Nicolette Boele (Bradfield, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the amendment as circulated in my name:

(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (after line 23), after section 6L, insert:

6M Temporary freeze in indexation for craft beer

(1) Despite any other provision of this Act, subsection 6A(1) applies, in relation to craft beer and each CPI indexed non-draught beer rate, as if the indexation factor were 1 for each of the following indexation days:

(a) 1 August 2025;

(b) 1 February 2026;

(c) 1 August 2026;

(d) 1 February 2027.

Note 1: This means the rates as they are on 31 July 2025 will be unchanged for the next 2 years.

Note 2: When indexation resumes in August 2027, the indexation factor for 1 August 2027 will be applied against these unchanged rates (see subsection 6A(1)).

(2) In this section:

CPI indexed non-draught beer rate means a rate of duty set out in subitem 1.1, 1.5 or 1.10 of the Schedule.

craft beer means beer brewed by a member of the Independent Brewers Association or a similar not-for-profit organisation representing independent, local brewers with appropriate governance of member eligibility and conduct.

indexation day has the same meaning as in section 6A.

Everyone knows that households and small businesses around the country have been doing it tough. The cost of living has been hurting Australians for some time now. To address that, one of the Labor Party's election promises was to pause indexation on draught beer excise and excise-equivalent customs duty rates for two years from August 2025. The idea, of course, is to ensure that the price of a cold one down at the pub stays the same for a little while longer. The legislation, the Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025, implements that promise. The Labor Party has a clear mandate for it, so I will be supporting the legislation.

However, in my view, the underlying election promise was flawed. By pausing the excise on draught beer only, the policy mostly benefits large, multinational companies and does nothing to assist the small independent craft brewers that Australians have come to love so much. Excise on those craft beers will not be paused under the legislation, which means the price of them will keep rising, even as the excise for draught beer stays the same. My amendment addresses that by extending the two-year excise pause to independent craft beer. If government revenue—taxpayers' dollars—is going to be spent to alleviate the cost of doing business, I want to make sure that it's helping local businesses.

Take Buckle Cafe and Distillery in Artarmon in my electorate of Bradfield as an example. After this legislation was introduced, I got in touch with Ben, the owner, to see whether he thought extending the excise pause would help the distillery and other similar local craft breweries. Ben said:

It's getting harder and harder.

I've been in the industry 15 years now and the day to day has certainly not gotten easier.

The freeze on draught beer excise was a great vote winner from Labor. Unfortunately, it sounds great;

But it actually disproportionately favours the big multinational brewers because they dominate and control a lot of the taps in the market.

He goes on to say:

It's about a fair go.

The Independent Brewers Association, whose members are overwhelmingly small to medium-sized business in big cities and small communities throughout Australia, agree with Ben from Buckle. The IBA points out that independent brewers employ locals, give back to their communities, strengthen Australia's manufacturing capability, provide tourism destinations and work directly with the agricultural sector. Critically, their profits stay in Australia.

So I repeat: if the government is going to be spending taxpayer money pausing an excise on beer, surely independent Australian businesses should be the priority. Spending that taxpayer money for the benefit of multinational companies just doesn't pass the pub test. Let's see if the government is listening. I commend the amendment to the House.

Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the member for Bradfield's amendments. These are good and sensible amendments. In my electorate of Indi and north-east Victoria we are lucky enough to have locally owned, locally loved and nationally renowned breweries no matter where you turn. In Beechworth, Bridge Road Brewers are celebrated for their Beechworth Pale Ale, a craft staple in pubs across the country. They're also a leader in the zero-alcohol market, with their popular Free Time pale ale now accompanied by a full range of alcohol-free stouts and hazy ales. Their raspberry sour was recently crowned Australia's best non-alcoholic beer.

Bright Brewery, a little further into the mountains, certainly know how to put on a family friendly party. This terrific venue beside the Ovens River is the place to be, no matter whether it's the Bright Rod Run or the Brighter Days Festival. Back in the High Country we have Mountain Monk Brewers and Crank Handle Brewery in the upper Kiewa Valley in Mount Beauty, both popular destinations after a big day on the slopes in snow season. Mitta Mitta Brewing Company is a great stopover on your way to the High Country, while King River Brewing Co have an impressive range and hold their own against the famous wineries of the King Valley. In Wangaratta, Pedal Slowly are demonstrating that a regional microbrewery can achieve in a small place, while On Point Brewing in Alexandra is a must-visit for those travelling through Murrindindi shire as it recovers from devastating bushfires.

Breweries aren't just a nice place to visit; they're vital supporters of local industries. When a local brewery thrives, it creates jobs, engages local agriculture and helps sustain the visitor economy. Local, independently owned breweries are strong contributors to the social and economic fabric of many regional communities, with the sector being worth more than $3.5 billion per year. Independent breweries reinvest profits in local wages, local suppliers and local infrastructure rather than overseas shareholders and multibillion-dollar corporations that often pay little tax. If we want locally owned breweries to sustain this contribution to local employment, tourism and community life in rural and regional Australia, then policy settings must reflect the outsized benefits they deliver back into their communities.

While I overall support this bill, I express the same frustrations as my colleagues and the independent brewing sector that this measure will only apply to draught beer. I've spoken with the Independent Brewers Association and small brewers right across the electorate of Indi, and they tell me clearly that, while any change to excise to ease cost pressures is welcome, the government's decision is still only a drop in their proverbial ocean, because they mostly sell packaged beer, not draught tap beer. The simple fact is this bill will take 10c off the cost of a beer or $36 if you had a pint every single day for the next year.

While the benefits to consumers are small, the benefits of this $95 million tax break will mostly benefit big international beer conglomerates, because the draught beer market is overwhelmingly dominated by three major brewers who control around 90 per cent of the market. They buy up local Australian brands, market them as Australian and then ship their profits offshore. While I try to avoid colloquialisms in this place, this is the appropriate time to say, as my colleague has just said, that this one absolutely does not pass the pub test. When foreign entities have such a strong hold on the sector, it's hard to understand why the government is passing a measure that will disproportionately benefit their bottom line, when it could have designed this tax break benefit for Australian companies.

I believe that a targeted pause in excise for independent Australian producers is a fair and sensible way to back local jobs, local investment and local ownership. They argue, and I agree, that such a pause would not only help stabilise a sector under real strain but also support greater investment in domestic production and in the independent retail market, where small brewers have more opportunity to get their products on shelves and on tap. If we want a vibrant, competitive beer industry in Australia with strong local producers and retailers in regional communities, like those in Indi, then we must be prepared to rethink the excise settings in a serious way and not just tinker at the edges to benefit big business.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Bradfield be agreed to.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

(1) Schedule 1, heading, page 3 (line 1), omit "Temporary", substitute "Indefinite".

(2) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (line 7), omit "Temporary", substitute "Indefinite".

(3) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 8 to 19), omit subsection 6L(1), substitute:

(1) Despite any other provision of this Act, subsection 6A(1) applies in relation to each CPI indexed draught beer rate as if the indexation factor were 1 for 1 August 2025 or a later indexation day.

Note: This means the rates as they are on 31 July 2025 will be unchanged indefinitely.

I propose amendments to the Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025 and Customs Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025. The rising cost of living has challenged millions of Australian families for several years now, with inflation rising sharply since our economy bounced back after COVID. The government has a hand in setting the price of relatively few grocery items, but one of them is the cost of beer. The average price of draught beer has gone up by over 30 per cent in the last three years, an increase which is considerably higher than the rate of inflation. This has, at least in part, been driven by the automatic indexation of the beer excise every six months which has forced price increases above their annual CPI. This indexation is yet another typical anomaly in our unnecessarily complex tax system.

It's pleasing to see the government's commitment to freezing indexation on draught beer for two years, but indexation of the excise over recent years has left those draught beer prices already too high. Indexation of the beer excise needs to stop, and that's why I'm moving that this freeze should be permanent. A permanent cap on the draught beer excise would help millions of Australians with cost-of-living pressures. It would also help support Australia's emerging craft beer industry. Despite rapid growth of small independent brewers, 85 per cent of Australia's beer market is controlled by two foreign owned multinationals. Our craft beer industry supports local workers and economies. The independent beer sector employs over 8,000 people directly, with many brewers also contributing to local hospitality and to tourism. Independent brewers face challenges with the rising cost of ingredients and energy, softening consumer demand and stiff competition from large retailers like Coles which are increasingly selling home brand beers and mimicking craft styles. Many small brewers deferred excise increases during COVID and are now struggling with that debt in a persistently tough economic climate.

Alcohol taxation in Australia does not make a whole lot of sense. The wine equalisation tax taxes wine and other fruit based alcohol products based on their wholesale price, not their alcohol content. That has led to an oversupply of cheap wine products in Australia. It's decreased tax income, but it's also increased consumption of fruit based alcoholic products, flavoured ciders and cleanskins. The WET should be abolished. We should tax all alcohol products consistently with a volume metric tax based upon their alcohol content. That has been recommended by several independent reviews.

There is a lot more that we could and should do to responsibly tax the alcohol industry. In fact, there is plenty that we could do and should do to reform our tax system overall. We could derive fairer income from fossil fuel and mineral exports by more effectively taxing resources that are owned by all Australians. We could get reasonable income from our digital services. We could stop subsidising fossil fuels by means of the diesel fuel rebate for mining companies. We could tax labour less and income from passive sources such as rent, interest, super and capital gains more. We could take a good hard look at every part of our tax system, and we could have the courage to tackle housing affordability as well as the significant challenges associated with the funding of health, education and aged care.

But to do that, we would need to have a government which had both courage and vision. For the moment, those of us who do care about tax reform in this country have to push this government—bit by bit, issue by issue—to make things fairer and more equitable, and to restore some sense to a system which really does not make a whole lot of sense. And so I've moved this amendment to permanently freeze indexation of the draft beer excise to help thousands of Australian craft brew workers and to offer some cost-of-living relief to the millions of Australians who simply want to be able to afford one of the simpler pleasures of life.

Question negatived.

Andrew Gee (Calare, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (line 1) to page 3 (line 23), omit the Schedule, substitute:

Schedule 1 — Removal of excise for draught beer

Excise Tariff Act 1921

1 Subitems 1.2, 1.6 and 1.11 of the Schedule

Repeal the items.

I'm moving this amendment because while freezing the beer excise for a couple of years is better than nothing, the reality is that it just locks in sky-high schooner prices. After that, we're just going to be back in this place arguing about it all over again. I believe it is time to axe the tax, and that's what this amendment does. We need to implement a fairer system of alcohol taxation that helps ensure the long-term viability of our hospitality sector and doesn't keep stinging consumers year in, year out. That's what this amendment does.

I've heard opposition members complain that this bill only freezes excise for two years, notwithstanding that it was the policy they took to the last election. The crossbench is here to help. We know things are very chaotic on the opposition benches at the moment. We know that every day brings a new episode of the soap opera—it's like Days of Our Lives. They seem very distracted, and things just aren't very happy in the happy kingdom anymore. But we are here to help, so we've drafted this amendment to give all members of this House, but in particular Nationals and Liberal Party members, the chance to vote to axe the tax.

Now, they could have drafted this amendment themselves, but I'm very happy to assist them and do the heavy lifting for them. In my electorate of Calare, there are more than 400 licenced venues that employ around 1,300 people and service countless residents and visitors each year. These venues are often key employers in our smaller towns and villages—and in our larger ones as well! Our country pubs and hospitality venues don't just serve drinks; they support our local farmers, entertainers, local community groups. They keep people connected. Our country pubs and clubs want the tax axed.

The Hotel Orange is one of our iconic heritage pubs. Vijay is the publican and says that the hospitality industry is one of the hardest hit when it comes to taxes. Coupled with high operating costs, it's not an easy gig. He says that freezing the tax would be good but if it were completely scrapped, that would be better. It would make business more sustainable and be good for the hip pockets of his customers.

Peter Sargent, the chief executive officer of Bathurst RSL club, says:

The cost-of-living crisis is about managing the basics and being able to go out and have a beer. But as the excise creeps up, this simple activity becomes unaffordable.

Bathurst RSL try to keep their prices as low as possible, but with each and every excise increase it becomes harder and harder to do that. Peter is concerned that, if they keep being taxed like this, being able to go to the pub for a beer and a schnitty—that small enjoyment, that simple pleasure that a lot of everyday Australians like to experience; I love it too—will become out of reach. While the freeze on excise for two years means that the club will be able to keep prices of products lower for longer, Peter says a permanent fix would go a long way to help.

That's why we need to axe the tax. This amendment is our opportunity to not only axe the tax but update, overhaul and reform the whole tax regime around beer, wine and spirits. We all know it's long overdue. The current system is no longer fit for purpose to support our local hospitality and tourism sectors. At the last election, I stood at polling booths and I heard National Party members and their Plymouth Brethren proxies constantly tell voters they were for cheaper beer. Well, this is their chance to prove it. Come in and vote for this amendment. Show us that you actually support cheaper beer. Don't just lock in sky-high schooner prices. Put aside the daily drama, the daily soap opera with multiple episodes going live in Parliament House every day. Come in here and actually do something for your constituents instead of talking about yourselves. Come into this chamber and axe the tax. I commend this amendment to the House.

Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Since I didn't refer to the member for Calare's amendment explicitly in my summing up, I thought I would just briefly acknowledge the amendment and, as with the other amendments, acknowledge the intentions behind it. But I will just again say that the government believes that the bill as drafted strikes the right balance between supporting our pubs and clubs and maintaining budget sustainability. For that reason, we won't be supporting this amendment.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells having been rung—

As there are fewer than seven members on the side of the ayes in this division, I declare the question negatived in accordance with standing order 127. The names of those members who are in the minority will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

Question negatived.

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the amendment as circulated in my name:

(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (after line 23), after section 6L, insert:

6M Temporary freeze in indexation for tap spirits

(1) Despite any other provision of this Act, subsection 6A(1) applies, in relation to a tap spirit and each CPI indexed alcoholic beverage rate, as if the indexation factor were 1 for each of the following indexation days:

(a) 1 August 2026;

(b) 1 February 2027.

Note 1: This means the rates as they are on 31 July 2026 will be unchanged for the next year.

Note 2: When indexation resumes in August 2027, the indexation factor for 1 August 2027 will be applied against these unchanged rates (see subsection 6A(1)).

(2) In this section:

CPI indexed alcoholic beverage rate means a rate of duty set out in:

(a) item 2 of the Schedule; or

(b) subitem 3.1, 3.2 or 3.10 of the Schedule.

indexation day has the same meaning as in section 6A.

tap spirit means:

(a) an alcoholic beverage not exceeding 10% by volume of alcohol stored in an individual container:

(i) of at least 8 litres but not exceeding 48 litres; and

(ii) designed to connect to a pressurised gas delivery system or pump delivery system; or

(b) an alcoholic beverage exceeding 10% by volume of alcohol stored in an individual container:

(i) of at least 4 litres but not exceeding 20 litres; and

(ii) designed to connect to a pressurised gas delivery system or pump delivery system.

This is a straightforward amendment that would extend the government's pause on indexation of draught beer excise so that it also applies to on-tap spirits from 1 August 2026. We welcome the pause on the draught beer indexation. In fact, it was Nationals policy going back some time. We've said very clearly that pubs, clubs and hospitality venues deserve support, especially in our regions where our locals play an important role in our communities. But this particular amendment goes to something more important, and that is fairness. Because under the government's approach, if you order a draught beer at a bar, you get relief. But if you order a gin and tonic, a vodka soda or a spirit served on tap, you keep paying the inflation tax. I want to ask a very simple question: how is that fair? Why should Australians who prefer spirits be singled out to keep paying automatic tax increases while beer drinkers get a break? I'd genuinely like to hear someone from the government benches explain that logic.

In many venues, spirits on-tap are becoming more popular. They're served the same way over the same bar by the same staff in the same venues as draught beer. Yet the government has decided that one drink deserves relief from inflation-linked tax hikes and the other doesn't, and that unfairness matters more when we look at who is being affected. Spirits, particularly lighter, mixed drinks are more commonly consumed by women and young people. This government likes to pretend it's a friend to women and younger Australians, but clearly not if you don't prefer beer. What the government has effectively done is say, 'If you drink beer, we'll give you a break, but, if you drink spirits, you're on your own.' At a time when the cost of living is already at a crisis, that distinction is hard to justify, and then it becomes even harder to justify when inflation runs hotter than expected.

Annual inflation to December is now at 3.8 per cent, and, yesterday, we had a rate hike. So, when Labor provides relief from inflationary tax rises to some drinkers and not others and inflation is out of control, the impact of that unfairness only grows. By pausing indexation for draught beer but not for on-tap spirits, the government is deliberately locking in unequal treatment and letting it compound over time. Why is the government picking winners and losers here?

This amendment will ensure that every Australian's tastes are treated the same. The decision makes even less sense when you consider the practical reality for venues. Pubs and clubs don't see beer and spirit drinkers as separate classes of customer. They're all patrons. They're all supporting the venue. They all keep local hospitality alive. But, under this government's approach, venues will face distorted incentives, pushing some products over others purely because of a tax treatment, not consumer choice. That's bad for customers, that's bad for venues, and that is bad policy.

This amendment doesn't reduce the relief beer drinkers are getting. They deserve a drink. All it does is say, if we're pausing the inflation tax on alcohol served on tap, we should do it fairly. Beer on tap and spirits on tap should be treated the same. This isn't a radical position, and it's not likely to break the government coffers. It's just basic fairness. At a time when Australians are struggling with the cost of living, the least we can do is make sure relief measures don't arbitrarily favour one group over another. I urge the House to back this sensible, fair and modest change and ensure that, when relief is provided, it's provided equally. Thank you.

David Batt (Hinkler, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to this amendment. The National Party is backing the amendment presented by the member for Cowper. It's about a fair go for spirit drinkers. It's about a proper, albeit well overdue, review into Australia's ancient alcohol tax system. As I have proudly stated and metaphorically raised a glass to in this place before, my electorate of Hinkler is famous across not only Australia but, indeed, the world for producing some of the finest tipples you'll ever try—the iconic Bundy rum, Kalki Moon distillery, the Spirit Collective and Campfire Distillery in Hervey Bay, the legendary Bundaberg ginger beer, and, of course, the many craft breweries, including 384 North Brewing in Bundaberg and Cauldron Brewing in Hervey Bay.

The makers, distributors, the pubs on the corners of the main streets in our country towns, the sports clubs that bring families together for each of these—changes to our alcohol taxation system couldn't come fast enough. It's a mess. That's why the Nationals are putting forward amendments to legislate a review of the alcohol tax excise system to be finalised by Treasury before 2 November and extend the indexation pause on draught beer to include on-tap spirits. These amendments strengthen what is already being served up. It puts the bubbles in the beer and delivers a better deal for the makers, the supply chain and, ultimately, those who enjoy a cold one at the pub, the bowls club or while watching the local footy on a Saturday afternoon.

Industry has briefed us and made it clear that tap spirits are a growing part of the product mix for pubs, clubs and small bars and appeal to a wider variety of customers. Extending the freeze to tap spirits served in hospitality venues will strengthen the flow-on benefits and provide cost-of-living relief beyond customers who choose to drink beer. The alcohol excise framework is more than 100 years old. The 2010 Henry review was the last comprehensive look at the excise system, recommended a single volumetric tax system based on alcohol content and criticised the patchwork system of rates. Freezing the tax only for draught beer is arbitrary and unfair. It provides welcome support for pubs, beer producers and beer drinkers but ignores distillers and people who prefer spirits over beer, including many women and young adults.

These amendments back up what I called for last year, soon after meeting with the chair of Diageo, Sir John Manzoni, and his Australasian team while they visited here in Canberra. Diageo is a global leader in premium drinks, and they look after the Bundaberg Rum brand and many others. In my home state of Queensland, the Queensland Hotels Association has thanked us for backing the freeze on draught beer excise. Yes, it's a win for local pubs, hardworking hospitality workers and every Aussie who enjoys a cold one without needing a small loan, but these amendments will go further. Hardworking Aussies deserve to be able to afford a cold beer or a glass of their favourite spirit mix. In a cost-of-living crisis, net zero is adding to power bills and sending Australian jobs overseas. Let's reduce the cost associated with keeping your beer cold. Let's cut the energy expense so that the makers of your favourite drop don't have to pass it on. Pubs and clubs are the meeting places for our regional communities. Let's make them more affordable.

The Nationals are pushing for the comprehensive Treasury review of the alcohol tax system and an extension to indexation relief on tap spirits. The Nationals support tax relief on beer but want to see the whole alcohol tax system improved. In regional Australia, in the cities and towns I represent in Hinkler, pubs and clubs aren't a luxury. They are the social and economic lifeblood of our communities. They sponsor local sport, host fundraisers and keep towns connected. That's the real Aussie spirit. My electorate of Hinkler's array of award-winning makers, brewers and distillers serve up more than amber ales. When it comes to a top-shelf drop, Hinkler leads the pack. I ask the government to agree to these amendments, back a fair go for spirit drinkers and take this opportunity for a broader review of Australia's alcohol tax system. Do it now while we can, because it's well overdue. Will the government consider long-term relief—relief that makes a real difference—for the hospitality sector and deliver consistent and evidence based measures that matter?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is amendment (1) on sheet 1, moved by the honourable member for Cowper, be agreed to.