Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I am just checking whether it was. As the member for North Sydney would know, there would be a range of opinions on the impact of the government’s proposed taxation arrangements when it comes to the mining sector in particular and the economy in general. I draw the honourable member’s attention to a note released today by Macquarie Research Strategy, by Rory Robertson, which says:

So Canberra’s objective today is not so much to increase taxes on the resources sector as simply to return payments to the public purse from mining company profits to the sorts of shares observed less than a decade ago.

The bottom line is this: when it comes to the return to the Australian taxpayer from the mining sector, 10 years ago one dollar in every three in profits came back to the taxpayer through royalties; 10 years later, one dollar in seven comes back to the taxpayer through royalties. The Leader of the Opposition asked a question about corporate tax—well, come in, spinner!—because if you add the royalties to resource taxes and the company tax rate, in 1999-2000 to 2003-04, you will have royalties, resource taxes and company tax representing 55 per cent in profits and, in 2008-09, you will have royalties, resource taxes and company tax representing 27 per cent of profits.

This is the data contained in this research note from Macquarie Research, which was just put out today. The bottom line is that the total tax take of these companies, including all forms of tax, when measured against profits has halved over the last decade. What we stand for as a government, therefore, is to get a fair share back for the Australian people from a resource which is owned by the Australian people. Miners do deserve a fair share for their investment, and the Australian people deserve a fair share because the resource is also owned by them.

But, given that the member for North Sydney has asked this question about clarity concerning our tax policy and its impact, it is only fair for me to conclude by asking: what actually is the tax policy of those opposite? Is it Julie’s policy? Is it Barnaby’s policy? Is it Julie’s policy, which says that the mining industry is paying enough tax, or Barnaby’s policy, which says that they should be paying more tax? Maybe what we should do, given this lack of clarity, is get it in writing from the Leader of the Opposition, because we then know it will be the full, gospel truth as to what the tax policy of those opposite is. At present, it is chaos and confusion.

See this speech in context