rehctub,
Firstly, apologies for omitting the r from your name last time.

Secondly, your reasons for opposing the existing tax system are rather ill thought out IMO. Many people would regard having all our taxes on one thing as more unfair than having a range of different taxes. And having business spending exempt from GST is a deliberate attempt to keep our businesses competitive by keeping their costs down. You don't seem to care about keeping business costs down.

Having said that, I don't regard the status quo as ideal, and I'd like to see the GST abolished and a broad based land tax applied.

A natural disaster would be an idiotic time to try imposing a tax that, even at half a percent, would devastate the economy. But if your interested in finding out why your tax wouldn't work, just look at who would pay how much, and would what they're doing still be profitable if they're paying so much tax.

BTW I notice you posted no evidence whatsoever that even suggests our current tax system is collapsing.

Shockadelic,
"That is a choice that can be made under *any* tax system."

Yes it is. But a transactions tax would give them much more incentive to do so. In much of the financial sector it'd become a necessity rather than a choice.

"You can't order your groceries from Taiwan, rent a DVD from Japan or fill your fuel tank in Hong Kong."
Not a physical DVD, but you can certainly stream a movie from Japan.

But more to the point, it's some (not all) of the transactions that don't currently attract tax that are at greatest risk of offshoring when one is imposed.

"Pur-lease.
All taxation is a 'restriction on freedom'.
Grow up."
So you're saying that because some restrictions on our freedom are needed, we should accept all restrictions on our freedom?

"Millions are transacted on the stock exchange every day."
And YOUR TAX WOULD PREVENT MOST OF THEM OCCURRING because it would make them unprofitable.

"I said it *is* a religion."
Yes, you're using the disgraceful Republican Party strategy of calling something a religion to make it sound irrational to atheists and evil to Christians. But it's not a religion and you should be ashamed of yourself for making that deplorable claim.

"it's some (not all) of the transactions that don't currently attract tax that are at greatest risk of offshoring"

Aidan, there isn't ANYTHING economic/financial that isn't currently taxed in one way or another.
A single simple tax is just a much easier way to do it.

There are few things that can truly be "offshored" as most goods and services must be produced and consumed locally.
"Offshored" goods still need to be imported to be sold, and are then taxed.

And you avoid addressing the currency conversion issue.
Not so clever to pay a 3% conversion fee to avoid a 2% tax. DOH!

Land tax?
Land values are hypothetical. Transactions are actual.
Land really only has "value" when actually bought or sold, which would be taxed under a transaction tax.

"So you're saying that because some restrictions on our freedom are needed, we should accept all restrictions on our freedom?"

You really are the King Of The Strawmen.

There are practical realities that must be worked out some way or another.
We must drive on one side of the road. This necessarily "restricts freedom", but it is a practical, useful restriction.

We must tax, if we are to fund the public goods people expect.
It's just a matter of how.
There is no perfect, 100% "fair" way.
But one simple tax is the *easiest* way.

"And YOUR TAX WOULD PREVENT MOST OF THEM OCCURRING because it would make them unprofitable."

Your land tax would also discourage "investment".

The stock exchange is just a gambling casino for 99% of the "players" (BTW gambling is also currently tax-exempt, but not with transactions taxed).

Those "players" though are NOT going to be paying 30% tax on their profits.
They may be forced to make wiser choices, but there will still be opportunities for the eagle-eyed.

"you should be ashamed of yourself for making that deplorable claim."

Off with my head!

Faux outrage from the King.
Yawn.

Aiden the only evidence you need is that our taxes no longer pay the bills. What more evidence do you need.

As for a TT hurting, how can $2 per every $100 hurt?

The other problem I have is that less than 3 in every 10 actually pay real tax. This is a huge problem because we have too many hanger oners.

rehctub,
It's very misleading to clam the taxes no longer pay the bills. We're in the stage of the economic cycle where it's almost inevitable that the government runs a deficit, and it's economically irresponsible to even try to get back into surplus right now. But as we advance in the economic cycle, we're likely to get back into surplus quite easily. Though even if we weren't, the bills would still get paid.

"As for a TT hurting, how can $2 per every $100 hurt?"
Isn't it obvious? Turnover is always higher than profit, sometimes much higher. And taxing turnover makes it harder to even make a profit.

"The other problem I have is that less than 3 in every 10 actually pay real tax. This is a huge problem because we have too many hanger ones."
Why? Why shouldn't the taxes be paid at the time the people are making money? Surely you're not assuming the others never pay tax?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Shockadelic,
"'Offshored' goods still need to be imported to be sold, and are then taxed."
Increasingly they're being sold before they're imported.

"And you avoid addressing the currency conversion issue.
Not so clever to pay a 3% conversion fee to avoid a 2% tax. DOH!"
But banks aren't paying a 3% conversion fee. Also it means when someone earns money in a foreign currency, they'd keep it in that currency rather than converting it to Australian dollars.

"You really are the King Of The Strawmen."
What, for rephrasing your argument in a way that highlights its stupidity?

"But one simple tax is the *easiest* way."
The easiest way to bankrupt businesses and raise much less revenue than you think it would.

"Your land tax would also discourage 'investment'."
It would discourage the kind of investment that does nothing to improve productivity. It would slow the increase of land prices, ultimately making houses more affordable.

"The stock exchange is just a gambling casino for 99% of the 'players'"
But it's quite an efficient way of translating speculation into real production.

"Increasingly they're being sold before they're imported."

It doesn't matter, smartypants.
If the sale was WITHIN Australia it would be taxed.
Are you honestly suggesting most businesses would use offshore accounts to pay *each other* back and forth?

And what of their end user/customer? Are they using foreign accounts too? Ludicrous!

If money is sent to or from an Australian account it would be taxed.
If the money is sent to or from a foreign account there would be a conversion fee.
There is NO WAY to avoid paying some fee or tax.

And "offshoring" still does not evade/avoid tax altogether.
You would still need to pay tax in that other country.
Is that going to be lower?

And what of companies offshored in different countries (e.g. Singapore and India).
Again you need *conversions* whenever payments are made.
Conversion = fee.

In all likelihood, the simplicity of transaction taxes means it will probably become a universal standard one day.
There will be nowhere you can go to avoid it.

"But banks aren't paying a 3% conversion fee."

No the customer/account holder is, smartypants.

"Also it means when someone earns money in a foreign currency, they'd keep it in that currency rather than converting it to Australian dollars."

Not if they must buy or sell WITHIN Australia.
We are talking about businesses trading and customers buying WITHIN Australia.
The moment you do that, a conversion must occur.
Conversion = fee higher than the tax!

"What, for rephrasing your argument in a way that highlights its stupidity?"

No for the ludicrously hyperbolic exaggeration of "*all* freedom restricted".
That's not a "rephrasing", smartypants.

"It [land tax] would discourage the kind of investment that does nothing to improve productivity."

And gambling on the stock exchange is "productive"? Like hell.

You seem to have concreted your opinion about this purely because Pauline Hanson supported it.
She also supports breathing.