Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Senator Cormann. Research into the Turnbull government's personal income tax reveals that the Prime Minister's own electorate of Wentworth will be the biggest winner from the government's tax changes, while the electorates of Braddon and Longman are amongst the 10 worst-off electorates. Can the minister confirm that an average income earner in Wentworth will receive a tax cut nearly three times bigger than an average income earner in either Longman or Braddon?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure I answered a question like this yesterday. What that question proves is the Labor Party just doesn't get aspiration. Now, of course, we've got an admission from the highest level of the Labor Party that the Labor Party doesn't get aspiration.

On this side of the chamber, we understand about the aspiration of working families wanting to get ahead. We understand that working families around Australia want to see a stronger economy. They want to see a government that has a plan for stronger growth, more jobs and higher wages, which, of course, we will deliver. I went through these stats yesterday. Somebody earning $30,000 a year will, under our plan, get an 8.3 per cent income tax cut every year for the first four years, while someone on $200,000 a year will get a 0.2 per cent income tax cut every year for the first four years. It stands to reason that if you earn $30,000 you only pay $2,200 worth of tax, whereas, if you earn $200,000, you will pay $67,000 worth of tax.

All of these attempts at class warfare will not get you anywhere, because all Australians want to get ahead. All Australians have an aspiration for their children and grandchildren to do better than they did and to get ahead. They understand that we need to ensure we provide the right incentive for people to get ahead. We need to provide the right reward for effort and the right encouragement to work harder. People don't want to see their kids and grandkids penalised for working harder, which is precisely why we are pursuing our long-term plan for income tax relief for families around Australia: to provide cost-of-living pressure relief for low-income families and also to ensure we address bracket creep and provide the right incentive for all working Australians to get ahead. That is what our side of parliament stands for.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bilyk, a supplementary question.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why does the Turnbull government think the only way to help low- and middle-income earners is to give $25 billion a year to big business and high-income earners?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You know, this is another thing that Labor doesn't understand. Labor doesn't understand that nine out of 10 working Australians work for private sector business, and the future job opportunities, the future job security, the future career prospects and the future wage increases of nine out of 10 working Australians depend on the future success and profitability of the businesses that employ them. Labor wants to stand in the way of lower, globally more competitive business tax rates here in Australia. In doing so, Bill Shorten, as the most socialist, antibusiness Leader of the Opposition in the history of the Commonwealth, is standing up for the best interests of big business in the United States, in the United Kingdom and in France. He is helping big business overseas to take investment and jobs away at the expense of working families in Australia. That is what Bill Shorten is doing. He knows it. He is just playing politics because he thinks it's going to get him into the Lodge.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bilyk, a final supplementary question.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

NATSEM has said about stage 3 of the government's Personal Income Tax Plan:

It means higher income inequality—the rich get more of the tax cuts than the poor.

How can the government claim that its Personal Income Tax Plan is fair?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can tell you why we can say that our income tax plan is fair. Right now, the top 20 per cent of income earners in Australia pay 61 per cent of income tax revenue generated in Australia. You know what'll happen if we legislate our full seven-year long-term plan in full—if we legislate our full long-term plan for income tax relief for all working Australians? You know what'll happen? The top 20 per cent of income earners in Australia will still pay 61 per cent of all income tax revenue generated. You know what will happen if we don't legislate our plan for income tax relief for hardworking families? Families will go backwards. The Australian Labor Party want Australian families to be poorer. The Australian Labor Party want Australian working families to be poorer. You know that bracket creep is a drag on economic growth. You know that slower economic growth means less opportunity in particular for low-income earners. You know that low-income earners are most exposed to the risk of lower economic growth, yet you are standing in the way of a plan for stronger growth and more jobs, and you should stand condemned for it. (Time expired)