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 > General Discussion > Fuel taxes

Fuel taxes

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. All
Thanks again Rhian. It's been a few years since I chased this up.

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/30A3BB70B09DBAB7CA25742B001A6293/$File/55120_2006-07.pdf

In table 31, p 41, what do you think the $6 billion spent on fuel and energy covers?

Also, you quoted road trasport spending of $11 billion. This leaves out the $5 billion spent by local governments. See page 42.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst5-04.htm

The projected excise income indicates to me that fuel consumption is going down, but slowly.
Posted by freediver, Friday, 27 June 2008 6:33:29 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
Freediver
The budget papers suggest that expenditure on fuel covers mainly Fuel Tax Credits (I’d guess, mainly the diesel fuel and aviation rebates) and the Energy Grants (Cleaner Fuels) Scheme, also the fuel and energy aspects of climate change policies and Securing Australia’s Energy Future initiative.

The diesel fuel rebate is an interesting issue here – as most of the diesel is used on farms or remote mine sites then there’s an argument such users should not contribute to road costs, but they also escape any impost for the environmental costs of their activities.

You’re right – I missed the fact than the road funding only covered state and commonwealth, not local government. A lot of local government funding derives from grants and payments through the states, so I’m not sure if there might be some double counting here.
Posted by Rhian, Friday, 27 June 2008 8:27:25 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
The author of this article probably criticises his Local Government for having Libraries which he doesn't use.The call is always made in self interest on taxes, I was in favour of GST so long as Income Tax was cancelled.That way everyone with enough money to spend it would pay Tax.Money is wasted by some Governments but the overriding fact is that they need tax to provide benefits for all.Thank your blessings fellow Aussies a dollar saved here will appreciate in time. Go and LIVE IN ZIMBABWE if you are not happy here!
Posted by DIPLOMAN, Monday, 30 June 2008 6:02:02 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
About the GST.
Firstly, when I held that compulsory voting was unconstitutional I refused to vote (albeit being a candidate in the election) and after a 5-year legal battle I succeeded against the Commonwealth lawyers!
I have now taken up that the GST is unconstitutional and the ATO (Australian Taxation Commission) has responded that nevertheless they as an organ of the crown are bound to comply with the legislation. I responded that where it is unconstitutional they have no legal position to enforce unconstitutional legislation and refuse to even hand in tax returns or charge GST.
A large book distributor wrote to me to be required by legislation to withhold 48.5% if I didn’t provide an ABN number. I responded that if they are not willing to pay the total bill they get no books delivered. They have no indicated they will pay the entire bill I would forward to them, without deduction.
The Framers of the Constitution made clear that any tax that would be applied to both “rail” and “post” would be unconstitutional as it cannot be applied to two items. The GST precisely does this, albeit unconstitutionally.
The Framers of the Constitution also made clear that Appropriation Bills and Taxation Bills were to be presented to the Parliament to compliment each other. As such no such thing as a 1936 tax act as the tax laws expired at the end of the financial year as to the Appropriation Bills for that year.
The ATO argued that in the O’Meara case the Court previously had rules the GST was constitutionally valid, so I made clear the court never considered what the Framers of the Constitution had stated and as like compulsory voting the Commonwealth found it was wrong, and if it took me to court and lost it would have to repay all GST to all people. I doubt they want to risk that as the ATO lawyer already acknowledged that I had considerable knowledge about the constitution, as did the lawyers for the Federal Government having lost the 5-year litigation against me.
Stand up for your rights!
Posted by Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 3:48:25 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
"Firstly, when I held that compulsory voting was unconstitutional I refused to vote (albeit being a candidate in the election) and after a 5-year legal battle I succeeded against the Commonwealth lawyers!

Can you please link to more info about the case?
Posted by freediver, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 11:55:32 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
Diploman, you state that you were in favour of the GST as long as income tax was done away with. Well, that hasn't happened.

Have you bought your ticket for Zimbabwe yet?
Posted by Austin Powerless, Friday, 4 July 2008 1:17:21 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. All

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