Rex Patrick (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

[by video link] by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1411 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 1), omit the table item, substitute:

(2) Page 12 (after line 14), at the end of the Bill, add:

Schedule 3 — Publication of information about COVID-19 payment recipients

Taxation Administration Act 1953

1 Subsection 2(1)

Insert:

annual turnover of an entity for a financial year is the total of the following that is earned in the year in the course of the entity's business:

(a) the proceeds of sales of goods and/or services;

(b) commission income;

(c) repair and service income;

(d) rent, leasing and hiring income;

(e) government bounties and subsidies;

(f) interest, royalties and dividends;

(g) other operating income.

If the entity is a non-profit body (within the meaning of section 23-15 of the A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999), treat the operations or activities carried out by the body as the business of the body.

Coronavirus economic response payment has the same meaning as in the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020.

jobkeeper payment means a payment under the jobkeeper scheme.

jobkeeper scheme means the scheme for the Coronavirus economic response payment known as the jobkeeper payment provided for in rules made for the purposes of subsection 7(1) of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020 in relation to the period 1 March 2020 to 28 March 2021.

2 At the end of Part IA

Add:

3J Commissioner must publish information about entities that received jobkeeper payments

(1) The Commissioner must publish the following information about each entity covered by subsection (2) that has received a jobkeeper payment:

(a) the name of the entity;

(b) the number of individuals for whom the entity received a jobkeeper payment;

(c) the total amount of jobkeeper payments received by the entity;

(d) whether the entity has voluntarily paid to the Commonwealth an amount equal to all or part of the amount referred to in paragraph (c), and if so, the amount of the payment.

(2) An entity is covered by this subsection if the annual turnover of the entity for a financial year in which the entity received a jobkeeper payment is more than $10 million.

(3) The information must be published as soon as practicable after the commencement of this section on a publicly available website maintained by the Commissioner.

3K Commissioner must publish information about entities that received certain Coronavirus economic response payments

(1) The Commissioner must publish the following information about each entity covered by subsection (2) that has received a Coronavirus economic response payment provided for in rules made for the purposes of subsection 7(1B) of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020:

(a) the name of the entity;

(b) the total amount of such payments received by the entity;

(c) whether the entity has voluntarily paid to the Commonwealth an amount equal to all or part of the amount referred to in paragraph (b), and if so, the amount of the payment.

(2) An entity is covered by this subsection if the annual turnover of the entity for a financial year in which the entity received such a payment is more than $10 million.

(3) The information must be published as soon as practicable after the commencement of this section on a publicly available website maintained by the Commissioner.

(4) Information published under this section must be kept up to date.

These amendments are designed to provide a level of transparency around those companies that receive JobKeeper. We must understand that JobKeeper was passed by this parliament on 8 April 2020, not as a scheme with any particular form but as a head of power that allowed the Treasurer to introduce or declare rules around the program that is now known as JobKeeper. The parliament had very little to do with the construction of the JobKeeper scheme, and that was because it was an emergency. Everyone understood it was an emergency. We wanted to get through the pandemic and keep employers and employees connected, so it was the will of this parliament that the program be implemented. But the details came down to the Treasurer, and he basically created an honesty system where you didn't have to show anything as actuals. Rather, you were able simply to project and indicate to the Taxation Office that you thought your revenue would drop by either 30 or 50 per cent, depending on the nature of the company.

The idea behind that was quite okay. Particularly in those circumstances, there would have been a lot of cash-flow issues for companies, and what was put in place was good. Unfortunately, there was no clawback regime put in place to deal either with dishonesty or with people who got through the bump and actually did a lot better than perhaps they might have done in the previous year. And that's where the problem lies; there's been a huge prudential failure in relation to the JobKeeper program. It is a massive scar that will sit with Treasurer Frydenberg for years to come. This is going to bring about the biggest public expenditure scandal in the history of this country. Thank you very much, Treasurer Frydenberg!

What we need to do in these circumstances is to address the situation where we find that money has been funnelled from the wallets of taxpayers to the wallets of investors, and to executives by way of executive bonuses. One of the ways to do that is simply to shine a light. Light is a great disinfectant. This amendment mirrors the scheme that the New Zealand government voluntarily put in place because they, clearly, believe in the benefit of transparency. Everyone can access the New Zealand website. People just have to Google 'wage subsidy disclosure New Zealand', and they will be taken to a site where they can look up any company—any company at all—that received a wage subsidy payment. It's public money. It's not private information. When a business goes to a bank and gets money, that is private business. When a business gets money from the public, that's public business. New Zealand have recognised that. We've seen a situation in New Zealand where they paid out far less in wage subsidies—I think it's in the order of $13 billion—and have received $600 million-plus back. We've paid out $90 billion and have only got $200 million back. They've got a five per cent return; we've got a 0.25 per cent return.

This amendment seeks to shine a light. It won't name and shame companies. For companies that needed JobKeeper, no-one begrudges them the fact that they got that money. What the amendment will do, however, is allow employees to identify whether their company received JobKeeper. They'll understand how well the company was doing. It will simply lay out the basis for, potentially, more companies to stick their hands up and say: 'You know what? We're going to do the right thing. We're going to return the money that we didn't actually need, the money that came from the public purse.' That money could be used for social housing, health, aged care and a whole range of things that we need and for which we struggle to get money—it could be education, university degrees—whatever it is. This is public money that has come from our debt register. It is money that will be paid for not by me or anyone else in this chamber but, rather, by our children and our grandchildren. And that is such a shame. I urge the Senate to support my amendment.