Tax policy: Coalition, Labor plans offer clear choice

Today in The Australia

With Pauline Hanson deciding to support the government’s proposed tax changes, Australians now face a stark choice between competing visions of our fiscal ­future.

 

 

About Henry Ergas

Henry Ergas AO is a columnist for The Australian. From 2009 to 2015 he was Senior Economic Adviser to Deloitte Australia and from 2009 to 2017 was Professor of Infrastructure Economics at the University of Wollongong’s SMART Infrastructure Facility. He joined SMART and Deloitte after working as a consultant economist at NECG, CRA International and Concept Economics. Prior to that, he was an economist at the OECD in Paris from the late 1970s until the early 1990s. At the OECD, he headed the Secretary-General’s Task Force on Structural Adjustment (1984-1987), which concentrated on improving the efficiency of government policies in a wide range of areas, and was subsequently Counsellor for Structural Policy in the Economics Department. He has taught at a range of universities, undertaken a number of government inquiries and served as a Lay Member of the New Zealand High Court. In 2016, he was made an Officer in the Order of Australia.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Tax policy: Coalition, Labor plans offer clear choice

  1. OldOzzie

    Henry,

    Given from your Article

    Under Labor, the top marginal rate of personal income tax would be stuck at 49 per cent. At the same time, increases in capital gains tax and restrictions on negative gearing, along with the changes to the taxation of trusts and to franking credits, would push the effective top rate to about 55 per cent, compared with 47 per cent under the Coalition.

    You would think Lord Waffkes of Wentworth and Lady Lucy of the Turnbull Party would be able to make hay of this particular Point!

    I won’t be holding my Breath for Turnbull to do anything – he is inacapable and incompetent

  2. OldOzzie

    Again Henry from the Comments on your Article

    2 sum it up

    1. – Imho, Henry, it is Abbott who has provided the killer line Turnbull should be using against BS and his comrades : when he said they would be the worst Labor government ever, with economic policy set by the Unions, and social policy set by the Greens.

    I might have missed them, but where are the cut-through lines from Turnbull, Morrison, Ciobo, Frydenberg et al …..

    2. – Henry, don’t bother. They don’t care.

  3. .

    All the more reason for Coalition voters to split:

    1. Liberals – to the LDP (David L).
    2. Conservatives – to the ACP (Cory B).

    The two stark choices I can see from the Treasury and Opposition benches are social democracy (barely tolerable theft) and democratic socialism (brazen theft and extortion, and dare I say, usury).

  4. struth

    The uniparty is exactly that.
    And they have compulsory preferential voting to ensure an election is not made too uncomfortable by democracy.
    If you want to change Australia, find out what your local member, Labor or Liberal, think of Australia being part of , and the uniparty creating laws that support, the global socialist U.N and it’s anti western policies.
    The policies pushed by both Liberal and Labor are often stated as being beholden to the greens, as meaning the actual very minor party of miscreants given way to much air time by the ABC compared to their minor influence.
    They are not beholden to the greens.
    They are beholden to the U.N. and it uses green propaganda to kill the west.
    It’s a very big difference.

  5. EvilElvis

    If you call that stark, Henry, I’d hate to be around when you see something chasmic.

  6. Chris M

    Will the ALP introduce an internet sales tax and ban halogen bulbs?

    Perhaps these two should combine like the councils and form a super party.

  7. mareeS

    While I am a huuuge hater of MT, I will now have to put libs above Lab/green at the bottom end of the ballot paper.

  8. JohnL

    I am puzzled. If old Henry wants Cats to read his article why does he puts it behind the paywall?

  9. I am puzzled. If old Henry wants Cats to read his article why does he puts it behind the paywall?

    Henry is paid to write articles for the Oz, so he can’t simply post them freely online. This is where the likes of Their ABC have it all over the commercial media, they don’t need subscribers because they have a bottomless pit of gold to use.

    The unfortunate thing about the Oz and others that lurk behind paywalls is that not that many want to pay for entree, main, dessert and drinks, when all they might want is a main. I won’t subscribe to any of them because I see no value in doing so, especially when it supports crap authors that are riding on the coattails of one or two decent ones.

  10. mareeS

    JohnL, it costs next to nothing, a,couple of lattes per month, to get behind the paywall.

    Coffee isn’t free, neither is The Oz. Plus, it’s usually good reading.

  11. Mother Lode

    You would think Lord Waffkes of Wentworth and Lady Lucy of the Turnbull Party would be able to make hay of this particular Point!

    Trumble is like a battered spouse to the progressives that will not raise his hand when coming out of hospital because he believes that if he is subservient enough they will love him again.

    You can bet when he put the tax cut legislation before the house he was it was with shortened breath and a knot in his stomach that he was doing something the progs would disapprove of.

  12. Mother Lode

    I am puzzled. If old Henry wants Cats to read his article why does he puts it behind the paywall?

    The Oz paid for the column. They kind of own the rights to it.

    Here it is a bit of a teaser – be teased and pay, or don’t be teased and don’t.

    He’s one of the good guys so it is good to have a heads up when he puts something out.

  13. Habib

    I expect a big swing to free stuff.

  14. Eyrie

    “Coffee isn’t free, neither is The Oz. Plus, it’s usually good reading.”
    No, it isn’t. Shallow articles at best, when they aren’t plain wrong or complete garbage.

  15. Chris M

    Philosophically opposed to paying to fake news even if there is the occasional smattering of worthwhile articles. I”ll not pay to be lied to and have no desire to feed the bottom feeding journalists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.