GST - Should it be increased?

Should the GST be changed and to how much?

  • It shouldn't be changed.

    Votes: 36 56.3%
  • 11%

    Votes: 2 3.1%
  • 12%

    Votes: 6 9.4%
  • 13%

    Votes: 2 3.1%
  • 14%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • +15%

    Votes: 18 28.1%

  • Total voters
    64
  • Poll closed .
Just read a couple of articles on increasing the GST and then thought I would look at the world and their tax rates. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates

I personally would like to see a hike in GST, perhaps up to 15%, like the Kiwis.

My reason for this is that it would increase revenue 50%, and undoubtedly allow future governments flexibility when budgeting.

What did you vote for and why?
 
It's not going to happen any time soon.

A party which increased GST without taking it to the electorate first would do themselves a lot more damage than a party introducing a carbon tax.

GST is distributed to the states anyway so I don't see it helping the federal budget.
 
I personally would like to see a hike in GST, perhaps up to 15%, like the Kiwis.

My reason for this is that it would increase revenue 50%, and undoubtedly allow future governments flexibility when budgeting.

What did you vote for and why?

Yes, it would increase revenue by 50% and then what would it be spent on? When they introduced GST the states were going to remove all stamp duties and what happened, they took the GST and kept the stamp duties. Do you seriously think the government can spend your money better then you?
 
Yep, I think GST should definitely be increased but at the time time PAYG Tax should be decreased - I'm a big fan of the user pays system.
 
I would love to see GST increased to even 20% ... but ONLY IF every other of the 125 hidden (and not so hidden) taxes were removed - payroll tax, land tax, stamp duty, fuel tax, registration tax, retail sales tax and every other hidden tax

And income/company tax at a flat 20%
 
Yep, I think GST should definitely be increased but at the time time PAYG Tax should be decreased - I'm a big fan of the user pays system.

I agree, only difference I would like is do it in this order:
1) Decrease PAYG tax
2) Remove state taxes that were meant to be removed before.
3) Then and only then Raise GST to 20%.
 
Yes, it would increase revenue by 50% and then what would it be spent on? When they introduced GST the states were going to remove all stamp duties and what happened, they took the GST and kept the stamp duties. Do you seriously think the government can spend your money better then you?

Kerry Packers rebuff of the Gov spending ringing in my ears.
(right at the end of this clip.
But the whole clip is priceless.
 
I voted no as a consumer, assuming no changes for other taxes. Business will pass GST to consumers, so everything will have higher price and income stay the same and I'll start buying items outside the country (Amazon?)

If they reduce Income tax to 10-20% max probably ;) and land tax and halved or even no stamp duty, and other discounts.
 
When the GST was introduced it was anticipated that it would solve the annual arguments between Federal and State Governments over the share of grants.
Modelling at the time failed to foresee changing spending patterns and as a result GST collection growth no longer keeps pace with State spending.
One reason is changing spending patterns with more income being spent in areas that don't attract GST, such as health care and education (associated with the growing number of people choosing private schools).
At present rates of GST growth and State budget expenditure we will soon see the entire GST collections being consumed by the health care budget.
This is as a result of the combined effects of an aging population and advances in health technology that are not only expensive to administer but also extend the life of the population.
State Governments rely primarily on the GST and land conveyancing to raise their own funds to provide education, health and policing services.
Then you get selfish and self interested citizens who resent the paying tax but also moan and whinge when they have to wait at the hospital emergency departments. The Governments increase budgets to reduce waiting lists but people don't want to pay for it through increased taxation.

What will have to happen in the future is either people will have to expect less services to be provided by the Government or the GST will have to be broadened by removing the current exemptions, the rate increased or a combination of both.

With stamp duty on the sale of property, IMHO that should be scrapped and replaced by an expanded annual land tax levied on all properties.
 
Then you get selfish and self interested citizens who resent the paying tax but also moan and whinge when they have to wait at the hospital emergency departments. The Governments increase budgets to reduce waiting lists but people don't want to pay for it through increased taxation.

Many of these "selfish" people have seen large increases in their private health premiums due to increased taxes and have every right to whinge. It is no surprise that waiting lists get longer in the public sector when governments encourage people away from the private sector by increasing their tax burden.
 
What will have to happen in the future is either people will have to expect less services to be provided by the Government or the GST will have to be broadened by removing the current exemptions, the rate increased or a combination of both.

Or....The Govt employees could just do a bit more work and become productive as opposed to "just put it in the stack, I'll get to it one day".

Privatise the Govt I say...:D
 
They waste what they've got now. Why give them more?

Well all Governments waste money. The Federal Government is the biggest cartel. The main issue with States is that they have the constitutional responsibility for the major cost items (health, education) but lack the taxing powers to pay for them.
 
Yeah, only joking, but not with the Govt stumping up some increased productivity.

Isn't that happening?

With the public service being cut back- a process begun under the previous government and continued with the current- yet still presumably expected to produce all the same outcomes.

(There are some exceptions as some government policy changes mean different outcomes in some areas).
 
Many of these "selfish" people have seen large increases in their private health premiums due to increased taxes and have every right to whinge. It is no surprise that waiting lists get longer in the public sector when governments encourage people away from the private sector by increasing their tax burden.

Well statistics that I read say that hasn't happened. People with private health care hasn't dropped. Although you do hear complaints by funds saying health care providers are overcharging them leading to higher health care costs and rising premiums. If you are paying for it I suppose the temptation would be to use it up as much as possible.

Isn't that happening?

With the public service being cut back- a process begun under the previous government and continued with the current- yet still presumably expected to produce all the same outcomes.

(There are some exceptions as some government policy changes mean different outcomes in some areas).

Yes that's the Federal Government efficiency dividend. Department heads have been left to manage their own departments within constrained budgets, as has the Australian Defence Force.
The GST, though, relates to State Governments who employ under the Healthcare, Education and Police budgets which make up the bulk of the employees along with Administrative Services.
One possible area that Federal and state Governments could address is Administrative Services in the health and education areas. Perhaps some room for amalgamation there if agreement could be reached without leading to arguments about lost funding or impinging states rights.

Here in South Australia the Government has been trying to address a problem with our PS becoming a bit top heavy, so they've been offering redundancy packages to some of the higher paid admin people whilst increasing front line staff like police and nurses.
The redundancy packages cost quite a bit to fund though.
 
Back
Top