Prev
Next

Let’s get rid of the rats in the tax system

Robert Jeremenko

by Robert Jeremenko

18 Mar 05:35am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Carbon Tax, Government, Henry Tax Reiew, Julia Gillard, Revenue, Tax

45 comments

The Gillard Government has declared its carbon tax won’t be included in the Federal Budget in May - and that’s not a surprise.

Getting rid of some of these should be a first step for tax reform. Photo: Sharyn Rosewarne.

The real shock is why we’re even talking about a carbon tax without a debate about broader taxation reform.

There aren’t many Australians who wouldn’t like to pay less tax, but reforming the system goes way beyond that.

Our country would work a lot better if we had fewer taxes that worked more efficiently to collect even the same amount of money from more of us.

The 2010 Henry Review of the tax system got it right when it said there are 125 taxes across all levels of government in Australia, yet just 10 of them collect 90 per cent of revenue.

Eliminating some of these 115 other “rats and mice” taxes would make the system far simpler and much easier to run.

A tax system is like a finely-tuned timepiece – tamper with one of the mechanisms and the whole lot can seize up.

Imposing a new tax to make people use green energy might be the right thing to do, but all sides of politics need to agree to properly examine the entire mechanism before adding an extra spring.

By world standards, our tax system works well - but that doesn’t mean it will still be fully functional by the time our kids grow up.

By 2050, the number of Australians aged 65-plus will more than double. We will need retirement and hospital systems that can cope, and having a fair and efficient tax system is how we’ll pay the bill.

There are other short-term reasons to have a look at the tax system.

The end of the financial year is three months away and people are starting to think about gathering together their shoebox of receipts and lodging their tax return.

Yet eight in ten of us will pay a tax agent or accountant an average of $300 to do it for us.

That’s almost always claimed as a deduction the following year, which just adds one more complication.

Australians are the second-most tax agent-reliant people in the world (77 per cent) with only the Italians (96 per cent) needing help more.

That’s understandable when you realise that the Income Tax Act that was 126 pages long in 1936 now runs to 7000 pages.

Few politicians are able to explain the details of the tax system - yet they’re the people making the laws that the Australian Tax Office administers to run it.

The Government is already moving towards allowing taxpayers with simple returns to take a standard deduction and file their tax return. It’s one small step in the right direction.

The Government has also been promising a tax summit before the end of June. 

Of course a carbon tax should be part of that, along with issues like GST, abolishing inefficient state taxes and simplifying welfare payments.

The clock is ticking on all this and it’s not just about the environment.

Robert Jeremenko is Senior Tax Counsel for The Tax Institute, the body representing Australia’s tax professionals. 

Most commented

45 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Dan says:

      04:50am | 18/03/11

      I agree the whole thing needs an overhaul. I would expect though that this government will keep all the existing taxes and waste the extra money on (non) working families or welfare bludgers somewhere….you know the people who need your money more than you do but don’t seem capable of earning it themselves - the ones we need to support as a society so they can breed and increase in proportion… thats what this govt will do, its a one trick pony.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      04:57am | 18/03/11

      It’s only the PAYE suckers that really pay tax. The corporations and rich have tax accountants to minimize their tax, Tradies mainly use a cash economy with generous tax deductions for their business, the poor either don’t make the threshold or have multiple casual jobs that make filing tax returns a nightmare. The Australian economy is a lot like the Greek economy, lots of tax avoidance, rorting of state benefits and an ever dwindling taxation base.

      Reply

    • Joan says:

      08:13am | 18/03/11

      Spot on…. thank heavens for the GST at least some tax got from the parasites living off the PAYE tax payer. The GST should be increased and PAYE rates lowered and death taxes applied.

    • Jedi_T says:

      06:20am | 18/03/11

      So Ross releases another report to support his Payers Carbon Tax.
      Even if he wanted, Ross couldn’t release a paper that damned Carbon Pricing, as it would probably result in him not getting paid.
      Unless something more than a balance of probabilities argument can be made for Climate Change being substantially contributed to by Humans, this so called Tax is nothing but a joke.

      Reply

    • Thirsty says:

      06:51am | 18/03/11

      A new tax system could be so easy
      Husband earns $100,000, wife stays at home. Total tax bill $26,450
      Husband earns $50,000, wife earns $50,000. Total Tax Bill $17,200
      All we hear about from both sides of politics is how family friendly they are. Its all a load of bullshit. Tax the family income, not the personal income
      Tax Trusts as companies, then let the trust stream the income to beneficiaries with tax credits (same as company imputation), simple and effective
      Abolish FBT statutory formula for company cars, easy, effective and a huge boost to government coffers
      Abolish the payroll tax threshold, lower rates, everyone pays the same…effective, simple and more importantly, equitable
      Get rid of GST exemptions, save millions in compliance costs
      Get rid of 30% Private Health Insurance rebate, increase Medicare Levy to 2%. Massive (Billions) dollars saved, raised, put into health care. If you want private insurance after that, pay for it….government isnt asked to pay for my private insurance on my house, why should they pay a portion of my health insurance???
      Just the above changes will go a long way to simplifying the tax act…these measures are the ones effecting most households and businesses

      Reply

    • Ryan says:

      09:04am | 18/03/11

      @Thirsty: here here, plus the family where the husband earns $100k and the wife stays at home doesn’t have a daycare bill of 15k per year for the government. Lets not mention the fact that the family where the husband earns 100k will be paying a flood levy whereas the other family does not.
      There is no fair go in Australia when it comes to tax.

    • Thirsty says:

      10:34am | 18/03/11

      @Ryan
      With clildcare etc mate, thats why they should abolish Family Tax Benefit Part B…it rewards familys that can afford for a parent to stay at home. Why should I be able to stream my income so that my wife can get Part B, even though I earn over $100K. Its bloody stupid. If a family group earns x amount, you get y amount of FTB, doesnt matter how the respective earned it
      FTB should be paid based on family income as a whole, with childcare rebates factored in so that those that do not need it (ie, stay at home parent) arent penalised and/or denefited due to their choices.
      The welfare transfer from PAYE to FTB is the biggest rort going around….fix this mess with family centric taxing and welfare benefits, the better for all

    • Ryan says:

      02:56pm | 18/03/11

      @Thirsty: I fully agree, the family tax benefit part B should be abolished and replaced by allowing us to offset our total pre-tax income between two.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:46am | 19/03/11

      Called income splitting isn’t it? There’s a wikipedia entry on it.

    • Old Bert says:

      04:50pm | 19/03/11

      @ Thirsty, “Get rid of 30% Private Health Insurance rebate, increase Medicare Levy to 2%. Massive (Billions) dollars saved, raised, put into health care.” ?  So, you’re saying Age Pensioners who are NOT exempt by way of having say, a Defence Force or other annuity for example, should pay an increased Medicare levy of 2%?. And I’m referring to those and other members of the public who don’t go to the nearest doctor or medical centre, on the whim of a percieved “illness”, those who manage their age related decay with appropriate actions. You’ve highlighted the ongoing 30% Private Health Insurance rebate, an abominable Howard Govt imposition, adopted by this government, when you consider it’s a ‘Robin Hood’ reversal, the poor(er) relatively, will pay for the rich. Let’s see the end of this obscenity. Now. It’s 19th century.

    • Adam Diver says:

      07:21am | 18/03/11

      I would love to see reforms in the tax system. Honestly I think the small taxes should be removed replaced by an increase in the GST.

      More importantly how the hell does a country have 96% of people use a tax agent? Can anyone enlighten me on the Italian taxation system?

      Reply

    • Tator says:

      02:04pm | 19/03/11

      If it is anything like they used to wire up Alfa Romeos, it would be a dogs breakfast

    • Nigel says:

      07:39am | 18/03/11

      A breath of fresh air from a gent who is in an area that would stand to loose from these reforms. Thank you for a simple down to earth approach to the growing disillusionment that out govt is creating.  How about this simple answer (From a non accounting person) – 40% tax on all individuals and get rid of stamp duties, GST, import duties and all the other rubbish and 35% on all companies.

      Reply

    • Tubesteak says:

      07:45am | 18/03/11

      What is really needed is a whole rethink. Not just tinkering. Even the Henry Tax Review was tinkering around the edges.

      What we need to do is
      - increase the tax free threshold to $50k (indexed to CPI)
      - reduce maringal tax rates to a flat 20%
      - introduce a broad based consumption tax of at least 30%

      This would significantly reduce compliance costs and be equitable for all. People would pay based on their consumption rates and all would pay the same proportion. Those that want to work hard and achieve more aren’t penalised for doing so.

      Other things that can be reviewed are things like negative gearing which costs the government billions every year. Limit deductions so that you can only claim as much as you earn from a passive investment.

      Company tax would be 20% and the dividend imputation system would be retained.

      Reply

    • JohnB says:

      07:51am | 18/03/11

      Great article. The problem I see is we all lead our lives according to tax (or I do anyway). i.e. take advantage of present tax law. If it’s changed there will be inequity to sort out.

      Man, I would have been cranky if they brought the GST in close to or in my retirement. An otherwise great way to raise revenue seemingly fairly, but by my logic, it definitely negatively affected the people in their later years..

      Reply

    • Scotchy says:

      08:22am | 18/03/11

      Just get rid of TAX!!! Go for a debits tax, thats a tax on a transaction, very small percentage (eg. Half a cent per dollar) will raise many many billions and the country can remove the ATO as its all(mostly) collected electronically and the transaction volume in oz is in the trillions. ATO gone = savings, compliance gone = savings, investment in a tax free haven = wealth, more nett pay in the pocket = savings/spend power. More study and research required as inflation may spiral, but that can be capped (by law) to gdp etc.

      Reply

    • grumpy old man says:

      08:38am | 18/03/11

      absolutely correct. There is fundamentally no reason why, in this electronic age, we should be using such archaic taxation measures. We should also get back to the original purpose of taxation, that is, to raise money for the Govt to meet its obligations. Taxation was never intended to be used as a social engineering mechanism as it is now.

    • Ryan says:

      09:13am | 18/03/11

      This is a great idea except that they would then need to allocate some serious resources to overseas parcels. Some overseas companies are also perfectly happy to declare the item at a mere fraction of its actual value or cost.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      09:13am | 18/03/11

      I agree with the implementation of a debit tax / financial transactions tax as a way to counter tax avoidance.

    • Richard says:

      11:54am | 18/03/11

      Yes of course, its the best tax for everyone, except the super rich bankster elite financial terrorists who are actually in charge. What, you thought politicians were in charge? Hahaha. They’re not, they get told what to do and they have no choice in the matter.

      Who do you think gave the order to implement a Carbon Trading Scheme? The banksters, because they stand to make a lot of money out of it: selling artificial “carbon permits” and engineering up all new exotic instruments to defraud the carbon market, exactly like they did in the mortgage market in the lead up to the sub-prime meltdown of ‘07/‘08.

      But they’ll never let financial transaction get taxed, because that is the source of all their power, shifting digital units of fiat currency around the place, producing nothing but charging huge fees and interest.

      They create our money did you know? The government doesn’t create our money, the private reserve banks and federal reserves do. They create it out of thin air and then loan it to the government/retail banks bearing interest.

      Its a scam, and we’re the ones who pay for it. And the situation will never improve until we REBEL.

    • Another Dave says:

      12:38am | 20/03/11

      Absolutely. And repeal the Double Taxation Agreement Bill 1952. Set a tax of 20% for companies transferring money out of country. America charges 36%, Japan 50%. Get rid of the FTA with America unless it is renegotiated fairly. Apply reciprocal import tariffs, adjusted for exchange rate, this will create opportunities for industry in Australia and help with balance of trade, increased employment and expanded tax base. I’m all for a level playing field, as long as it is truly level.

    • AdamC says:

      08:46am | 18/03/11

      There are a few big issues with taxation in Australia. To my mind, these are, in order of big badness:

      1. Personal and corporate tax rates that are far too high in comparison to our Asia Pacific peers and competitors.
      2. A persistent cash economy that substantially reduces revenue collection.
      3. Exceedingly high complexity
      4. Taxes that distort behaviour, in particular the system of franking credits and the CGT discount.

      Talk about rich tax avoiders and welfare rorters may be valid, but you won’t get substantially more bang for your buck by cracking down on Paul Hogan or dole-cheating single mums.

      Does anyone have a different set of tax priorities?

      Reply

    • Thirsty says:

      10:41am | 18/03/11

      @AdamC
      re your suggestion about tax rates in the Asian region….we could match their tax rates if we also matched their standard of living, government input into services etc
      The whole percentage of tax is a bullshit arguement. Its how the tax is raised, if it is equitable over all in the population etc etc
      CGT discount, 100% agree, CGT should be paid at your full marginal rate, with indexation brought back in. This was the fairest and most equitable way in which CGT was calculated.
      Dont agree with your franking credits, this drives equality. Why should I as an investor be taxed on the taxed amount of income from a company, with no flow through credits. Abandoning this would crazy. All you have to do is stop the buy back rorts that Treasury implicitly OK’s by compenies such as BHP, RIO etc etc. This isnt right in anyones language

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:38pm | 18/03/11

      Aaah yes.  The cash economy. I.e.  tax avoidance. Cheating. And we rate ourselves above US, UK, Germany and Japan in Transparency Internationals Corruption Perceptions Index?  Because?

      We don’t have the degree of problems here as OS. We live in la la land with wealth for toil. Isolated. Lord of the Flies could have been written about us. Hence Australia’s Cultural Cringe.  When we go OS and open our mouths we oft sound either conceited or like spoilt jerks. The white trash of the region. We could be so much more.

    • Realist says:

      09:25am | 18/03/11

      Could be said any better. But will the ego inflated self serving policticians and lobby groups ever do anything in the best interests of country?????????????

      Reply

    • malohi says:

      09:42am | 18/03/11

      “A tax system is like a finely-tuned timepiece – tamper with one of the mechanisms and the whole lot can seize up.”
      Did anyone else read that?
      The more hamfisted suggestions being proffered in the comments make me lol. They would be impossible to implement, it would be anarchy trying to set it up, but I see the logic in most and i like the idea of raising the consumer pays (gst etc) portion of tax collection.

      What irritates me is tax avoidance from non PAYG employees and the deception through the statisticsof who actually pays tax.

      It would interest me to know what percentage of working age people in this country actually have a tax debt at efy and how much it is. Part timers likely wouldnt. Many tradies and small buisnesses can fudge transactions to avoid much debt, and many just don’t file returns.
      Don’t get me started on the unemployed.

      The system as it is not is not too bad, it is functional at least. It just needs to be enforced.

      Reply

    • Tubesteak says:

      11:03am | 18/03/11

      With all the middle class welfare in this country most PAYE taxpayers don’t really pay tax. It just gets shifted around a bit and returned to them as payments.

      This isn’t even including the government funded services they consume.

      If you really want to see where most funding comes from you’ll find it is actually High Net Worth Individuals and companies.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:08pm | 18/03/11

      Tubesteak. “It just gets shifted around a bit and returned to them as payments.”  Isn’t that exactly the point of tax and government.  Collecting tax and redistributing it for the good of the whole nation?  Sometimes that money goes to others, but sometimes it comes back to you in your time of need.  The more tax a State collects from an individual, the more they need to give back to that individual.  Otherwise the State looks more like a feudal lord than a system for delivery equity. To pay an individual $100K, a QLD company needs to find an extra $22K.  With no deductions s/he then pays $24950 income tax and $2500 medicare levy. Spending $35K on G&S (excluding petrol and alcohol) attracts $3.5K in GST. That’s an effective tax rate of 44% on the only thing that individual has to sell: their labour. (The super guarantee is merely a privitisation of the pension.) Now add WET/Duty (on $20pw), fuel taxes (on $40pw) and council rates of $3K and we’re up to around 46%. And I haven’t even added the stamp duty for moving a moderate home say every 15 years or e.g. the cost of buying a new car every say 15 years.

      Fine by me.  I’m OK with this form of forced savings that stops people blowing money on rubbish so it’s available when they have kids, dependent partner or get sick.  That can be a good system.  But it also needs to be equitable. Calling it welfare tells me soemthing about you.
      The branding of some payments as ‘middle class welfare’ is spin used as a moralistic wacking stick to drive a better bargain in the equity deal. Oft people are disadvantaged because of circumstances, but sometimes its because of choices they make. Where do we draw the welfare line? Sorry, its not welfare, it’s an equity deal.  Guess what you can do with your moralistic wacking stick.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      02:19pm | 18/03/11

      Addendum.  Median house price in Melbourne is $600K.  Stamp duty on a $500K home (PPR) is $22K.  So moving home every 15 years brings the effective tax rate up to over 47%. Hmm I wonder how many other hidden taxes, duties, levies I can throw on the pile? What’s the GST on an Aussie built bog standard Falcon or Commodore every 10 years? Add annual rego.  That’s another approx $900 a year.
      My good tax paying hero doesn’t smoke. Does your hero smoke?

    • Tax guy says:

      10:01am | 18/03/11

      Yes yes.. everyone hates tax. Real life example - I work at tax, and one day I rang someone to inform them I had stopped an attempted fraud on their account.
      Got yelled at for holding up their return.

      The 9000 pages bit is a little disingenuous… a lot of it is history, explanations and definitions. In reality most people are still impacted by less than 20 pages of tax law.

      Reply

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      10:15am | 18/03/11

      I can just hear Swannie and Gillard saying: ‘but the current tax complexity means jobs.  Jobs for tax agents and accountants, their support staff, their IT staff, cleaners etc etc. Our prime focus is on jobs.  And all those incomes means they pay taxes.’ Jobs jobs jobs. Taxes taxes taxes.  Jobs and taxes.  Lucky we’ve got such a big farm and big mine to pay for it all. But what does it all achieve?

      Reply

    • Yak of the Goldfields says:

      10:42am | 18/03/11

      I find it a bit ‘rich’ that the wealthy (actually anyone) can employ an accountant to reduce their tax bill to 12% and then claim the accountant as a tax deduction. Isn’t this just the ATO looking after their own. I believe everybody has the right to reduce their tax but this should be capped at, say, $200 for individuals and a couple of grand for small business’s. If the Tax system was easier to comply with, most wouldn’‘t even need one.

      Is it that the ATO is assissting their profession in making money for themselves. Self perpetuating?

      Reply

    • Thirsty says:

      11:29am | 18/03/11

      @Yak of the Goldfields
      What absolute bloody rubbish
      Do you honestly believ that a small business should be able to claim direct expenses agianst their turnover (not tax)?
      Most PAYE payers cant claim bugger all aginst their income, because they dont spend any money to earn it….very simple, accounting 101
      Small business incurs all maner of expenses in order to earn their income, namely. the wages paid to the PAYE earners to start with, plus stock, rent etc etc. Do you really believe that small businesses are rorting the system so much?
      Your pathetic notion that small business can reduce their tax to 12% is complete bullshit. They might pay 12% of their turnover, but this is not their income. These 2 notions are completely seperate.
      Ask any accountant, tax compliance is the last job that they want to do for a client. Their main focus is one helping businesses becoming more efficient, sustainable etc etc. Tax work is a consequence of being an accountant, not the driving force behind wanting to be an accountant to start with
      remember, if anyone comes to you and says that they have a great accountant because they dont pay tax, its primarily the result of them not earning any meaningful income, not because of the magic of a bean counter

      Reply

    • Yak of the Goldfields says:

      12:05pm | 18/03/11

      Sorry Thirsty, I wasn’t refering to small business’s getting away with “tax dodging”. These are the very foundations that sustain our economy.

      My grip is with the Packers and Bonds of the world. How Bondy can get away with paying 3 cents in the dollar (couple of years ago, mind you) and yet live the life of Riley (or Bondy) is a disgrace.

      It seems the more you earn, the less you have to contribute. Is this from sensible accounting or just cheating the system.

    • Yak of the Goldfields says:

      12:27pm | 18/03/11

      That first bit didn’t come out right. I meant small business’s are the foundation of our economy. I don’t think tax dodging is the foundation, but I would have to ask an accountant.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:56pm | 18/03/11

      Yak.  Bondies mistake was that he flaunted it. still waters run deep.  What about the Rileys that don’t flaunt it?

    • Martin Hopes says:

      12:52pm | 18/03/11

      “the Income Tax Act that was 126 pages long in 1936 now runs to 7000 pages” Keating and Howard (Costello) added about 6800 pages between them, more during the Howard years.

      The reason we have such a high number of people using an agent is simple -  We’re not as smart as we think we are, and Italians are dumber. Dumb and dumber comes to mind.

      Reply

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:26pm | 18/03/11

      Martin.  That’s the smart money using democracy’s loopholes to their advantage. And they’re also focussed on the corportised legal fraternity to do the same with that other arm of power: the judiciary. Chip chip chip chip.  Smart aren’t they. I suspect the same has happened in the UK and US. What’s putting downward pressure on the system we inherited from the UK? Them?  Or our complacency? If it’s us then why? Technology?  Is there any metric so we can compare the quality of service delivered by democracy and the judiciary now with 25, 50, 75 and 100 years ago.  I doubt number of pages of legislation is a good metric.

    • k says:

      12:56pm | 18/03/11

      In my work as a solicitor I’ve seen a lot of people’s tax returns over the years and you’re fooling yourself if you think that small businesses are paying any meaningful tax.

      I’ve seen doctors earning hundreds of thousands of dollars with 4 separate tax returns splitting income every which way (trusts, businesses and personal tax returns) which means they pay as much tax as I did on $70,000 PAYE. I didn’t recieve any ‘middle class welfare’ either before people start on about that. Where is the equity in paying the same tax whether you earn $70,000 or $400,000?

      And I’ve seen so many business owners driving BMWs and having nice homes in lovely suburbs yet on their tax returns they have a taxable income of less than $10,000.

      Of course what they don’t realise is that if you have a claim for loss of earnings at some point then we look at tax returns so tradies running on a cash economy and small business people claiming so many deductions do lose out then.

      Reply

    • Yak of the Goldfields says:

      01:15pm | 18/03/11

      In regard to your final paragraph, isn’t this the reason so many lawyers file for bankruptcy? Can’t find the statistics, but I believe lawyers have the highest rate of bankruptcy in the land.

    • Yak of the Goldfields says:

      01:59pm | 18/03/11

      Wow, I have so many posts on something I know nothing about; I’m beginning to feel like part of “the Punch” family.

      The owner/operator of a mob I was working for was complaining to me about how CSA weren’t believing him that his income was below $37,500 for his child support payments. Apparently the ATO believed him every year. Poor soul only turned over $600K per year. I didn’t even pretend that I felt sorry for him. His ex-wife and three kids weren’t sorry for him either.

    • Matt says:

      11:07am | 19/03/11

      Yak, turnover and taxable income are two were different things. Best you don’t talk about things you have zero understanding of, eh? Maybe you should have felt for him, considering he was keeping you gainfully employed?

    • Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

      10:57pm | 19/03/11

      The simplest tax system I have ever heard of was in Hong Kong pre the hand back to China 20% in EVERY dollar goes to the tax man, NO deductions, how good would that be

      Reply

    • Jolly Rodjer says:

      11:48am | 21/05/12

      Taxes will increase in proportion to the debt of the nation public or private, as both are the same when it comes to the banks, where the bond purchases supply the deposit for bank credit expansion of up to ten or more times the value of the bonds.
      Banks then proceed to charge interest to all government and public the resultant debt is reflected in the amount of tax government has to collect to pay the banks.
      If the government did what Ben Chiffly advocated & loaned to themselves at no cost then our taxes would be very low, we pay for our own enslavement where private property can be confiscated by debt from private bank money that did not exist, the taxpayer pays all and can loose all in this scam.
      Ben Chiffly wanted a government bank that did not make a profit! he stated this in the 1937 royal commission into banking who studied the last great ripp off or depression we have had two so far 1903 &1929;.
      He then got the parliament to pass a bill to Nationalise the private banks this was knocked on the head by the “privy council” a mob in another country!
      Ben Chiffly was not a lawer like most politicians he was a taxpaying worker who achieved more than all the rabble that followed him so different to today’s labour movement he seems to be from another planet.

      Reply

    • Jolly Rodjer says:

      11:48am | 21/05/12

      Taxes will increase in proportion to the debt of the nation public or private, as both are the same when it comes to the banks, where the bond purchases supply the deposit for bank credit expansion of up to ten or more times the value of the bonds.
      Banks then proceed to charge interest to all government and public the resultant debt is reflected in the amount of tax government has to collect to pay the banks.
      If the government did what Ben Chiffly advocated & loaned to themselves at no cost then our taxes would be very low, we pay for our own enslavement where private property can be confiscated by debt from private bank money that did not exist, the taxpayer pays all and can loose all in this scam.
      Ben Chiffly wanted a government bank that did not make a profit! he stated this in the 1937 royal commission into banking who studied the last great ripp off or depression we have had two so far 1903 &1929;.
      He then got the parliament to pass a bill to Nationalise the private banks this was knocked on the head by the “privy council” a mob in another country!
      Ben Chiffly was not a lawer like most politicians he was a taxpaying worker who achieved more than all the rabble that followed him so different to today’s labour movement he seems to be from another planet.

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Colgo 23 May 13 11:07PM

@TheStalwart an analyst in Sydney said it was a "sad day" http://t.co/vh4Yu4OgDD. I think he was just exhausted and gave up analyzing

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 23 May 13 10:43PM

@CatherineDeveny @sydwritersfest A wobble

Paul Colgan

Colgo 23 May 13 10:38PM

RT @NASA: Amazing views from the International Space Station of Pavlof Volcano erupting in Alaska. http://t.co/vqBkkiOful

Paul Colgan

Colgo 23 May 13 10:30PM

US Google Doodle features a girl's touching depiction of her father's return from Iraq http://t.co/4LiRFOntTY

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter