To me this article is another piece of the picture.
Unlike some, I don't like jumping to conclusions on purely mass media releases.

I wonder has The Govt hasn't got in the back of it's mind to address the differences between the mining and petroleum taxes. Having made their 'sure hands, Australia first' re-election pitch they may be inclined to 'having heard the people' fiddle with the thresholds and definition.

Regardless of which party is involved, it is the 'people' who vote and therefore need to be convinced...that's party politics. Both parties need to do this multi issue balancing act between competing interests. It is one thing to declare the supremacy of the people's interests but to achieve it is a whole other topic. Finally all parties have to play popular perceptions game....*seen* to be done.

I think it's too simplistic by orders of magnitude to assert that the reason for this tax and it's pejorative labeling is all about filling "holes?" (pejorative term).

I'll wait untill the final form, in absence of ALL the information (it won't be as currently presented.) before I make a decision.
Sadly our entire system is built around expensive rituals and OTT angst, fear and loathing before it happens.

I see no real problem with the tax. For the companies to say they will stop mining and the industry will collapse is posturing. These resources are finite and they need to serve the nation and the world for that matter for as long as possible, not just fill the pockets of the baby boomers and their massive appetite for consumption and selfish greed. Never mind the rights and wrongs of the budget, all i have heard as feed back is "what about me" not "was this good for the nation".
The slowing of the boom side of our two paced economy will cause some hurt to the national debt and trade for a period but ultimately will lead to a more stable economic position where the strengths and weaknesses are more evenly spread.
The problem of course stands in what will be done with the money. I would rather see the future fund expand it's portfolio for the future, rather than let the heads of the super funds set us up for another financial disaster.

*For the companies to say they will stop mining and the industry will collapse is posturing.*

Ah Nairbe, but that is not what the companies are saying. Obviously
mines already developed and running, will continue.

What the companies are saying is that they expect Govts to be
reliable and not act like those in parts of the third world.

What companies are saying, is that when they they work on the feasability study of a project, before they spend billions or
tens of billions of $ on development, they need to be able
to budget on net returns, so that projects are bankable and
a decision can be made, if it pays to go forward or not.

If not, no worries, they can look at other projects elsewhere.
Or not borrow any money in the first place.

Companies have in fact been paying around 43% of profits in
tax. Of the rest, only a small amount ever went to shareholders,
most was ploughed into expansions and upgrades, usually in
Australia.

What companies are saying is that if they had known that little
jokes like this one were coming, they would have never gone ahead
with alot of the present projects on the go.

What companies are saying that all new projects will have to be
evaluated using the new figures, which involves hundreds of
projects and its highly likely that the majority will be canned
or delayed until the figures improve.

Given that the Govt is proving to be as reliable and predictable
as a blonde bimbo on heat, I don't blame them.