Compo or picking winners?

The best that can be said for the Coalition’s direct action plan is that they don’t intend to spend much money. I have been hoping that the direct action plan would be quietly shelved when the carbon tax gets repealed. But news reports today suggest that is unlikely to happen.

In Launceston today, Mr Hockey said the Coalition would not be issuing handouts to business but “if there individual businesses that will be affected, we will deal with them on a case-by-case basis”.

“We have allocated funds under our direct action (policy) to deal with initiatives that have been underway,’ he said.

The government has jumped on that statement suggesting that a coalition government would have to pay compensation for abolishing the carbon tax. I suspect not – it would be very strange if the Commonwealth had to pay compensation every time a tax rate or threshold was changed. That wouldn’t be a trivial problem – every time the corporate tax rate is changed and/or the personal tax rate is changed the value of dividend imputation credits changes.

So what is Joe Hockey proposing? Well right now a whole bunch of economically non-viable firms are viable because the price of electricity is artificially increased by the operation of the carbon tax. If and when that tax is abolished those firms will fail. But the Coalition will provide some of them with a subsidy to prevent that from happening.

This entry was posted in Economics and economy, Taxation, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Compo or picking winners?

  1. C.L.

    I read the compensation story an hour ago and thought, ‘what the hell?’

    As in, what the hell is Hockey talking about?

    Paying compo for abolishing a tax?

    I’m never entirely convinced Joe is ready for prime time.

  2. William Bragg

    SO, which leftists are you Cats going to support: Gillard’s market-augmenters or Abbott’s command and controllers?

  3. candy

    Sounds reasonable to support some businesses that are likey failing because of the unasked for carbon tax that has stuffed them around.

    Also there’s people’s jobs involved.

  4. Alfonso

    LibLab are joined at the hip, I’m shocked.
    I believe the reason our Tone won’t call CAGW out as BS is that both Lib and Lab don’t wish to pile derision on the ideological UN and its lying IPCC. Imagine the fury of the MSM.

    I mean, no telling where that might lead……withdrawl from UN “refugee” protocols perhaps. The Australian Lib Lab Establishment will never let the people decide that gem…..they fear referenda above all things.

  5. Sinclair Davidson

    Candy – these firms are profiteering from the carbon tax, not stuffed around.

  6. jumpnmcar

    My guess:
    Abbott- ” WOW the books are worse that we could imagine, I’ll do the Green Army with volunteers and work for the dole contributors. Ohh, and Nuclear energy should be looked at as an option. “

  7. Jc

    The direct action plan is actually small potatoes as the cost is capped at $3 billion per year.

    However the real cancer in the system is the renew ball quota expected to be 20% of total power needs by 2020. That’s just bullshit.

    They need to get rid of the renew ball quota as that’s the serious problem.

  8. eb

    C’mon Billy. Tell us that you’ll be supporting Tony. Command & Control is your style.

  9. “I’m never entirely convinced Joe is ready for prime time.”

    You think Joe’s a lightweight?

  10. Alfonso

    Joe’s a softcock…
    He enabled Lu Kewen when Lu desperately needed the exposure ….and Joe STILL doesn’t f***ing get how that works.

  11. Glenn

    I suspect that this relates to the fact that Labor’s bill granted property rights to carbon credits, so compensation may need to be covered for destruction of property.

  12. brc

    Argh I wish they would just have the balls to call it allot and say its a giant con, a waste of money and it will all,be abolished and the chips will fall where they may.

    It’s an open secret that ‘global warming’ is a giant joke, an emperor with no clothes that you snigger at. Only the true zealots believe the tales of woe. Everyone else just wishes it would go away.

    I guess what we are seeing is the small target strategy. But I wish they had the backbone for more.

    Oh well, I certainly will be making my opinions clear to my local LNP candidate before the election. I guess if we all do that the message might finally get through, and we can leave it all behind like mullets and puffy Jackets.

    As jc says, it’s the ret that is killing us, nobody has the gumption to call that one out.

  13. .

    SO, which leftists are you Cats going to support: Gillard’s market-augmenters or Abbott’s command and controllers?

    Lies, we support either.

    “Market augmenters”

    This is a sickening abuse of logic, language, economics and your own body William.

    Yes we’re augmenting the market with the RET! making energy unaffordable by 2020 will augment the market!

  14. Gab

    If and when that tax is abolished those firms will fail.

    Stiff. Let them fail, it’s not like they haven’t been warned well ahead of time.

  15. Helen Armstrong

    They have had plenty of notice that the Carbon Tax Tit is going down.

    Completely opposite of course, to when the government simply announces one day that ‘it is over, I am shutting (insert viable hard won industry built with real capital here) down with no notice’.

    The first is risk management, it is the second that is a catastrophe.

  16. mundi

    There was some brick/tile manufacturer on ABC radio this morning complaining about carbon tax.

    Whats disgusting is how no one would tell him the truth: They want him to go bust. They want less pollution, less energy, less kilns burning, and less tiles/bricks being made. That is the whole point of the carbon tax.

    Yet the way they went on, they only cared about compensation. Apparently the carbon tax is about everyone paying more, but being compensated for it, you know, so emissions can remain exactly the same. That seems to be the ABC take on it anyway.

  17. wreckage

    Gillard’s market-augmenters or Abbott’s command and controllers?

    Actually when a government is intent on f*cking the marketplace up to suit it’s own ends, I STRONGLY prefer that it come right out and say it. Picking winners is less destructive than ratcheting up tax on everyone until nobody but the winner you wanted in the first place is in business!

    Additionally institutions have their own inertia, and no government ever lets a revenue stream close; a new form of taxation once settled upon never goes away. The Comptrollers in the Coalition will have to make do with existing revenue streams, and therefore will rightly have to make the case everytime they shove money into some loser scheme instead of services, infrastructure or tax cuts.

Comments are closed.