and also have such generous funding arrangements for private schools.

I won't derail this, however I would much rather the Govt gradually exit funding private education and remove the tax deductibility of large donations to private schools.

Run the linear models of how much it saves, I prefer the Govt stick to essential business and whilst I emphatically support Freedom of Choice....you also can pay for it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top