CCIWA moves to end talk of new resource taxes as Treasurer Jim Chalmers assembles economic roundtable
The Treasurer will convene a meeting of industry experts, business leaders, unions and policymakers for talks at a national economic summit in Canberra next month aimed at jump-starting Australia's dire levels of productivity.
But representatives from some of the nation's biggest resource companies have been locked out of the three-day meeting. They instead met with Resources Minister Madeleine King late last week as part of a round of consultations among stakeholders ahead of the summit.
The Chamber of Commerce and Industry WA on Sunday sought to fend off contentious proposals for a tax on the export of fossil fuels that could potentially raise $50 billion.
Former treasury secretary Ken Henry — now chair of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation who has been invited to Dr Chalmers' roundtable — has renewed calls for a carbon tax, lashing former governments for dropping the tax.
'It still boggles the mind that we had the world's best carbon policy and then, for purely political reasons, decided that we can afford to do without it,' he told the National Press Club last week.
Dr Henry, who authored the Henry Tax Review in 2010 to guide tax reforms over the next 10 to 20 years, also said there needed to be more 'spending discipline'.
Resources companies, which account for the lion's share of national exports, fear they could become targets at the summit to offset tax cuts in other areas that will help attract investment, boost productivity and deliver reforms that could reshape Australia's reliance on income taxes.
CCIWA acting chief executive Aaron Morey said Australia's global competitiveness was already being eroded daily as companies shift investment to more favourable jurisdictions overseas.
Mr Morey said the lobby was concerned by proposals to target miners, who he said have paid $395 billion in taxes and royalties to governments over the past decade.
'Increasing the tax burden would take an already high-cost, high-risk investment environment and push it further over the edge,' he said.
'Industrial relations changes have increased costs and complexity. Approvals processes are gummed up in ever-growing bureaucracy.
'Energy is no longer a source of competitive advantage. And businesses in Australia face one of the highest overall tax burdens in the developed world.
'Mining supports thousands of regional jobs, underpins our export earnings and generation of wealth, and delivers the investment that lifts productivity and wages across the broader economy.
'Instead of higher taxes, the upcoming economic roundtable should be focused on repairing our global competitiveness.'
Attorney-General Michelle Rowland on Sunday moved to head off a revolt from miners, saying the Government was 'not looking' at possible new taxes on the sector.
While the heads of the likes of BHP and Fortescue were not invited to Dr Chalmers' summit, former WA treasurer Ben Wyatt — who now sits on the boards of Rio Tinto and Woodside Energy — was on Friday named among the 24 delegates.
Dr Chalmers said the talks would focus on resilience, productivity and budget sustainability.
'It's an outstanding group of people who we believe will make a big contribution to the future direction of economic reform,' he said.
'While we can't invite representatives from every industry or organisation, everyone has the chance to have their say in this process with online submissions still open.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
21 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Labor vowed to crack down on consultants, but spending is going up
The Albanese government had more than $637 million worth of consulting contracts in the past six months, up more than $100 million on the previous half-year, despite repeated promises to cut back on external advisers. A biannual statement tabled in parliament on Tuesday revealed the government had 131 consultancy contracts valued at $2 million or more active for at least one day between January 1 and June 30, with some individual contracts worth $30 million alone. The high spend shows the challenge for Labor after it vowed to crack down on overreliance on private consultants following concerns about outsourcing and the 2023 PwC tax leaks scandal. Treasurer Jim Chalmers has previously said the Coalition gave core government work to consultants before Labor was elected in 2022, and pledged to restore the public service. 'When we came to office, the public service was hollowed out with too much spending on contractors and consultants,' Chalmers said in April. Loading The publication of the data will also test Labor's pre-election pledge in April to save $6.4 billion in four years by reducing spending on consultants, contractors, labour hire and non-wage expenses like travel, hospitality and property. Multimillion dollar projects with descriptions such as 'industrial uplift strategy' and 'structural review services' from major firms such as McKinsey and BCG are some examples of department spending on consultancy services. Governments commonly give contracts to consulting firms because they claim to offer independent advice, have solved similar problems overseas or at a state level, and can provide access to experts with specialised knowledge.
The Age
21 hours ago
- The Age
Labor vowed to crack down on consultants, but spending is going up
The Albanese government had more than $637 million worth of consulting contracts in the past six months, up more than $100 million on the previous half-year, despite repeated promises to cut back on external advisers. A biannual statement tabled in parliament on Tuesday revealed the government had 131 consultancy contracts valued at $2 million or more active for at least one day between January 1 and June 30, with some individual contracts worth $30 million alone. The high spend shows the challenge for Labor after it vowed to crack down on overreliance on private consultants following concerns about outsourcing and the 2023 PwC tax leaks scandal. Treasurer Jim Chalmers has previously said the Coalition gave core government work to consultants before Labor was elected in 2022, and pledged to restore the public service. 'When we came to office, the public service was hollowed out with too much spending on contractors and consultants,' Chalmers said in April. Loading The publication of the data will also test Labor's pre-election pledge in April to save $6.4 billion in four years by reducing spending on consultants, contractors, labour hire and non-wage expenses like travel, hospitality and property. Multimillion dollar projects with descriptions such as 'industrial uplift strategy' and 'structural review services' from major firms such as McKinsey and BCG are some examples of department spending on consultancy services. Governments commonly give contracts to consulting firms because they claim to offer independent advice, have solved similar problems overseas or at a state level, and can provide access to experts with specialised knowledge.
7NEWS
a day ago
- 7NEWS
Australian farmers desperate for answers over unrealised capital gains tax as Jim Chalmers works to overhaul super
Should you be required to pay tax on money that you haven't earned yet? That's the question being asked around a new tax brought in as part of the federal government's changes to superannuation. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is looking to overhaul the way super is taxed, changing concessions for super balances over $3 million. But the sticking point for farmers and farming families is the new tax on unrealised capital gains. This new tax will mean if an asset held in super goes up in value, the account holder will be required to pay tax on that increase. With the threshold for this change set at $3 million, it is being sold as a 'rich people tax' but that doesn't show the whole picture. Jack Neilson, a cattle farmer from western Queensland, said the new tax was going to hurt hard-working Australians — 'especially in agriculture'. 'Jim Chalmers needs to realise he's not just catching the yacht-owning yuppies with this $3 million rich people tax that they are trying to sell it as,' Neilson said. Neilson pointed to the difficulties in getting young people into agriculture, calling it a 'minefield'. 'What a lot of farming families do is that, mum and dad, the operators put the actual property into a self-managed super fund,' he said. 'That way it is then leased to the next generation so that the next generation gets going and starts their farming careers, essentially, and mum and dad still make, a little bit of an income.' Nationals Leader David Littleproud told farmers were doing what they could to keep their property in their family. 'Farmers' properties are their superannuation,' he said. 'And that's why when self-managed super funds came in, many farming families put their properties into these self-managed super funds, because that was a way — a vehicle — for them to be able to bring the next generation through.' The unpredictable nature of income as a farmer has raised questions about the practicality of paying tax on unrealised gains as an increase in the value of the land doesn't directly point to an increase in income for a farmer. Katie Nash, a farmer and rural advocate, has also questioned the policy. 'If the land value goes up but the income stays the same, how are they supposed to pay the tax without selling the farm?' she said. 'How are they supposed to survive that?' However not everyone is sympathetic to the situation. Graeme Samuel AC, a professor at Monash University's Business School in Melbourne, said putting property into super wasn't about inheritance — but tax avoidance. 'For those that are caught with unrealised gains, what I'd say is question number one: how did you get into this position in the first place? Why did you put these assets into a super fund? And be honest about it, don't give us the myth that it's all about providing for the next generation, because that's what family discretionary trusts are designed to do,' he said. The National Farmers' Federation estimates around 3,500 farmers will be directly impacted by the new tax. And they maintain that where income is made, tax should be paid. But when the gains are unrealised, they argue the tax just doesn't seem fair or justified. President of the National Farmers Federation David Jochinke said the law was going to force families to sell up. 'It just baffles me why we're even talking about something where we haven't got either the capacity to pay, or it's going to force family farms to have to sell an asset that not only the parents require for their retirement,' he said. 'It also takes away from that family farming unit, which we all know needs to stick together — especially in tough times — to survive.' Jochinke wants the government to reconsider the legislation. 'The principle of having to pay a tax on an uncystallised asset is completely wrong and what we consider un-Australian,' he said. 'Let's actually have a talk about how we can manage superannuation when the assets crystallise, when farmers have got the cash to pay. And that's what we're just calling for. Let's make this a common sense piece of legislation, not a ridiculous one.' Sarah Tulloch, a farmer from NSW who has seen first-hand the impact of the pressures farmers, said she was worried about adding another pressure on the industry. 'They will lose a lot more than just their properties. There's farmers committing suicide daily just with what they've got going on at the moment with droughts and floods,' she said. 'To add this extra pressure, for people who are already doing it tough ... yeah, it's just not going to have good consequences.' Treasurer Jim Chalmers has repeatedly said he is committed to an overhaul on super taxation, saying it will make a meaningful difference in funding other priorities. reached out to the federal government in response to the concerns from farmers and farming families. 'We listen respectfully to the NFF and farmers but this is a modest change, introduced in a methodical way, that won't affect the vast majority of Australians,' a spokesperson said. 'Our changes only apply to about half a per cent of people with more than $3 million in super, who will still get generous tax concessions, just slightly less generous ones. The changes are all about making our superannuation system fairer and more sustainable.'
