The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Get Ready for the Flat Tax Debate > Comments

Get Ready for the Flat Tax Debate : Comments

By Joff Lelliott, published 19/9/2005

Joff Lelliott reviews global tax debates and concludes that flat tax will have to make an appearance in the Australian tax debate.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
I’m not saying ‘the rich owe us’, my parents ran a small business and their accountant helped a lot, but they were still always over-taxed (in my humble opinion). If anyone sympathises with your argument- it’s me.

You’ve completely misread my comment.

There’s nothing better than competition- especially from an early age in education. Higher education could certainly do with a dose of competition instead of the crap we have now.

They were genuine questions (as shown by the question marks), which you’ve answered by saying:

“I don't agree that there should be any tax deductibles at all […] The savings that could be achieved are astronomical. By the time a farmer saved accounting fees, time lost dealing with bureaucrats and his income tax the loss of other benefits wouldn't seem so bad.”

No need to overreact and treat me like some fool advocating a command economy.
Posted by wrighta, Tuesday, 20 September 2005 7:24:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We need tax cuts. Not more so called "revenue neutral" tax reforms that take with one hand so they can give with another. Removing tax deductions and cutting the headline rate is no tax cut at all. It would just be more silly games, played merely for the theatre of it all
Posted by Terje, Wednesday, 21 September 2005 12:21:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wrighta in your words:

"I think a better way to decide what is and is not tax deductible should be to base this on income, lower incomes should allow for greater tax deductions." This isn't creating an anti competitive environment based around class?!

In regards to Terje's comments I think we are both on the same wavelength. Although I think real tax savings can be delivered with the fundamentals of my model. All tax deductions do is make it harder to forecast one's earnings, and even harder to keep track of expenditure.

In addition it would be far easier to justify a cut in the top tax rate to say 35%, if people in this bracket weren't driving around in leased Porsches claiming a tax deductibility through a business. Earners who can afford such luxuries (ie $75k pa) should be paying 35% in the top bracket without being equiped to write that down further through deductions.
Posted by wre, Wednesday, 21 September 2005 8:23:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi guys
I think we need to keep our 'complicated' tax system for many of the obvious reasons pointed out during this forum.
However...I believe the actual specifics of it - ie % rates need to be revisited in line with the fact that we brought in GST.
GST has provided wonderful extra $ to state governments and a classic example of that is the Queensland Government where we have Peter Beattie being able to beat his chest that he has built a decent size sports stadium and a walking bridge across the river in Brisbane and we are running out of water and electricity across the state. They had blown out their budget, even though no infrastructure had been built (except the sports stadium) and along came their GST windfall which thankfully saved the day. However, in the process I believe we have become overtaxed and therefore should reassess percentage of tax paid - with the poorer paying a lot less. www.nancysommerfield.com
Posted by Nancy Sommerfield, Wednesday, 21 September 2005 10:02:01 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I think a better way to decide what is and is not tax deductible should be to base this on income, lower incomes should allow for greater tax deductions." This isn't creating an anti competitive environment based around class?!

Originally I saw this as encouraging entrepreneurship, but after more recent news, I’m easily convinced by your argument to drop tax deductions.

Someone sent me this story (http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/big-business-should-fork-out-for-liberals-pm/2005/06/25/1119321941354.html)

"A personal donation of, say, $10,000 to the Wilderness Society was fully tax deductible but a similar donation to the Liberal Party gets only a $100 tax deduction."
Posted by wrighta, Thursday, 22 September 2005 12:55:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You know,income tax was first brought in to redistribute income from the wealthy to the needy.With the growth of tax has come the growth of socialism and the growth of Govt Depts.Now the shrinking middle class and the working class pay most of the tax and the wealthly pay very little.

Jobs in Govt Depts is just like middle class welfare.If you have a degree in Arts or the caring industry you will inevitibly find you niche in the public service finding new ways to get people hooked on social security.I heard recently that for every dollar in the cash economy,there is a dollar of social security fraud.So the cash economy and social security fraud are going hand in hand.

If more people worked in private enterprise real needs and wants would then be satisfied and many could not only get off the dole but also DSP benefits.There are 1.5 million people of working age being supported full time by the tax payer.There is only 10 million in the work force and many of these are casual positions.They should be quoting the under emloyed rate also.

Forty years ago we had a single bread winner,far less technoloy,far less tax and no one starved.We have seriously lost the plot.Nutters like ACOSS cry out for more tax to expand their empires and make real jobs even more scarce.

The prime function of Govt should be a referee and not a participant that inevitibily kills incentive of wealth creation.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 22 September 2005 7:27:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy