Recent Commentary has suggested that the proposed RRT will be levied on all minerals including including fertilisers, sand and stone.
According to Henry this should not be the case;Abbott also made the obvious but telling point that not all ''resources'' are the same. While the government might want to characterise the tax as a tax on greedy foreign-owned exploiters of our natural resources – despite the fact that the big miners are net investors in this jurisdiction – the ''super tax'' would apply to low-margin stuff in the ground, like fertilisers and sand and stone, which are hardly super-profitable. A one-size-fits-all tax would have some rather severe unintended consequences, which is why BHP Billiton's Marius Kloppers has been arguing for differential tax rates for different types of resources.
But in the government's response to Henry it appears that they are.C1b
applies to non-renewable resource (oil, gas and minerals) projects, except for lower value minerals for which it can be expected to generate no net benefits. Excepted minerals could continue to be subject to existing arrangements if appropriate;
If applied to domestic consumption it will also be a new tax (by stealth) on the Australian people. Section 5.3 (Taxing Point) from the above document does not differentiate between export and domestic usage. This suggests that the RRT would apply to the domestic consumption of lower value minerals.5.2 Which resources will be subject to the Resource Super Profits Tax
RSPT will apply to all mining and petroleum projects, with the exception of PRRT projects, for which
opt‐in arrangements will be developed in consultation with industry. This differs from the Australia’s
Future Tax System recommendation (Henry) that the RSPT replace the PRRT and that certain low‐value
commodities be excluded from application of the RSPT on the grounds that compliance costs would
likely exceed the benefits from application of the scheme.