The Albanese government is about to have to make a really important decision.
It’s going to have to decide what’s more important: supporting Australians who are financially under water, or keeping an election promise.
And it’ll have to do it soon. It’s already working on its May budget, now just six months away.
That choice will affect almost every Australian, and it could shape whether you’re thousands of dollars a year better off – or not – from July next year.
[…] When asked in an Australia Institute survey what was more important – keeping a promise or reacting to changing economic circumstances – 61% picked reacting to changing circumstances.
Even among Coalition voters, 56% supported reacting to changing circumstances.
It puts the Stage 3 tax cuts in play. There’s still time, and plenty of electoral and economic reasons to rejig them.
ELI5: Why were these tax cuts even proposed in the first place? They offer no benefit to the vast majority of voters, and the lost revenue will end up being a detriment to public spending that DOES provide a benefit to the vast majority of voters. Why does this have majority support?
Cost of living is making it hard to afford to exist, but thank goodness the rich have some more pocket money.
They were a product of the lnp government whose whole selling point is essentially “we’re bringing down your taxes”. You can see it for example in how they always campaign around the narrative that Labor are coming for your money. Death taxes - the Bill Australia can’t afford etc. That and ‘stop the boats’. It’s very effective I guess, who doesn’t want to pay less taxes? Most people don’t really understand the complexities of why paying tax is good for economic equity and how we all benefit from properly funded services.
Tax bracket creep. The tax brackets haven’t been adjusted despite average salary going up. So those who aren’t mega super wealthy are now moved into the next tax bracket and hit hard. It’s a middle class issue.
Yeah but the best way to address that for all Australians is to increase the lower tax bracket, not the upper. Or at least increase both. Or lower tax rates on the lower bracket. Or, instead of lowering taxes, we could just spend them properly, but that’s an altogether different line of thinking.
Indeed, the tax brackets need to be shifted every now and then in order to keep track with inflation (due to not being automatically adjusted). Moving the bracket cutoffs upwards is not a bad idea, though I disagree with the implementation - it really should have been done by raising the tax free threshold and working upwards through all the brackets.
Didn’t they do that in the stage 1 and 2 tax cuts? https://www.superguide.com.au/how-super-works/income-tax-cuts
They raised the upper bound of the 19% bracket but left the lower bound the same, so the tax free threshold remains the same. The additional low income tax offset in stages one and two was useful to help reduce the effects of bracket creep on the lower end of the scale but unfortunately it was only temporary.
