Senate debates

Tuesday, 23 February 2016

Questions without Notice

Taxation

2:00 pm

Photo of Anne UrquhartAnne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Brandis, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's statement yesterday that 'increasing capital gains tax is no part of our thinking whatsoever'. Is increasing capital gains tax no part of the government's thinking whatsoever?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

I can absolutely confirm the accuracy of what the Prime Minister said yesterday. I can confirm to the chamber that the government will not implement anything as rushed, distorting and potentially destructive as the Labor Party's anti-investment capital gains tax plans. There will be no change to the 50 per cent CGT discount for individuals. The government is still carefully considering some other changes. That is how tax policy—

Senator Wong interjecting

Aha! Come in spinner, Senator Wong! Of course, that is the way that tax policy is developed—not the way in which it was developed during that unlamented period when you were the minister for finance, Senator Wong. Remember the Henry tax review, in which every proposal but one was abandoned and the one that was chosen was a tax that raised no revenue? The government is developing tax policy the way it ought to be developed: carefully, methodically, paying due attention to the complexities of the system. The Labor Party in government commissioned a major review, the Henry tax review. It abandoned every single recommendation of the Henry tax review except one. It selected one recommendation from some 150, and that was the worst recommendation—the recommendation for a mining tax. So that is not the way that we are going to go about reform of the tax system. We are considering some changes, but those changes will not include a change to the 50 per cent discount for individuals.

2:02 pm

Photo of Anne UrquhartAnne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to the comments from Mr Turnbull's spokesman who said the Prime Minister 'was still open' to reducing the capital gains tax discount for investors. If increasing capital gains tax is still on the table, why did the Prime Minister say it is not?

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

I am sorry, Senator Urquhart; you must not have been listening to the answer to the primary question.

Senator Cormann interjecting

Well, Senator Cormann, that is true, but I was not going to be so unchivalrous as to point that out! Now, Senator Urquhart, as I said in answer to the primary question, there will be no change to the 50 per cent CGT discount for individuals. The government is still carefully considering some other changes. That is the way that tax policy is developed by a government that goes about the development of policy in a careful, methodical way that considers all the matters that ought to be considered.

2:03 pm

Photo of Anne UrquhartAnne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I refer to the Prime Minister's statement:

… all economic reform options remain on the table.

Is a hike in GST one of the options that remain on the table?

2:04 pm

Photo of George BrandisGeorge Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | | Hansard source

No. No. Having had a long community discussion about the desirability or otherwise of increasing the GST—a discussion, I might say, initiated by the Labor Premier of South Australia, Mr Jay Weatherill, and a discussion in which premiers from both sides of politics participated, economic commentators participated, former treasurers and former prime ministers participated, and the crossbench of this chamber participated—the government, having taken in the learnings of that discussion, the community having had a very thorough look at this, has decided to take that option off the table.