PDA

View Full Version : Carbon deal tax cuts - What do you think?



nobullsupplements
10-07-2011, 07:24 PM
From: Carbo tax package (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/15-billion-in-tax-cuts-for-low-and-middle-income-earners-under-carbon-deal-20110710-1h8in.html)

Low and middle-income families and singles pensioners and other welfare recipients are the biggest winners from the carbon price while those on generous incomes will bear almost the full brunt with next-to-no assistance.

Unveiled at midday today by the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, a package of $15 billion in tax cuts and increased benefits mean 4 million households will receive more in compensation that the carbon tax will add to their cost of living.

A further 2 million households will be no worse off by being fully compensated, while another 2 million will receive something.
Of the nation's 8.8 million households, only 700,000 receive nothing.

The scheme will operate as a fixed carbon price of $23 from July 1 next year, and move to a full emissions trading scheme on July 1, 2015, when the market will set the carbon price.

It excludes petrol and is not revenue neutral as first forecast. It will cost the budget $4.2 billion over four years and will erode the forecast $3.5 billion return to surplus in 2012-13 by $530 million

The increases to the cost of living, estimated to be 0.7 per cent, will result from the nation's top 500 polluters passing on their costs of having to pay for the carbon dioxide they emit.

Figures released today show the average hits to households will be $9.90 a week, or $515 a year, whereas average assistance will be $10.10 a week, or $525 a year.

Electricity will rise by $3.30 a week, gas by $1.50 a week and food bills by an average 0.80c a week.

The tax cuts, worth $8 billion, will result in 60 per cent of earners receiving an annual tax cut of at least $300, or about $6 a week.

The tax cuts will operate by lifting the tax-free threshold from $600 to $18,200 on July 1, 2012, and to $19,400 in 2015.

This will remove 1 million people from the tax system and be worth $600 a year from somebody on $20,000, and $303 for somebody on $65,000.

On incomes over $80,000 the tax cuts disappears to $3 a year, or 6c a week.

For example, a single earning $85,000 will receive $3 a year from the tax cuts but face a $463 increase in the cost of living.

Family circumstances vary widely depending on the number of children, whether thee are one or two salary earners, how much each earns and total income earned.

For example, couples on dual incomes of up to $95,000 a year with one child aged five and another 12, will be better off. The family will receive $759 a year in assistance combined tax cuts ad family benefit supplements - whereas the impact of the carbon price will be $615.

The same couple earning $100,000 will be fully compensated.

Families on combined incomes of up to $200,000 can still receive compensation if one of the income earners earns less than $80,000 and qualifies for the tax cut.

However, a family on $180,000 combined or more, and not eligible for either tax cuts or family benefits, receives only between $3 and $6 a year and faces an average increase in the cost of living of around $1000.

Pensions, family tax payments, the dole, student allowances and other benefits will increase by 1.7 percent a year.

The first-full year benefit will be paid as a lump sum in May and June next year, before the carbon price starts and then in fortnightly instalments from 2013 onwards..

This will amount to $338 for a single pensioner, $110 per child for a family which receives Family Tax Benefit Part A, $69 for a family which receives benefit Part B

As promised, fuel used by motorists, small business vehicles and tradespeople will be exempt for good.

So too, will be diesel and other transport fuels used in the agriculture, fisheries and forestry.

Other heavy on-road transport vehicles weighing over 4.5 tones - will not be exempt and will pay a effective carbon tax on fuel by having the reductions in excise it currently receives being clawed back. But this clawback will not start until July 1, 2014, providing temporary reprieve for truckies.

Off-road heavy vehicles, predominantly those used in the mining sector, will have their excise clawed back by about 6c a litre when the scheme starts on July 1, 2012.

Excise on aviation fuels will be increased to reflect the impact of a carbon price. These increases will add $930 million to aviation fuel bills over the first four years of the scheme. The clawback of excise reductions will save another $1.9 billion, meaning the total savings on fuel will be $2.8 billion.

This will help offset the cost to the budget which will still be a hit of $4.3 billion over four years.

Shrek
10-07-2011, 09:28 PM
KMVc0IbtyAQ


There is nothing more to say.

Fucken liars.

Christian
10-07-2011, 09:49 PM
They all lie and are all scum , but these monkies are by far the worst...

walt
10-07-2011, 10:38 PM
See ya Julia next election.

But whos to vote for. Lets put the greens as the majority!

nobullsupplements
10-07-2011, 10:52 PM
Bob Brown is already our prime minister.

Shrek
10-07-2011, 11:04 PM
Absolutely.
Bob is calling the shots right now.

sookie
11-07-2011, 10:59 AM
I am just a simple person and simple needs. Whats the point in giving out more money when cost of living goes up. To be honest, it doesnt make sense.

I think they should invest more money into educating people then giving out hand outs.

TrentZor
11-07-2011, 11:48 AM
Welfare payments have gone up and high income earners pay $1000 living expenses.. yet recieve little 6 bux a year in tax cuts ROFL..

I'll bend over some more not that I pay enough already!!

tat maytals
11-07-2011, 01:08 PM
I don't like to get involved in political forum talk usually, but I think a lot of people have the wrong idea about this.

This is a good decision.

Shrek, ALL politicians have lied. Out of all the lies, this is by far the best for us. The revenue from the tax will be invested to supply support for the majority of people who will cop it unfairly as it's passed on from the 500 companies. The other portion of the revenue will be invested into other energy sources.

Tony Abbot stated a carbon tax was the way to go in 2009, but his wasn't going to compensate anyone, so the actual companies creating the emissions were better off and so were the government, but not the public.

As for the lies, which is better; the no carbon tax which will benefit everyone in the future or the industrial relations reforms?

I don't know you, so you may have been better off with the reforms and Tonys version of the carbon tax. But there is a point where everyone has to stop being an economist and think of our resources and future.

Christian, I don't think this government is the worst. They aren't doing a great job, but they didn't have much to work with.

Howards era ran off the back of the strongest labour government australia has ever seen. Bob and Paul did more for the future of australia than any other prime ministers. Howard rode the wave of their smart investments and industrial reforms. Then just sold off almost all our assets and stripped our education and health system to keep up a surplus.

Rudd/Gillard had the GFC, the fires, the floods, Japan, NZ etc. These are huges impacts. They came into an economy that had nothing except mining holding it up. During howards reign the rate of small business failure was the highest in our history outside of the depression.

We are doing pretty well with this government, really.

No government is perfect and this labour government is FAR FAR FAR from it. But they are a billion times better than what an Abbot lead liberal party would be.

I think NSW also has the worst opinion of labour as we have had very unfair budget distribution from the federal government. QLD, WA and VIC have had a much more generous portion due to the different industry heads. WA - Mining, VIC - Banking, QLD - Tourism etc.

This isn't the be-all and end-all of this topic, I know it's not 100% thorough - but who is going to be on a forum? This post is probably already too long for most people to read. I don't want people to not have a different opinion, it just seems like everyone is taking the daily telegraph and the australians words and point of views.

At the end of the day, Australia is doing well compared to pretty much everywhere. We have some many other things going on that are less justifiable and beneficial than this tax, yet this is the only thing we hear about with the odd between breath comments of boat people.

I wish the media and the parties would give the public more of their policies to digest and think about.

Bazza20
11-07-2011, 01:47 PM
Lol at Tat. Don't even try and hide your bias.

I don't know enough about the carbon tax but a couple things stick out.

If we have a carbon tax but the rest of the world doesn't then we are going to disadvantage business in Australia and and some will just go overseas.


Like ceffo said this is just another way to tax the people already paying shit loads of tax and give more to the ones already leaching of the government.

tat maytals
11-07-2011, 03:22 PM
Bazza - There is no hiding on my part. I think I clearly stated I don't like this labour government but I dislike the current liberal government a lot more. The carbon tax however is a good thing. Don't forget an extra 12 000 tax free each year. Just because I said bob and paul were good, claimed rudd/gillard were disadvantaged and I agreed with the carbon tax while pointing out the flaws of recent liberals does make me bias either. I don't feel an allegiance to any party, I just vote on a mix of what I think is best for me and best for Australia's future. We can sit here all day and discuss what I don't agree with about labour, liberals, greens, independents etc, but what's the point?

Also, we are not the only country in the world that will have it. Lots of countries in europe have a carbon tax and there currently is a market for it. Probably more countries than I am even aware of.

Can you support your statement of how this will only benefit people "leaching" off the government? Who are these people? how much of our tax goes to them?

Considering a large portion will be committed to other energy sources, can you explain how this won't benefit everyone?

Rambodian
11-07-2011, 04:01 PM
Hate to say it, but it's a socialist monarchy we are starting to live in, talk about big overwhelming government. People in the lower income bracket are being misled (to help sell this shit) and will only be taken care of in the initial stages of this tax (maybe 5-8yrs), long term will be a much much different story, if it wasn't it wouldn't work---period! Another thing people in general don't realize is that the policy it self is not designed entirely by Australians for Australians (it's been modified for us), it's mostly the inadequate design of the IPCC and that makes us open to the will of an institution that wants to, and is trying to, make it law to impose it's will and ideology on all word governments (maybe I should of said banana socialist monarchy shees). Then there is the FACT that we didn't friggen want this fuurrken tax anyway.
Unfortunately it seems we will be stuck with this fuuurked policy of over whelming ever increasing tax, as the sheer cost of withdrawing it from the economy once it is up and running will be to great. I hope for the love of all Australians and our future generations that the opposition can some how stop this ridiculous act of socialist, economy destroying, ridiculous act of ideology.

nobullsupplements
11-07-2011, 04:08 PM
I just think that if this is such a good policy, and with all the details out and available now, why doesn't the government go to an election.

TheGiftToLift
11-07-2011, 05:11 PM
I just think that if this is such a good policy, and with all the details out and available now, why doesn't the government go to an election.

it was released yesterday wasnt it?

Skalatharx
11-07-2011, 05:18 PM
Just more bullshit tax to pay

Shrek
11-07-2011, 06:36 PM
The Government had no mandate to introduce a Carbon Tax (or as I heard Combet call it today an Emissions Trading Scheme).

Businesses will take their investments elsewhere.

TheGiftToLift
11-07-2011, 06:58 PM
Shrek,
With regards to mining -
First off, no they won't. Second, other companies will take their place if they do. It's still going to be highly profitable to mine in Australia. They're making a fking sht tonne of money now... theyll just be making less, but itll still be well worth their while. Don't believe the stupid mining ads... They're as bad as the no brand label ciggarette ads. Why do you think they focus on stupid stories about their employee's life history, rather than presenting facts about losses to revenue...

All other sectors will simply pass on their additional costs to consumers... Hopefully the govt rebates will counteract these... time will tell.

i wouldnt worry about the resource industry. seriously.

walt
11-07-2011, 07:04 PM
Oh man, when China rise their Interest rates, say bye-bye Australian economy.

Grippy
11-07-2011, 08:44 PM
All in all this seems like a wealth redistribution tax, the big producers get taxed more, pass on their costs to the consumers, the big earners get taxed more, the battlers get some compensation to help cope with the ever increasing cost of living which is already out of bloody control. Then the government pledges hundreds of millions of dollars to developing countries to develop their infrastructure, many of which are run by dictators and corrupt organisations that will spend the money elsewhere, yet how the fuck is this supposed to help the environment. I believe this sort of scheme has been in the EU for a while and is full of corruption.

Shrek
11-07-2011, 09:08 PM
Shrek,
With regards to mining -
First off, no they won't. Second, other companies will take their place if they do. It's still going to be highly profitable to mine in Australia. They're making a fking sht tonne of money now... theyll just be making less, but itll still be well worth their while. Don't believe the stupid mining ads... They're as bad as the no brand label ciggarette ads. Why do you think they focus on stupid stories about their employee's life history, rather than presenting facts about losses to revenue...

All other sectors will simply pass on their additional costs to consumers... Hopefully the govt rebates will counteract these... time will tell.

i wouldnt worry about the resource industry. seriously.So the miners will get taxed via an Emissions Trading Scheme (Carbon Tax) and via the Super profits tax.

They will take their business elsewhere. They'd be stupid if the didn't.

IRON TANKS
11-07-2011, 09:56 PM
I am in business - and as mentioned don't like to get involved in forum politics - but tat-maytals is right.

I'm not strongly for paying more (who is?) but the current liberal models are based on: a) infinite resources (read: fossil fuels) b) infinite ability to store waste. I'm happy to listen to alternatives, but unfortunately the liberal alternative is: Climate change is a farce, fingers in ears, in the face of scientific evidence.

As I said - i'm all ears - something needs to be done. The sooner the better. We need a sustainable and resourceful future, not only for us, but for future generations. (And I don't even have kids - yet).

Not a coincidence:

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/425/co2emissionsvslevels.gif (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/824/co2emissionsvslevels.gif/)

TheGiftToLift
13-07-2011, 06:26 PM
EXACTLY!

so sick of hearing "old darren the aussie batter from penriff who cant afford the carbon tax."

Industry is too slow to respond to climate change on its own. The only effective means to change this is through taxation. Subsidies don't work, and they are funded through taxation anyway.

The world really is more fuked than the media portrays. It is time for panic stations. The days of fossil fuels need to end. It sucks that people in these industries will suffer... but there is no alternative. Once new industries emerge, hopefully these people can retrain.

The liberals present nothing but emotive argument ad hominem. They critisize the labor govt. but don't offer any alternatives.


So the miners will get taxed via an Emissions Trading Scheme (Carbon Tax) and via the Super profits tax.

They will take their business elsewhere. They'd be stupid if the didn't.

What this statement assumes is 2 things:

1. that the mining will no longer be profitable - Myth
2. that there exists other mining opportunities elsewhere which are open for purchase and are cheaper to run than Australian mines post tax... even if this is true, which it may be - set up costs alone make it highly unlikely. You don't abandon a mine in full swing unless costs are out of control. Which they won't be. It's just a beat up in the media by the mining companies... they will still be highly profitable. Even if they go elsewhere another company will form to take over their mine. Mines are under lease, and I assume there is an exit clause for the Govt if the company no longer mines them... i.e, they revoke their lease and sell to any of the millions of other people willing to mine them.

We're not talking about some fragile industry. There is going to be massive demands for coal for at least the next decade. Where there's money to be made someone will step in to make it.


Hate to say it, but it's a socialist monarchy we are starting to live in, talk about big overwhelming government. People in the lower income bracket are being misled (to help sell this shit) and will only be taken care of in the initial stages of this tax (maybe 5-8yrs), long term will be a much much different story, if it wasn't it wouldn't work---period! Another thing people in general don't realize is that the policy it self is not designed entirely by Australians for Australians (it's been modified for us), it's mostly the inadequate design of the IPCC and that makes us open to the will of an institution that wants to, and is trying to, make it law to impose it's will and ideology on all word governments (maybe I should of said banana socialist monarchy shees). Then there is the FACT that we didn't friggen want this fuurrken tax anyway.
Unfortunately it seems we will be stuck with this fuuurked policy of over whelming ever increasing tax, as the sheer cost of withdrawing it from the economy once it is up and running will be to great. I hope for the love of all Australians and our future generations that the opposition can some how stop this ridiculous act of socialist, economy destroying, ridiculous act of ideology.

Dude, stop listening to Alan Jones.

Geez, what rant... whats that old saying...

dont discuss money or politics? :\

Rambodian
13-07-2011, 08:25 PM
Well if you like having a welfare nation good for you, I don't want the government taking more of my money and then giving whatever they think I deserve back to me, it's ridiculous. And what does it end up fixing......Nothing, Australia will keep on increasing its emissions anyway, just outputting ever so slightly less, and nothing in consideration of global scale...its insignificant. So again, why do something the majority of Australians don't want to do and making it even more expensive for our businesses to compete globally, its not rocket science, common sense says its just not bloody worth the cost involved to operate this ridiculous ideology.

TheGiftToLift
14-07-2011, 12:03 PM
Look into how much the tax is predicted to cost you. Middle income earners will be hit with around a $10 increase.

Other companies such as QANTAS have indicated that they will be forced to raise ticket prices.... by a startling $3.50.

All those ad campaigns you've been seeing are just playing to your emotions. How many ads have you seen where they present ANY facts about the tax. NONE. They're all about some immigrant who works for a mine (good for him). Or about how its going to cost the Aussie Battler more money... which it will... $10 per week.

p.s Australia emits more carbon per capita than the US. So no, it's not insignificant.
Australian's have enjoyed such an amazing standard of living for so long... We have running water that you can drink in our homes. We have 24 hour electricity for christs sake. We have commission flats for those who can't afford accomodation... 50% of the world does not have the standard amenity of a commission flat.
Seriously, you need to put this tax in perspective. Pollution is serious. The only way to affect change is to make those responsible pay... just like a fine for drink driving.

Bazza20
14-07-2011, 02:45 PM
Sure have a carbon tax to help the environment it's gonna make a few greenies feel all warm and fuzzy inside. But unless the rest of the world jumps in it's going to be bloody useless.

TheGiftToLift
14-07-2011, 03:22 PM
We produce a lot of carbon pollution. If we don't do something, how can we expect other less advantaged nations to do something? If a guy in a Range Rover told you to walk to work, you'd say get stuffed.

Why bother turning off your tv at the wall? or walk to work? or catch a bus? or switch to E10?... because that's the only thing that will work. Worldwide effort by all individuals. Someone has to be first. It may as well be one of the richest countries, with one of the highest per capita pollution rates...

Bazza20
14-07-2011, 03:40 PM
We produce a lot of carbon pollution. If we don't do something, how can we expect other less advantaged nations to do something? If a guy in a Range Rover told you to walk to work, you'd say get stuffed.

Why bother turning off your tv at the wall? or walk to work? or catch a bus? or switch to E10?... because that's the only thing that will work. Worldwide effort by all individuals. Someone has to be first. It may as well be one of the richest countries, with one of the highest per capita pollution rates...

Last figures I heard were Aus carbon emissions were less than 1% of the total emissions

If other countries don't follow it is a waste of time and just a feel good factor for some people.

I don't turn the tv off at the wall, do you seriously do that??

TheGiftToLift
14-07-2011, 03:47 PM
You're right, I think our emissions are around 1.4%... which doesn't sound like much... but if you consider per capita rate - which is the only rate we should consider, then this is significant. i.e, there are around 21 million people in Aus, and around 7 billion in the world. 1 billion is a thousand million, so Aust represent 21/7000... so thats 0.3%.

So 0.3% of people produce 1-1.4% of the world carbon pollution. Sounds significant don't ya reckon?

Bazza20
14-07-2011, 03:52 PM
You're right, I think our emissions are around 1.4%... which doesn't sound like much... but if you consider per capita rate - which is the only rate we should consider, then this is significant. i.e, there are around 21 million people in Aus, and around 7 billion in the world. 1 billion is a thousand million, so Aust represent 21/7000... so thats 0.3%.

So 0.3% of people produce 1-1.4% of the world carbon pollution. Sounds significant don't ya reckon?

No I don't. Total emissions are the problem. And our total emissions are a blip on the world scale. What we do isn't going to make a difference if other countries don't follow.

TheGiftToLift
14-07-2011, 04:07 PM
I am nonplussed by your post.

of course it matters. they can't follow if nobody leads.

Bazza20
14-07-2011, 04:10 PM
I am nonplussed by your post.

of course it matters. they can't follow if nobody leads.

I don't expect you to be

So what happens if no one follows.

TheGiftToLift
14-07-2011, 04:46 PM
good question.

I think that we are at the stage now where the time for talk is over. Yes, other countries pollute more, but I think that in this context the term "country" is outdated. We need to think in terms of the individual. It is the consumer that will decide whether we tackle climate change or not. As such, and on an individual basis - Australians consume a shit load.

I see your point about what will happen if nobody else follows. Well, I think what will happen is that people will begin to immigrate on mass to 1st world countries where they can. I think world hunger will increase, diseases of the respiratory system will increase, sea-levels will rise and we will be thoroughly rooted. So lets hope they do. Sadly, even in a country like ours people resist positive changes towards preventing further climate change. We are talking about $10 a week... What hope do we have. I hope people change their minds.

But you know if we don't change, how can we expect other countries with low education rates and large scale poverty to change?

Another thing... there are around 200 countries in the world... so we produce 2x our share if we produce 1%. So on a country and a per capita basis we are bad. Maybe not the worst, but still bad.

IRON TANKS
14-07-2011, 07:42 PM
The crux of the argument is sound. No one will follow if nobody leads.

All this is leading to is a stalemate. Why does Australia always have to be the sheep? We could be innovators, and stay well ahead of the curve.

The US will be stuck for quite some time under their highly intelligent republicans who think God is responsible for climate change and the control of it (this is not a joke - look up Bill O'reilly on youtube and see for yourself).

Also, the gift to life is entirely correct. DO NOT listen to Alan Jones OR Andrew Bolt. All of their tirades are fear mongering, hate inciting bullshit, none of which is evidence based. The decisions we make should be that of a secular society - with evidence, with science. Not with hearsay, faith, prejudice and bias.

emm
16-07-2011, 11:25 PM
And Australia will lead the world will they Pffft.

What we save in carbon pollution in a year China and India will put back in 5 days, and they are growing at a huge rate, India have a carbon price its $1 per tone.

And how will anything change when our companies will be forced to simply buy carbon credits from overseas from county's planting imaginary forest plantations.
Yep send billions of our dollars overseas for a piece of paper that says its ok for you to spit out the carbon you always did, pass the cost on to us.
The only winner's will be overseas, Oh and our government who will look great to the UN.

The one good thing that will come from this is this will be the end of the labour party for a generation :-)

Please!!

TheGiftToLift
22-07-2011, 05:01 PM
And Australia will lead the world will they Pffft.

What we save in carbon pollution in a year China and India will put back in 5 days, and they are growing at a huge rate, India have a carbon price its $1 per tone.

And how will anything change when our companies will be forced to simply buy carbon credits from overseas from county's planting imaginary forest plantations.
Yep send billions of our dollars overseas for a piece of paper that says its ok for you to spit out the carbon you always did, pass the cost on to us.
The only winner's will be overseas, Oh and our government who will look great to the UN.

The one good thing that will come from this is this will be the end of the labour party for a generation :-)

Please!!

you clearly have no idea about the carbon tax at all.

tray_182002
22-07-2011, 08:57 PM
. Even if my house was carbon netural i still would pay the tax which is sht. They should go of what people/business use per year and make them lower it each year and tax them if they fail to met the level per year . But time will tell if it is going to work i guess