Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I have hit a raw nerve over there! They increased the threshold for transparency of private companies to disclose their private tax affairs from $100 million to $200 million, thereby letting off the hook about 600 Australian private companies that would have been forced to disclose, through their general purpose accounts, their taxation arrangements and their tax payments to the Australian government. In doing so, they have let 600 Australian companies off the hook.

We saw this ridiculous scenario where you had these coalition members in the House of Representatives claiming, 'If we reduce the threshold for tax transparency for private companies, our families are going to be kidnapped! Shock, horror! People are going to be threatened because of this legal change!'

The Labor Party and no-one in the Australian public believed any of that. Through a freedom of information request, we actually asked the coalition government to disclose the number of complaints that they have had from the Australian public about these so-called kidnapping threats—a big fat doughnut—zero. There was not one complaint from one Australian about the threat of kidnapping from this ridiculous proposal that they cooked up with the Greens to reduce tax transparency, so that is their record on tax transparency.

The first question I have for the minister relates to the register of ultimate beneficial ownership of shell companies. In April 2016, the minister announced publicly and committed the coalition to a register of beneficial ownership of shell companies. This was another tax transparency initiative which should shed light on who own legal entities which can be hidden by a web of offshore accounts and shell companies. My questions to the minister are: was the ATO consulted on this announcement? What advice did the ATO offer the minister? Was Treasury consulted and, if so, what was the advice of Treasury? Were any other departments or agencies consulted and, if so, what advice did they offer? On that issue, again, I wish to ask the minister further: does the register only apply to corporations or to all legal entities?

A recent report in the Australian Financial Review said that Treasury was pushing back on a proposal from the finance department for the sale of the ASIC corporate register. My question to the minister is: was this pushback from Treasury because it would adversely affect a publicly assessable beneficial ownership register? Further, since April the government has backtracked on this commitment of a publicly available beneficial register to exploring options around the registry. Why is this minister? Why is the government now backtracking on this important policy and what has gone wrong?

My final issue relates to the announcement that was made by the Treasurer on budget night, on 3 May 2016. This relates to protections for whistleblowers who disclose information to the ATO about potential tax misconduct. It was announced with such fanfare as part of the Treasurer's media release on that evening, a tax plan for Australia's future. On the second page of that, they used tough rhetoric:

We are introducing tough new laws and much harsher penalties including: … New protections for whistleblowers who disclose information about tax misconduct to the ATO.

My second set of questions relates to the government announcement for better protection for whistleblowers. Where is it? What consultations are currently occurring regarding this announcement? If they have not begun yet, when will they begin? (Time expired)

See this speech in context