Page 2358 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We heard it there from Jeremy Hanson: his intent would be to reverse our stamp duty cuts if he ever formed government. Why? You have to ask why, given that quote from this report:
Stamp duties are poor taxes. As a tax on transferring land, they discourage land from changing hands to its most valuable use. Stamp duties are also an inequitable way of taxing land and improvements, as the tax falls on those who need to move.
Let us just dwell on that point for a moment. The Liberal Party’s preference is that if a relationship breaks down, if a couple divorces and has to sell the family home, that is when you want to tax them. That is when the Liberal Party wants to get you. When your circumstances change and you have got to sell the family home and you need to move somewhere else because maybe your relationship has ended or maybe you have had a catastrophic incident in your life that requires you to move, that is when the Liberal Party wants to get their hands in your pockets. And it is not to the tune of a few hundred dollars a year; they want to get you for $20,000 or $30,000. That is the tax system that they prefer.
This is the case if you divorce, if there is a death in the family or maybe if there is positive news. Perhaps you have had another child and you need to move to a bigger house. That is when the Liberal Party want to tax you. That is when they want to get their hands in your pockets, and very, very deeply, because if we do not change stamp duty, if we do not get rid of it, over the next couple of decades the average house in the ACT will attract stamp duty approaching $50,000. Over the next couple of decades that is where we will get to if we do not reform stamp duty.
The Liberal Party appear very comfortable with that. That is what they would like. They want to hit you for $50,000 if you have another baby and you need a bigger house. That is their tax policy. Let me repeat again that stamp duties are an inequitable way of taxing land and improvements as the tax falls on those who need to move. That is one of the compelling reasons why we need to make this shift away from these inefficient transaction taxes and towards a fairer and more sustainable revenue base.
The other question that the estimates committee were obviously exercised about in their recommendations was the question of the economics of budget deficits and surpluses. The CIE has gone to great length to discuss these issues. But there is a pertinent paragraph or two in their commentary that deserves to be shared with the Assembly. I quote it:
Given the expected slowdown in the ACT economy and the relatively strong state of the ACT Government’s balance sheet, the Government’s budget strategy to provide a stimulus to the economy and return the budget to balance over the medium term is considered to be prudent.
Let me repeat that CIE stated that given the ACT’s strong balance sheet, the government’s budget strategy to provide stimulus to the economy and return the budget to balance over the medium term is considered to be prudent.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video