Swan’s Canberra summit is a massive tax dodge

Maree says:

12:56pm | 04/08/11

Agree: The government is just out of their depth. Anyone got some ideas ? Anyone at all ? Poor old Swanny, pretty ineffectual, but to his credit has managed to bring in some 19 or so new or increased taxes. I would have thought bringing these issues to the table for revue or stream lining would have been at the top of the agenda !!

Amused says:

01:14pm | 04/08/11

An idea for Maree, get to Canberra on the 22nd August and support the BIG Convoy of NO Confidence in the Gillard government, convoys coming from all over Australia, as far away as Port Hedland.  Check out the Jo Nova website for the information.

Nathan says:

02:58pm | 04/08/11

Dont you have an argument to get into with Rob Oakeshott about Earth Hour Dennis?

http://www.vexnews.com/2009/03/earth-wind-fire-federal-mps-boogie-over-earth-hour-farce/

John A Neve says:

07:01pm | 04/08/11

This article by “Dr. Jensen (who) currently has the highest scientific qualfications of all MP’s and senators”! Makes me wonder what sort of crap the dumbest of them would put out?

Oh, for a full by-partisan tax revue.

Rick says:

09:28am | 04/08/11

Thats pretty good for 6am with a screamer. What about Rudd’s summit for our best and brightest, the lib’s were left out because they couldn’t find any best or brightest.

Rick says:

09:28am | 04/08/11

Thats pretty good for 6am with a screamer. What about Rudd’s summit for our best and brightest, the lib’s were left out because they couldn’t find any best or brightest.

Glen M says:

01:48pm | 04/08/11

Why would the libs want to participate in a summit where the numbers of labor and the unions have been stacked so that any vote is basically a rubber stamp of Labor policy. The Libs would just then be beaten around the head with tacit agreement by participation. No… better to avoid this stupidity alltogether and come up with some real tax reform options that dont include adding more indirect taxes to the economy and preventing growth.( ie carbon tax).

Disappointed says:

02:52pm | 04/08/11

Glen

“Real” tax reform?

Ask yourself what the libs did after GST. They had 7 years and boom revenue.. what did they do with it besides minor threshhold adjustments and handouts for the wealthy?
SEVEN YEARS they had. If they had any “real tax reform options” as you say they do… they’d have implemented some of them, no?

ZSRenn says:

08:40am | 04/08/11

@ S.L. Please see todays article by Joe Hildebrand.

Dash says:

08:53am | 04/08/11

Man you are deluded! The GST is the most significant piece of tax reform since the introduction of the 1936 tax act! 100% of it went to the ALP state governmnets. You should be asking yourself what your state ALP did with the money!

For Swan to say the GST is off the agenda is a joke of the highest order. It shoud go to 12.5% with real relief given to PAYG taxpayers. It would still be lower than wost other western economies! NZ recently increased it’s GST to 15% and the top marginal tax rate there is 33% compared to 46.5% with medicare here in Australia. Too much reliance is placed on the top 10% of PAYG taxpayers who contribute more than 50% of the PAYG tax revenue. And the ALPs answer is to take more from them!! For how much longer can they continue to bite the hand that feeds it?

The fact is, the ALP is all noise and no action. They are marginalised way too far to the left and handcuffed to the increasingly irrelevant unions who represent less than 15% of Australian workers. They ignore the will of the majority to govern for themselves and to feather the ALP nest. We will not get real tax reform or solid economic management until we get rid of this government.

You also need to learn a bit about economics! The LNP repaid $96billion of ALP debt, restored the nations AAA rating which Keating had lost, produced the lowest unemployment rate in 30years, produced consistent surplus budgets, and left $26billion and the futures fund to the ALP.

I would suggest to you that the Howard government did much more to protect Australia from the GFC than anything the ALP did by being in office for half an hour! They brought down the Financial Services Reform Act which did much to protect the balance sheets of local financial institutions and they left the ALP with the fiscal means to stimulate the economy (even if they did throw $900 to dead people). And as I said left the place in surplus. If we’d have had 11 years of the ALP, there is no way we would have had zero debt and 26billion in the bank!

Our economy was also decoupled from the US by the time the ALP took over. China’s GDP was growing at 10% and they were (and still are)driving our economy. The LNP did benefit from the mining boom, just as the ALP are now. What’s important is what they do with it! Your reference to the US is stupidity of the highest order. And Swan is not fit to wipe the boots of Costello. He will never have a record that even comes close!

The Australian economy is showing signs of stress. The ALP has done nothing but rely on China’s appetite for our natural resources, increase taxes, and throw money down black holes. Wayne Swan would not know if his arse was on fire. the ALP are huigh taxing and high spending!

Ask Swan what his plan is to pay off the debt he has racked up in under 4 years. He has no answer, because he has no plan! At the rate of the projected surplus for 2012/13, it would take these fools 100years to pay off their debt!

Go and talk to the people of the US, Greece, Ireland, Italy about the impact of debt! For how much longer can Swan talk up the economy and blame cyclones for his incompetence? And for how much longer, will fools make the kind of excuses you do?

S.L says:

09:52am | 04/08/11

@Dash which conservative MP do you work for? You better turn of 2GB/MTR while you write such rubbish too!
The Howard government only survived as long as it did through fortunate circumstances around election times (Tampa etc).
GST at 12.5%? Sounds similar to the stooge callers ringing the aforementioned radio stations screaming about the return of death duties in Australia that was sparked by an article in the Australian about the NZ opposition suggesting it over there. 
@ZSRenn ok I’ve read Joes post. And your point is?

Rocksteady says:

10:25am | 04/08/11

Dash - The GST was a great big new tax. On everything.
If that makes good economic management as you say then all Swanny has to do is raise it 20% and then take credit for getting a huge surplus in 4 years? What bollocks!
  One year into power Costello sold all of our gold for $3 billion at $300 an ounce, today gold is well over $1500 an ounce. That gold would be worth $15 billion today.
  Howard and Costello rode the China wave, selling all our assets,  giving out wasteful middle class welfare and not spending anything on hospitals and infrastructure. Baby bonus anyone?

Dash says:

10:26am | 04/08/11

S.L. - nah, no member of any political party, work for no polly and don’t listen to the radio. Good try though.

The concern about death duties in Australia is because it is Greens policy. And as we know, the ALP and Greens announced a coalition after the last election. The ALP has increasingly marginalised itself to the left and are paying for it in the primary. People see the greens directing ALP policy and naturally are concerned. The Greens openly want increased personal income tax and increased corporate tax. Go and have a look at their web site.

I am happy to debate the economic credentials and the economic performance of the LNP and the ALP for as long as you like. As an Accountant with an economics degree who has worked in the financial services sector for over 20 years (both here and in London), I am only too happy to talk tax reform with you.

Unfortunately, it sounds like your mind is closed to such a debate. You also sound as if you believe the ALP propaganda around the way they have managed the economy. To dismiss the Howard era the way you do is laughable. most reasonable people would love to see the ALP manage our taxes responsibly.

When Swan manages to balance a budget (any budget), let alone repay his debt, look me up. I don’t expect I’ll hear from you any time soon.

Anubis says:

10:50am | 04/08/11

@ Rocksteady you say “The GST was a great big new tax. On everything. “

What utter crap. The GST replaced a raft of Sales Taxes which varied from 5% up to 23% which were levied at wholesale point of distribution. It greatly simplified that aspect of business. Yes some articles increased in price but the majority (including electronics) reduced in price. GST is not levied on fresh food stuffs and trades and businesses can be rebated on some of the GST they pay. Also, State Governments were supposed to remove taxes like Stamp Duty and Land Tax as part of the reform. This didn’t happen because most of the State Governments were Labor, who are addicted to their taxes so they can continue with profligate waste and excessive spending.

Do a bit of research before you step up to the keyboard and one day you may be able to make some comments that are factual.

Yes, the Howard/Costello team were very good at selling off the farm in order to fake up the surpluses and had absolutely no idea about what that fandangled thing called infrastructure is. But, compared to the massive waste and greed of the current Government they were a good government. I never voted for them, and probably never will vote Liberal, but after the last four years I do not see any reason at all to support this “new” Labor party which is populated by union spivs and socialists and is beholden to the lunatic fringe Greens.

Dash says:

11:15am | 04/08/11

Rocksteady - you blame the LNP for the incompetence of ALP state governments! What did your ALP do for State hospitals, State Roads, State Education, State Transport with 100% of the GST? It’s laughable to blame the Howard Costello government for the crapness of the ALP right accorss the country!

Also, the GST was introduced on the back of removing inefficient state taxes. Unfortunately the Democrates screwed part of that process up. And I would suggest to you that if the ALP had not racked up almost $100billion in debt, there would have been no need to sell anything. Are you suggesting we should not have paid off the debt? Bloody hell, I hope you don’t run your household that way!

And no, good economic management is not just about taxes. The ALP has done nothing but increase taxes and introduce new ones since 2007. yet their economic management has been crap. And the GST was not introduced on the back of an election eve lie either!

Where would Rudd and the ALP have been if the ALP debt had not been paid off? They probably would have lost the country’s AAA rating just as Keating had done previously. I can tell you now, 11 years of ALP would not have seen us with zero debt and $26billion in the bank! If you believe otherwise, you belive in fairies down the back of the garden.

The problem we have now, is that the ALP never learn and are back to their old wasteful spending ways! They are racking up 130million a day in debt. And they have no plan to pay it off! Once again that will be left to a responsible LNP government.

You also seem to forget that the LNP gave back to the taxpayer (baby bonus included) after they HAD THE BUDGET IN SURPLUS!!!!! Wanna give gack your five rounds of PAYG tax cuts do you Rocksteady?

Bit different now with the ALP allowing builders to rort taxpayer funds whilst running record defecits! And after the me too LNP tax cuts, they have delivered zero to the PAYG taxpayers in this country. FFS wake up!

S.L says:

12:29pm | 04/08/11

@Dash the death duties scare had nothing to do with Greens policy. A mountain out of a mole hill was made from the article in “the Australian”. So you’re an accountant? Good for you! Now Dash have you ever had a real job either here or in London?

Dissident says:

01:15pm | 04/08/11

Excellent points, Dash. You will notice that the people countering your arguments have nothing better to say than claim you work for a political party. No attempt to counter your point on it’s merits. Likely because they are incapable of doing so, but they still have the rest of the day to respond with a coherent argument. I am not holding my breath waiting, though.

The tax summit is simply a farce. Everything should be on the table. Everything. That doesn’t mean you have to implement everything, you just discuss it.

Are the Labor party scared of the results of open discourse?

Dash says:

01:48pm | 04/08/11

@S.L. - Ha, what’s your definition of a real job? One where you don’t have to think that comes with a stand over union rep? Too funny!

ZSRenn says:

08:41am | 04/08/11

@ATM Swan’s don’t deliver! They lay eggs.

Dash says:

09:25am | 04/08/11

Tubesteak - I agree with you and would propose GST to 12.5%, marginal tax rates reduced and the number of brackets reduced. We have the stupid situation in this country that the tax responsibility rests with too few. The top 10% of PAYG taxpayers are expected to pay too much of the tax take. Unfortunately, the ALP has just made that worse and Swan refuses to look at the GST despite it being the lowest rate of any of the Western economies.

The ALP told us they would have a root and branch tax review and then refused to allow Henry to look at the GST. Hardly root and branch and definitely not an independant review!

In terms of the negative gearing, I’m not so sure about that. You can’t tax profits without allowing a deduction for the expenses necessarily incurred to derive that income. If you disallow the deduction, it seems wrong to tax the income. If the government had a fairer tax system (ie didn’t put the onus on the top 10% of taxpayers) there would be less incentive to negatively gear. I think we need to get that balance right.

Unfortunately, we will not get this from the ALP. They are too aligned to the unions and too busy feathering the ALP nest to worry about the majority of Australians. If they want to stimulate the economy and help retail, sort out the tax system.

I also worry about these ALP sponsored talk fests. Athey’re just a front to hold up as an “independant” view telling us what the ALP want us to hear.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants has been submitting paper after paper of recommendations on tax reform and yet the government refuses to listen or to act. The summit is therefore a stunt because there is plenty of information and experct advice already being submitted to the government. They want to drive the agenda, they want to tell the committee what to say. they have been doing that for the last 4 years. Some people are stupid enough to fall for it!

Tim says:

10:56am | 04/08/11

Tubesteak,
completely agree.
The Henry Review came up with 200 (??) recommendations and they weren’t even allowed to look at the GST.
How many have been implemented?

I’d still allow negative gearing but only on new houses. Negative gearing on existing housing is a joke.

Tubesteak says:

11:27am | 04/08/11

Dash
I’d actually go to 20% GST and a flat 20% MTR with a tax free threshold up to $30k. No more tax brackets. It would be difficult to model the impacts of this as we don’t have reliable data on the extra spending that would be generated by having a higher disposable income (plus less PAYG tax liability for companies so freeing up some of their cash-flow and impacts on cost savings). It would change a lot of things.

Yes, the top 10% of taxpayers pay 50% of the tax take. This is ridiculous (included in this figure are companies and super funds, though). Refusing to look at GST is a politically expedient cop-out.

When I say negative gearing I refer to the strict definition of it such that you claim more in deductions than you earn in income during the tax period. I would limit deductions to the amount of income earned for each asset. Most of the assets that attract negative gearing are passive assets. I don’t see this as efficient. Therefore, deductions remain but only up to the amount of income generated.

This won’t happen because it is a sacred cow of “investing”. Residential property investment is incorrectly seen as a great investment vehicle by many voters and itnerfering with this would not be politically expedient.

I’ve seen Labor listen in respect of some tax things but these were mainly in relation to financial taxation. Nothing broader than that.

Tim
Only about 3 recommendations from Henry were favoured. Some were completely discarded and most were put on hold. But Henry was not a root and branch review at all. More a twig and leaf review. It was weak.

See above comments re negative gearing.

Tubesteak says:

11:30am | 04/08/11

Oh, and we also need to find a way of ending all state taxes. This can only be done via the Constitution so it really is wishful thinking…....

stevem says:

04:39pm | 04/08/11

Tim says 10:56am | 04/08/11
“I’d still allow negative gearing but only on new houses”

Negative gearing is meant to cover the losses associated with a new investment, with the expectation that it will become profitable in the future. Too many people are claiming the negative gearing benefits with the full intent that the property NEVER becomes profitable. Given the choice I’d allow either the negative gearing OR the Capital Gains Tax exemptions, but not both.

FINK says:

10:50am | 04/08/11

Luke! What you have proposed would be paramount to treason in the Governments eyes. Pauline Hanson mentioned a similar concept at 2% per transaction and look what happened to her. Tax is the greatest controller of the population that’s why there is over 30,000 pages of tax law of which any one of the laws can see you in serious financial trouble or in gaol. I remember once when a Tax return was for the individual, independent of spousal income or relevance, now you have to declare your spouses income on your tax return for the middle class welfare benefits and medicare fines and for what? more Government control over our lives. Imagine if the Govt did not have this control and we were trusted to save and spend 98%  of income on what suited us, what would we have? FREEDOM with no tax evaders and NO tax fraud and limited Govt control over our lives.

wayne says:

01:59pm | 04/08/11

When you are doing something that you actually have no idea how to do properly .... that my friends means you have just performed a “swannie”

Matt says:

10:02am | 04/08/11

Good call on the teleconfrencing! Conroy is, after all pushing for people to work from home, so I fully expect that the travel costs of politicians will be slashed going forward, and there will be a LOT less international travel for “research” purposes seeing as everything can now be done via the NBN…

... And pigs might fly.

nossy says:

12:04pm | 04/08/11

@RyaN - count me in RyaN - my favourites!

RyaN says:

12:26pm | 04/08/11

@nossy: sorry mate, we aren’t actors and actresses so we aren’t invited.

Steve says:

03:03pm | 04/08/11

The GST abolished the previous debit tax. Being taxed to put money into and out of your bank account were not good taxes. They were desperate taxes because the wholesale sales tax was on goods not services and was not delivering the desired revenue.

99% of the work for small businesses in respect to the GST is in keeping their books up to date. The actual time spent completing the activity statement is about 5 minutes once your books are up to date.

Businesses who gave the accountant the shoe box full of receipts and the end of the financial year now have to progressively keep their books up to date during the year. Begrudgingly most business operators prefer the discipline of the quarterly activitey statement.

Most businesses accumulate GST before forwarding it to the ATO on a quarterly basis. If you are clever with your cash flow management you can use the GST to lessen overdraft requirements. Either way a “nightmare” is overstating the impact of the GST on businesses.

John the Zombie says:

03:45pm | 04/08/11

Shane from Mleb you do realise that under the GST agreement states were supposed to abolish the stamp duty. Also funny you mention the purchase of ocerseas goods, well Shane most our goods are purchased overseas and also due to the abolition of sales tax and other taxes it has made our costs lower and if you are trying to say that allowing ppl to buy things overseas you seem to be trying to use the Gerry Harvey line.

Secondly you do know that we were charged a tax on the money we had in our accounts pre GST of 1.5%. Have you forgotten the BADT tax?

Also have you owned or currently run a small business as I have and I can tell you it is quiet simple. What is hard about it. It has not increased the paperwork for small business owners and you tell me how hard is it with software these days that do the work for you such as MYOB. Even if you cant afford this it can be done using an excell spreadsheet and even just a basic accounting notebook.

Dash says:

05:12pm | 04/08/11

Shane - lol. Are you serious? The Howard government significantly changed the PAYG tax rates and scales. For example, the top marginal tax rate kicked in at $60,000pa when Keating was in charge. By the time Howard was finished it kicked in at $180,000pa. Absolutely nothing about bracket creep?? What on earth are you talking about?

The ALP me too’d the LNP tax cuts at the 2007 election. Howard delivered 5 consecutive years of PAYG tax cuts! The ALP have delivered none of their own. As soon as the “me too’d” LNP tax cuts were over, they delivered nothing!!! Ziltch. And stripped $2billion away from families and hit us with a flood levy. Where have you been hiding?

And whilst we’re talking about bracket creep, what do you percieve will be the impact of the Gillard government’s proposed increases in the 2nd and 3rd tier tax rates? That’s right, they have increased the tax rates which is a classic example of letting bracket creep rake in the cash for them as incomes increase over time.

So the LNP provided PAYG tax cuts and lifted the tax brackets. The ALP has increased PAYG tax rates. And you want to get on here and talk about bracket creep? Un-Bloody-Believable!

Arnold says:

12:22am | 05/08/11

Dash,
As a fellow accountant, I applaud and support most, if not all your comments on this page.  I would however implore you not to forget the slashing of superannuation contributions thresholds (by 50%) since Labor took power, in addition to the plethora of new taxes being legislated which you have already mentioned.

It is ridiculous that a nation concerned about an aging population would reduce the amount that taxpayers can contribute to their superannuation (retirement) funds before copping an additional 31.5% tax on their “excess” concessional contributions (46.5% on non-concessional contributions)..

The Labor government is an economic joke.  The level of deceit, mismanagement and incompetence would be considered criminal (literally - look at the now defunct HIH) in the private sector, yet our elected officials continue to dazzle with exceedingly high levels of stupidity and waste.  Seriously, if this Labor team were directors of a listed company, the shareholders would have removed them years ago.

However, where I do disagree with you, is where it comes to negative gearing on passive investments.  Don’t get me wrong, I still play the game to get the best results for my clients, but I would like to see this abolised purely to reduce much of the heat in the property market, as it increasingly becomes a rich mans arena only as wealthy taxpayers increase their holdings.  This limits the ability for the Average Joe to be able to break into the property market as demand outstrips supply and pushes up prices. 

In my opinion, I would prefer that taxpayers be allowed to access their superannuation benefits early to purchase/pay off their famly home.  This would reduce the level of demand in the market and hopefully lower costs at the same time.  Additionally, property is generally a sound long term investment suitable for superannuation investment, thereby leaving an income earning asset should it be required (e.g. nursing home bonds, retirement income streams, etc.).

And to Shane, I would suggest next time that you decide to comment on the Howard governments record on economic management, you frame your argument a lot better.  As Dash has pointed out, tax brackets were raised far in excess of bracket creep.  To claim otherwise is ridiculous.  Further, if small business owners continue to find the GST an administrative burden, then they too are as incompetent as our current Treasurer & Prime Minister.  Any business owner that does not maintain current and reconciled accounting systems is asking for liquidation (I know, I just spent 2 weeks of my life fixing a client’s MYOB file, simply to tell them at the end they are insolvent and need to appoint an administrator - this would have been avoided if their systems were maintained as little as 7 months ago as corrective action could have been taken then), especially in the competitive environment that many business now trade in.  If these systems are kept current, activity statements can be completed in no more than 20 minutes, as these programs tell you which numbers to put in which box on your BAS’.  Simple stuff really! 

Ps. Dash, loved your response to the Joker telling you to get a “real” job.

Debbie says:

11:12am | 04/08/11

Two rates of tax ... one being zero ... sounds very much like a “tea party” policy ... 100% tax rate on the first $50,000 and zero on everything beyond.

AdamC says:

11:29am | 04/08/11

Er, no Debbie. I think you have horribly confused yourself.

Anyway, at point 4 above, I meant slash the corporate tax rate.

Hamish says:

11:58am | 04/08/11

The main problem with this summit is that 90% of the time will be taken up helping Wayne Swan understand complex issues, like what a tax is.

Steve says:

02:45pm | 04/08/11

Adam. You are aware that franked dividends are paid from after tax profits?

AdamC says:

03:02pm | 04/08/11

Steve, yes. Franking credits are effectively a tax credit for company tax paid by the company that is claimable by shareholders receiving dividends. The problem is, not everyone can receive (nor all companies generate) them. So it is much better to eliminate the credits and use the proceeds to cut the company tax rate.

Steve says:

04:02pm | 04/08/11

Adam, I assume you meant not every one can use them rather than not every one can receive them when referring to franking credits?

As such I acknowledge that those who are below the tax free thresh hold receive no benefit from the credits and would no doubt prefer a higher unfranked dividend. This issue will come into sharper focus when the tax free threshold increases under the carbon tax.

Hoever I find that the idea of taxing a profit more than once to be so abhorant that I still support the existing franking system.

You might be seeking perfection where it can’t be found.

AdamC says:

04:50pm | 04/08/11

Steve, overseas investors can’t use them, companies don’t receive them on forign-derived income. It’s a silly system in that respect. I say just cut the rate. Obviously, there’s no such thing as perfection when we are talking tax!

Steve says:

05:51pm | 04/08/11

Adam. I am no expert on tax treaties but i expect you are correct in most instances. However dividends are a distribution of after tax profits, that is a given for overseas investors. As such they are not really missing out on anything. The credits simply put a stop to the profit being taxed twice in Australia.

To lower the company tax rate and forgo billions of revenue simply because overseas investors don’t receive a benefit from franking credits would not sit well with me.

It is difficult for me to correlate your concern for overseas investors with your advocacy for a new mining tax.

Arnold says:

12:50am | 05/08/11

Steve,
Low income earners are the greatest beneficiaries of franking credits (as well as superannuation funds).  Contrary to what AdamC has let you believe, Australian residents receiving franked dividends are always entitled to the tax credits already paid by the company.  What this means, is that if you are a low income earner with no liability for tax (say, someone earning $14,000 per annum) then you would receive 100% of those franking credits back as a tax refund upon lodging your tax return. 

AdamC, I am interested in hearing which companies cannot accrue franking credits, with the exemption of those are are already exempt from paying any income tax (generally charities).  If these guys are exempt from tax, why are they disadvantaged by the franking system in Australia?  They generally don’t pay dividends anyway.

Further AdamC, depending on the double tax agreements in place with foreign nations, many foreign investors will benefit from franking credits, especially those living among our trading partners.  Just as many Australian investors receive franking credits for overseas investments.

The reason for franking credits is to ensure tax is not being paid twice on the same source of income.  If BHP makes a $10b tax profit, it therefore pays $3b in tax (30%), why should an investor not receive a tax credit?  After all, franked dividends only represent that shareholders percentage of after tax profits generated by their initial investment.  If these credits were not allowed, you would effectively have the government grabbing more than 50% of any corporate earnings (30% corporate tax and assuming 31.5% individual marginal tax rate).  Who would allocate limited resources to an investment that will attract more than 50% tax on earnings?  A corporation’s return on investment would have to be greater than 15% pa just to be more attractive than term deposits. 

E.g. back to BHP’s $10b profit.  If it has paid $3b in corporate tax already, it only has $7b left to pay dividends.  Assuming the entire after tax profit is paid out and every shareholder is paying 31.5% marginal tax, this comes out to $2.25b tax.  Therefore, on the original $10b profit, a total of $5.25b in tax has been paid (52.5%).  Hardly makes Australia an attractive place to invest I would think.  Would you?

Steve says:

02:39pm | 04/08/11

It was not an increase in royalty rates but a removal of a concession that was no longer appropriate.

I am not trying to be pedantic on this. A concessional rate was struck on “fine” ore decades ago to ensure the more valuable “lump” ore was not exclusively mined.

Contemporary steel producers are gearing production towards fine ore recognising that lump is not as prevelant on a global basis. As such fine ore is growing in demand and value and the concessions are no longer appropriate.

Both Liberal and Labor state Governments have had the goal to remove these concessions for some time and the change has bipartisan support. The fact that it was a Liberal state government that finally removed these concessions without any political fuss is a tribute to the premier.

Most of the additional royalty revenue will result in a lower GST share for WA and by definition a higher share to the other states.

Steve says:

02:10pm | 04/08/11

The disclosure is in the usual spot at the bottom of the page.

ZSRenn says:

03:15pm | 04/08/11

@ Steve It seems his name is apt!

Blind Freddy says:

03:40pm | 04/08/11

@Steve & ZSRenn

I have just checked again (several times) and I cannot see a disclosure anywhere. Maybe I am blind - or you are just making it up?

Debbie says:

04:17pm | 04/08/11

There is a disclosure on the page I’m looking at.

Steve says:

04:17pm | 04/08/11

Down the bottom under the heading of PUNCHING ON TODAY. There is a photo and a little bio of the author. It is there every day.

Louisa says:

10:04pm | 04/08/11

... and the use of a pusher to eat his lunch!