Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No.6) Bill 2021. It is a bill that seeks to amend a number of streamlining and integrity measures for energy retailers and other liable entities, as well as those part of Australia's growing franchising sector, and it seeks to improve the visibility of superannuation assets during Family Court proceedings. This is to be enacted through five schedules. Australia is a world leader in renewable energy investment and our government is committed to working to ensure renewables are more reliable. We are investing in further transmission projects and strengthening the grid to enable electricity to be more accessible and affordable nationwide.

Schedule 1 to the bill continues our momentum. As has always been the case with the Renewable Energy Target scheme, energy retailers and other liable entities are required to surrender large-scale generation certificates or pay a shortfall charge. This measure will clarify the operation of income tax law for energy providers. It provides certainty that energy retailers and other liable entities will not be charged tax on the amount of shortfall refunded. It will ensure that the market for large-scale generation certificates works as it has been designed to, meeting targets for clean energy while minimising costs for consumers.

Schedule 2 makes amendments to Australia's franchising sector. The government introduced the mandatory franchising code in 1998. Since then, it has been revised a number of times to address issues in the sector. This bill throws down the gauntlet to establish a more effective enforcement regime for Australia's franchising sector. With thousands of franchise brands in Australia and the hundreds of thousands of people employed by them, this bill will also encourage greater compliance with industry codes of conduct. It will see an increase in the maximum penalty amount that can be imposed for breaches of provisions across all industry codes. This is critical to keeping franchisors accountable and it is critical to eradicating poor conduct. The maximum civil precautionary penalty amount will be increased from 300 to 600 penalty units and, for breaches of the franchising code by a corporation, the maximum civil penalty available will be the greater of $10 million. This is three times the benefit obtained from the contravention of the code or 10 per cent of annual turnover.

Sufficient penalties allow the ACCC to protect prospective or vulnerable franchisees against exploitive behaviour by franchisors. These are necessary measures to ensure our local franchises can be successful, reach their potential and deliver for the members of the community who are choosing to put their money behind them. They are necessary to ensure that franchisees and their staff feel supported and safe going to work. This is clearly a ripple effect from the top down, and that is why we aren't holding back on putting strict measures in place.

Then there is schedule 3, which delivers on the government's 2019-20 budget commitment to reduce red tape and costs for affected superannuation funds. This bill intends to remove a redundant requirement for certain superannuation trustees to obtain an actuarial certificate when calculating exempt pension income, where the fund members are fully in retirement phase for the entire income year. This measure benefits self-managed superannuation funds and small, APRA-regulated funds.

Schedule 4 of the bill will strengthen the industry codes framework by providing legal certainty. It clarifies that industry codes can validly confer powers and functions on third parties to the commercial relationship between industry participants. This will reduce legal costs for the Commonwealth and avoid potential challenges against the validity of code provisions that confer powers and functions on third parties.

Finally, there is schedule 5. This schedule includes some major amendments to improve the visibility of superannuation assets during family law proceedings. This measure will allow more couples who are separated to divide their property on a just and equitable basis. Separation can be a very difficult process and can cause significant distress for those involved. Women are often the ones who make work related sacrifices to raise their family in the best, most nurturing environment possible. They are often the carers and the ones who reduce their work hours to spend more time at home with their children. This impacts the amount of superannuation that they can accrue. For those going through the separation process, it can put them in a vulnerable position for their future, especially if they have dependants. Findings suggest that amongst separating couples there are low levels of awareness of their own superannuation entitlements and those of their spouses. This is particularly true for women, and our government is committed to improving the economic security of women.

That is why this schedule implements the measure 'improving the visibility of superannuation assets in family law proceedings', which was announced as part of the government's Women's economic security statement2018. These amendments provide the legislative basis for an information sharing mechanism to allow separated couples undergoing family law proceedings to apply to court registries and request superannuation information about the other party that is held by the ATO. Parties will then be able to use this information from the ATO to seek up-to-date superannuation information from their former partner's superannuation fund. These amendments will make it harder for parties to hide or underdisclose their superannuation assets in family law proceedings. They do this by reducing the time, cost and complexity for partners seeking this vital information.

Unfortunately, the separation rate of Australian couples is an increasing statistic. These measures are, more than ever, critical to ensuring the superannuation of parties is properly considered during the separation process. These measures deliver fairness and they help alleviate the financial hardship that we recognise so many experience as they navigate through this time. It is clear this is a comprehensive bill and it is one that provides certainty and security to more Australians thanks to these five targeted schedules. I certainly commend this bill to the House.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I won't keep the House, or the member for Bennelong, very long; I just want to make a few remarks. The Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 6) Bill is an important bill, and I endorse the remarks of previous Labor speakers. Especially important is schedule 5, an amendment to the Taxation Administration Act and the Family Law Act to provide a new mechanism to share superannuation info in family law proceedings. As we've been hearing from all speakers, including government speakers, that was a measure the government committed to in 2018. It's an urgent measure, yet it's taken the government three long years to get around to legislating it, again evidencing their lack of real commitment and urgency to advancing issues that affect women. It's welcome that it's in this bill and it needs to get through quickly.

I want to make a couple of procedural remarks. Two of these schedules in this bill were previously introduced in the Treasury Laws Amendment (2020 Measures No. 4) Bill. When that bill left this House and went to the Senate, Labor supported amendments regarding the grandfathering of arrangements for certain large private companies in relation to tax transparency. For seven or eight years now the government has been trying to hide the tax affairs of large private companies. Labor's got a pro-transparency, pro-disclosure approach, so we supported successful amendments regarding this. The government, of course, wanting to protect these large private companies and keep their tax affairs secret, refused to progress the bill. Some of those schedules are back here, in this bill, but now with something more urgent, which is schedule 5, which will be of benefit and is of import to women. There's the risk, when the bill leaves this House with everyone's support, that the same thing will happen again. There's also the risk that senators, in particular, Green senators, may pull a little parliamentary stunt, which they've been doing, and tack on another amendment relating to JobKeeper transparency. So I want to send a message to the Senate: don't play games with this bill.

This bill contains an important measure, schedule 5, that would allow people, usually women, going through divorce proceedings to get proper information about their spouse's superannuation to allow for a fair division of property and to stop tying up the court's time. It's an urgent measure. The government should have done it three years ago, but it's finally getting around to it. Labor supports tax transparency, but this is not the bill for independent senators and particularly the Greens stunt party in the Senate to play parliamentary games with. Labor has moved amendments to require the publication of names of every firm who received JobKeeper where they had an over $10 million turnover. That's our position. Wherever we can we move those amendments, and I commend the member for Fenner, sitting right there, for his work to expose the government's rorts and waste—billions of dollars of JobKeeper paid to profitable companies. The Australian taxpayer should see that list. In the US and the UK, with similar schemes, their taxpayers know which companies got that public support. But the question is: How do we best achieve that? How do we force the government to do that? I say again to the Senate: be careful not to delay urgent bills with juvenile parliamentary tactics.

We saw this recently with another bill with the Greens and the crossbench in the Senate. They moved an amendment supporting disclosure of JobKeeper, the policy I just outlined, but they moved it on an urgent bill which was providing money to support people in lockdown. In the Senate, Labor supported the amendment for transparency in JobKeeper payments, but when it got back to the House the government wouldn't support it. We were not going to block that bill and fall into a silly parliamentary trap that the Greens and the crossbench thought they were setting for us. If we'd agreed with what the Greens and the crossbench were doing, there would have been businesses and individuals across the country in lockdown with no economic support. It's a silly game to wedge Labor, and the whole point of it really is to spread rubbish on social media trying to pretend that Labor doesn't support tax transparency. Twitter lights up. Facebook lights up. The juvenile Greens go home thinking they've had a good day out at the parliament and they've achieved something.

We need to be really clear: there are urgent bills and there are not urgent bills. Supporting women to get proper information about their spouse's superannuation when they're going through divorce is urgent. It was urgent three years ago; it's more urgent now. Supporting businesses and people doing it tough in lockdown to get money in their pockets and economic support, that's urgent. It was urgent last week and it had to get through. This is not the bill for more silly Greens' stunts. Where Labor sees an opportunity, we'll move amendments for tax transparency. We'll move amendments to force the government to put out lists in public of which companies with a turnover of over $10 million got JobKeeper. We'll do that, we did it last week on another bill and we'll continue to do that, but this is not the bill for parliamentary games. This place is not student politics or whatever sandpit the Greens like to think they're playing in. It's not to create memes to wedge Labor and get people all angry on social media. This is the parliament. This is a serious bill. It needs to go through this House and go through the Senate unamended. Thank you.

John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

[by video link] I rise today to discuss a disparate collection of issues included in this Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 6) Bill 2021. I must apologise for the chaos of the upcoming speech finding a narrative thread through the topics of renewable energy, industry codes of conduct, superannuation and family law. It's not an easy process. But this is the joy of treasury law amendments. I suppose there is a certain comfort to know that, as the delta variant threatens the world, half our population remains in lockdown and uncertainty is spreading faster than COVID, tweaks to treasury laws continue. That's the ultimate sign that democracy is plugging along; we are reforming processes and making things imperceptibly better. While I'm a fan of vision and broad, sweeping plans for this great nation, we know that it is evolution—not revolution—that provides the most sustainable changes. Consider the Porsche 911, for instance. These amendments today will probably be pushed off the front page by the opening of the Paralympics, but without them this country doesn't work as smoothly or as well in the future.

In these amendments are some really important reforms. Take schedule 2, which protects franchisees against franchisors and ups the penalty from $133,000 for breaches of the code of conduct to a maximum penalty of $500,000. When corporations breach the code, the maximum civil penalty available will be the greater of $10 million, three times the benefit obtained from contravention of the code or 10 per cent of annual turnover. This is not small change. These enhanced penalties are important to combat the significant harm that can be caused to small businesses and franchises by overbearing franchisors. Sufficient penalties allow the ACCC to protect prospective or vulnerable franchisees against exploitative behaviour by franchisors. The last 18 months have brought unprecedented difficulty for our small and medium businesses through bushfire, disease and lockdown. To face pressure from franchisors at this time would be terrible, not to mention unethical. This reform here strengthens the support for small businesses at a time when they need all the support they can get.

Schedule 1 also sounds Byzantine but will offer huge benefits to this country. As has always been the case with renewable energy target schemes, energy retailers and other liable entities are required to surrender large-scale generation to pay a shortfall charge. Should businesses later surrender outstanding certificates within the allowable time frame, they receive a refund of the shortfall charge. This was intended to provide flexibility to help these businesses manage the costs of complying with the scheme. Today, we're ensuring that energy businesses will not be taxed on the amount of shortfall charges refunded. It will cost $70 million over the forward estimates, but for this we will get simplicity in tax treatment, which will encourage investment. This will ensure the market for large-scale generation certificates works as intended, meeting targets for clean energy while minimising costs for consumers.

We know we have a long way to go to ensure we have a fully renewable future. It won't happen by wishful thinking. But we also know that huge leaps have been made in renewable energy sources over the past few decades, many of which—especially in the field of solar panels—have happened here in Australia. We have the technological prowess to curb our emissions strategy, and further breakthroughs are made every day. Outside of the CSIRO, it is not the government that makes these breakthroughs. What we can do here in government is facilitate these breakthroughs and incentivise their adoption. Inventing solar panels and batteries is far more interesting than facilitating the tax laws to incentivise their take-up, but the former is not as successful without the latter. This amendment today is one of the many steps we will take that will never be seen and will never be celebrated but without which this country would not see the climate reforms that we need to see if we're going to succeed in our fight against climate change.

Schedule 5 represents another small change, with huge implications. This schedule implements the improving the visibility of superannuation assets in family law proceedings, a measure that was announced as part of the government's Women's economic security statement 2018. These amendments provide the legislative basis for an information-sharing mechanism to allow separated couples undergoing family law proceedings to apply to the Family Court registries to request superannuation information of the other party that is held by the Australian Taxation Office. Parties will then be able to use this information from the ATO to seek superannuation information from their former partner's superannuation fund.

These amendments will make it harder for parties to hide or not disclose their superannuation assets in family law proceedings by reducing the time, cost and complexity for a party seeking information about their former partner's superannuation. Improving the accessibility of superannuation information will support more separated couples to divide their property on a just and equitable basis. This underreporting has been going on for decades and often impacts women more than men, meaning they are locked into financial hardship after they leave a relationship. We also know that financial uncertainty is one of the many factors that can keep women in abusive relationships longer than they should be. These changes will hopefully go some way to alleviating this fear in some cases.

This schedule also goes to a broader problem about women's superannuation. It has been well reported that many women have far less superannuation than men—a product of lower wages and time taken off for family reasons. Separations with inadequate division of superannuation can compound this problem and can lead to real poverty for women in later life. This bill will not solve the problem of women's lower levels of super. That is a massive problem, with resolutions that lie across corporate Australia and in cultural norms about family. But this amendment will provide a small change that will make a start towards evening up this ledger.

Schedule 3 tackles the red tape in superannuation funds, removing the redundant requirement for trustees to obtain an actuarial certificate when calculating exempt current pension income where the fund is fully in the retirement phase and for all the income year. This measure benefits self-managed superannuation funds and small APRA regulated funds.

Finally, schedule 4 will strengthen the industry codes framework and provide legal certainty around the conferring of powers between industry participants. This one sounds particularly arcane, so I'll leave it at that.

What do each of these have in common? Each of these schedules represents a small change against a big problem. None of them will be a total solution, but each of them is a part of an answer. And when these small changes meet others that have happened, and the two come together, big things will happen.

Andrew Leigh (Fenner, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 6) Bill 2021 is, as the member for Bruce has said, an urgent measure which will bring on important changes to allow greater transparency of superannuation holdings in family law proceedings. Like the member for Bruce, I urge the Senate not to attach amendments to the bill that would slow its passage. Labor takes the same approach to this bill that we took to a bill that went to the Senate in the last sitting period which related to support for people in lockdown. At the same time, we have the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Bill 2021, which was recently considered by this House and is now under consideration by the Senate. But when the government realised there would be support from Labor and the crossbenchers to amend that bill so as to require the reporting of every JobKeeper recipient that had a turnover of over $10 million, they filibustered the debate and took the bill off the Notice Paper.

What have the Morrison government got to hide? Why are they hiding from the Australian people how taxpayer money was spent?

This wasn't Liberal Party money; this was taxpayer money. We know that some $13 billion went to firms with rising earnings. If you're in Britain or the United States or New Zealand, then you get to see how your government spent wage subsidy support. That information is available through downloadable spreadsheets and searchable databases. In those countries taxpayers know precisely how their equivalent of JobKeeper was spent. But here there is none of that transparency. It's only through reporting through the Australian Securities and Investments Commission that we know about the JobKeeper receipt for listed firms. But among unlisted entities we know very little, and that is why this transparency amendment is so important.

The government is pursuing 11,000 people through Centrelink debt notices based on their having received JobKeeper in the work they were doing, affecting their eligibility for the pension—people like Jan Raabe, who I spoke about in the House in the last sitting period—yet it won't allow the Australian people to know how JobKeeper was spent. Labor will fight for transparency against this cowardly government that, rather than support a transparency amendment in the Senate, has taken the bill off the Notice Paper and is running for the hills.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I would like to thank those members who have contributed to this debate. Schedule 1 to the bill amends the income tax law to ensure that no tax is payable on refunds of large-scale generation certificate shortfall charges. This measure will clarify the operation of the income tax law for energy providers and ensure that the taxpayers who receive a refund of shortfall charges are not inadvertently disadvantaged. This will enable the market for these certificates to work as intended, meeting targets for clean energy whilst minimising cost impacts for consumers.

Schedule 2 to the bill establishes a more effective enforcement regime to encourage greater compliance with the franchising code by amending the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to increase the maximum civil pecuniary penalty available under the code to the greater of $10 million, three times the benefit obtained from the contravention of the code or 10 per cent of annual turnover. The maximum civil penalties that can be applied to industry codes generally will also be lifted from 300 to 600 penalty units, or $133,200.

Schedule 3 to the bill removes a redundant requirement for superannuation trustees to obtain an actuarial certificate when calculating its exempt current pension income when all the fund members are fully in the retirement phase for their entire income year. This measure will reduce costs and simplify reporting for affected superannuation funds by streamlining an administrative requirement for the calculation of exempt current pension income.

Schedule 4 to the bill will strengthen the industry code's framework and provide legal certainty by clarifying that industry codes can confer powers and functions on third parties to the commercial relationship between industry participants.

Schedule 5 to the bill improves visibility of superannuation assets during family law property proceedings. This schedule amends the Family Law Act 1975 and the Taxation Administration Act 1953 to allow parties to family law proceedings to apply to Family Court registries to request information from the Australian tax office that will assist them to identify their former partner's superannuation interests. Parties will then be able to use this information provided by the ATO to seek up-to-date superannuation information from their former partner's superannuation fund for use in these family law proceedings. These amendments will reduce the time, cost and complexity for parties seeking accurate superannuation information, supporting more separated couples to divide their property on a just and equitable basis. I commend this bill to the House.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Whitlam moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be disagreed to.

Question agreed to.

Original question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.