The super tax debate is divorced from reality – and more proof that Australia’s tax system is built for the rich | Greg Jericho

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Debate on Superannuation Tax Changes Highlights Inequities in Australia's Tax System"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 6.2
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The ongoing debate surrounding changes to Australia's superannuation tax system reveals a significant disconnect from the realities faced by the majority of citizens. The government's proposal to reduce tax concessions on superannuation earnings exceeding $3 million is set to impact a mere 0.5% of the population. Critics of the proposal, however, have reacted with exaggerated claims, suggesting that such changes would severely disrupt the financial landscape. For instance, some commentators have argued that a hypothetical scenario where an individual's superannuation balance grows by $1.18 million in a single year would unjustly impose a tax burden of only $1,528. This reaction highlights a broader trend in the discourse around taxation, where the focus seems to be more on protecting the interests of the wealthy rather than fostering a fair tax system for all Australians. The superannuation tax changes are being framed as an attack on wealth, despite the fact that they are designed to address a significant loophole that allows the richest individuals to avoid paying their fair share of taxes on unrealized capital gains.

Furthermore, the discussion around corporate tax rates also underscores a systemic bias favoring wealthy individuals and large corporations. Many high-earning companies in Australia pay minimal tax on substantial profits, raising concerns about the fairness of the current tax system. Research from the Australia Institute highlights that Queensland LNG projects generated over $310 billion in income yet contributed only $966 million in company taxes, equating to a mere 0.3% of their total income. This situation is compounded by calls from certain sectors to lower corporate tax rates, despite widespread tax avoidance among large companies. The commentary surrounding the proposed superannuation reforms reflects a deeper issue within Australia's tax policy, which appears to prioritize the financial interests of the wealthy over the needs of the broader population. As the nation grapples with these issues, it becomes increasingly clear that a reevaluation of tax structures is necessary to ensure equitable contributions from all citizens, ultimately allowing for improved public services and infrastructure.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article presents a critical view of the current debates surrounding Australia's superannuation tax system, particularly focusing on the proposed changes that would reduce tax concessions for super balances exceeding $3 million. It argues that the criticism of such changes is largely disconnected from reality and highlights the inequities within the tax system that primarily benefit the wealthy.

Critique of the Current Tax System

The author emphasizes that the Australian tax debate is skewed towards protecting the interests of affluent individuals and corporations. The proposed tax changes would affect a mere 0.5% of the population, yet the backlash suggests that a massive injustice is occurring. This reaction reveals a deep-seated bias in the conversation about taxation and wealth distribution.

Reality versus Perception

The article points out that some critics erroneously frame the situation as one where wealthy individuals would suffer disproportionately from the tax changes. For example, a scenario presented in the Australian Financial Review illustrates a wealthy individual facing a minimal tax obligation of $1,528 after a substantial increase in their super balance. This highlights the disconnect between the realities of wealth accumulation and the public discourse surrounding taxation.

Corporate Tax Avoidance

The argument extends beyond individual wealth to corporate tax practices. The author mentions the relatively low tax contributions of large corporations, specifically citing gas companies that have generated significant income while paying minimal taxes. This points to a broader systemic issue where the tax structure favors large entities, allowing them to evade substantial tax obligations.

Call for Reform

While the article acknowledges the need for tax reform, it stresses that the focus should be on addressing loopholes that allow large corporations and wealthy individuals to minimize their tax liabilities. The emphasis on lowering corporate tax rates for competitiveness is critiqued, suggesting that the real problem lies in the unequal tax burden borne by different sectors of society.

Public Sentiment and Manipulation

The article seems aimed at reshaping public sentiment regarding tax reforms and the wealthy's role in the economy. By showcasing the disparities and questioning the motivations behind the criticism of tax changes, it attempts to foster a more equitable understanding of taxation. While the article provides valid points, it could be seen as manipulative in that it may oversimplify complex economic issues to advocate for a specific viewpoint.

In summary, the article effectively critiques the current discourse surrounding superannuation tax reforms while revealing deeper issues within Australia’s tax system. It aims to promote awareness of the inequities faced by the majority in contrast to the privileges enjoyed by the wealthy and large corporations.

Unanalyzed Article Content

The unhinged criticismsto changes in superannuationmake more sense when you realise that Australia’s entire tax debate is geared to ensure rich, wealthy people and companies get richer and wealthier.

The government’s proposal to reduce the tax concessions on earnings on super balances above $3m has been the ultimate case in point.

It will affect only 0.5% of people with super and would take many decades of governments not increasing the threshold to affect anything close to even 10% of people, and yet you would think the government is about to seize the means of production.

So divorced from reality is some of the commentary that the Australian Financial Review thoughtpresentinga scenario where someone’s super grew $1.18m in one year to $3.18m was a winning argument against the tax because that person would be required to pay (gasp!) $1,528 in tax.

The new argument is that the tax is bad because people willjust find other tax rorts to make use of. (Great, let’s go after those as well!)

Because avoiding paying tax is pretty much the point of the system for wealthy individuals and large companies.

For example, right now, numerous commentators who are against the changes to super are also saying we needto cut company taxto ensure competitiveness. Less mention is made that many large companies pay little or no tax, including in some of the most profitable sectors in Australia.

My colleagues at the Australia Institute found that from 2014-15 to 2022-23 Queensland LNG projects delivered $310.1bn total income for gas companies but they paid just $966m in company tax – or just 0.3% of total income (and all of that was paid by just one company).

If the graph does not display click here

When huge multinational companies are able to earn such huge incomes but pay bugger all tax, the problem that needs to be addressed is not that our 30% company tax rate is rendering Australia “uncompetitive”.

Yes, we need to reform our tax system. But suggest gas companies should pay more tax and the chin-scratchers will say “hmmm not like that, something, something Hawke, Keating … bipartisanship!

That’s because most commentary about our economy values profits as sacrosanct and more important than wages:

If the graph does not display click here

The same applies to individuals – wealthy ones matter more, especially when it comes to superannuation.

We’re told the real evil is taxing “unrealised capital gains”. These are the increases in the value of the assets held in your super that you have yet to sell (or “realise”).

And look, I can understand how bad it would be.

Imagine if, for example, Centrelink had a record of every share you owned and every six months calculated their value, or if you had to let Centerlink know if the value of your non-financial assets went up by more than $1,000.

Outrageous! Unprecedented! Communism!

Oh wait, sorry, actually that’s whatpeople on the age pension already have to do.

We have a system where it is considered right thatthe poorest people in Australia are penalised if their assetsgo above $314,000 but where parts of the media come out against a proposal that if someone’s super goes up $314,000 in a year from $3m they should pay $4,462 (1.4%) in tax.

Please. The only reason there is so much outrage over this is if the rich and vested interested are annoyed people might realise just how big of a rort they have going.

Currently these massive unrealised capital gains in super can keep going up and people pay no tax on them (unrealised, you see!) and then when they are retired they can sell them (ie realise them), and then pay … errr zero tax.

Under these changes they would have to pay 15% on the share of earnings above $3m.

Yeah, end of times.

Heck even normal capital gains outside of super gets a great deal. If you have held an asset for over a year you will get a 50% tax discount on the profit.

Earn $250,000 in capital gains, you get $125,000 tax free.

Earn $250,000 in income, you get $18,200 tax free.

Little wonder the rich love capital gains. The 0.2% of taxpayers who make $1m each year account for 41% of all capital gains:

If the graph does not display click here

The average salary of people with an income of $1m or more is around 16 times the average of people earning less than $100,000; the average capital gains is 234 times larger:

If the graph does not display click here

The very rich, their media supporters and financial advisers are worried we might start wondering how much revenue is being lost each year from giving them these tax breaks.

Well, we know the answer – in 2025-26 around $33bn in tax breaks for capital gains tax and superannuation go to the richest 10% – or around two-and-a-half times what it would cost to funddental in Medicare:

If the graph does not display click here

So here we are – tax reforms meaning companies that pay bugger all tax demanding cuts in the company tax rates, and the richest 0.5% demanding they not get a slightly lower tax break on the super earnings.

Don’t be fooled into thinking they are caring about you. Instead think of what could be done if Australia’s tax system was better designed – better schools, better hospitals, better infrastructure.

Right now, Australia’s tax system works to give the wealthiest in society the smoothest of rides. These super changes will force them to go over a very small speed bump.

They should be supported and they also should be just the start.

Greg Jericho is a Guardian columnist and policy director at the Centre for Future Work

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian