![]() |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8768526)
When a sovereign state introduces a retrospective tax, as this is, it creates uncertainty in the market which is to the detriment of inward investment. Australia only survived the GFC because of mining. You are saying that taxing the very sector that saved us from recession is good for the country and the miners. We are not out of the woods yet with this GFC. If there is a double dip then this tax will ensure we don't get of so lightly.
As part of my current job (soon to be old yay!!!), I have to calculate royalties payable to our suppliers. Whenever we discuss new royalty models or agreements we always push for percentage based royalty models, as it gives us the reseller (mining companies) much more flexibility and offers the owners of the source material the ability to grow their income from us if we grow. During the GFC this was critical for us, as times were tough on the income side of things and our EBT figures would have been shocking with a fixed model. I also believe that this should be rolled out in other industries, especially the financial sector. |
Re: The mining tax
A danger in Australia is that resources smother free enterprise by keeping the dollar high and using skilled labour. Retrospective one off taxes strike me as a deterrant to free enterprise but so far its application has been very selective and not detrimental. I am still dubious about using them.
Whether what I believe to be a "Super Profits" tax and what Rudd was proposing is same thing is another matter. I am not an accountant or lawyer privy to the details. Mining profits themselves are determined by a number of factors but primarily costs of capital, cost of getting it out and commodity prices. Rio and BHP also add in cost of buying up competitors. The Rio/BHP dominance on the rail infrastructure in the Pilbara has held up competitors who would put some downwards pressure on the price of ore at the port, not at the mine gate. Your point on Rio/BHP being intertwined with the establishment is very true. Just look how powerful their as campaign has been perceived to be. The junior miners are miffed they missed out. I cannot see that the liberals would play an alternative game differently.
Originally Posted by Amazulu
(Post 8768338)
I hear what you are saying and it has merit but we have to be careful that we don't smother free enterprise and the ability of companies to generate wealth - for their shareholders and taxpayers.
'Super profit' taxes have been applied/mooted to oil companies, banks etc in the UK, USA and other countries, but these have been one-off payments, not ongoing taxes like the proposed mining tax. You have a point by mentioning 'poor competition' as Rio and BHPB had a virtually monopoly in the Pilbara and could almost do as they pleased - supported by compliant state and federal governments. It was only recently that guys like Andrew Forrest have managed to break their monopoly but even so, Rio and BHPB are very dominant up there. Ultimately though, record mining profits are dictated by the market for commodities and what customers are prepared/have to pay for them. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by IvanM
(Post 8768613)
A danger in Australia is that resources smother free enterprise by keeping the dollar high and using skilled labour. Retrospective one off taxes strike me as a deterrant to free enterprise but so far its application has been very selective and not detrimental. I am still dubious about using them.
Whether what I believe to be a "Super Profits" tax and what Rudd was proposing is same thing is another matter. I am not an accountant or lawyer privy to the details. Mining profits themselves are determined by a number of factors but primarily costs of capital, cost of getting it out and commodity prices. Rio and BHP also add in cost of buying up competitors. The Rio/BHP dominance on the rail infrastructure in the Pilbara has held up competitors who would put some downwards pressure on the price of ore at the port, not at the mine gate. Your point on Rio/BHP being intertwined with the establishment is very true. Just look how powerful their as campaign has been perceived to be. The junior miners are miffed they missed out. I cannot see that the liberals would play an alternative game differently. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by Broad Shoulders
(Post 8768598)
The same industry that was the very first to start shedding jobs by the bucket load, all the while still making lovely profits.
Originally Posted by Broad Shoulders
(Post 8768598)
At the end of the day this tax is all about taxing an industry at a level that is commensurate with its earnings.
Originally Posted by Broad Shoulders
(Post 8768598)
At the end of the day this tax is all about taxing an industry at a level that is commensurate with its earnings. If I earn $180k per annum, I expect to be taxed at a higher rate than someone who earns $40k per annum.
Originally Posted by Broad Shoulders
(Post 8768598)
I also believe that this should be rolled out in other industries, especially the financial sector. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8768636)
So what if they shed staff, better that than go bust
No it's not. It is about finding a way to get out of the problem created by the labor government when it gave away and wasted too much money.
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8768636)
You may expect to be taxed at a higher rate but it is morally wrong to steal more from people just because they happen to earn a bit more than others. The only fair tax is a flat tax.
|
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by Broad Shoulders
(Post 8768631)
Clive Palmer
I still haven't recovered from that time I saw him on Lateline...huffing and puffing under the weight of those chins. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by bcworld
(Post 8768661)
...please stop, I'm trying to eat dinner! :(
I still haven't recovered from that time I saw him on Lateline...huffing and puffing under the weight of those chins. |
Re: The mining tax
The major problem with this tax, and I agree with the likes of Andrew Forrest here is that it was ill thought through by Rudd, and now Gillard in that the main payers percentage wise will be the junior Australian miners. The large multi nationals were always going to get away with it either by their negotiations as they appear to have done so far, or by channelling profits overseas. The compnaies taking the big hit are Australian, which for all the guff from Rudd of taxing the evil foreign corporations shows his and Gillard's total lack of understanding of the industry.
|
Re: The mining tax
The speed and willingness of the industry to lay off workers as quick as they did in the GFC highlights the dangers of being so dependent on commodities that go up and down like a yoyo. If the industry wants to profit massively from the land of the Australian people then it needs to ensure that it looks after Australia.
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8768636)
So what if they shed staff, better that than go bust.
|
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by IvanM
(Post 8770727)
The speed and willingness of the industry to lay off workers as quick as they did in the GFC highlights the dangers of being so dependent on commodities that go up and down like a yoyo. If the industry wants to profit massively from the land of the Australian people then it needs to ensure that it looks after Australia.
If the Australian people want to profit from inward investment to develop the land and resources then Australia needs to ensure that it looks after industry. You don't do that by creating uncertainty and retrospective big tax grabs. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8770751)
Some of these staff were laborers earning in excess of $60.00 per hour. you bet they were quick to lay them of at signs of a downturn.
If the Australian people want to profit from inward investment to develop the land and resources then Australia needs to ensure that it looks after industry. You don't do that by creating uncertainty and retrospective big tax grabs. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by jimbo_d
(Post 8769146)
The major problem with this tax, and I agree with the likes of Andrew Forrest here is that it was ill thought through by Rudd, and now Gillard in that the main payers percentage wise will be the junior Australian miners. The large multi nationals were always going to get away with it either by their negotiations as they appear to have done so far, or by channelling profits overseas. The compnaies taking the big hit are Australian, which for all the guff from Rudd of taxing the evil foreign corporations shows his and Gillard's total lack of understanding of the industry.
:thumbup: |
Re: The mining tax
Labour, whether it be UK or Australia, have no other policies than to tax and spend. And no good ever comes of it. It's what you get if you are stupid enough to vote in a Labour government.
So the mining tax is no surprise to me. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by spilko
(Post 8770815)
Labour, whether it be UK or Australia, have no other policies than to tax and spend. And no good ever comes of it. It's what you get if you are stupid enough to vote in a Labour government.
So the mining tax is no surprise to me. |
Re: The mining tax
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 8770847)
Yep, I must agree. It's even happening in the USA and their economy is going down the toilet fast. It's the good old redistribution of wealth fallacy. One day the wealthy ones go elsewhere and the the poor end up even worse off. Try explaining that to the masses when they know they are in for a $920 cheque.
1974 UK Tax rates 83% income tax on incomes over £20,000 plus 15% surcharge on 'un-earned' income Total 98% marginal rate for many people |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 9:32 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.