The key area for concern over the miners, from the people, seems to be one of the fact that the minerals belong to the people, so they feel they deserve a better deal.

BTW, none of this was of any concern until prices skyrocketed.

So, rather than 'double tax' the miners, why not make royalties a percentage of the price the mineral is sold for. Almost like a 'francise fee' of soughts.

Now, let's say raoalties are set at 6%, then the poeple would receive $3 per ton at $50, or, $7.20 at $120.

Now you could also have safey nets in place, whereby the miners don't pay royalties, or at least, discounted rates, unless they return a profit.

The more they dig, the higher they sell for, the more the people get in return. And visa versa.

Could this be a better solution?

I believe there's far too much reliance placed upon this tax. let's just say if, for example, another country suddenly sells ore to China at a lower rate than Australia, what then I ask ?
What if China starts looking around in China & finds is own ore ? Just a thought.

Could this be a better solution?
rehctub,
even better would be not having a Labor Government.

I agree with individuaL

Would this sort of cherry picking and abnormal treatment of miners occur under the Libs

Answer No - because the Libs would not have squandered the existing tax revenues on pink batts, overprices school halls, stimulus packages or additional border protection over and above the Nauru PAcific solution.

The point - The Henry Tax commission was charged with finding ways to simplify the tax system

inventing new, additional taxes is not "simplifying it

but

making it more complex and more piecemeal

Like most socialist thinking..... the outcome is the inverse of how it is intended or sold....

Collectivism (by any name) - of all the options

the worst of options

It sounds like it could be the way to go. Maybe make it 10% tax, reduce all other taxes to 10%, increase the tax on bread and milk to 10%, and have a flat rate of income tax of 25%. Unfortunately, there is always a temptation to make a quick buck where one can claim the moral high ground (smokes and grog are examples). Convincing the public we live in some kind of egalitarian utopia and we all have a claim against mining companies, is just a cheap shot.

It is obvious, the beancounters see high wages and want a cut of the action, without actually doing anything in return. The impacts will range from subtle and barely perceptible to the public (cut off grades, less exploration), to severely impacting rural communities and increasing the costs of living. The reason mining has been chosen as a target for persecution, is that the flow-on effects will be the next politicians problem who in turn wont do anything about it because it was the fault of the previous politician...

Hey, I agree with all of the above, in that there should be no tax at all. They already pay a profit bassed tax, it's called 'company tax' and is paid on every cent of profit made.

The problem is though that I recon the labor government may well be re-elected (without my help I might add), then we will be in real dire straights as I hold little chance of them not continuing on with thier 'wastfull ways' and, we will all have to come to terms with the fact that there will be the need for a huge 'money grab', possibly from all 'big business' or, face the real possibillity of financial ruin. Just look what they have wasted in less than three years. Remember, we still have to pay out huge sums in the future to fix the stuff ups and compensation to those killed, injured or that have had their businesses ruined.

How on earth can any government pay back the debt without some increase in taxes. Any suggestions?

Wages & prices freeze & sunshine clauses for Public service positions & pay. Simple really !

Individual: If we slow down the rate of mining in Australia now, and let everyone else use up their resources at today's low prices, then our stuff is going to be truly valuable in the future when the world's population doubles, resources are scarcer and the price skyrockets. Of course, that would encourage others to just move in and take over ... so perhaps we should sell it all really fast and cheap so we don't have anything left? Can't win. Cossomby.

They already pay income tax on profits, land tax, fuel tax, fringe benefits tax, capital gains tax, mineral royalties, stamp duties, income tax on salaries, and countless other hidden taxes and charges.

As for 'the minerals belong to the state' - only because the state took them. The simple answer to that is, don't take them in the first place, that'll dispose of that argument!

None of the statists makes a claim on minerals undiscovered in the ground: let them have their share of them!

But for the minerals they want a share of, someone had to go out into the desert and find these minerals, and then they had to raise the capital to mine them, then they had to go out there and build roads and housing and towns, and then employ people to dig it up, and then ship it out, and manage it, parasitised at every stage by the political class. The mining tax is just another way of taking from others the fruits of their labours, so the self-appointed elite can distribute it as unearned favours to anyone they feel like.

Please don't try to fix a non-existent problem by suggesting new ways the government can tax the population. It would be more to the point for the government to cut its spending by that much.

We could save 10 percent of the cost of government in one stroke just by abolishing flex time for the parasite class. Nobody else gets paid to stay at home and call it work, why should they?

A better solution would be to submit to the population a list of government agencies with how much money they cost, and ask the people to nominate which ones, and the taxes that fund them, to be abolished.

Just you wait. If Labor gets in we'll probably look a "being old" tax down the barrel. Or maybe a "you've worked all your life now pay for it" tax.