"Name any other large company, who pays their 30% company tax, then once they earn about 12% return on investment, they are expected to pay ANOTHER 30% on each dollar thereafter."

The MRRT has generous write down provisions for depreciation, once for determining company tax liability then again for the assessment of MRRT liability. So established high infrastructure mines with plenty to depreciate have a big buffer, especially as they don't pay MRRT until all their depreciation credits are eroded. Furthermore, market valuation of mines rather is allowed instead of book value in calculating depreciation.Many mines will have years before the tax bites, should it not be repealed that is.

All the whipped-up political hysteria over the shortfall in the MRRT collected now should be balanced against the benefit in the longer term, like other great initiatives that wrought the same hysteria, such as floating the dollar, removing tariffs etc.

The Coalition has done a brilliant job of maintaining the hysteria level so consistently over the term of this hung parliament with hyperbolic attacks on every visionary reform and even normal occurrences such as the retirement of ministers intending to leave parliament at the next election etc. etc. This frenzied attack will continue until a minute before midnight when the Coalition's vision and detailed, costed political platform is hopefully revealed. We'll see if Johnnie's small target game works again, I guess, but I digress.

I can't name a large company, other than a mining one, that is paying a super-tax, but any that are depleting an unsustainable resource and not paying enough for doing so should be super-taxed, IMO. I don't believe banks fall within that category.

Can you guarantee that that the MRRRT will generate super profits in the future; not forgetting costs of production will also increase?

In yesterday's West Australian, there was an analysis of the mining tax by Andrew Probyn, their Federal Political Editor, which shows the income and costs of production of iron ore.
Assuming a price of US$155 a tonne, which is for 62% iron ore, including cost and freight.
'It includes freight, moisture, royalties, product discount and currency, which the companies don't get.' (The banks make a motza on the exchange rates).
The average grade is 59% from the Pilbara, but varies between 54% and 63%.
Deduct $10 a tonne for freight, convert to Aussie and deduct 7.5% for moisture (either added or natural, as a dust mitigation factor), then their is a discount to the headline price to achieve a sale of between 4% and 8% (depending on grade), 6.5% rising to 7.5% for royalties.
There are other factors like depreciation etc.
It goes on to say that for big companies they realise $72/tonne profit, mid-caps $52/tonne and small caps $32/tonne.

All that is before the design of the MRRT allows the big miners to "effectively double dip on depreciation".

It goes on to say that due to the design of the tax it will be 5-10 years before the big boys pay MRRT.

And that is why it raises bugger all; because there is no super profit to start with.

lee1, all of the above was true when ore was below 100/tonne and miners were making more than 10% on investment capital.

How was 126 million collected if the whole deal you describe is so miserable for miners and the ore price spent time at $80/tonne? The per tonne price of a certain grade of ore is the per tonne price. Then the cost of producing that tonne is deducted to determine the profit. That it is 60% iron is irrelevant other than establishing the ore grade.

The next thing we'll hear is miners are doing Australia a charitable service. In fact, that's what their advertising against the mining tax boiled down to, and the Coalition supports that to ensure the financial support of miners.

How was $126m collected? Simply because the small miners and the startup miners don't have the advantage of the grandfather clause that the big established miners do.

The figures were provided by the Economics editor, not me.

The figures, as stated, were provided as at $155/tonne.

Don't shoot the messenger, because it doesn't agree with your beliefs.

"How was $126m collected? Simply because the small miners and the startup miners don't have the advantage of the grandfather clause that the big established miners do."

What is your source of information to be able to make this statement, lee1?

I thought you were the messenger. What is Probyn's source of information? Official, unofficial, an accountancy firm? He is a journalist with artistic licence isn't he?

I come back to it, Swan and/or the Treasury have made the error of not expecting ore price volatility, of not accepting that the states might lift royalty rates, and not forecasting that bad management decisions might affect the bottom line of big mining companies. He/Treasury is not yet guilty of levying a tax that will not benefit Australians in the future, especially once depreciation passes through the system.

The Coalition appears to have no plan for Australians to benefit better from this rare opportunity to ride on the coat-tails of huge growth in Asia that is driving commodity prices. Or maybe it does and is keeping it a secret to spring upon us later, along with other revelations that demonstrate it is forward thinking and not just the stymieing, carping pack of whiners, who play the man rather than the ball, it is at present, along with its supporters.