Page 1433 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 11 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
least a few of these cases presented to her for them to be included in the list of exemptions announced on Friday. Even given the Treasurer's statements on land tax arrangements, there will still be cases where some individuals are disadvantaged. I cite one instance where a property was placed in the names of a woman's children because of her poor health. Thankfully, she recovered; but her children are now in the situation where they own the house, derive no benefit other than providing their mother with a home, and are not part of the company, nor are they subject to the provisions of a will. These people cannot seek relief under the new arrangements.
Why has it taken so long for the ACT Government to respond to these anomalies? How can it be that the solutions offered 12 months after the introduction of the tax still miss some of the people affected by unintended consequences of the Act? I welcome the Government's moves to offer relief. However, the views expressed only a few weeks ago by the Commissioner for ACT Revenue indicate a hard-nosed attitude and offer no hope that the remaining cases of hardship will be looked upon sympathetically. The land tax arrangements currently in place came into being for the 1991-92 financial year and then bills were accompanied by explanatory notes setting out land tax arrangements. No such explanatory material was sent out with this financial year's bills.
As I have stated earlier, I have no argument about the imposition of land tax per se. However, from the point of view of a public relations exercise alone, the administration of the land tax could have been handled much more competently. It seems to me that, if the ACT Government wants to continue to raise revenue from the ACT community, it needs to do so with a maximum of goodwill, sensitivity and flexibility, and to prevent as far as possible anomalous situations arising from the imposition of land tax.
MR CORNWELL (4.00): Madam Speaker, I would first like to declare an interest in this subject, and to raise a concern, as far as I personally am concerned, with an interjection made by the Chief Minister, who I note is not present, that the people on this side of the house are "landlords to a man". I am quite prepared to declare my interest because I made note of it in my member's declaration. I know that this is held by your good self and that, if it were released to anybody, I would be informed. That has not been the case on this occasion and I sincerely hope that the Chief Minister will explain the meaning of the interjection she made in relation to members on this side of the house - that we are "landlords to a man".
The land tax changes have been very badly put together and clearly have not been thought out. We see the evidence of this today in the four amendments to the original proposal. At least two of those matters, and Ms Szuty has referred to one - life tenancy under a will - were self-evident and should have been known to those who drew up this land tax in the first place. However, the land tax goes further in its unsatisfactory features. As we heard in question time earlier, there is no pro rata provision and, according to the Chief Minister, there is no intention of providing opportunities for pro rata payments of this tax. She is not in favour of quarterly payments of the tax and, as we all know, there is no threshold for the tax.
I fail to see how, therefore, she can claim that this ACT land tax is regarded with esteem by other taxing authorities around Australia. That may be the case, for we all know that taxing authorities are often very rapacious. But I do not know that it would have the support of people around Australia, any more than it has the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .