Page 2304 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 15 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
the clauses in my Bill. The provision that is in the Bill allows the commissioner to prospectively grant an owner a three-year exemption providing that the commissioner is satisfied that the person's absence is by reason of his or her or his or her spouse's current employment and that the owner will be returning to the ACT at the end of that transfer. I think that is reasonable, Madam Speaker.
Mr De Domenico: What if they are transferred for more than three years?
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, persons transferred for longer than three years may still be granted a three-year exemption, but they will be required to pay land tax in respect of the additional years. This is an extension of the current scheme. I think it should be welcomed by many employees. Madam Speaker, while the concept of two years' continuous residence after a posting has been retained, it is now only a precondition in relation to the granting of any subsequent exemption in relation to a second or subsequent posting. I wanted to make sure that members had that extended exemption clear.
To conclude, I think the biggest difference between my Bill and Mr Kaine's is that Mr Kaine's will not work. I have been through some of the extraordinarily difficult provisions of his Bill and I really do consider that it provides much less certainty, not just for the taxpayer but also for the Commissioner for Revenue, and provides the commissioner with a degree of discretion which I know he does not welcome. It is important that tax regimes are readily understood, and important also that they - - -
Mr Cornwell: And are fair.
MS FOLLETT: As Mr Cornwell says, it is important that they are fair and are equitable in their application. The Bill that is before the Assembly in the Government's name does represent those criteria. Whilst I am appreciative, like Ms Szuty, of Mr Kaine's work on this issue, I regret to say that the Bill which he has put forward is simply not workable. For that reason I commend the Government's Bill to the Assembly.
Question put:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
The Assembly voted -
AYES, 10 NOES, 7
Mr Berry Mrs Carnell
Mr Connolly Mr Cornwell
Ms Ellis Mr De Domenico
Ms Follett Mr Humphries
Mrs Grassby Mr Kaine
Mr Lamont Mr Stevenson
Ms McRae Mr Westende
Mr Moore
Ms Szuty
Mr Wood
Question so resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .