If they pare back the promised stage 3 tax cuts would you:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts - Who Will You Vote for Now?
minijumbuk on 24/01/2024 - 07:31
Last edited 26/01/2024 - 07:18 by 2 other users
Last edited 26/01/2024 - 07:18 by 2 other users
Poll Options
- 1144Voted labor, will continue to vote labour. It's the right thing to do.
- 209Voted labor but won't anymore, breaking election promises is the wrong thing to do.
- 116Didn't vote labor but will now, he's doing the right thing.
- 445Don't vote labor and won't next time, breaking election promises is the wrong thing to do.
Comments
Voted labor as he’s given the reassurance he’s not changing stage 3 (and couldn’t stand the thought of Dutton being PM) but honestly, will def go back to Liberals next
Exactly my thoughts
Out of interest - will you be better or worse off under the new plan?
If you're fortunate enough to be one of the 8% of Aussies earning $150k+ how materially do you think an extra $4k vs an extra $8k is going to materially effect your life?
As a once off, a little hit, but 4.5k less per year every year, coupled with the extra 50k less per year since interest rates went up. Plus the new cuts are more inflationary than the original, so that will likely impact interest rates, making it an even greater hit overall.
I know I was much better off before albo got in, that's for sure.
I get your perspective but rate rises are hardly Albo's fault and your comment about "the new cuts are more inflationary than the original" kinda sounds like you want people on lower income to curb spending but not you.
Also, what are your thoughts about fairness across incomes, I agree with you that lost 4.5k a year sucks but the LMITO was only temporary but the stage 3 forever. Isnt this better for everyone?
@samyall: Rate rise is not his fault, but his disastrous energy policies are causing inflationary issues. Energy drives everything, not just your utilities. Go woke go broke
@samyall: Rate rises arent his fault, but his governments policies have certainly played a role in keeping inflation high (other countries its falling more rapidly than ours). This means our rates will be higher for longer than it may have been without his energy and immigration policies, which means higher repayments in the long run, so his government definitely plays a role.
The new cuts are more inflationary. You only have to look back to the start of the pandemic when every news article was "giving money to the poor stimulates the economy because they spend it, and the "rich save it".
Regarding fairness, this is my biggest bug bear. The Tax system reeks of unfairness all across it. The super rich and companies have ways to minimise their tax so a lot of them wont even be paying the higher brackets. A lot of multinationals pay a fraction. Single income households pay significantly more tax, on a household income basis than dual income households of the same total.
More and more people are crossing the higher bracket thresholds. These cuts barely scrape the surface of bracket creep.
In my opinion one of the most challenging income ranges is the 100-200k range. You get frequently told by the media that "your rich", you start getting taxed a lot more, you lose government benefits, childcare fees, more medicare levy etc. Pre-tax your getting a lot more, however your disposable income is no where near as high as people think it is.
I've been through those years, and they are tough. I liked the Stage 3 cuts because to me that encouraged more people to try and better their life without being smashed by the government.
I like the changes to the lower income brackets, but they should have kept the other changes as well, the government can sure afford it with the amount of extra tax money they are taking in over the last few years.
@dmcneice: I don't know that paying less tax when earning more is the deciding factor encouraging people to better their life through career ambitions. A pay rise is a pay rise and I think anyone earning 100k now will be happy to be earning 200k no matter the tax scenario.
@samyall: All other things being equal, sure. But its not usually that simple.
It's more like this:
-Do i get a second job, or work weekends (in addition to full time), to get enough extra dollars to save for a deposit, knowing that I'm more heavily penalised the more I work, and that it comes with the downside of seeing your family less, seeing your kids less, not having time off and instead working through etc..At least thats what it was for me. In the end it was a deciding factor for me. It may not be for some people. I've decided to work less because the extra effort for less reward wasnt worth it to me.
@dmcneice: To me, it seems like the tax system did a good job of helping you make the right decision to not overwork yourself and spend time with your family.
150k today, now many will cross that threshold over the next 15-20 years?
Interesting question. I did some calculations and assuming wages grow at 2.5% (target inflation rate) then in 5 years (a more realistic timeline until the next change in policy) then 12% will be earning over $150k. Assuming 4% wage growth then about 15% will be earning over $150k.
@samyall: 5 years? The stage three "cuts" took 6 years alone. Most changes in tax over my lifetime have been extremely minor and far removed from salary growth/inflation.
Would have greatly helped mortgage repayments to have that extra income, now only getting half because of that weasel prick.
Basically he’s saying that there’s no point having a highly skilled high paid job in Australia. There’s literally no point in incremental pay rises for me anymore given 50% of it goes to the gov, and the remaining 50% doesn’t even cover inflation.
I'm sure your employer will happily oblige not giving you pay rises.
Lol, they're moving the 45% tax rate back $10k instead of $20k, not inventing it.
I'm in that 8% and that extra tax cut would probably have gone into my super fund or ETFs - meaning there's even less of a chance that I would be a burden on the taxpayer in my retirement. I suspect that the majority of your 8% would have done something similar.
This mentality is exactly why we go nowhere as a nation because most people seem to think the LNP are better at running the country whilst Labor has been in power for a lot less time compared to the LNP since the 90s.
Are we better off as a nation than where we were 10, 20, 30 years ago? I would say no. Immigration is off the charts — and it was high every single year the past decade — at a time where vacancy rates are extremely low and not enough houses are being built, house prices have gone up despite interest rates going up, we're in a per capita recession (which doesn't happen overnight either so the LNP are definitely to blame), there are now homeless tent cities popping up around the country, COL has skyrocketed, youth crime is increasing all across the country.
People seriously have terribly short memories in this country. The LNP gave taxpayer money to the likes of Gerry Harvey and Alan Joyce during the pandemic neither of which repaid it all back.
This is just more carrots to distract the sheep from the real causes of high cost of living, corporatism and mass immigration (both of which go hand in hand and both parties are happy to placate at the expense of citizens).
Albo before 2022: "We don't support the LNP's mass migration policies."
Albo after 2022: Imports 700k people in one year@Ghost47: just in case you have an open mind here are the real numbers
https://www.statista.com/statistics/608052/australia-net-ove…
Covid really messes with things but both governments seem prettymuch the same on immigration.
You guys will continue to vote labor? After such a massive election promise is broken? I guess it doesn't impact you, so you don't care right? Deplorable. What was the rich is no longer… not after covid and not after the inflation we've seen. We need these cuts more than ever.
An election promise that wasn't their policy and now being tweaked (in no way removed) to benefit more Australians - it's a rare time when an election promise should be broken, and most Australians will understand that (hopefully!).
U must be one of the more australians that will benefit from the 50% reduction in tax benefit taken from me. Remember its a reduction in taxes… meaning its taking my hard earn and giving it to someone else.if you want to make more money, work harder, dont take from others
Have you tried working harder yourself to offset the tax changes? Just need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and put your nose to the grindstone
Dutton, is that you?
How's the boycott Woolies going?
Benefits more than 90% of people more than the original plan did. What's not to like?
"But I was told to be angry."
Hello, Robot from Futurama: "I believe what I was programmed to believe"
My world has been turned upside down and my faith demolished by this galling slight change
Cats and dogs sleeping together. Unmarried women having children!
It is not about if the stage 3 is right or wrong. It is about if you ( Labor) agreed to support it and promised not to change it so firmly, you should not. It either meant Labor was despreate to be elected so they would say anything to get the vote or they simply were terrible at economics (that they cannot foresee at least some possiblities this needs to be amended to some extent down the road). So they could have said something like depending on economic situatiuon at the time, changes may occur etc etc.
This sets a terrible example for the Australia politics as anyone now can use this as a defence in the future game whne they break their election promise. And LNP can also use this to flip on policies they don't like but promised so they can win back seats like climate changes ones to defeat the Teals.
There is no winner in this game in this manner.
It's really not - we expect our government to do what is best for the people AT THAT TIME. Acting like the world hasn't gone through major changes in the last few years is the worst mistake a government could make.
People banging on about broken promises need to look to the numerous prior examples to find ones that shouldn't have been changed - this isn't even close.
The problem is that Albo said today that things have changed. Fine, i accept that. But those things didn't just change in the last week, when he was still promising no changes to the tax cuts. I find that unacceptable.
Why does it matter so much? The changes are being made, they are good changes, getting caught up in the politics of it seems pointless.
@whatgift: Let's use an analogy. So you say to your child six months ago, I'll buy you this toy for your birthday. Your own economic circumstances have changed and can no longer afford the toy and as recently as a week ago, still promised the child the toy knowing that it's not being delivered. Is that lying or what? So it doesn't matter to you making empty promises as a parent?
@kyle: Once again, it's politics - it's not new or surprising, and it's bizarre to spend so much energy getting upset about it!
@whatgift: There are people make a living by politics so it does matter to some people. Sure it is your rights not to but shouldn't be surprised some do, as we go to vote from time to time.
You effectively proved my point, Labor CAN make changes - but as a mature political party, they should have the capability to predict there is such a "strong" possibility, or in your words, a need to change/amend. Failing that, it means either of my point. And I'd pick up the desprate to be elected as the reason.
Labor lost its political decency. (note I am not saying LNP is better, hence I said there is no winner in this game in this manner.
Nope the simple problem is this constant taxing and taking from people who work hard and giving to people who dont.
I don't think stage 3 was a factor in Labor winning the election.
So if you are cruising along the highway at 100km and the traffic in front has slowed due to an accident you just continue as you are?
This stuff was legislated 5 odd years ago and A LOT has changed in the economy since then. The govt has adjusted to respond to that.
Almost everyone is better off under the changes and those who are not (including myself) can afford to get a bit less.
It's the homeless turn to say " it's not fair!!! Those rich people with $50k income is getting nearly $1000 in tax cut!!" What about me?? We need to look after people who needs it most and I have NO income"
Why don't we just half the tax cut of those making $50k and give them to those that are more deserving.
You're on to something. We really should increase funding for public services. I would be happier still if they reduced the cut further across the board and increased funding for social housing programs to help the homeless.
Just decrease overall income tax and increase GST and put it on everything. There, all consumers pay tax.
To be fair the stage 3 tax cuts were BS and the Libs last pat on the back for itself on their way out.
Take a look at the increasing crime rates all over Australia… If people can't afford to live, they resort to crime.
If the lower rung of society collapses, it takes the top rung with it.
The rich should be happy to pay more to contribute to society.
And I say that as someone who is currently on 150k + (obviously not super rich but still)
What's more important keeping a promise or making a sensible change intune with the current climate. It's like the Commonwealth games, maybe it was a good idea at the time but things change. Sometimes its harder to make a change to a decision than ploughing ahead with something that wont work
The commonwealth game saga just examplifed that Labor lacks of critical thinking and planning. Well, LNP is not better, like the submarine contract with France.
Gonna say that 100s of million and 10s of billion of dollar maybe slightly, just slightly different orders of magnitudes
whats better wasting 100s of millions cancelling the com-games or just not putting your hands up to host them in the 1st place costing taxpayers nothing- instead, you do your due diligence prior to wasting almost a billion dollars
honestly some you ALP die hards make me laugh - it kind of fits the profile of an ALP voter but it always shocks me at the rubbish you come up with
this website is starting to become like the cancer of a forum r/australia
It's got nothing to do with being an ALP supporter, it's to do with common sense. It's not wrong to try something and have it not work out, what's worse is doubling down on a mistake and not learning from it.
Exactly. It might not even have been a mistake but external factors change.
Common sense would be indexing the brackets
In absence of that from both sides of politics you would say common sense would be to expect the government to stick there promises
It is also a sign of a poor leader is one that comes in and only policy is to undo the action of the last one
Common sense would also dictatate the fact that 80% of Australias tax collected comes from less then 10% of the population is an unfair and sustainable model.
The new proposed tax laws actually will hurt middle income families in less the 2 years due to bracket creep
But unfortunately like you and those who support this have displayed common sense is not very common
If this was about helping families this government with index the brackets after the changes and be done with the political football
@Trying2SaveABuck: Agree- stop bracket creep by updating thresholds by some living cost index every year. Although Dept of Finance wouldn't like that!
@UNO: based on you're above comment the above bracket should be around 250-270k however you dont support lifting the top bracket to 200k
im not having ago at you but when i say this is blind support for the ALP - that is exactly what it is…you know logically speaking the brackets should be higher and if anything stage 3 didnt go anywhere 'far enough' but due to blind loyalty or perhaps sheer ignorance the ALP die hards will defend this and believe the spin this is good for workers when is reality this is much worse for workers once a few years of creep sets in.
just another example of why the LNP is a much better party even if it is a party of some hard headed rich people it is at least forward thinking and creates policy for the long term not for 'short term' polls
for the record i personally think the liberal party in particular isnt great which tell you what i think of the ALP and even worse the Greens who want to scrap the cut all together - they are parties for people who dont understand simple maths
Maybe you should stick to your Facebook group echo chamber if you can't handle people disagreeing with you. It's sad that you get so upset about other people's opinions that you call them ALP die hards rather than having a moment of reflection and thinking, maybe people are just relieved they might have a little bit extra to spend on food, bills or medical expenses that they otherwise didn't.
The media spent a huge amount of time getting Albanese to commit to the stage 3 cuts on the election campaign for this reason. They wanted a wedge they could attack him on knowing full well that there was already huge changes to the world since they were legislated.
I'd like to see proper tax reform to follow with indexation but this is a good change.
Well put, Baz
Dont get triggered i didnt mean to come off that way but if you got thithlord agreeing with you then youre probably in the wrong
Have a good day
After watching Utopia. I commend any government or government body that has the guts to cancel a project based on feasibility rather than pish through with it just for the 'optics".
Funny how some think this is the first time this has happened. It isn't the first time and won't be the last.
it is why indexation needs to be applied to the tax brackets the power of income tax need to be taken away a bit from politicians
No it won't be the last but is it that how we want our political leaders to act - policies to win votes then do a back flip?
“There will be no GST”
Not an entirely new phenomenon that a politician has told a lie. It does seem like the sensible choice however.
Worse bowler ever
Incomes should be taxed as little as possible. If only there was a good way to tax wealth, then we wouldn't have to prevent economic mobility by taxing incomes so highly. It is ridiculous that the realised profits from a sale of an asset is taxed less than the incomes of working people. What we need to do is get rid of CGT discounts while decreasing income taxes proportionally. A mining super profit tax and carbon tax with corresponding cuts to income taxes would also help in my opinion. For example a highly skilled doctor from a poorer family will end up less wealthy than someone who doesn't work nearly as hard but inherits from a richer family.
Alternatively just minimise your tax as much as possible by ideally starting a small business which distributes into a trust which distributes to your retired parents, negative gear like crazy and buy an EV which is exempt from FBT.
If you don't want to buy property then from what I understand you can invest in shares on margin and claim the interest as a loss. When you eventually sell your shares, assuming they were held for over a year, then you'll get a 50% discount on the tax bill.
lol invest shares on margin
Most people aren't that lucky to turn a profit from that it's pretty high risk
Regards to negative gearing… I don't even know why people bother waiting for the property to increase while making a loss. It's hard but I would look for properties that are positively geared from day one.
Yeah but 40% of the money you are risking you'd pay in tax anyway, which changes the calculation especially if you are investing in diversified index funds.
@radradrobotank: it's different because if you get margin called and you are borrowing to do it. you generally wouldn't borrow to buy shares, buy with what you got
also there's no guarantee ya small business will turn a profit
issue is some business owners have their hopes up but it's hard to be successful
did you end up buying a house in China?
Albo says inflation forced his hand on the tax cuts.
His government is stimulating inflation & making the RBA's job of controlling inflation harder. Our inflation is becoming "home grown" or "Albo grown".
For example the Fair Work Commission minimum wages increase of 5.75% & the new industrial relations bill, Closing Loopholes.Ah yes, there must be a lot of data about just how inflationary those wage increases were, given that they've taken effect a while ago, right? You sound like you're well informed, I assume you must have read something about how these were proven to be inflationary and therefore a bad idea. I'd love to take a look.
Yes do that, take a look. Here's some comments from the IMF recently.
"Echoing warnings from former RBA governor Philip Lowe, the fund said the pick-up in nominal wage growth to 4 per cent could delay inflation returning to the 2-3 per cent target band, particularly because of weak productivity growth.
“Despite historically low labour productivity, wages continue to trend upward, alongside real measures of unit labor costs,” the IMF noted.
“Sticky inflation could risk accelerating wage growth, potentially igniting a wage-price spiral with high and destabilising inflation expectations.”
If there was actually a sane alternative to Labor in my electorate I would vote for them.
But unfortunately the only alternative is the "No-alition" and after what they did with the referendum and other activities I would never support them again.. even though I used to even be a member of the liberal party when it was a sane party with outstanding members.I agree Liberals have probably lost their way but im sorry the nationals are still a very good party for the most part have no changed there principles and look after those in country and regional areas
Forget "promises", that is so naive. Tax cuts that benefit those at the top of the range are on the nose when so many people are struggling. It's just not right to give government money to those people while a good proportion of the population are struggling with cost of living pressures. Which of the two us the best use of government funding? This is not about promises, it's about doing the right thing.
let's cut out the naivety about "doing what's right" which I'm sure will be the campaign slogan for ALP. the money isn't going to those struggling. the bulk of it is going to middle class earning in the low 100ks that make up the bulk of swing voters. it's just politics
The middle class are the ones struggling with mortgage rates rising and the cost of living crisis.
Pretty sure it’s everyone except the richest by now.
@WhyAmICommenting: the richest will be on the lowest tax bracket anyway all their income is funneled through trusts and companies
Currently 360 cucks have voted.
180?
Think I did a 1080 cuck in THPS last week, but got tons of air from a fan boost.
Hmm tax cuts….don't they mean a reduction in the amount of money they are stealing off us!
I think all politicians should wear sponsor jerseys….just like NRL players, so we can see who owns them!
it's a number's game. there's a lot more 80-180k swing voters than 180k+ swing voters so the backflip is designed to lure them back to labor by throwing cash at them. no one cares about the struggling single mothers barely making ends meet. if anyone believed a politician's promise then I've got news for you..
Bracket creep would dictate most of those 80-180k workers are worse off in under 2 years under these changes compared to the orginal stage 3
Around time for an election - this is not a good move poltically nor is it a good move for working Australians this is a government who has absolutely lost control
People need to look past their nose
In what fantasy world will bracket creep make anyone in the bottom 95% of income earners worse off by next election?
More then half of workers would be better with the orginal plan within 5 years.it is about fairness not helping the bottom 5% that is what stage 1 and 2 where for boss.
This is the difference between short term thinking and long term planning and imho the difference between the LNP and ALP and why the ALP wont retain power
This change would only make sense if the brackets where indexed from here on in which they have no plan of doing the people championing this are the same short sighted clueless fools that have lead Victoria to bankruptcy
@Trying2SaveABuck: Think this through.
Someone is only worse off if they earn $150k+.
So for someone to be worse-off in 5 years, they would currently have to earn over $120k today, assuming 4% inflation.So you have the people who are worse off today earning $150k, those who will be worse off in 5 years earning over $120k, and those under $120k who will be better off today and in 5 years time.
Do you think that over 50% of workers earn more than $120k? Because that's just factually incorrect.
Also - bracket indexation was never part of stage 3 (from my knowledge), so by your own words isn't this LNP policy also incredibly short-sighted?
If they actually wanted to fix the problem they would have added indexation, and let couples file joint taxes to avoid single-income families from being overtaxed compared to a dual-income family.
But they didn't, so either their intention wasn't to fix the broken system, or they were just plain incompetent at their jobs.
Where is the "Didn't vote for Labor, Still won't vote for Labor, but he is doing the right thing?" There aren't only two parties to vote for.
preferences will mean they will go to labor or LNP eventually. you are still making a decision one way or the other
I guess if you look it like that, but that's not exactly how the questions were worded. The fact that this is the right decision, doesn't mean I am any more likely to move my preferences up for Labor.
The media as well as most of the community had been calling for stage 3 cuts to be reviewed or cancelled because it was aimed at the rich. It was the hangover from the Liberal government, and due to the cost of living crisis calls have only increased.
I find the Liberal comments that this was the wrong call and that it was a broken election promise to be disgraceful. They know that it is the middle and lower sections of the population that are struggling, but they still want to see the rich benefit. This stance will lose them votes. It is totally out of touch. They constantly complain about the government doing nothing, yet offer no ideas themselves, and when something that will help is put forward, they try to shoot it down. I was a liberal member, and this is the reason I left. Pandering to the rich, opposing help to the broader community and offering no constructive ideas will not see them return to government in a hurry.Libs have their way with the NBN and then try to fatten their own greedy pockets. Thanks for your service /s
And then in the end of the day you're all debating on the legitimacy of a Government over what is essentially a couple of hundred bucks.
Distraction
$4546.
Also no one here is debating the legitimacy of the Government.
If the Gov is intent on taxing those on 200k to the absolute hilt then so be it - but don't be surprised when the tax base shrinks because these people decide to emigrate to the US/Singapore/HK/Middle East/etc (and double their incomes in the process). High income earners are not cash cows who should be expected to pay for everything and everyone under the guise of "fairness" and "equity" (where fairness = more of other people's money given to me). This decision will accelerate the brain drain and Australia will be poorer overall because of it.
@R4:
Don't you ever feel ashamed that you've sold yourself out to a political ideology?
I always think it's sad when people say that they are a (insert some political buzzword here). When your politics are such an ingrained part of your identity, you can't take any sort of criticism or debate without feeling that your integrity is being questioned.
FWIW, how can you even be a conservative libertarian? They're fundamentally opposed ideologies - conservatism is an ideology which places institutions above the individual - the idea that governments dictate to individuals how to live, who they can marry, what drugs they can put in their body, where men are sent to war…etc., whereas libertarianism is an ideology which places individuals above institutions (to the extent that they even exist at all), in that people can do what they want as long as it doesn't encroach on anybody else's freedoms.
You're just a conservative. tagging on the "libertarian" part to make yourself sound a little smarter and more refined. Such a shame.