Melbourne: Redline auto electrics car shop targeted in Melton factory fire
Police are investigating a suspicious fire that broke out at a car repairs shop in the outer suburbs of Melbourne early on Thursday morning.
The fire broke out at a factory on Glenville Drive in Melton about 2.50am.
No one was inside the premises at the time of the incident.
The business is Redline auto electrics and airconditioning. Its Facebook page with more than 600 followers shows custom jobs modifying often niche and retro cars.
Police on scene after a suspicious factory fire in Glenville Drive, Melton. Picture: NewsWire/Ian Currie
Police said the fire caused extensive damage to the building.
A crime scene has been established, and the investigation is ongoing.
Police are urging anyone who witnessed the incident, has CCTV or dashcam footage, or has information to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or submit a confidential report online at www.crimestoppersvic.com.au.
Redline auto electrics and airconditioning did not respond to NewsWire's request for comment.
More to come
Originally published as Car repairs shop targeted in 'suspicious' Melbourne factory fire
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
RBA rate cut pressure mounts as Australian dollar surges on US debt woes
A 'couple of storm fronts coming out of the US' has seen the Australian dollar soar in recent weeks, adding further pressure on the RBA to cut interest rates. Australia's dollar hit an eight month high against the US dollar on the back of greenback having its worst start to a year since 1973. A host of economic policies, which is adding to a budget deficit already running at 7 per cent of GDP, has investors in the US dollar fearing it will be unable to pay its money back. Webull securities Australia chief executive Rob Talevski said the RBA will be closely watching the fallout from the latest Trump development. 'We have a couple of storm fronts coming out of the US in the scene of the big beautiful bill but also a depreciating US dollar and questions of the independence of the Fed. 'This obviously has ramifications for the rest of the world and one the RBA will be taking note of. 'Ultimately, the RBA will be cautious, but for the short-term there's plenty of reasons for the RBA to cut in July,' he said. DRAG ON THE AUSSIE ECONOMY While a rising Aussie dollar against the US is good for travellers and those buying from overseas, it could have a massive impact on the Australian economy. Australia's three major sectors are raw materials exports, tourism and international education at universities which all come under pressure with a rising Australian dollar. While conceding a couple of rate cuts won't alone solve Australia's economic problems, Mr Taleski says it adds to a chance of a rate cut 'Obviously the Australian dollar is a commodity dollar and that is the sector that will be impacted. 'We've already seen a slowdown in tourism and international education with a strengthening Aussie dollar likely to harm us. 'It is definitely something the RBA will be monitoring closely. According to Mr Talevski combined the falls in mining revenues, tourism and education will see the Australian economy stall over the next 12-months. He also opines this adds more pressure on the RBA which would be wise to consider the mounting risk that a falling US-dollar has on the global economy. 'Brand USA has been an impeccable defence in the face of mounting economic challenges in recent decades – sustaining global investor trust throughout the massive post-GFC monetary expansion and a deteriorating fiscal trajectory is not a luxury that would be afforded to any other country on earth,' he said. Mr Talevski said the RBA acting a bit quicker and cutting rates in July could help with some of the pain from a higher Australian dollar. 'If we look back and analyse the RBA historically, the main criticism is that they are very slow to react whether it is increasing or decreasing monetary policy.' 'Information flows really quickly whether it is good or bad so reactions from that need to be a lot quicker than we've seen the RBA perform. BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL The latest storm facing the US dollar US President Donald Trump's passing his signature bill through the US House of Representatives by four votes on Friday overnight. Dubbed the 'big beautiful bill' will do a host of things including fund a crackdown on immigration, pass his 2017 tax cuts, no more taxes on tips, cut credits or clean energy and EVs, state and local tax deductions as well as cut social safety net programs. Republicans said the legislation would lower taxes for Americans across the income spectrum and will help spur on economic growth. Critics say it gives the top 1 per cent of US households with incomes of more than $917,000 will get a $66,000 tax cut or about 2.4 per cent of their income. Going along with the bill will be cut to medicaid and food stamps meant for lower income earners. Overall the tax cuts will add $US3.4 trillion to the national debt between 2025 to 2034, adding to the US current $36.2 trillion national debt according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Mr Trump cheered the passing of the big beautiful bill on Truth Social. 'One of the most consequential Bills ever. The USA is the 'HOTTEST' Country in the World, by far!!!' Mr Trump wrote. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver said the economic impact of this bill will be ambiguous. 'On the one hand the tax cuts likely provide a supply side boost to the economy, partly offsetting the negative supply side impact of the tariffs,' he wrote in his economic note. 'It may provide some near-term stimulus via the front loading of tax cuts but again this is at least partly offset by the tariffs. 'And with the income tax cuts being skewed to the rich (who don't change their spending much) and the spending cuts skewed to low-income earners it may mean that it could act as a drag on growth.' But over the longer-term Dr Oliver conceded it will add further pressure on the federal debt levels.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Home insurance premiums set to rise after $1.8b in payouts for extreme 2025 weather
Shirley McRae remembers how much her insurance cost when she first bought her house back in 2010. "$984 for the whole lot, that being flooding, contents and home insurance," Ms McRae said. But following repeated natural disasters, her premiums have skyrocketed, making it difficult to justify insuring her NSW Mid North Coast home. "My view was that my house never flooded. So why would I pay such a high premium when it's never flooded?" In the years since then, her 120-year-old house has flooded twice — in 2021 and again this year. Insurance premiums are now in the tens of thousands of dollars a year for Ms McRae, if insurance companies are even willing to cover her. It is not just people on the flood plain feeling the pain. Across the board, premiums for all policyholders are expected to continue to rise after a string of natural disasters this year. The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) said it was part of a 20-year trend. "What we are seeing is that, collectively, extreme weather events and their growing frequency and intensity are having an impact on all premiums," ICA's general manager of public affairs, Matthew Jones, said. "That's why we've seen premiums rise at very significant levels over the past couple of years." Generally, insurers price their policies with an eye on a multitude of risk factors: where you live, what your house is made of, as well as factoring in the cost of running their business, inflation, and international pressures on the global reinsurance market. The ICA says the total amount claimed on insurance has been around $1.8 billion for the past financial year — all resulting from three natural disasters in parts of New South Wales and Queensland in the first six months of 2025. Michael Sherris, emeritus professor in actuarial studies from UNSW, said every time these severe weather events occurred, insurance companies raised their premiums and re-rated their policies to factor in the costs they have had to pay out. "They have to cover the cost somehow, so they'll spread it across more policyholders and across time," he said. "These companies are profit-making, they've got shareholders, so they're trying to maximise their profits. "The fact that they have incurred more and more costs than planned will mean there's more and more pressure for them to put up their premiums to stay solvent and operating." The ICA found that since extreme weather events, like the 2019–20 Black Summer bushfires and the 2022 floods, premiums across Australia had been rising. "Insurers have had to play catch-up and replenish their resources so that they can continue to pay claims into the future," Mr Jones said. "It's the case that people in more flood-prone areas all around Australia, all up and down the east coast, their premiums rose more than other people's because insurers are very aware of the risk of flooding on the east coast of Australia." Recent analysis from the ICA found that of the estimated 225,000 homes in the highest-flood-risk locations across Australia, only about 23 per cent had flood cover. Flood cover in these locations costs as much as $30,000 per year. Last year, a federal House of Representatives inquiry into flood insurance claims following major flooding in 2022 recommended that the government force insurers to be more transparent about their pricing. The inquiry suggested this could take the form of a traffic light rating system to show the level of risk a property has, or a descriptive analysis about why the premium is rising. As premiums continued to rise, Mr Sherris was concerned that more people would not renew their insurance or would be underinsured against risk. "That becomes an issue for the government to think more carefully about the benefits of private insurance and how they can make it work better for these catastrophic events." To combat rising premiums, the ICA is pushing for the federal government to invest in resilience measures, including a $30 billion flood defence fund. For Shirley McRae, being priced out of flood insurance coverage meant she faced an uncertain future. "I'm 74 going on 75. I've just retired. Only six weeks ago, I was sitting on my back verandah thinking I own everything I've got," she said. "If anything should happen to me now, the children will be fine. My funeral's paid for, and I'll be fine. "Well, let me tell you. I had no idea that this was going to happen."
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
Not just millionaires: Australia's worst tax dodgers could surprise you
Avoiding tax can almost seem like a national sport in Australia, but is it ever fair for our richest residents to pay no tax at all? Last week, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) released data showing 91 people who reported a total income or loss of more than $1 million in 2022-23 paid no tax. Experts say there are legitimate reasons why high-income earners may be paying no tax, but it does raise questions around whether the system could be fairer — especially for those who don't have the same opportunities to benefit from tax deductions. Why some people don't pay tax Independent economist Saul Eslake says there could be several reasons why people earning substantial incomes are not paying tax. For example, those who earn income generated overseas may have already paid tax in a foreign country. Australia has treaties with most countries, so residents don't pay double tax. Of the 91 individuals who paid no tax in 2022-23, at least 28 reported $14.8 million in foreign-source income. Lottery wins in Australia are also not taxed. "Personally, I think [lottery wins] should be subject to tax, but they're not," Eslake says. Superannuation earnings in the draw-down or retirement phase are also not taxed, something that has been described by former federal treasury secretary Ken Henry as "stupid". 'Unfair' system that disadvantages wage and salary earners Ann Kayis-Kumar, associate professor of accounting at UNSW Business School, says while tax planning is allowed in Australia and laws around deductions are relatively generous, they don't benefit everyone equally. She says business owners are much more likely to be able to claim deductions and reduce their tax to zero than Australians who are earning a wage or salary. A study by UNSW found high-income taxpayers were best able to mitigate their tax liability because they were more likely to have access to different business structures. For someone [earning] salary and wages ... there aren't any sophisticated structures that we can use. Greg Jericho, chief economist at The Australia Institute, says wage earners often find it difficult to claim tax deductions for expenses. "As soon as you're either a sole trader or small business, suddenly things become business expenses and you're able to claim them," he says. "There's a lot of carrying forward losses from previous years and things like that, which just doesn't happen for someone who is on an income." Business owners are able to claim tax deductions easier than wage and salary earners. Source: Getty / Krisanapong Detraphiphat Eslake says income from capital gains, dividends, partnerships, trusts and superannuation funds is also taxed at lower rates than wages and salaries. Around 82 per cent of the income earned by those in lower tax brackets is gained through wages and salaries. This drops to just 58 per cent among those in the top tax bracket. Among the 91 individuals who did not pay tax, just 18 reported $4.7 million in income earned from salary or wages. But they reported $430.4 million in capital gains, which are profits from the sale of investments such as property, shares and crypto assets. Something that's fundamentally unfair about the tax system is that it does discriminate against wage and salary earners. Eslake says the system also benefits people aged over 65 because they rely less on wages and salaries, although many receive a pension. "There's an awful lot of capital gains, dividends and partnership income that people over 65 earn, and they don't pay the same rate of tax as you would if you were earning it in wages and salaries, it's lower," he says. "Personally, I think that's unfair between rich and poor, and it's also unfair between old and young." Salary and wages make up a small portion of the $52.4 million in income reported by 91 individuals who paid no tax in 2022-23. Source: SBS News The worst offenders when it comes to tax avoidance While attention is often focused on high-income earners, Eslake says small businesses are believed to be the worst offenders when it comes to avoiding tax. Eslake is part of an expert advisory panel run by the ATO, which has estimated the difference between the amount of tax collected in categories such as personal tax, company tax, and customs and excise duty, and what would be collected if there were full compliance with the law. He says the ATO estimates small business discrepancies make up around 40 per cent of the tax gap, amounting to $17.7 billion of the $44.5 billion gap in 2021-22. They don't put a lot of resources into making sure small businesses comply because there are so many of them. In contrast, Eslake says the ATO invests significant resources in ensuring that high net worth individuals and companies are compliant. "The tax office would know who those people are, they will have gone over their affairs with a pretty fine-tooth comb and if they're not paying tax, it would be for a good reason," he says. High-income earners better able to take advantage of tax deductions Gifts or donations to charity make up a significant portion of the tax deductions claimed by the 91 individuals who paid no tax in 2022-23. But Jericho says one of the more interesting aspects of their deductions is how much the group is spending on managing their tax affairs. "It really highlights that the millionaires who avoid paying tax are spending a lot of money on fairly high-priced accountants and tax lawyers to find every loophole to enable them to get their taxable income below the tax-free threshold [of $18,200 a year]." On average, the 91 individuals spent around $51,000 each on expenses such as accountancy fees and litigation costs. The group reported a total income of $461.8 million, but their deductions came to $390.3 million. One person claimed $8 million in dividend deductions alone. Some of the tax deductions claimed by 91 individuals in Australia who paid no tax in 2022-23. Source: SBS News But the results for this group are likely to differ this financial year, as they are set to lose a significant source of deductions. In 2022-23, they claimed $63 million for the cost of managing their tax affairs, but the overwhelming majority of this money ($58 million) was for interest charged by the ATO for late payment of taxes and penalties. Changes announced by the Albanese government in 2023 mean the general interest charge (GIC) and shortfall interest charge (SIC) will no longer be tax-deductible from 1 July this year. "The change is designed to ensure that taxpayers who do the right thing and pay their tax in full and on time are not disadvantaged relative to those who do delay payment," an ATO spokesperson says. Eslake supports the change and says there's no reason these interest charges should be tax-deductible. "It's not an expense necessarily incurred in producing accessible income — like interest on a loan taken out to purchase an investment property or the cost of cleaning work clothes such as a uniform — and it is not a policy purpose, such as donations to registered charities … so it shouldn't be a tax deduction," he says. 'National hobby' in Australia to avoid paying tax Jericho says most millionaires do pay tax and most of them (24,164 individuals) even remained in the top tax bracket in 2022-23. Overall, 860,021 individuals in the highest tax bracket paid $106.4 billion in tax. This equates to 38 per cent of the total income tax collected, even though this group only makes up 5.3 per cent of taxpayers. Jericho says many tax concessions, such as the capital gains tax discount and negative gearing, are viewed as legitimate and this encourages people to change their behaviour to avoid paying tax. It almost seems sometimes that one of the national hobbies is trying to find ways to avoid tax. Jericho says if some of these incentives were removed, there would be less pressure to increase taxes. Seeing wealthy individuals avoid taxes can also erode people's faith in the system. "[It] almost implicitly encourages people to try and think that avoiding tax is legitimate and a worthwhile thing to pursue, and we really should not be encouraging that kind of activity," Jericho says. "We should have people feeling that paying taxes is a good thing because it delivers all our services." Taxes fund our roads, schools and other services Australians rely on. Source: AAP / Luke Costin Kayis-Kumar says Australia has an over-reliance on personal income tax and former treasury secretary Ken Henry has warned about the intergenerational unfairness of the system. "This is a really important conversation to be having about income inequality and wealth inequality, and how can we use tax policy and design to mitigate the effects rather than [tinker] on the sidelines," Kayis-Kumar says. What changes could be made? While some wealthy individuals may have legitimate reasons for paying no tax, Jericho says this raises the question of whether a minimum rate of taxation on total income — instead of taxable income — should be considered. Limiting the amount of money someone can claim as a deduction for managing tax affairs to around $3,000 might also help. "It would put a bit of a crimp on these people who are spending huge amounts of money on tax lawyers and tax accountants to avoid paying tax," he says. A study led by Kayis-Kumar looked at capping deductions for managing tax affairs to $3,000 — something Labor proposed in 2019 — and found it could be effective in reducing the exploitation of tax professional services as a means of reducing tax for high-income earners. But a second study found the ability for individuals to direct deductions between personal and corporate income may dampen the effectiveness of such a change. Kayis-Kumar says Australia's system makes it relatively easy to apply deductions across different income categories. "The top rate of personal income tax [47 per cent] is higher than the corporate income tax [30 per cent], so you've immediately got that incentive," she says. "It's more attractive to put income into pots where the tax rate's lower, and to put deductions into pots where the tax rate is higher." Support needed for changes Changing the system is also difficult due to unintended consequences and knock-on effects, Kayis-Kumar says. For example, if Australia reduced the number of deductions available and lowered tax rates simultaneously, most people wouldn't get much of a refund at the end of the financial year. In Australia, especially, we love our tax refund culture, so it's really hard to unpick all of that in a way that will get everyone on board. These types of changes may also not solve the bigger problem, as high-income earners may still find ways to plan around the rules, particularly because there may still be differences in how business or overseas income is taxed. Kayis-Kumar says it may be necessary to look more broadly at the taxation of other assets, rather than changes to income tax. "A broad-based land tax has been described as a really effective way to solve that puzzle around why we have this over-reliance on personal income tax." The taxing of super profits — for example, the above-normal profits of mining companies — could also be reviewed. Eslake says reducing capital gains tax discounts, negative gearing and changing how trusts are taxed could be other ways to make the system fairer. Australia could also tax capital, investments and business at a flat rate of around 25 to 30 per cent with no tax-free threshold. "It would be simple and I think it would be fair," Eslake says.
