Page 472 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
very staff who briefed Mr De Domenico on all four of the Bills we are considering today, and also briefed our Independent colleagues on the same matters. The Revenue Office staff, in my view, invariably display great courtesy and great consideration for all members of this Assembly, and I think it is a great pity that one of them has chosen to speak about those staff in that way.
Madam Speaker, another threshold issue that I would like to address is that the Bill before us does not actually change the existing rate of tax, which is 10 per cent. What it does do, however, is facilitate the introduction of those changes by bringing all licensees into the same payment scheme, and the rate will therefore be able to be set by determination. Members may recall that Mr Kaine, on 20 October, when he asked me a question in relation to the High Court's ruling on the X-rated video franchise, specifically asked me whether I saw "any need to revise the tax arrangements for liquor to provide for collection in arrears rather than in advance". So on 20 October last year the Liberal's leader, at least, was well aware that we needed to take action on this matter as a result of the High Court decision, and he was absolutely right. As I said in relation to the previous two Bills, this period of sitting of the Assembly has been the first available opportunity when I could bring forward such legislation. As for the other Bills, I consider it necessary to deal with the matter at the first available opportunity in order to prevent any subsequent challenge as to the constitutionality of the legislation.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address a couple of matters in a little bit of detail. There is a further aspect concerning the urgency of the liquor Bills, and that relates to the certainty for liquor traders of just what the taxing regime is. The next payment date for those traders is 17 March, which is the date of commencement of the new scheme. If the legislation is not in place the traders will be required to pay their fees under the existing arrangements, the current arrangements, with possible adjustment once the legislation may be passed by this Assembly. I think that is regrettable and is a potentially confusing state of affairs. I would prefer, once the scheme comes in, for them to be able to pay their next fees under the new regime. If there were to be a delay in this Bill until, say, the July to September quarter, that would result in a significant loss of revenue for the Territory - in fact, up to $1m, I am told. Part of that loss, about one-third of it, is due to the fact that we have already had to delay the differential tax scheme from 1 January. The delay from 1 January was caused by the need to review the High Court decision and make changes to the legislation. I would be extremely reluctant to see any further delay that may add to that loss of revenue.
Madam Speaker, a number of members commented upon the degree of consultation with the industry concerning these matters. May I say that I am satisfied in this instance that the consultation has been appropriate and has been thorough. Mr Lamont said that consultation had taken place with the Licensed Clubs Association, the liquor traders and the Australian Hotels Association, and indeed that is the case. Madam Speaker, as long ago as 24 July last year there was a discussion paper put out by the Revenue Office discussing the proposal to bring all licensees into a scheme where quarterly payments would be based on purchases in the quarter commencing two quarters before the coming period.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .