Labor supports tax cuts, should disband

There is no other way to put it than a complete sellout. The AFR is piling on the pressure:

Senior Labor figures are leaning towards waving through the Morrison government’s full $158 billion income tax cut package but only after trying to split the legislation so the party can symbolically vote against relief for high income earners.

With Opposition leader Anthony Albanese calling a shadow cabinet meeting for Monday in a bid to settle on a position, frontbenchers are canvassing the option as a way to make a political point that the stage three tax cuts are fiscally reckless while also allowing Labor to neutralise the issue and move on.

Along with its businomics sister at The Australian:

Anthony Albanese has been warned Labor would “further ­tarnish” its reputation with corporate Australia if it opposes Scott Morrison’s income tax cut package, as business leaders across the nation urge the opposition to ­accept the government’s election mandate to implement its $158 billion plan in full.

Energy Australia chairman Graham Bradley told The Weekend Australian that it was essential to business confidence that Labor delivered bipartisan support for the Prime Minister’s three-tiered tax package. “It is absolutely critical that there is money put into consumers’ pockets at this time,” Mr Bradley said.

The former Business Council of Australia president, who is also the chairman of GrainCorp and HSBC Australia, said the ­Coalition had a “clear election mandate” on the policy. “I believe business fully supports both the direction and the urgency of ­implementing these cuts,” he said. “I think (Labor) will further tarnish their reputation (with business) if they don’t support them.”

Bradley has never seen a Labor policy that he liked. Why would it listen to him?

The Coalition’s tax cut package is massively regressive and would reduce the annual tax bill of people on the highest incomes by more than $11,000 from 2024-25 if the third stage proceeds.

This is irreconcilable with any notion of “labour” politics. It is also stupid politics. The Government will be blamed for any broken promise not Labor.

Moreover, if it folds, the current leverage in the senate enjoyed by Centre Alliance, which is being deployed as a weapon to crush the gas cartel and prevent the destruction of 200k manufacturing jobs, will be lost.

Labor must hold the line or it might as well disband.


Update. It has folded:

Australia is set to legislate a 30-cents-in-the-dollar tax rate for all workers earning under $200,000, with the Labor Party preparing to announce it will not block the tax cuts.

The New Daily has confirmed the strategy, to be discussed at shadow cabinet on Monday, leaves open the door to a future Labor government repealing the 2024 tax cuts for high-income earners, which it regards as regressive and unaffordable. 

But crucially, the ALP would not insist on amendments so it cannot be accused of delaying $1080 tax cuts for 10 million workers from July 1.

Houses and Holes

David Llewellyn-Smith is Chief Strategist at the MB Fund and MB Super. David is the founding publisher and editor of MacroBusiness and was the fouding publisher and global economy editor of The Diplomat, the Asia Pacific’s leading geo-politics and economics portal.

He is also a former gold trader and economic commentator at The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, the ABC and Business Spectator. He is the co-author of The Great Crash of 2008 with Ross Garnaut and was the editor of the second Garnaut Climate Change Review.

Comments

  1. The reality is that these tax cuts will still leave us with a highly progressive income tax system (which isn’t to imply that some measure of progressivity isn’t desirable). Of course the tax cuts are going to benefit higher income earners more than lower ones — because they currently pay a substantially larger percentage of their income in tax than lower income earners (and will continue after such cuts, albeit to a slightly smaller extent).

    Our society is far from a perfect meritocracy, but that doesn’t mean that a substantial percentage of those earning decent incomes in the $200K range haven’t worked damn hard for this. And no, those earning $200K are in most cases far from rich — it leaves about $135K after tax. Rich people can afford to send kids to private schools and expensive houses. Two kids in a private school = $70K, just the interest payment on
    a $3m house (which is far from a mansion in Melbourne/Sydney) is $110K.

    I think people here need to face reality rather than be motivated by jealousy, and realise that $200K earners are for the most part not ‘rich.’

    • GunnamattaMEMBER

      Pigs arse….

      What we really need is an ‘Audit’ of the top 10% of income earners to sniff out how much of that income is off the public teat, or is maximised by the avoidance of tax – primarily the privately educated kids, the write off of home expenses against business administration costs, the real estate [which is extraordinarily expensive, and a complete national level economic waste backed by the tax framework].

      The simple fact of the matter is that those ‘earning’ such sums fall into two basic categories. The first is those earning in some form of remotely plausible ‘market’ – some of your specialised IT types, some of your specialised mining types maybe, and maybe some forms of ‘management’ [although looking at what any given ‘management’ does beg a lot of questions]. Those guys ‘earning’ 200k is basically fine.

      But the major category of 200+ incomes being ‘earned’ is where the income is earned off the Australian taxpayer. Either directly clipped the public teat on a case by case basis – any given GP or medical type – or by the taxation foregone basis – the bulk of your property developer, accounting/conveyancing/quasi legal types, superannuation and education ‘sales’ types, most forms of ‘consultant’ ‘mentor’ ‘advisory’.

      Maybe we should get the public service – and the executive levels there are gummed with 200k incomes being ‘earned’ through nothing more than an appropriate tactile sensation being being achieved when applied to the rights buttocks with a tongue – to maintain a national ‘Fake Income’ register and send out some Roboletters for Negative Gearing and Capital Gains examinations (and claims on the cars, the real estate and the kids educations etc).

      The greatest load of bullshido of all is pretending that those ‘earning’ high incomes are doing so in some form of competitive market situation which is more worthy of taxation concessions in particular, but more generally that they are a better bet for ‘relief’ than the punterariat (earning 100k or less).

      The ALP has made its choice

      Labor’s Jim Chalmers says workers on $200,000 a year are not ‘the top end of town’
      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/23/labors-jim-chalmers-says-workers-on-200000-a-year-are-not-the-top-end-of-town

      The reform minded members of the electorate can withhold their votes accordingly………..

      And that is before taking a peek at the property portfolio of Australia’s political representative class (even the ALP subsection of).

      And of course the ALP apologists can come out with ‘Well you won’t get better under the Tories, we are as good as you are going to get’ and the punterariat can respond with ‘You may be better but you arent good enough to vote for, and we will continue to vote for chaos rather than ALP’ while becoming progressively more angry and sullen.

      And of course the comentariat can continue wondering why Australia’s politicians, media, commentators, corporate elites (real corporate elites that is) and ‘management’ is progressively more reviled, whether there is a limit or trigger point to that revulsion, and what forms that hostility may take when lit.

      If you flick over every now and then on an advert break you can keep track of the storyline easily without following the whole movie closely.

      • Pig’s arse. Audit away. The system is very progressive and still will be after any cut. The tax taken is rapacious. If you don’t pay much tax in the first place, a tax cut won’t yield you much benefit. A concept that MB commenters struggle with.

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        The system will have those on 45 and 200k per annum on the same tax threshold.

        For any MB commenter with issues grappling with the progressivity involved that is placing people on about the 40th percentile of incomes on the same taxation basis as those in the top 1%

        Maybe your notion of progressive is somewhat at variance to a lot of ALP voting types

        If you don’t pay much tax in the first place, a tax cut won’t yield you much benefit. A concept that MB commenters struggle with.

        ……..Yeah and all those ‘millionaires’ working their taxable income below the bottom threshold are a living breathing insight into the charade on taxation Australia is drifting towards, as at least one MB commenter struggles with a few extra concepts

        ……..and

        The tax taken is rapacious.

        Only because the 60% of Australians claiming Sweet FA as a tax concession keep getting their hard earned taxes frittered away as ‘concessions’ – often on an economic basis which is spectacularly regressive, is invariably half baked, and is difficult to see as anything other than a rort for an entitled species of (often but not always) psychopath who doesnt want their patch looked at too closely while shunting the real tax burden onto someone else.

      • Strange Economics

        Great summary of the ways to high income in Australia.
        Some could be called productive workers (eg your mention of IT, Trades, manufacturing mgmt), many of the rest
        benfefits of the government funding business charade like Australia’s world leading FIRE boondoggle, medical closed shops etc ..
        And With luck many of them easily limber under 200K after all the deductions.

      • ErmingtonPlumbing

        The Right faction is reasserting it’s control of party policy on matters Economic in an acquiescence to organised money. (The corporate sector inc the Media)

        The left may only contribute on matters concerning “Identity politics” and the “Culture wars”.
        They to serve Plutocracy. https://t.co/GdT9AkQOHL

    • It would be interesting to see how many people earning more that 200k are actually working in the productive economy. We have set up a highly unequal society for Australia with asset ownership at the core (primarily housing), and a finance industry that services this new ‘income’.

      • Strange Economics

        Do a survey of say 10 people you’ve met in the higher income bracket –
        I’d say 25% of the purely productive non finance on that criteria ?

        Lets see 75% – lots of fundies, medical specialists, RE, developers, rich retirees, consultants…
        Some 25% – IT, construction (or is this FIRE?), small business, …

      • Strange – of the wealthy I know, very few of them are “productive” – most are either suckled to the govt or debt-teats.

        Australia is a Rentier Economy.

    • Private school fees are being paid by “equity maaaaaate” ………either the parents or grandparents.

      That is how the system works.

      Private banks create money for asset price speculation and asset prices rise.

      Those who have assets extract some of that wealth increase and buy cars and other luxury goods like private school education.

      Trying to recover that privately created money back via income tax is painful and unpopular and very difficult.

      Recovering public control over public money creation and/or taxing capital gains from speculators is MUCH easier.

      But the ALP pollies are too stupid and/or have too much invested in the asset price speculation game themselves to do anything about that so they promote stupid policies like abolishing negative gearing or opposing income tax cuts instead.

      • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

        Excellent – I can now use my tax deduction to help people in my community, other needy white Anglo-saxons and a couple dollars to our indigenous to alleviate my white guilt.

        Of course I shall make sure that the donations I do make are through registered tax deductible charities to further reduce what remains of my income tax bill.

        Living in an economic zone as opposed to a nation is of increasing appeal to me – I can get coolies to deliver my Uber Eats, mow my lawns and paint my house for me, servicing my every need like little Lord Fauntleroy, on what remains of my upper middle class income (gratefully expanded by these income tax cuts), while feeling good about myself making tax deductible donations to my community. Plus all the while doing the absolute minimum to make any contribution to those abominable Dalit classes and their values that we’ve imported to wipe our bums (who should just consider themselves lucky for being here!!).

        Really – what is there to dislike about this economic and social model? Nothing unless of course you want to build a nation as opposed to a caste system.

        Toot toot!

      • Stewie,

        Are you opposed to higher taxes on asset price speculation?

        Or do you just prefer tax policies that don’t work because those promoting them cannot get elected?

      • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

        If the taxes on asset speculation negatively impact my communities ability to re-invest in itself and project their values forward into the future, or result in a transfer of wealth from my community to other communities within our shared economic zone, so as to assist them projecting their values forward into the future – than I object to any reform.

        If we theoretically lived in a more homogeneous society with a common set of cultural values and beliefs, then I could probably support taxes such as LVTs or Tobin taxes, knowing that they will be helping to reduce inequality in my community and not helping to support or further values or beliefs that are in conflict with my own.

        No war but the class war…. unless there is a cultural war, in which case all bets are off.

        Labor lost for the simple reason they were intending to make existing Australians worse off, simply to accommodate more immigration. People aren’t dumb, Boomers know that cutting their super perks means their kids will have a smaller pot available to them when they die, same goes with their houses. Sure it might make it more difficult for their kids in the meantime, but at least they’ll still have an advantage over some migrant fresh off the boat come to grab a piece of what we’ve already got.

        Even recent immigrants knew that Labor were going to be taxing them or reducing the perks available to them through Super and NG basically to accommodate more people. No one is going to support policies that financially weaken them and their kids negotiating position against newcomers.

        So what did they do – without any genuine choice they voted for the LNP, knowing full well that although they’d probably keep immigration running as fast as it has been, at least they wouldn’t be losing their tax perks to help to import even people to compete against them and their kids.

        It might be distasteful, which is probably why it hasn’t been enunciated in any news papers by any columnists, but deep down most people know it to be true.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      The progressive tax system has been under attack for decades. If you want to see what progressive taxes look like, go back to the 60s and 70s.

      • You need to include negative taxes like family tax benefits as well. These are mostly means tested.

      • fitzroyMEMBER

        True, but if you add the gst on top, it is workers who are punished but not investors.

    • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

      Blah ha ha ha hah – the 1950 and 60s…. that horrible period when Australia was still suffering the lingering effects of the White Australian policy, when you couldn’t get a decent cappacino or fresh kale but your kids could get a free University scholarship and houses were affordable.

      It would have been horrible having to live with a sense of community or civic obligation that comes with living in a society built around shared values.

      I’m glad we’ve exchanged that sense of community and civic obligation with the promotion of individual responsibility and the pick-and-choose grab bag of assorted morals and values from our vibrant society.

      That leaves me free to choose me and my own, and not feel the slightest bit of guilt about it.

    • Let me give you a statistic here. I am one of those earning over 200k per year. I just moved back to Australia Dec 2018 and leaving Dec 2019. I am not staying in this HOLE you call a country and paying 45% in taxes. I am taking my money back to the US where Ill pay 20-30% income tax. Last year I paid 20% on that tax THANK YOU TRUMP NOT OBOZO. More and more people like me who are earning over 200k are leaving or trying to leave Australia. I know of 3 small businesses doing over 1 – 3 million a year and shutting down their businesses to take them to the US because they cant make any money here. The people who support people like me and these other business to be taxed a 40-45% or more can keep wishing this and when there are not many small businesses out there guess what happens to the economy. I cant get out of AUSTRALIA fast enough and am shutting my Australia business down June 30th. This is the attitude of alot of small business. My accountant in Australia has said she is seeing more and more small business clients shutting because they just cant do it with all the F#%KING taxes. Also she tells me Australia is the not the place for small business anymore. On top your Carbon TAX, labor laws and all the other crap that comes with doing business in Australia. I cant get out of Australia fast enough. I AM SURE THERE ARE PLENTY OF MORE BUSINESSES LIKE ME

      • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

        We don’t call it a country anymore, it is a shared Multicultural economic zone.

        Those taxes form a fundamental fiscal support for our economic model, building infrastructure and supplying services to accommodate the people we import.

        Contrary to your shallow concerns with antiquated 21st century capitalist ideals, we are enriching ourselves through diversity not profit.

      • It just becomes a problem when everyone in America is too poor to actually buy stuff from small businesses. We are heading that way in Australia too, not because of taxes but because of RE prices. Hopefully you are servicing large corporate clients who have the deep pockets.

  2. What % of our population contributes nothing to the maintenance of the State? Replace all taxes with a poll tax, carbon tax, and land value tax, and delete the welfare state, then there will be no argument. Give a slightly lower land value tax for those who have four or more kids with at least two aged below 16.

    $15,000/year from age 22-70 allows income tax and GST to be eliminated. ATO could be abolished for individuals and just retained for businesses. Centrelink abolished.

    For those who can’t pay: no healthcare outside the extreme basics, no voting, no driver’s license.

    This is better than UBI: Universal Basic Tax.

      • In the above proposed model, we don’t. Thus we have more poverty and greater problems throughout the community caused by poor health and poor education. It’s the arithmetic if a measly accountant who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

  3. “Moreover, if it folds, the current leverage in the senate enjoyed by Centre Alliance, which is being deployed as a weapon to crush the gas cartel“.

    You do have to wonder how much of this is a cause not an effect.

  4. Disband?

    The ALP should pass the tax cuts in full and if they really think they are unfair make the case for repealing them WHEN they win government.

    Perhaps they might even grow a brain and only increase taxes for the rich instead of all retirees.

    Did anyone back in the 50s take the introduction of top tax rates of 75% to an election?

    Who did that anyway? Menzies !

    https://treasury.gov.au/publication/economic-roundup-winter-2006/a-brief-history-of-australias-tax-system

    “..Australia’s top marginal tax rate has decreased over the past 50 years from over 75percent in the 1950s to 46.5percent (including the Medicare levy) as of 1July2006 (see Chart3). Notwithstanding the increase in the proportion of personal income tax paid by lower income quintiles, Australia’s average effective tax rate on the income of a range of household types is in the lowest eight out of the 30 OECD countries (Warburton and Hendy 2006)…”

    • Interesting isn’t it. What this really shows is that in the face of monetary policy that is aimed at extreme asset growth, income has become somewhat irrelevant.

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      I think the ALP would rather merge with the LNP, then election won’t be needed either!!

  5. Torn about this one. I think a progressive tax system is good. I hate neg gearing and 50perc cap gains discount.

    Its all about the welfare state and I don’t think it works well in a multicultural society tbh. Or an aging population. Why should I pay more tax when I see 3rd worlders being imported many if whom sit around all day like they do in moorooka in brisbane? Why should I pay more tax just because nanna retired when she was 60 and wants a stent inserted at 92yo? Why should I pay more to get up at 6am to go to work so old mate with a dodgy back can be on dsp for the last 30 years and still find time to work on his car?
    It’s a bit like old mate on qanda a few years ago….he pays no tax. Was a crim. And he wants even more from people who support his lazy butt

    • “Its all about the welfare state and I don’t think it works well in a multicultural society tbh.”

      Australia has been multicultural since WW2. A big part of its post war success was the welfare and services to the community like health, education and infrastructure. It’s the above average immigration rate coupled with the collapse in government investment back into the community that is the issue.

  6. Also 20 billion buys a lot. Why does Qatar get over 20bil usd for their gas and we get only 800mil? Look it up. That’s most of your tax cuts there

  7. Labor would “further ­tarnish” its reputation with corporate Australia if it opposes Scott Morrison’s income tax cut package

    Enough said!!!
    It should me made clear, loud and put into text book that the corporate Australia chooses (via fake democratic voting system and media brainwashing) who wins elections.
    Our system is not corrupt democratic but rather designed to look like domocratic and work as oligarchy.

  8. Funny how none of the posters here arguing for tax cuts for people earning $200k a year pay MB subscription fees.

    • Yep. Absolute tightwads or astro surfers.

      I find it interesting when right wing pricks post incorrect English frequently – are they guns for hire or are they getting paid $250k/year due to ageism/nepotism?

      Land ownership is certainly due to ageism – just be born in the right decade and you can own 1000 sqm of land!

  9. As I said before the election, the right wing pricks are smart and the left wing lunatics are stupid.

    There is no point in being anti-poor lite. Be different to the LNP by being genuinely pro-poor.

    Even Americans want more taxes on $1 million salaries:

    (I know opinion polls are off by 3% these days, but 65% is a very clear majority)

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-voters-favor-taxing-the-wealthy-increasing-domestic-spending

    After the 2019 federal election, Alan Kohler said there is no need to take a tax reform to the election if it is only going to impact 10% of the voters. The ALP was silly enough to take franking credit reform to the election – even though it was only going to impact a small fraction of society. Tim Wilson was able to go troppo and call it a “retiree tax”.

    Raise the income tax free threshold to $25k/year and exclude the rich ($200k/year) from all negative gearing subsidies and all private school subsidies.

  10. People in Australia including PM don’t understand how representative democracy works. Beside the fact that our majority voting system makes large percentageg of people unrepresented they want to play another majority vote accumulation in the parliament. That would mean that despite the fact that less than 4 million (out of 14 million) voted for LNP tax plan they want 90% of members of parliament to vote for it. Who is going to represent 10 million who didn’t vote for LNP tax plan?
    We are democracy? Yeah like North Korea

  11. “Prime Minister Scott Morrison will call for a “fresh look” at industrial relations reform as a way to boost growth at a time of rising threats to the global economy, putting unions on notice to expect tougher laws”

    Pro population growth Labor is destroying our country.

    “Aspirationals” seem pretty happy with LNP.

    There’s only one way out of this mess for the plebs. Destroy Labor.

  12. The current version of the ALP are a bunch of useless virtue signalling Fake Left boofheads. The are causing far more problems than they solve, and the best thing that could happen for the country is for them to be given a good squirt of Mortein so that they scuttle off into the corner buzzing and spinning until they curl up and die like the useless cockroaches that they are.

    And for what it’s worth, I get paid a bit over $200K after a 37 year career as an Engineer in private enterprise, most of it working for a small company that builds useful things that we sell to make money. No public service freckle-bathing, or service industry bullsh!t or anything like that, just decades of bloody hard labour. I have no tax lurks and I paid about $60K tax last year, so out of every three hours that I work, one hour goes to The Man, and I reckon that’s too much. I think I’m paying more than my fair share, and it sh1ts me. Despite having a whinge about this, I also pay my way at MB, and have done so for 6 years now. My subscription is due in 6 days and I’m going to renew it.

      • No. It’s not a business expense in any way and it would be dishonest. I don’t make dodgy tax deduction claims. Maybe that makes me stupid. I dunno.

    • HadronCollision

      Engineer of 18 years, let’s say in between 120 and 150. Mix of private sector, now in public (eHealth) – 15 private, 3 public.
      I have to take issue with the constant archetyping of public service as slacking.

      I am happy with a tax cut as you are.

      I think there is more scope to capture tax from corporate boondoggling. Michael West’s hit lists and gas a good place to start plus all the other high net worth lurks

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        I totally agree with you on the public sector. The vast bulk of them turn up each day and churn out what they are told. A lot of them have EL and SES level management imperatives shat down on them from above (often by people syphoning off 150-200 k per annum) which they know are bullshit in terms of what they do, which their uber earning chiefs know is bullshit, and which Australias politicians know is bullshit ideology………but still mandate anyway because it adds to the smorgasbord of juicy public sector outsourcing contracts, every last one of which spawns another high income tax avoiding entitlee or two and creates a few more coterie group members to slag public servants.

        Micael West and Macrobusiness should be the starting point for any Australian tax reform. They wont be, but they should be. And until such time as Australian politicians are identifying the same issues we should assume our politicians are bullshitting us.

    • You read more reasonably than Davey so I thought I would reply to your comment. My family of five live off less than what you pay in taxes. And we still pay tax. We are educated parents working in the arts/production and social enterprise sectors as freelance/casual and permanent part time respectively because that is all there is right now and we need to take into account school hours. Everyone works hard for their money (we have to otherwise no heating through winter) and everyone should pay taxes they can afford. The wealthy can afford more and so pay more. They should revel in the knowledge they are helping the most vulnerable in society. Not complain like toddlers, ‘they took my money’ whilst stamping and sticking out a petulant, entitled bottom lip. We currently live in a petty, greedy world and I worry for the future of my children. I am only a member for two weeks as I can’t afford the subscription but have been enjoying these articles for more than 8 years. Sorry I can’t pay.

    • You read more reasonably than Davey, LSWCHP, so I thought I would reply to your comment. My family of five live off less than what you pay in taxes. And we still pay tax. We are educated parents working in the arts/production and social enterprise sectors as freelance/casual and permanent part time respectively because that is all there is right now and we need to take into account school hours. Everyone works hard for their money (we have to otherwise no heating through winter) and everyone should pay taxes they can afford. The wealthy can afford more and so pay more. They should revel in the knowledge they are helping the most vulnerable in society. Not complain like toddlers, ‘they took my money’ whilst stamping and sticking out a petulant, entitled bottom lip. We currently live in a petty, greedy world and I worry for the future of my children. I am only a member for two weeks as I can’t afford the subscription but have been enjoying these articles and comments for more than 8 years. Sorry I can’t pay.

      • I’m glad you think I sound reasonable. Not many people feel that way. 🙂

        I’ve raised three kids, and twenty years ago I was in your position…a fairly low single income and 4 other mouths to feed, clothe, house and educate. It was tough. I know it’s hard. And I agree with the idea of a progressive tax system, it’s just that I think the distinction between progressive and regressive is blurred at best. I’m in the top tax bracket, so out of any extra money I earn now, nearly 50% goes to the gummint. That’s incredibly discouraging, and in my case has actually discouraged me from seeking advancement as the rewards are not proportionate to the extra stress. Time is now far more important to me than money.

        And as others have pointed out, the PAYG taxpayer like me gets reamed by the ATO while millionaires artificially reduce their taxable income to near zero through trusts and other lurks, while big business does the same through transfer pricing etc. That is really infuriating.

        My comment about paying for the MB subs was related to triage above, who suggested that none of those who whinge about paying too much tax aren’t subscribers. I’m in both camps.

        I hope things go well for you and your partner and your kids. Children are the best thing in life.

    • a small company that builds useful things that we sell to make money

      For export or domestic consumption?

      You say an income tax rate of 30% is too much. Have you ever said that the homelessness rate is too much?

      June 2, 2015

      Melbourne teenager going to school while living under a bridge

      But let us give income tax cuts to rich 55 year olds.

      There is an alternative to giving tax cuts to the rich. Gas reservation would put more money into the pocket of everyone who consumes electricity on the east coast – regardless of income. Taxing immigrants – $1000 per week per work visa – would raise revenue and reduce immigration.

      • We sell domestically and overseas.

        I wrote a long and bitter response to your contemptible comment, and then deleted it. You’re not worth it.

  13. ErmingtonPlumbing

    Tax cuts for a shrinking top end of town.

    “Wonder if Scomo will tackle this in his big eco speech today – “Australia is now in the worst wages slump – relative to total earnings – since records were first published in 1959.” @alanaustin001 #auspol https://t.co/PGcQoQzMhr

  14. It is dismal that the likes of Khalil in Labor think they will be perceived as economic “wreckers” if the tax cuts don’t go through, but that says more about the pro-Coalition media bias than anything else.

    If Labor want to “neutralise” the issue then supporting the future tax cuts is the way to go, as the Coalition won’t actually have anything to talk about come the next election. In 2022 they won’t be able to offer more tax cut bribes if the ones due in 2024 haven’t even come through yet. OTOH, the Coalition will probably campaign that Labor will reverse the cuts even if they do support them. To go one better, if the Coalition thinks the tax cuts are necessary, Labor should insist on all of them going through immediately which I am sure they would reject as being financially irresponsible as it would put paid to the surplus promise.