Page 471 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The possibility of this accelerated payment causing cash flow problems for some licensees in a tight liquid position is recognised. Therefore, should any licensee, as a consequence of these provisions, be in a position where the additional fees payable cannot be met without suffering hardship, the commissioner is willing to enter into individual arrangements with licensees to overcome this short-term problem. Summing up, Madam Speaker, these Bills are important, as they affect the Territory's revenue, and urgent, as any delay increases the risk of challenge and increases the risk of revenue loss.
MS SZUTY (4.54): I was thinking that other members wanted to speak to these Bills, but perhaps they have changed their minds. Madam Speaker, these Bills have come to the Assembly as a result of the High Court decision in October 1992 which found, in the first part of its decision, as the Chief Minister has outlined, that the ACT could not levy excise duties. The ACT Government has quite properly considered the High Court's decision and examined legislation most likely affected by the court's decision; hence the bringing forward of these four Bills for consideration today.
I wish to comment specifically on the Business Franchise (Liquor) Bill 1993, on which I have had some representations from the Australian Hotels Association. This legislation changes significantly the arrangements concerning the payment of licensing fees. Concerns have been raised with me about possible hardship which may result in fees from the most productive quarters of liquor sales being due in succession because of the timing of the new arrangements. The Commissioner for Revenue has assured me that, where hardship is identified for particular businesses, account will be taken of that particular hardship and alternative payment arrangements made.
This legislation also brings into being, as other speakers have said, the adoption of different rates of taxing low and high alcohol beverages - 7 per cent for low alcohol beverages and 13 per cent for high alcohol beverages. This measure was announced by the Chief Minister in June 1992, and subsequently in the budget, and has therefore been anticipated by the industry, to my mind, for some time. In fact, the deferral of these arrangements, in the light of this legislation now presented, could be seen to be of advantage to the industry. I support the different rates of tax on low alcohol and high alcohol beverages, as I believe that the consumption of low alcohol beverages in our community needs to be encouraged.
It is to be regretted, Madam Speaker, that industry groups were unable to be effectively consulted on the content of these Bills specifically. However, as I have stated earlier, the timeline regarding debate on these Bills has been determined by the High Court decision of 1992 and the urgent need to amend affected legislation accordingly in order to minimise an impending loss of revenue to the Territory.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (4.56), in reply: Madam Speaker, I thank members for their comments. I begin my response to those comments by saying that I deeply regret that Mr De Domenico saw fit to imply criticism of the staff of the Revenue Office in his address on this Bill. It has been my experience that all of the Revenue Office staff invariably set an extraordinarily high standard of efficiency and of propriety. For Mr De Domenico to attempt to slight those staff is indeed regrettable. I would say also, Madam Speaker, that it was those
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .