Talking Politics | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Talking Politics

spook

Kick the f*ckin' goal
Jun 18, 2007
21,912
26,417
Melbourne
Great read from another worthy independent media outlet:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

eZyT

Tiger Legend
Jun 28, 2019
21,434
25,772
Why so much criticism of the State Premiers by Federal Gov Ministers in recent weeks? This isn't by accident. What's the bigger agenda here?.

I'd say because Scottyfrommarketting knows The National Cabinet is orders of magnitude more talented than The Federal Govt Cabinet

(Jesus, the former sports rorts minister McKenzie hasn't even got any talent for subject shifting, rhetoric and blame shifting. if she was a carpenter, she wouldnt be capable of retaining a grip on a hammer, and she's pretty typical of the front bench talent I reckon)

and hell really dont hath no fury like a sociopath spurned and faced with their own deficiencies.

****a Credlin is waging war on Palaschuk (and Trad) at the moment. Which makes me like them all of a sudden.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,874
Melbourne
Great read from another worthy independent media outlet:

Excellent article and a lot to take from it.

I have read Mazzucato and pointed out a few of the examples given, it is reality that government has subsidised or just developed on its own just about every piece of technology which enables me to post on this forum - that's reality, not hypothesis, theory, best case scenario or whatever, it is what has happened.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,199
17,593
Camberwell
I’m tipping one outcome of this virus - an increase in the GST rate.
You may be right MDJ. There is also a chance that state governments may look at a land tax rather than stamp duty on sales of properties to lessen the reliance on sales and move it to ownership.
 

MD Jazz

Don't understand football? Talk to the hand.
Feb 3, 2017
13,329
13,711
You may be right MDJ. There is also a chance that state governments may look at a land tax rather than stamp duty on sales of properties to lessen the reliance on sales and move it to ownership.

Which would not be a bad thing. Ultimately those that can afford it should be charged with the heavy lifting. Some of the suggestions in the article posted by spook make sense.
 

Ridley

Tiger Legend
Jul 21, 2003
17,755
15,433
Which would not be a bad thing. Ultimately those that can afford it should be charged with the heavy lifting. Some of the suggestions in the article posted by spook make sense.
How is it proposed that the land tax would work for those who have already purchased homes? Can't see the equity in slugging another tax on people that have already paid tens of thousands of dollars in stamp duty. Someone that has bought a house in Victoria for $1,000,000 (not at all uncommon these days) has already paid $55,000 in stamp duty.

I believe Victorian stamp duty is the highest of anywhere in the world. I would welcome reform in this area but some would want to see some detail on how it would affect existing home owners that have already been slugged.
 

MD Jazz

Don't understand football? Talk to the hand.
Feb 3, 2017
13,329
13,711
How is it proposed that the land tax would work for those who have already purchased homes? Can't see the equity in slugging another tax on people that have already paid tens of thousands of dollars in stamp duty. Someone that has bought a house in Victoria for $1,000,000 (not at all uncommon these days) has already paid $55,000 in stamp duty.

I believe Victorian stamp duty is the highest of anywhere in the world. I would welcome reform in this area but some would want to see some detail on how it would affect existing home owners that have already been slugged.

Not sure Sing was suggesting land tax be applied to your principal place of residence.

Land tax revenue is going to fall if/when property values fall significantly.
 

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,113
18,923
Best way to raise revenue is to get rid of middle class welfare. That includes CGT discounts and franking credits, child allowances for people who don't need it.

Then the big elephant in the room, negative gearing. While I understand the concept, it's being abused in the residential home market. Lock negative gearing into a single asset. Don't allow loss making on one property offset profits from another.

But doing the above is a certain recipe for a lost election, unless some unholy alliance between the 2 major parties occur, but that's getting less and less likely every day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Ridley

Tiger Legend
Jul 21, 2003
17,755
15,433
Not sure Sing was suggesting land tax be applied to your principal place of residence.

Land tax revenue is going to fall if/when property values fall significantly.
Yeah was commenting on the issue in general. I believe serious consideration is being given to applying land tax on all property including principal place of residence. I also believe it would be in lieu of upfront stamp duty.

I think reform in this area is necessary as Victorian stamp duty on property is possibly one of the greatest tax rip offs ever known. That said, you wouldn't want to be in a situation where you'd paid $50K in stamp duty a few years ago and then had to pony up again on an annual basis.

It's a complicated issue to reform but certainly worth investigation.
 

Ridley

Tiger Legend
Jul 21, 2003
17,755
15,433
Best way to raise revenue is to get rid of middle class welfare. That includes CGT discounts and franking credits, child allowances for people who don't need it.

Then the big elephant in the room, negative gearing. While I understand the concept, it's being abused in the residential home market. Lock negative gearing into a single asset. Don't allow loss making on one property offset profits from another.

But doing the above is a certain recipe for a lost election, unless some unholy alliance between the 2 major parties occur, but that's getting less and less likely every day.
Agree on negative gearing and allowances for children. Not sure about the others. I see the merit in the arguments but there is already substantial taxation paid by everyday Australians; income tax is amongst the highest in the world. You pay tax on every dollar you earn and then you use that after tax dollar to save and invest and then when you earn a return you get taxed again. A lot of double, triple, quadruple dipping going on. I also believe in incentivising people to fund their own retirement. The less people that rely on the pension the better. All the stuffing around and changes to superannuation is not helping.

But yes there needs to be a serious discussion on tax reform and everything should be on the table in that discussion. Unfortunately it's a very complicated issue to resolve. The first thing we need to do is ensure big companies and mega gazillionaires are paying there fair share of tax and remove the loopholes that allow them to avoid it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,113
18,923
Agree on negative gearing and allowances for children. Not sure about the others. I see the merit in the arguments but there is already substantial taxation paid by everyday Australians; income tax is amongst the highest in the world. You pay tax on every dollar you earn and then you use that after tax dollar to save and invest and then when you earn a return you get taxed again. A lot of double, triple, quadruple dipping going on. I also believe in incentivising people to fund their own retirement. The less people that rely on the pension the better. All the stuffing around and changes to superannuation is not helping.

But yes there needs to be a serious discussion on tax reform and everything should be on the table in that discussion. Unfortunately it's a very complicated issue to resolve. The first thing we need to do is ensure big companies and mega gazillionaires are paying there fair share of tax and remove the loopholes that allow them to avoid it.

Agree with that. There would need to be wholesale reform to make the taxation system more equitable with less loopholes.

Que: a post about how tax is theft by force
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,199
17,593
Camberwell
Yeah was commenting on the issue in general. I believe serious consideration is being given to applying land tax on all property including principal place of residence. I also believe it would be in lieu of upfront stamp duty.

I think reform in this area is necessary as Victorian stamp duty on property is possibly one of the greatest tax rip offs ever known. That said, you wouldn't want to be in a situation where you'd paid $50K in stamp duty a few years ago and then had to pony up again on an annual basis.

It's a complicated issue to reform but certainly worth investigation.
I wasn't really commenting on the merits of it or not or the details but just that if the States want to be find an alternative to sales based property stamp duty I believe they are looking at land tax.
As you rightly point out the losers would be those who have already paid it, especially on their principal residence. The others issues with land tax is that it can lead to rent increases (although the market may well drive what happens there) , how to handle apartments and flats equitably, are businesses exempt etc etc.
I'm not against land tax as an alternative to stamp duty but the transition to it would be very important for all those reasons
Stamp duty is very high in Victoria for sure but I think one of the reasons why it's high in Australia generally compared with the rest of the world is because most other places have a land tax
 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,199
17,593
Camberwell
Best way to raise revenue is to get rid of middle class welfare. That includes CGT discounts and franking credits, child allowances for people who don't need it.

Then the big elephant in the room, negative gearing. While I understand the concept, it's being abused in the residential home market. Lock negative gearing into a single asset. Don't allow loss making on one property offset profits from another.

But doing the above is a certain recipe for a lost election, unless some unholy alliance between the 2 major parties occur, but that's getting less and less likely every day.
When the negative gearing changes were discussed before the last election the mantra of the LNP was that lots of people with middle incomes had negatively geared properties and it wasn't just rich people. I wrote to my local member (who happens to be the Treasurer) and suggested that they should put a dollar limit on interest deductions. So instead of saying it's one property only (someone could have a $2 million loan on a Noosa Heads beach front as an example) say that interest on loans up to a limit can be deducted ( say $500k or something like that). I never got a reply !
I am not against franking credits because all they are in the end are making sure dividends aren't taxed in total above the individual tax payer's marginal tax rate but what I am against are the changes made by Howard/Costello which allowed cash refunds of franking credits. All they do is reverse all or part of the company tax paid on the underlying profits from which the dividends are paid and that is fundamentally wrong.
There has to be a transition period on these things however because there needs to be time to adapt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

MD Jazz

Don't understand football? Talk to the hand.
Feb 3, 2017
13,329
13,711
Best way to raise revenue is to get rid of middle class welfare. That includes CGT discounts and franking credits, child allowances for people who don't need it.

Then the big elephant in the room, negative gearing. While I understand the concept, it's being abused in the residential home market. Lock negative gearing into a single asset. Don't allow loss making on one property offset profits from another.

But doing the above is a certain recipe for a lost election, unless some unholy alliance between the 2 major parties occur, but that's getting less and less likely every day.

Agree, other than franking credits. They should simply stop them being refundable if they exceed the total tax payable.

Also agree it is very unlikely any gov't will get rid of negative gearing.
 

MD Jazz

Don't understand football? Talk to the hand.
Feb 3, 2017
13,329
13,711
But yes there needs to be a serious discussion on tax reform and everything should be on the table in that discussion. Unfortunately it's a very complicated issue to resolve. The first thing we need to do is ensure big companies and mega gazillionaires are paying there fair share of tax and remove the loopholes that allow them to avoid it.

Not sure you would get any arguments on this. But it requires massive co-operation across tax jurisdictions.
 

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,113
18,923
We have little chance of real Tax Reform. When the sitting government commissions an independent review of the taxation system and it makes recommendations on how to fix for the government to just ignore it, you know we have no chance.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user