Only having first heard of this tax 5 minutes ago, I have no opinion
on whether it is a good thing or not.
My first thought on the matter is how will it be assessed.
Will it be on the production output ?
Does the operation indeed have an output ?
Will it be levied on the robot machines power consumption, after all
energy consumption is a direct measure of work done ?
Would you subtract the energy used when the work was manually done ?
Will the tax be applied only to new installations ?
Will the tax be applied to packaging machines and if so what affect
will that have on supermarket shelf prices ?
Would the new robot driven Metro trains in Sydney be taxed ?
Lifts have been driven by robots for many a year now.
Will lifts be taxed ? After all they all had drivers once.
So I see a lot of room for bureaucracy to stick its fingers in.

I admit I am having a it of fun with this proposal, but then
politicians often generate laughable ideas.
Hmm sounds like I have made up my mind.

For those who haven't read the Oz article because of paywall issues, herewith the full text.

"Federal Labor is set to back a new body that would investigate proposals, including a “robot tax” on employers, aimed at ensuring workers displaced by automation are redeployed into jobs on similar pay and conditions.

ALP and union sources said agreement had been reached on a tripartite forum of employers, ­unions and Labor government representatives to “aid government policy thinking” on automation and the future of work.

The agreed platform change, expected to be endorsed by the ALP conference on Sunday, says the forum would “assess best-practice global models of productivity, taxation, training schemes and other measures to ensure displaced workers and young Australians are redeployed into jobs with similar pay and conditions and that those schemes are appropriately funded”.

An accompanying conference resolution put up by the Australian Workers’ Union, which sources said had broad support, says Labor should consider different employer levy models to fund the ­retraining of workers.

The most radical option it says should be considered is a temporary, economy-wide “training levy” for businesses with 100 or more employees, with the funds to be used to help retrain workers in higher and vocational education.

The resolution says Labor should also consider creating a “redundancy and retraining guarantee fund” for medium to large businesses.

Under this proposal, a “small percentage of employee costs” would be payable into a fund that would be used to retrain workers directly impacted by automation or redundancy. The funds would be in addition to redundancy and entitlement payments...

"...A third option would be a “retrenchment, retraining and redeployment levy” for medium and large businesses. This would apply where businesses retrench workers and remain in operation, and would help fund retraining.

Sources said the various options could be examined by the forum, with any recommendations to be then considered by a Labor government in consultation with employers, unions and other stakeholders

AWU national secretary Daniel Walton said automation loomed as a “once in a lifetime disruptive economic event” but it had been completely ignored by the Coalition.

“The problem is complex, but we should approach it as we have the economic challenges of the past — through tripartite co-­operation,’’ Mr Walton said.

“We need to convene the leading experts and start working out long-term approaches. The challenge is already upon us and if we aren’t careful, the problem could overwhelm our traditional tools of managing these issues.”

He said workers should not be punished by technological ­advancement and should have a pathway to just transition.

“Those that lose their jobs must be retooled and redeployed in modern, well-paying jobs and we need to make sure we have the ­revenue to pay for this massive structural challenge,’’ he said.

The proposed AWU resolution says projections of an exponential rate of digitalisation and automation call into question the cap­acity of the economy, society and government services to deal with a sudden surge in unemployment.

“A sudden up-ending of the lab­our market threatens to severely increase inequality and undermine social cohesion,’’ it says."

From my very limited understanding, automation is something that Australia should embrace as it is perhaps the only way of rebuilding a manufacturing industry along with regaining some of the jobs that have gone overseas. Automated factories are allowing this to happen in the United States. Innovation taxes and high power costs from crazy green energy policies will ensure the jobs stay offshore.

One example would be a primary producer using a robotic harvester. The farmer is competing with produce from a farm overseas with slave labour and is not cost competitive using contract pickers. Hitting the farmer with a robot tax sounds like an idea the Venezuelan dictatorship would come up with.

Thanks Graham,
So it's as I concluded: they're not actually planning a robot tax; they're just setting up a committee to develop a policy response to the problem of retraining people who lose their work through automation, and a robot tax is one of the many funding options that committee is considering.

IMO considering funding for this is unnecessary - it's likely to pay for itself even in purely financial terms. And in wider economic terms, the case for funding it from general revenue is even stronger, as automation is highly deflationary so whatever else happens, the money supply will have to be substantially increased to keep people working.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Bazz,
Though it's all moot, hypothetically if we were to introduce a robot tax, presumably we'd just follow South Korea's lead and wind back tax breaks rather than specifically introducing a new tax.

Bt contrary to this article's raison d'etre, the ALP aren't keen on it so I don't intend to discuss it further.

What I don't get is that the whole concept sounds very socially positive but in reality it's a false premise.
I get angry at the suggestion of re-training any bloody thing, these fools are morons if they think that just by 're-training' someone, they will automatically have/get a job.
If robotics are introduced and set up properly, they will make the business more efficient and therefore more profitable.
No one said squat diddly when the unions kept pushing up wages to the point where they made Aussie made products as viable as excrement in a sewer.
Now the stupid ignorant ALP want to shift their attack again and see how soon they can destroy more Aussie businesses.
Listen if the ALP are so smart I challenge THEM to start their own businesses, no one is stopping them.
But NO they are scum along with the union movement and all those that support such parasitic beliefs.
Seriously, c'mon you parasites, put your lack of money where your big bludging mouths are and set up your own businesses.
What a joke, they have no idea of what they spew.
RETRAIN?
Really?
And retrain for what job?
Where are all these jobs the ALP morons are forcing OTHERS to pay for?
Listen morons, if there is no work, THERE IS NO WORK!
All this crap about retraining is just the ALP trying to hold onto what little cred it thought it had left.
The truth is, they're not fooling those with more nous than any labour supporter.
If companies want to produce elsewhere, they have every right to even if it eats away at labour and the unions.
I suggest to all Australians, the 'good days' are over, you must take stock, stop and have a reality check, come back to earth, accept your fate, that you must all now live a more frugal life.
Get rid of the 4x2 with a swimming pool and all the bells and whistles, get rid of the toys, you know the ones, jet ski, 4x4, boat, camper/caravan (unless you intend living in it), and so on.