Page 2646 - Week 08 - Thursday, 14 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
THE CHAIR: Was it your intention that this tax would affect the take-home pay of contractors?
Mr Barr: Payroll tax is a liability on the employer.
THE CHAIR: Was it your intention that—
Mr Barr: I repeat: payroll tax is a liability on the employer.
THE CHAIR: You are avoiding the issue.
Mr Barr: My intention was to tax the employer and to close a loophole in our taxation arrangements.
THE CHAIR: But you avoid the issue. Is the government happy that people now, as in the case of Mr Taylor—
for those that do not recall, he was featured on the front page of the Canberra Times—
have $450 a month taken from the after-tax pay as a result of your changes?
Mr Barr: The government’s intention is that there is a level playing field in relation to payroll taxation.
THE CHAIR: So you do not care about employees taking a big pay cut?
There was a small incident then when somebody from the gallery spoke out, and Mr Barr continued:
Mr Barr: You are making that statement. Obviously any increase in taxation is going to have an impact on the community.
I asked again:
THE CHAIR: Was it your intention that workers in the ACT took a pay cut?
Mr Barr bravely sticks to his line:
Mr Barr: My intention was to close a loophole in our payroll tax arrangements to ensure a level playing field for all rather than continuing with an exemption that allowed some people to not pay the tax whilst others did.
THE CHAIR: If it was not your intention for people to have a pay cut, how will you stop that happening?
Mr Barr: As I say, I will take advice on the capacity we have to do that. But payroll tax liability falls on employers, and I would expect that employers would meet that cost.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video