Mining Super Tax

Martin, I know exactly how much I get from my self funded retirement, $25,000 with no yearly indexation for CPI.


As for the fat cat remark, take a good long look and you will notice that retirees are on the bottom of the pile and that some/a political party has even hinted that self funded retirees are fat cats. They ignore most are just scratching through.

Yes you bet sarcasm.. and sickened t death by watching politicians missmanage this nation, getting huge super pay outs and not even being able to introduce tax reform with out causing huge pain and botching the process.

I didnt read your post properly.....Looks like I need to retire sooner than I planned :C

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiwigeo

I didnt read your post properly.....Looks like I need to retire sooner than I planned :C

---

Highly recommend you talk to your friendly and helpful financial planner first. I hear K Rudd and Assoc. are very good. :D:D

Sorry :- and no disrespect to the recent retirees man have they been pummeled over the last 18 months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m2c1Iw

Highly recommend you talk to your friendly and helpful financial planner first. I hear K Rudd and Assoc. are very good. :D:D

Sorry :- and no disrespect to the recent retirees man have they been pummeled over the last 18 months.

---

Probably no worse than half the planners out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

The super profits tax cuts in long before the costs are recovered and the banks repaid. It's not scaremongery, it's very straight forward, this is about cashflow. The SPT will simply make it harder to obtain funds and make some mines not worth the risk. Companies gamble (forcast) on future commodity prices that rise and fall with the business cycle. In any study you would not forcast prices and demand to remain at these levels forever. The greater the repayment time frame, the greater the risk and the less likely you can put a case forward to get this off the ground.

---

Hi John, Exactly when does the super profits tax cut in?

Here are some extracts from the governments Future Tax website.

Current State Royalty Scheme

Quote:

---

For the resources sector as a whole, royalties can ‘underprice’ the extraction of non‐renewable resources — which are owned by the community. As royalties are relatively unresponsive to changes in resource profits, the community has largely missed out on sharing in the vast wealth generated from the sale of Australia’s non‐renewable resources.

Royalties tax high profit projects proportionately less and low profit projects proportionally more, thus distorting the pattern of investment. This may mean some of the more risky deposits, or those that are more costly to develop, are not pursued. It may also lead to the early closure of resource projects. This affects how much of Australia’s resources are utilised, and the return available to be collected through resource charges. This can lower the return to the community collected through its resource charges

---

.
The Super Profit Tax

Quote:

---

Under the current system, royalties are paid on the extraction/sale of resources — irrespective of the profitability of a project. Under the RSPT, firms will receive a refundable credit to offset royalties paid. A project will not incur a tax liability under the RSPT until it becomes profitable after recovering its costs. By extension, no project that was profitable under the royalty system will become unprofitable because of the RSPT. Rather, some projects that would eventually become unviable under the royalty system may now remain viable for longer because the RSPT is a profit‐based system that recognises costs associated with the project in deriving profits. The crediting of State royalties is discussed in the accompanying fact sheet.

---

Why would they lie?

HH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Investors no longer invest, they pull out to invest in other markets in other economies, share prices fall, and we pay.

Investors pull out, the level of an mine is reduced in so far as output of a mine, you need less employees. Look in Queensland and Axtrata (however you spell it)

---

Is that the place where XStrata are continuing to buy up land?

HH.

Yes, they are. Of course they have contingencies in place. The obvious one is Dudd being booted out and Australia coming back to its senses.

Money might appeal to Joe Public, but look at the bigger world picture. Something Dudd can't see to.

This is the kind of behaviour that makes the miners look like scaremongers where they use examples like this one as a canned project when in fact they are continuing to invest in it.

What is the bigger global impact of ensuring Australians get a long term benefit from a non-renewable resource? This isn't an attack by the way just asking the question.:U

HH.

Scaremongering from a man who is proud he will pay something like (can't recall right now) $1.5 billion this financial year in tax and is proud to - I don't think so.

He gave the most rational debate for this whole thing so far, which is so far removed from the spin that Dudd has done. Pure spin, but with no substance of detail. And for Dudd to resort to name calling of those who put back into our economy - it might be accepted in Parliment, but on a world stage?

Xstrata 'weighing up its future in Mount Isa' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Labor MP wants end to tax impasse - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

So now some Labor MPs are seeing sense and the damage being done.

I don't begrudge him any of the money he has earned but why shouldn't he pay that much tax when he is earning billions? He's no hero just because he pays his taxes just like the rest of us.

I'd suggest reading between the lines of XStrata in Mount Isa that either the project was already considered a dubious prospect or it's just temporarily on hold to try and impact this debate.

As for the pollie he's obviously only interested in saving his own neck and not in whether the tax should go ahead or not which he fails to give an opinion on.

HH.

Why should he pay more tax, just because of his success?

Consider that his success puts people in jobs, and that among many other things feeds into the economy. :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Why should he pay more tax, just because of his success?

---

That's what every person on a high income has to do ... so why not companies?

I've got better things to do than continue an argument, nothing personal but I don't need to increase my blood pressure.

Thankfully we all have opinions, if we didn't it would be boring. :2tsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Why should he pay more tax, just because of his success?

Consider that his success puts people in jobs, and that among many other things feeds into the economy. :?

---

He's not paying more tax the company is. And anyway we all pay more tax the more "successful" we are based on the tiered income tax system.

This tax is about applying the tax to the profits rather than the indiscriminate nature of the current royalties system.

HH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Thankfully we all have opinions, if we didn't it would be boring. :2tsup:

---

Very true. :2tsup::U

HH.