
Australian farmers desperate for answers over unrealised capital gains tax as Jim Chalmers works to overhaul super
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 7NEWS.com.au 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.
7NEWS.com.au 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.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


7NEWS
2 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Kmart dragged into landmark legal case over alleged links to Uyghur forced labor in China
In an Australian legal first, Uyghur community leaders have launched Federal Court action demanding transparency from retail giant Kmart over its potential links to forced labour in China. The Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women's Association (AUTWA) has filed a motion demanding Kmart hand over internal documents related to two of its clothing suppliers allegedly involved in forced Uyghur labour in the Xinjiang region. Both suppliers are listed in Kmart's 2024 and 2025 factory disclosures, AUTWA said. The legal action, led by Maurice Blackburn Lawyers and supported by the Human Rights Law Centre, aims to test whether Kmart's ethical sourcing claims hold up under scrutiny. Speaking outside the court in Melbourne on Tuesday, AUTWA President Ramila Chanisheff said the case marks a historic milestone. 'We just filed a document into the Federal Court asking for records from Kmart about two supply chains that could be linked to Uyghur forced labor,' she told 'It is the first of its kind in Australia to bring a case against an Australian retailer, and it's not just a small retailer, it's actually a major. 'We want to make sure that the products that are made in China and sold in Kmart are not linked to forced labour.' Kmart publicly markets itself as an ethical business. 'We aim to provide great products at the lowest prices for our customers while respecting human rights,' the retailer states on its website. Kmart said it is continually working to improve its ethical sourcing standards and processes, and is collaborating with suppliers, NGOs, trade unions, and government representatives to help improve working conditions in the regions where it sources its products. The court action now centres around whether the company may have breached Australian Consumer Law by engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct about the sourcing of its products. AUTWA is seeking access to documents that could demonstrate what Kmart knew — or should have known — about the origins of products made in factories with ties to Xinjiang, where widespread human rights abuses, including state-sponsored forced labour, have been well-documented. 'If it's found that Kmart's products are linked to forced labour, they must divest from those supply chains, not just in Xinjiang, but across China, where Uyghur people are often trafficked into mainland labour camps,' Chanisheff said. The goal is not only to hold Kmart accountable, but to put other industries on notice, she added. 'Australians deserve to make informed choices.' Retailers on notice Maurice Blackburn principal lawyer Jennifer Kanis, who is leading the case, said the legal action aims to hold Kmart accountable for its ethical sourcing claims. She said the company must be transparent about its supply chain practices, especially given the known risks of forced labour in Xinjiang. 'Kmart tells customers that it supports ethical sourcing and the protection of human rights — but we know there are credible links between two of its factories and the use of Uyghur forced labour in Xinjiang,' Kanis said. 'Documents will be sought from Kmart to determine whether it engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct about this issue.' She added the Federal Court will be asked to compel Kmart to provide evidence of what due diligence it has conducted on suppliers with links to the region. Associate legal director at the Human Rights Law Centre Freya Dinshaw said the case underscores significant weaknesses in Australia's approach to modern slavery. 'The alarm bells have been ringing for a long time in relation to the risk of forced labour in the Chinese garment sector, and Australian retailers have been on notice,' she said. 'This court case is about Kmart coming clean on whether it is really doing everything it claims to be doing to ensure that its products are slavery free.' Dinshaw argued it should not be up to the public to force companies into transparency through legal action and called for stronger laws that require businesses to investigate and prevent forced labour. She also noted that, unlike countries such as the US and Canada, Australia has not banned the importation of goods made with forced labour, allowing them to reach store shelves unchecked. What happens next? The Federal Court will consider AUTWA's request in the coming weeks. If successful, the outcome could pave the way for further legal action against Kmart or other major retailers. 'Kmart, and all companies, must ensure they are not profiting from forced labour in China.,' Chanisheff said. The case is expected to fuel growing public pressure on retailers to lift the veil on their offshore operations.

The Australian
2 hours ago
- The Australian
Economic reform roundtable: What Chalmers has planned revealed
Jim Chalmers is shifting the goalposts on his economic reform roundtable to focus outcomes on deregulation, cutting red tape and housing productivity – rather than major tax reform or reining in record government spending. Ahead of the Treasurer meeting the Business Council of Australia and other top chief executives this week, Anthony Albanese and Dr Chalmers are lowering expectations of significant reforms across a range of tax and economic policy issues. Drawing inspiration from the book Abundance, penned by progressive liberals working at The New York Times and The Atlantic, Dr Chalmers will seek consensus from business, union and community leaders on deregulation, productivity and lifting housing activity. The move away from more ambitious proposals to turbocharge Australia's sluggish economy comes amid rising anxiety in private-sector ranks about a unions ambush and the government using business leaders as cover to pursue tax crackdowns on employers and property investors. Despite the hype fuelled by the government over the potential for a contest of ideas at the three-day roundtable hosted by Dr Chalmers at Parliament House from August 19 to 21, The Australian understands there will not be a shared communique at the end of the summit suggesting unanimous agreement on contentious proposals. Instead, Dr Chalmers is expected to provide a wrap-up of the roundtable, and mention a handful of specific changes he will be tasked with implementing. Dr Chalmers, who will have met 75 chief executives and senior industry representatives before the roundtable, is expected to elevate the focus on what Labor describes as 'better regulation' to ramp up productivity and speed-up housing approvals. The Australian understands Treasury secretary Jenny Wilkinson, who will not publicly release the 900 roundtable submissions her department has received, has been involved in 30 to 40 hours of discussions with Dr Chalmers about proposals put forward. On the back of those discussions, the government has decided that deregulation and speeding up approvals across all tiers of government will now be the roundtable's central plank. The Treasurer, who does not believe all regulation is negative, is recalibrating the summit away from tax reform amid tax policy clashes between unions, business and the Productivity Commission. The return to prioritising productivity follows the Prime Minister initially referring to the post-election gathering as the 'productivity roundtable' before Dr Chalmers dubbed it the 'economic reform roundtable'. Mr Albanese, who shut down Dr Chalmers' signalling that GST changes could be on the table for discussion, said on Monday: 'This is a roundtable … just that … it is not more than that, it's not a replacement of the cabinet.' In June, Dr Chalmers said he was open to most ideas on tax at the roundtable, including the GST. 'I suspect the states will have a view about the GST,' he said. 'It's not a view that I've been attracted to historically, but I'm going to try not to get in the process of shooting ideas between now and the roundtable.' The roundtable, to be officially launched by Mr Albanese, will focus on 'resilience' on day one, 'productivity' on day two and 'budget sustainability' on day three. Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock, Productivity Commission chair Danielle Wood and Ms Wilkinson will deliver presentations ahead of formal discussions on each day. Ms Wilkinson will outline some of the big spending areas in a budget Dr Chalmers has described as unsustainable. She will reinforce the Treasurer's criteria that any reforms need to be budget-neutral at a minimum, in the national interest, and specific and practical. Ms Wood, who has already provided recommendations to the Treasurer on tax, energy and AI, has suggested a cashflow tax that would have been neutral to the budget in the medium term but was immediately rejected by big business. The Board of Treasurers, chaired by NSW's Daniel Mookhey, met last week and will finalise state and territory government positions ahead of the roundtable at a meeting late next week. Mr Mookhey is the only state and territory government representative at the roundtable, which has excluded local government officials despite a deregulation push across all tiers of government. Housing Minister Clare O'Neil, who met industry and union bosses on Tuesday, will hold talks with local government representatives in a separate roundtable on Wednesday as she seeks to achieve Labor's target of 1.2 million new homes by mid-2029. Between July 8 and August 15, ministers will have held 41 separate roundtables with stakeholders. Ms O'Neil said: 'It takes much longer to approve a home than to build one … this needs to change. Building regulations need to be simpler, environmental approvals faster and new technologies easier to adopt.' Housing Industry Australia chief executive Simon Croft who attended Ms O'Neil's roundtable said he was encouraged to see this level of government engagement. Dr Chalmers has met business executives including Commonwealth Bank boss Matt Comyn, Westpac's Anthony Miller, HSBC's Antony Shaw and Barrenjoey's Matthew Grounds, as well as BHP's Mike Henry, Woodside's Meg O'Neill, Rio Tinto's Kellie Parker, INPEX's Bill Townsend, Fortescue's Dino Otranto, Shell Australia's Cecile Wake, Wesfarmers boss Rob Scott, Google chief Mel Silva, Telstra's Vicki Brady and AustralianSuper chief executive Paul Schroder. Invitees to Dr Chalmers' roundtable, who will not be forced to sign confidentiality agreements and can speak publicly about discussions, include Tech Council of Australia chair Scott Farquhar, ACTU secretary Sally McManus, BCA chief executive Bran Black, ACOSS chief Cassandra Goldie, IFM Investors chair Cath Bowtell, Australian Retirement Trust chair Andrew Fraser, Woodside board member Benn Wyatt and Mr Comyn. Opposition Treasury spokesman Ted O'Brien, who has been meeting business leaders, will attend but is unlikely to push any major reforms given the Coalition is working through a policy review. The Australian can reveal that a business alliance working together ahead of the roundtable has swelled to 30 industry groups and is preparing a pre-summit joint statement outlining their priorities for outcomes. BHP Australia president Geraldine Slattery on Tuesday warned that any 'meaningful conversation about productivity' must focus on making tax settings more globally competitive to help unlock new investment and growth across the private sector. Amid calls from unions for the Albanese government to hike taxes for the country's biggest companies, Ms Slattery said 'proposals to increase the tax burden on Australian businesses would be counter-productive'. Labor's too hard basket piles up ahead of roundtable Politics The Productivity Commission has proposed giving tech giants free access to Australian content for AI training, sparking fears creators will miss out on compensation. Economics New regulation risks $116bn in economic gains at risk, Productivity Commission warns Jim Chalmers.

Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
A $200 billion boost to the economy – but it may mean losing your job
A combination of artificial intelligence and better use of our personal information could deliver a $200 billion boost to the economy over the next decade, the Productivity Commission has found, while warning it may cost some Australians their jobs. As the nation's second-largest company slammed a proposal from the commission that would increase its annual tax bill, the agency urged Anthony Albanese to reject calls from within his government to impose binding regulation on AI, saying it could leave everyone worse off. In its third report before this month's economic roundtable, at which 23 hand-picked experts, business and union leaders will map out ways to lift the country's productivity growth rate, the commission said data and digital technologies were the modern engines of economic growth. Likening the possible gains from AI to the way steam engines helped begin the industrial revolution, the commission said the emerging technology could underpin a surge of productivity over coming years. Loading It said productivity by workers could grow by 4.3 per cent, which, based on the current size of the jobs market and working hours, could lift economic output by $116 billion over the next decade. Benefits from allowing businesses and individuals to access and share data that relates to them, such as making better spending decisions, could potentially add another $10 billion a year through higher productivity. Commissioner Stephen King said new technology had driven productivity growth since the 1960s, which had improved living standards threefold since. 'With the right policy approach, AI technology and innovations in data could help Australia get back on the path to growth,' he said.