Page 2217 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it is the Government's responsibility to ensure that the tax that is expected by the community as a whole, through their elected representatives, to be paid is paid.
What Mr Stevenson is advocating is, frankly, that the rate of tax that a company or an individual should pay should be determined by who can hire the best lawyer, or the best accountant, or the best tax expert. I do not accept that. I think the provisions that we have covered in this legislation are just and justifiable.
There is one other thing I should mention. Whatever discussions Mr Stevenson may have had with representatives or friends of the Liberal Party during the days of December 1989, neither the Residents Rally nor the Independents Group know of any such discussions and never were a part of them.
Mr Stevenson: That is right.
MR DUBY: Thank you. In relation to the matter raised by Ms Follett in stating that the Alliance Government is somehow not raising the amount of revenue that can be raised, I guess really it comes down to the approach that one wishes to take in relation to the introduction of a new impost on businesses. Clearly, the Labor Party is trying to say that it wishes to impose stamp duty at conveyance rates on the total assets of the business less the stock in trade, whilst the Alliance Government has chosen instead to impose stamp duty on the sale of businesses at the same rate and in a similar manner to that imposed on companies in unit trusts.
It may well be asked why we decided to go down that track in relation to taxing sales of ACT businesses. Well, our Government's approach, of taxing the balance of the consideration paid or debt value of ACT assets at marketable security rates of 0.6 per cent, instead of the conveyancing rates of anywhere between 1.5 and 5.5 per cent, ensures that people transferring businesses or business assets through unincorporated entities will not be at a disadvantage compared to those who transfer business assets through incorporated entities. To me that puts everyone on the same footing. It eliminates that very thing that Mr Stevenson was talking about - the temptation that Mr Collaery raised in his comments of the smart tax lawyer or accountant to engage in tax avoidance - which I regard as both demeaning to the parties involved and unproductive to society as a whole.
Therefore, as the tax liability of the transfer of business assets - excepting motor vehicles, of course - by companies, partnerships and sole traders would be similar, there would be no incentive in most cases for these partnerships or sole traders to incorporate in order to achieve a lower tax return.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .