The Albanese government

[farmerge]

Chicken feed really.

We should be putting an export tax (say 10-20% of the current market price) on all our natural resources.

Major Export Commodities – Value Estimates for 2024​

• Total goods & services exports: AUD 644.4 billion Australian Bureau of Statistics+1

Top commodities by value:

Commodity	Value (Approx.)	Notes
Iron ore & concentrates	(Largest share)	~60% of exports to China (≈ US$100 b among ~US$340 b total goods) The AustralianTrading Economics+1
Coal (thermal & metallurgical)	multi-billion AUD	Forecast ~A$36 b (thermal) & A$47 b (metallurgical) in 2023-24 minister.industry.gov.au
LNG (petroleum gases)	A$63 b–A$71 b forecast	Down from A$93 b in 2022-23 minister.industry.gov.au
Unwrought gold & precious metals	~A$22 b forecast	Down from A$24 b in 2022-23 Industry.gov.au

So at 10% export tax that's

Iron ore $34b pa
Coal $ 8.3b pa
LNG $6b pa (say)
Gold $2b pa

Not to be sneezed at.

@SirRumpole I have long thought that an export tax of some sort or formula should have been invoked many years ago.
The minerals are not the exclusive right of ownership to a handful of individuals (even though shareholder benefit from the sale of these).
The countries wealth of these belongs to all who live here and as such all should be able to enjoy benefits that an export tax would generate

 

[orr]

The reductio ad absurdum argument would then say that any taxation less than 100% is revenue forgone I guess.

Hey 'diddim's'....
If only I could elevate you're commentary to to level of absurdist ... 'ahhh' a seemingly unattainable dream.

love'd ya melt down on the %100 inheritance tax.

Seeing as you're across, in society terms as to 'who has what' (nasal snort) ... Could you give the audience here a percentage number as to who would pay such a tax, if say the value of the average family home was a lower threshold exemption ???
Or is that to hard a question?



as an important note .. my view in the regard of inherited wealth aligns with Andrew Carnegie.

 

[PZ.]

We already have a company tax on mining profits and state royalties + a petroleum resource rent tax.

No Govt will apply an export tax on top of that

 

[Bellcose]

One major problem with Australia’s tax system is the wealthy don’t pay their share.
One way to solve this is an inheritance tax
On asset’s worth more than $5 to $10 million.

Not disagreeing with you but could you increase the lowest asset base a tad more. It'd kinda help if you know what I mean.

 

[wayneL]

Hey 'diddim's'....
If only I could elevate you're commentary to to level of absurdist ... 'ahhh' a seemingly unattainable dream.

love'd ya melt down on the %100 inheritance tax.

Seeing as you're across, in society terms as to 'who has what' (nasal snort) ... Could you give the audience here a percentage number as to who would pay such a tax, if say the value of the average family home was a lower threshold exemption ???
Or is that to hard a question?



as an important note .. my view in the regard of inherited wealth aligns with Andrew Carnegie.

I have no interest in interacting with someone who has zero idea about the difference between your and you're.

However, I would point out legitimate questions ≠ meltdown, which highlights your disingenuity.

 

[orr]

I have no interest in interacting with someone who has zero idea about the difference between your and you're.

However, I would point out legitimate questions ≠ meltdown, which highlights your disingenuity.

to hard a question hey 'sweetness'?
Do you need the 'master' to spell it out for you? I can, orr ...( the catholic church has numbers on this.. up your ally )


Percentage's....??? darling.

w-Anlyel..You started this one. are you to pizz-weak to go on?

 

[wayneL]

To hard a question, hey 'sweetness'?
Do you need the 'Master' to spell it out for you? I can, orr ...(the Catholic church has numbers on this.. up your alley )


Percentage'(<- X)s....??? darling?

w-Anlyel..You started this one. Are you to pizz-weak to go on?

Other conversational transgressions forgiven, apart from the juvenile unpleasantness.

However I am the enquirer, perhaps you have those answers.

 

[orr]

However I am the enquirer, perhaps you have those answers.

They are numbers.
They are known numbers.
You can find wealth distribution in Australia ? or is it beyond you? (probably is... some might think; definitely)

or go to Picketty "Capital in the 20 first Centrury' chapter 10" 'Inequality of Capital ownership'. for a wider OECD perspective.(way beyond you w-anyle)

I ask again .. Can you tell us ... from above.

'Could you give the audience here a percentage number as to who would pay such a tax, (100% inheritance ) if say the value of the average family home was a lower threshold exemption ???
Pressure is on you 'sugar tit's' ... what not up to it?

Just putting it out there ...But if it's more than are 75% are exempt ? .... sort of looks like a majority . (but who really likes democracy? certainly not the top 1%- 10%-15%-20%?... ohhhh .. starting to sound a bit close better stop )


from above ... Carnegie.

 

[sptrawler]

Australia is the 8th lowest taxed country in the OECD if we were average there would be another $100bil taken in each year.
One major problem with Australia’s tax system is the wealthy don’t pay their share.
One way to solve this is an inheritance tax
On asset’s worth more than $5 to $10 million.

That is the easiest and most practicle answer, the thresholds can be adjusted easily and it is easy to implement.

 

[IFocus]

Not disagreeing with you but could you increase the lowest asset base a tad more. It'd kinda help if you know what I mean.

Increasing the asset base doesn’t have a big impact (cannot remember the exact numbers) which surprised me.
Such is the amount of wealth that dodges tax.

 

[Bellcose]

Increasing the asset base doesn’t have a big impact (cannot remember the exact numbers) which surprised me.
Such is the amount of wealth that dodges tax.

The tax system has been creaking for sometime apparently. I did read personal income tax accounts for approx 52% of the tax raised (excluding state taxes/rates, etc) So we are relying on taxing those endeavouring to make a few dollars to a large degree such as the poor stiffs delivering parcels, retail and the like.

One of my children works in age care plus doing gigs in hospitality i.e serving food and booze to the ravenous hordes. Works hard, makes a dollar but not a great amount and tax is taken out accordingly. Whereas while I am also subject to personal tax, I'm not doing a darn thing to get it since it is all income from investments in addition to an account-based pension which is tax free. In my view, I really cannot call what I do as endeavour nor am I working hard to get it. It seems skewed tax wise in many respects.

Yeah, I been feeding my children $$ over the years so they is well pretty set. One told me last week, their investments using the money received is now generating $40k gross pa which of course supplements the money from aged care work. Without that they'd be pushed a bit.

 

[Smurf1976]

Whereas while I am also subject to personal tax, I'm not doing a darn thing to get it since it is all income from investments in addition to an account-based pension which is tax free. In my view, I really cannot call what I do as endeavour nor am I working hard to get it. It seems skewed tax wise in many respects.

Presumably you did however make a considerable effort to own these investments in the first place?

That's certainly the case in my own circle. I know several who've done reasonably well financially, but they all have a few things in common. All worked 7 days a week, all worked nights, all did work that was at least somewhat physically unpleasant and many wouldn't choose to do.

Nobody forced them obviously. But plenty of others get away with spending the lot on holidays etc then claiming welfare the moment something goes wrong.

 

[PZ.]

Agreed @Smurf1976. The current tax system encourages the holiday cum welfare fodder.

Superannuation contributions in their original form were designed to (at least partially) avoid this.

 

[sptrawler]

Presumably you did however make a considerable effort to own these investments in the first place?

That's certainly the case in my own circle. I know several who've done reasonably well financially, but they all have a few things in common. All worked 7 days a week, all worked nights, all did work that was at least somewhat physically unpleasant and many wouldn't choose to do.

Nobody forced them obviously. But plenty of others get away with spending the lot on holidays etc then claiming welfare the moment something goes wrong.

And now no doubt those same people who worked hard and saved to fund their own retirement, will no doubt be the ones who will be hit with budget changes.
The reality is the money to fund a failing economy has to come from somewhere, so the Government has to find a way of putting lipstick on it.
The fact is nothing will change, the economy is still in a slide and nothing is being done to reverse that.
Universities are now sausage machines, trade training is defunct, immigration is adding to the burden, energy costs are increasing, manufacturing is decreasing.
Maybe someone can explain where our growth will come from, I might be seen as negative and I would love some positive inspiration.

 

[Bellcose]

Presumably you did however make a considerable effort to own these investments in the first place?

That's certainly the case in my own circle. I know several who've done reasonably well financially, but they all have a few things in common. All worked 7 days a week, all worked nights, all did work that was at least somewhat physically unpleasant and many wouldn't choose to do.

Nobody forced them obviously. But plenty of others get away with spending the lot on holidays etc then claiming welfare the moment something goes wrong.

Yes it's true I made the effort to obtain those assets but that's my view. Others may see it differently. I admit I didn't actually create anything as the assets are all shares purchased on the secondary market.

However, I was referring to the method of taxing the income from those assets. To me there is the oddity of taxing those actually working and lazy sods like me in the same way. I'm not convinced it is entirely equitable. Yes, there is the risk aspect the market could go pear shaped but the longer you remain in the market the risk diminishes to some degree.

An absorbing subject actually.

 

[SirRumpole]

And now no doubt those same people who worked hard and saved to fund their own retirement, will no doubt be the ones who will be hit with budget changes.
The reality is the money to fund a failing economy has to come from somewhere, so the Government has to find a way of putting lipstick on it.
The fact is nothing will change, the economy is still in a slide and nothing is being done to reverse that.

I believe that there is a move to treat income from "personal exertion" differently to investment income for tax purposes.

It will be interesting to see how that pans out. Politically the Coalition would be dead against one assumes, but there are a lot of "Chardonay socialists" in Labor( and Greens) these days.

 

[Bellcose]

Politically the Coalition would be dead against one assumes, but there are a lot of "Chardonay socialists" in Labor( and Greens) these days.

There have always been factions in political parties just as there are in the general community. The elected ones have humongous bun fights behind closed doors and, usually, come out all apparently united but each still holding their personal views.

It's likely the factions in the general community are the force resulting in the present rise of the independents in Parliament. If the political parties do not reflect their views independents will. It's moved away from "I am your [insert party] representative in your electorate" to "I want my electorates views to represented in Parliament."

Case in point, in this part of the country in the electorate of Bean. In 2022 Labor held the seat by a margin of about 12%. Fast forward to 2025, the Labor candidate out-polled the independent by only 700 votes. There are over 100,000 voters in Bean. He wasn't seen to be doing anything for the electorate and, I think, was punished accordingly.

 

[SirRumpole]

Case in point, in this part of the country in the electorate of Bean. In 2022 Labor held the seat by a margin of about 12%. Fast forward to 2025, the Labor candidate out-polled the independent by only 700 votes. There are over 100,000 voters in Bean. He wasn't seen to be doing anything for the electorate and, I think, was punished accordingly.

Yes, that happens in a number of seats, but with a large overall majority to Labor they can afford to ignore the Independents for the medium term at least.

 

[farmerge]

Yes, that happens in a number of seats, but with a large overall majority to Labor they can afford to ignore the Independents for the medium term at least.

Which could be a dangerous move in time, if all of a sudden Independents became a force to be reconded with.

 

[Bellcose]

Yes, that happens in a number of seats, but with a large overall majority to Labor they can afford to ignore the Independents for the medium term at least.

Yes, they hold the majority of seats by heaps. However, I don't know the margin in each seat. I could, of course, go and find out but I prefer to outsource that task to other members of this forum. Being a sloth has some advantages.