It is my understanding that the mining tax is going to be collected mainly from QLD, WA and NSW, however, it is to be evenly distributed throughout all the states.

Is this fair?

My point is, the median house price in VIC is much higher than in QLD, so, is it fair to expect the VIC government to take a portion of their revenue from their property sales and give it to the likes of QLD?

More importantly, most mines are located in areas considered to be less attractive places to live, bring up families etc.

If governments wish to evenly distribute revenues, why shouldn't all revenues be in the melting pot?

Sorry mate.
I do truly, think you miss used the word understanding.
Australia is one nation one country.
Do we start a separation.
Or do we distribute this tax to places it is needed.
I have seen claims like this before, but remember, once the states not involved paid the bills.
You force me to ask, just why any one wants us to not be one people.
Rechtub, a simple truth, just looking at the threads title.
Was enough to know who posted it, its direction, and yes the fact you left big impacts out of your idea.
If every cent paid in tax went only to the state the payer comes from we would soon destroy Australia.

Belly, I have no problem with combining all government revenues, federal and state, then distributing them throughout the states, but this must include, all revenues.

All royalties, all levies, all stamp duties, all forms of revenue.

Forgive if I am wrong, but I don't think this is the case at present, or is it?

Since the floods last year, Qld has been forced to take out it's own inf insurance, something that until now has been considered unviable, given the size of QLD and, given our smaller population.

So, why should we have to pay our own insurance, yet share our mining revenues?

Fair is fair, don't you think!

Would it not be fairer for Australia to have inf insurance, rather than the separate states?

Sorry Belly, I can't agree with you on this.

For years the imposition of import duties & tariffs was used to transfer wealth, & jobs, from the states with no, or little manufacturing industry to Sydney & Melbourne, & a lesser extent Adelaide. Those taxes funded infrastructure & private wealth for them, that the rest of the country could only dream of.

Now they are rust buckets, sinking under their own excesses, their elites want to reach out to the bush again, to rip us off for their own welfare.

With so little publicly funded infrastructure in mining areas, companies are using fly in fly out workers, often from these capitals, so not only the mining profits, but their wages go back to the big smoke to be spent. Perhaps it's time to spend more of the nations income in the places it's earned, the bush.

After hundreds of millions already pumped into the motor industry, there are discussions about hundreds of millions more. Just how long are we going to continue pumping the wealth of regional Oz, & particularly Qld & WA into these city based industries, to the cost of everyone else?

Yes we need to maintain some industrial capacity, but with our cost structures, the automotive industry is probably one we can no longer logically support, particularly in it's present form. How much did we waste on Mitsubishi? While we have the export earning capacity of the mining industry we may be better off importing all, rather than just most of our cars.

Adelaide is a perfect example. Without auto industries subsidies, & direct government industries, [think subs], the place would wither & die, probably happily drinking their wine. However, without pinching more our water, they could not even grow their grapes.

Sydney is a huge & spreading cancer on a previously beautiful bit of country, but I suppose it does give us somewhere to dump all those immigrants that won't fit into Melbourne.
Continued.

Continued

So Belly, the new mining tax will make mining states poorer, while being used for nothing more worthwhile than propping up, for another decade, those obsolete twentieth century cities. They will die eventually, & the earlier they do the better for their people.

Wasting the new wealth on them, & not spending it where it is earned is simply bad politics in action. It is time to stop propping up old failures, & even past successes. We are going to have to come to grips with reality sometime. Wasting the effect of the new successful activities, in an attempt to hold onto the old is not very wise.

Belly, it's my understanding that stamp duty on property sales is a state tax, is that right?

If so, the average sale for a house in Mel is say $1M, where in Brus, it's more like $500,000.

So, for every 1% of stamp duty, Vic gov receives $10,000, whereas the Qld gov receives just $5000.

Do you consider this to be fair?

If so, why, and more importantly, what is the difference between this and the royalties distribution?

As I say, it should either be all in or not.

COA Gentlemen stands for? Common Wealth Of Australia, one nation.
No informed person could deny pre mining NSW and to a lessor extent Victoria, propped up Queensland.
The share of taxation was lower per head of population.
It is no measure to be proud of, the need to find fault with City's/people/states other than your own.
Hasbeen your description is, well, see I have seen my country all of it.
Never saw a part that did not make me proud.
Melbournits are more Australian, more open and friendly.
Queenslanders, once north of Brisbane, well maybe a bit more are open welcoming, and if they own any thing ex Victorians or NSW men.
WA blossoms,every bit of it glows SA NT we have a great country.
Common Wealth Common people, one country united.

I'm yet to see how it will be distributed at all, let alone "evenly".
There have been mentions of infrastructure and Superannuation increases but nothing specific enough to suggest it would be evenly distributed at all.

I do not think it has anything to do with distribution, it goes to federal revenue. It got nothing to do with GST.

So down a black hole then 579, for that idiot Swan to play with before Gillard wastes it.

So Belly, if we are/want to be one nation, why not share all we have, with all the people.

Or, as I suspect, is it simply a case of, 'what's you'res is ours, but what's mine is my own'

579' the states collect royalties, not the commonwealth, and there in lies the problem for ms Gillard and Mr Swan, they can't get their hands on it, something that is bothering them greatly, as they have nothing left to waste.

Hence, they have come up with this great big new tax, a tax that may well jeopardize our future generations.

Another problem is that the pollies get paid peanuts, while the mining gurus get paid a fortune.

One option may be to sell their minerals to an off shore company, which then on sells and any profits are taxes in another country, if at all.

I believe there was a large meat company that used to process in Murgon, sell to an off shore entity for about one cent per kilo profit, pay their pittance in tax here, then make their fortune elsewhere.

What ever the case, you can bet the miners will have a plan B on the think table.

If you are saying the meat company was fudging the figures. In the 70's a victorian meat works survived quite well on 2 c/ kg profit. I think you have lost the plot Butch; royalties tax , so what arn't we allowed a share of the dirt that gets exported, they will again submit a record profit for the year. This great big tax will pale into insignificance.
As you say they will have a plan B. And that will be to charge more for our dirt.

579, 2 c/ kilo profit you say.

Ok, a large producer here processes 15,000 head per week, @ say 300kg each.

Do the math and you will find it is you who has lost the plot.

As for the royalties issue, I don't have a problem with them being shared out, but only if all state revenues go into the pot, then it would be fair.

Sydney isnthe corporate cap of Aust, so one could assume they generate more state taxes from companies than say QLD, so, why not share these spolis as well.

This is all I am saying, if you want the benefit from our resources, we want a share of your taxes as well.

Can you explain to' me why that would be unreasonable?

Butch , What are you on about now, for a start 300 kg beast is chicken feed, throw it back to grow. So what is wrong with the margin, Profit is what is left after costs, transport, boning, washing down, tax. There is no loss of plot there.

579, firstly, 300 Kg is about the average for a meat works beast.

Now if you had any idea what so ever on how a business functions you would realize that we are no longer in the 70's.

Most butchers shops in the 70's did very well on a gross margin of just 28%.

Today, a shop with the identical turnover in dollars, working on a gross margin of 50%, just makes ends meet.

The additional 22% is eaten up in fees, rents, wages, super and compliance costs.

Small retail is dying.

Meat is not the total sum of retail, People have gone away from meat for years, and getting even less. Butch old boy 1200 kg was the biggest i seen in the abbs, Bull meat for russia. The trend has gone for younger cattle, to get back some byers. Most of the abbs in the 70,s were for export, and they did not play with undersize cattle. Local abbs done the kill for butchers. Butchers are now going by order, and far cheaper as well. Butcher shops can't compete with supermarkets any more. The quality line doesn't cut the mustard any more. If you do not have the cost you do not get the business.

Wow, 579, how little you know.

For starters, that 1200 kilo beast was live weight, which, once dressed ended up around the 550 kilo mark.

Secondly, butchers sold more meat in the 70's than they do today and, most came from registered abbs.

Thirdly, the largest export market is for cows to the US.

they average about the 350 to 400 kilo range, with the rumps, strip loins, fillets being sold here as either A meat, or Budget.

BTW, abbs profit is on what goes out the door, not what comes in and, it is for this reason they work on dressed weight.

You really have little knowledge of the industry mate.

As for butchers competing, it's all due to the failures of successive governments in not restricting the domination of the super markets.

It will be at our own peril in due cause.

If you have not already done so, I suggest you watch a movie/doco called FOOD INC.

It will really open your eyes and provide an insight in to where we are headed here in oz.

Remember, the cheapest item is not the best option in the long run.