Senate debates
Wednesday, 7 February 2018
Questions without Notice
Taxation
2:56 pm
Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. I refer to the Prime Minister, who on Sunday said, 'We have already provided middle-income tax relief.' The Parliamentary Budget Office report Changes in average personal income tax rates: distributional impacts shows that average tax rates on middle-income earners are expected to rise to 20-plus year highs. Who is correct, the Prime Minister or the Parliamentary Budget Office?
2:57 pm
Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank Senator Ketter for that question. I seem to remember that Senator Ketter is the chair of the Senate Economics References Committee—I see him nodding, so he is still the chair. In that capacity, I'm sure he would be aware that we actually passed through this parliament personal income tax cuts, lifting one of the marginal tax rates at the average income level from $80,000 to $87,000 a year. So of course the Prime Minister's correct.
Let me say that the contrast at the next election couldn't be more stark. Going into the next election, the Labor Party wants to increase the tax burden on the economy by more than $165 billion, putting investment and jobs at risk and making it harder for businesses to be successful. Thus, business under the Labor socialist agenda would be less successful because of a higher tax burden. What would that mean? Less successful businesses will be able to hire fewer people and pay them lower wages.
Senator Cameron keeps talking about wanting higher wages. We're all in favour of higher wages. But you know what? Higher wages don't grow on trees. Higher wages are paid for by successful and profitable businesses, which is why this government continues to work to help businesses be more successful and profitable so they can hire more Australians and pay them better wages. And yes, we will deliver personal income tax relief because we have been able to get the budget back under control. We inherited a rapidly deteriorating budget position. We've been able to turn that around and we will be able to deliver the dividend for the Australian people, for hardworking families. We will be able to deliver personal income tax cuts. Labor will want to continue to increase taxes by more than $165 billion.
Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order on my left. Senator Ketter, a supplementary question.
2:59 pm
Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On Sunday, the Prime Minister discussed the same thing as the minister's just said and claimed middle-income tax relief had been provided 'by increasing the $80,000 threshold up to $87,000.' Can the minister confirm that a worker earning $85,000 a year will lose the full benefit of last year's sandwich and milkshake tax cut and actually end up paying more in income tax?
Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
What I can confirm is that the Australian worker will always be better off under a coalition government than under a Labor government. Let me tell you what the Australian worker wants: the Australian worker wants to know they can get a job, that they can get a better job, that they can have attractive career prospects and that their wages will go up over time. That is what they will get under the coalition. Under Labor and under Bill Shorten's socialist agenda, we will have less investment, lower growth, fewer jobs and lower wages. His tax grab—this $165 billion tax grab, imposing additional taxes on the economy—will lead to less investment, lower growth, fewer jobs and lower wages.
Under the coalition, last year, in 2017, there were more than 400,000 new jobs, as Senator Cash explained to the Senate earlier. That compared to about 89,000 new jobs in the last year of the Labor government. In fact, full-time jobs under Labor were going backwards. Under the coalition, workers will always be better off— (Time expired)
Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Michaelia and Mathias equals wage stagnation!
Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order on my left! Senator Cameron, order! Senator Ketter, a final supplementary question?
3:00 pm
Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Isn't it clear that, when it comes to working- and middle-class Australians, the Turnbull government is the government of tax hikes, not tax cuts?
Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
When it comes to low- and middle-income Australians, when it comes to hardworking Australian families, the Turnbull government is the government that stands for opportunity and for helping families to get ahead. We want families across Australia to have the opportunity to have a job and to get a better paid job.
As I said before, these opportunities don't grow on trees; they are provided by successful profitable businesses. Nine out of 10 working Australians work for a private sector business. That is why we're working to help them become more successful and more profitable. Everything that Labor does makes it harder for business to be successful, which means fewer jobs and lower wages; everything that we do is designed to make it easier for business to be successful, which means more jobs and higher wages.
Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
It's not working!
Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Collins said, 'It's not working.' There were more than 400,00 additional jobs. We stand for more jobs and higher wages over time. Wages are already increasing above inflation— (Time expired)
I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.