House debates
Tuesday, 19 June 2018
Questions without Notice
Income Tax
2:22 pm
Trevor Evans (Brisbane, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services. Will the minister update the House on the importance of creating a tax system that rewards the effort of hardworking and aspirational Australians, including those in my electorate of Brisbane. Is the minister aware of any threats to the government's agenda.
Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank the member for Brisbane for his question. I only wish that the people in Longman had somebody as hardworking as the member for Brisbane. Let's hope that before too we'll see Big Trev join Little Trev in this place, because both Trevors know how important it is that people keep as much of their hard-earned money as they possibly can to save, to invest and to be able to get ahead.
Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
That is precisely why this government has put in place a tax system that is designed to help all Australians, whether they be business owners, employees, the young, the old and everyone in between. Under our personal income tax changes, under our tax plan, 94 per cent of taxpayers will pay no more than 32½c in the dollar. Those opposite, unbelievably, would not only stand in the way of that tax cut; they would hit Australians with more than $200 billion worth of new or increased taxes. It's enough for many Australians to think: what is the point? What is the point of expanding their business? The Labor Party will tax it. What is the point of doing an extra day of work, of going for that promotion or doing some overtime? Labor will tax it.
Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
What is the point of trying to get ahead and build a savings nest egg? Labor will tax that, too. Worst of all, what is the point of trying to be self-sufficient in retirement when Labor will just pocket your tax refunds through their mega retiree tax? It is death by a thousand taxes for the dreams and aspirations of millions of everyday Australians.
Mr Hill interjecting—
Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Of course, we all know why. Tellingly, we heard why from the member for Sydney, who reflected the views of those opposite when she said, 'Honestly, this aspiration term; it mystifies me.' They do not know what 'aspiration' means. For the benefit of those opposite, I'll educate them. It means 'wanting to get ahead'.
Ms Ryan interjecting—
Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
It means having more opportunity for yourself and for your family. Those people opposite want to cut down the aspirations of millions of Australians, and the Leader of the Opposition calls hiking up taxes 'brave'. I call it a smash-and-grab. There is nothing brave about that. There is nothing brave about ripping off older Australians. There is nothing brave about ripping off workers—young Australians who have low-balance superannuation accounts—and there is nothing brave about the Leader of the Opposition.
We know that Australians want lower, simpler and fairer taxes. The Labor Party stands for higher taxes, and the Leader of the Opposition would deliver those. (Time expired)
2:25 pm
Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Special Minister of State (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Prime Minister. Can this arrogant and out-of-touch Prime Minister confirm that, under his government's tax policies, an investment banker from Woollahra earning a million dollars a year will get a tax cut of over $7,000 a year, and that the bank will get a company tax cut, with $17 billion going to the big banks, but that a shop assistant from Caboolture will only get a tax cut of $10 a week, and that's before they lose up to $77 in penalty rates?
2:26 pm
Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I want to thank the honourable member for raising the subject of penalty rates, because he is sitting with a group of Olympic-class champions at getting rid of penalty rates—trading them away one after the other. How many students working on weekends at McDonald's don't get any penalty rates at all because of the agreement entered into by their union?
Ms Ryan interjecting—
Oh, yes—not a cut: they get nothing. The Labor Party has failed those workers. And do you know what, Mr Speaker—
Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Can't spell anything—
Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Okay. Well, you've just jumped the queue. The member for Moreton can leave under 94(a). And the member for Lalor, who has been warned, can leave under 94(a) as well.
The member for Moreton and the member for Lalor then left the chamber.
Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Under our Personal Income Tax Plan, people in the higher tax bracket of $200,000-plus will pay a larger share of the total income tax collection than they do today. So if that's the definition of 'progressive', it is much more progressive than it is today. So the Labor Party has no basis for complaining about the equity of the tax plan.
But this is the big difference: just like the member for Sydney, the member for Rankin does not want that person working on a low or lower-middle income to get ahead. He does not want them to get ahead—
Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Special Minister of State (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
We want to give them a bigger tax cut!
Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The idea that someone on $40,000, or $50,000, or $60,000 or $70,000 may aspire to earn more is lost on the privileged elite of the Labor Party opposite.
Opposition members interjecting—
Oh, yes! Those seats used to be filled by men and women who had worked with their hands, who had done those low-income jobs, and now we get one university-educated apparatchik after another, who has got in there and is failing the very workers their forebears used to represent. No wonder Paul Keating is disgusted by the failure of the modern Labor Party to connect to Australians' aspirations!
We know Australians want to get ahead. We know they are encouraged by the stronger economy to get ahead, and we will constantly remind them that the greatest threat to that stronger economy is the modern Labor Party, with its denial of aspiration—the denials of self-advancement that workers for generations used to deliver through the efforts of Labor representatives. This Labor Party is a disgrace to all the Labor history and Labor leaders of the past.