Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2818 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I do not see any amendments to this bill before us today, unless I have missed them. I assume you are going to deal with that administratively, in some way-by regulation of some sort, I assume. We will look at that regulation when it comes forward. We will take the Treasurer's word for the fact that the problem raised in the Estimates Committee will be fixed. With that expectation, I thank him for that.

Again I say that this is a tax on investment in the territory. I realise that raising the rate of taxation on residential properties is partly designed to increase the relative take on non-residential properties-to put a little more emphasis on non-residential than has been the case in the past few years.

I note that there is another way of doing that, so as to reduce the level of burden placed on the residential sector, but that was not in the government's contemplation. Mr Speaker, this must have an effect on the attractiveness of property investment in the ACT for income producing purposes.

Mr Quinlan: Effectively, we are talking about owner-occupied premises.

MR HUMPHRIES: Subject to land tax? That is not my understanding of land tax. It does not apply to people living in their own homes. Is there a secret provision in the bill I should be looking for?

Mr Quinlan: The change in relation to trusts and companies which own houses that are used by the principals of the companies is that-

MR SPEAKER: It might be better if we do not have a conversation across the chamber.

Mr Quinlan: They are residential premises.

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Quinlan! Mr Humphries, if you just stick to the issues you want to bring before the Assembly, Mr Quinlan will have adequate time to respond to them in due course.

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes. I think I know the point Mr Quinlan was trying to make across the chamber, Mr Speaker. I say to him that the effect of this will still be to increase the cost of operating an investment property in the ACT. The level of land tax they pay will rise. For argument's sake, let us say my family owns a property, although it does not own a property.

Mr Quinlan: Through your family trust?

MR HUMPHRIES: Through a family trust.

Mr Quinlan: All Liberals have family trusts, don't they?

MR HUMPHRIES: Unfortunately, this Liberal does not. Hypothetically speaking, I have a family trust and it owns a property. The overheads on that property rise because the rate of land tax rises. That is what you have said in the bill.

Mr Quinlan: If it is an investment property?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .