I hear there is a lot of talk about tax in the US, well there is a lot of talk here too. Popular topic. But this tax summit was a talk fest about what? Well certain things were sacrosant and could not be discussed. Carbon Tax. Mining Tax, Goods and Services Tax, Business Taxes were briefly discussed after which the Treasurer announced he wasn't in favour of any proposals, seems the Unions weren't either, so they got around to those "inefficient state taxes" which the states were in favour of forgoing for a share in income tax, but no takers from the Treasurer on that one either.

What did a two day talk fest resolve
Talk to hit its peak at tax summit (http://www.smh.com.au/business/talk-to-hit-its-peak-at-tax-summit-20110928-1kxbl.html)
Something Earth shattering? Something innovative? Here's the innovative part, the states thought it was a good idea to have something of a common tax regime, like no peddling advantage to attract industry. I don't know if they settle for the highest number or the lowest, but given the general state of bankruptcy it's any excuse to raise tax. What did the government say, the states have ample powers to tax just get it right.

And what did the alternative government contribute? Absolutely nothing, they didn't attend, and the organiser, who wanted this summit well he got a forum

So in other words the states think it's a good idea for Canaberra to decide where business is located ? Gee ...no chance of political favoritism there !!

Canberra is a strange place, Tom, peopled by even stranger people who have the idea they alone are capable of making decisions.

However they are happy for the states to implement their own policies just so long as they are uniform and don't cost federal money, after all who wants the responsibility for those loser tasks of Police, Hospitals, Water, Sewerage, Roads, Buildings, Electricity, Transport when you can talk all day about illegals, indigenous, carbon, tax, and poker machines the TIPIC or is that typical topic of Australian politics

Bill Shorten, you know him, the GG's son in law, and rising star, short haired boy and all that, said last night that Labor had implemented 32 of the Henry Tax review recommendations. Now we know that the only one not in the too hard basket was the Mining Tax, not yet implemented, so once again we have the disinformation campaign running full throttle, but he is giving us an early view of what might be in the budget next time around.

For those who may not remember
The Australia's Future Tax System Review, informally known as the Henry Tax Review was commissioned by the Rudd Government in 2008 and published in 2010. The review was intended to guide tax system reforms over the next 10 to 20 years.


The report made 138 specific recommendations, grouped under nine broad themes.

1. Concentrating revenue raising on four efficient tax bases: personal income, business income, private consumption, and economic rents from natural resources and land. Other taxes may be retained if they serve a specific policy purpose such as discouraging smoking or traffic congestion. Taxes fitting into neither of these categories should eventually be abolished.

2. Configuring taxes and transfers to support productivity, participation and growth.

3. An equitable, transparent and simplified personal income tax: a much higher tax-free threshold (around AUD 25,000), only two tax brackets, and a simplification of superannuation, deductions and offsets.

4. A fair, adequate, and work supportive transfer system.

5. Integrating consumption tax compliance with business systems.

6. Efficient land and resource taxation.

7. Completing retirement income reform and securing aged care.

8. Toward more affordable housing: substantially increase rent assistance, gradually move to a uniform land tax and remove transfer taxes (stamp duty), and gradually move to a neutral treatment of rental and owner-occupied housing.

9. A more open, understandable and responsive tax system.

good luck with that... I just say simplify the system to reduce the number of lawers accountants and bureaucrats involved in the process. Equitable is cool . A flat tax achieves that . A fair tax is a flat tax.
What do rent subsidies really accomplish ? A stagnant rental market and higher demand as units are rented below their value. Landlords eventually let the units go into disrepair because they don't get a fair return on their investment . Suddenly you've created ghettos .

Very harsh view there Tom particular in relation to rental property. You have vast estates of delelict properties created by a government that did not exercise common sense, where as we have an insufficiency of rental properties despite negative gearing being in full flight since Adam rented out his first cave. In any case recent changes to the Tax thresholds have eliminated the effectiveness of this investment for small investors in recent years so retention is largely academic, a vaneer to lure the unsuspecting.

A flat tax rate is not fair to the poor unless it is very low. As I recall the effective tax rate for most when I was young was about 10% but is now 25% or higher but you need around 50% to make negative gearing effective. Our government stills tries to give incentive for the construction of rental properties, in order to avoid direct intervention in the construction of rental property as was common 50 years ago. 25% of gross income is considered to be the maximum commitment for resident property, without negative gearing and applying your policies residential property would be unaffordable.