Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister advise the House how many of Australia's nearly three million small and family businesses will be carved out of Labor's capital gains tax grab?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can inform the House that our government backs small business, and I'll make these points: we announced $3½ billion in the budget in new measures that lower taxes for businesses to encourage investment and innovation; we're making the $20,000 instant asset write-off permanent for the first time, providing $890 million in cash flow support over five years; we're introducing a permanent loss carry-back to support resilience, investment and risk taking, helping up to 85,000 companies a year; we're introducing loss refundability to help up to 25,000 startups per year grow in their early years; we're expanding tax incentives for venture capital to unlock industry knowledge for young, expanding firms; and we're better targeting the R&D tax incentive.

When it comes to capital gains, there are four different carve-outs and concessions for small businesses, and all four are staying in place. What that means is if you sell your active business to retire, to start a new business or to relocate you can still reduce, or in some cases completely remove, your tax on any capital gains. Ninety per cent of small businesses in Australia are eligible for these concessions, and they'll continue to remain eligible. All budget measures on top of that are entirely prospective. They don't start until 1 July 2027. That means that any business value that's been built up before this date can use the old discount rules, no matter when the business owner decides to sell in the future.

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Why are the reforms at the core of the budget so important in the current economic conditions? How does it compare with other approaches?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A big thank you to the member for Corangamite for her question and for all of her work. Inflation came down in the data today for April, and that's very welcome news. It came down by more than what was expected, but it's still too high in our economy. We had inflationary challenges before the war, but the war has made them worse, and those impacts are broadening out in our economy.

Petrol was a big part of the improvement in today's data, but it's not the only part. Rents and food came down a bit as well. Again, that's welcome. Our inflation came down in April in Australia while it went up in April in the US, Canada and the Euro area.

But we know that people are still under pressure, and that's why our budget strategy is so responsible and so important. It's why we've saved more than we've spent in the budget and improved the bottom line each year, and got debt down a bit more as well. It's why we're helping with the cost of living in a responsible way by cutting fuel taxes, and cutting income taxes as well.

Tomorrow we will introduce the tax cuts legislation with the changes to the capital gains tax discount and negative gearing. They're in the same bill because one pays for the other. It means that we are cutting income taxes five times and in three different ways. The average worker will save $2,800 a year when it's up and running.

If those opposite vote against a tax cut, they'll be making the exact same mistake that they made last year. It will prove beyond any doubt that they haven't learned a thing from the last election and that they haven't changed a bit since. Their three objectives are to talk down the economy, to talk up division in our society and to run a scare campaign against the same changes that the shadow Treasurer has repeatedly called for.

Our three objectives are to make it easier to own a first home, to cut income taxes again and again, and to better align the tax treatment of income and assets. That's why Bob Breunig at the ANU says:

Australia's most ambitious budget in decades deserves support. It acts on numerous fronts long treated as too hard: negative gearing, the capital gains tax discount, trusts and the tax burden on workers.

It's why the Barefoot Investor said:

The system lets wealthy families with good accountants pay less tax than nurses and tradies. That doesn't pass the pub test.

It's why the shadow Treasurer himself has said:

There's no intergenerational justice in such preferential arrangements …

He wrote that in his book. He said in the parliament:

… the tax system is screwing over young Australians.

The Institute of Public Affairs said that indexation is 'a more rational and economically efficient way to tax capital gains'.

Too many Australians are locked out of housing. We're addressing that and cutting income taxes for workers, and those opposite should vote for it.