Treasurer Joe Hockey spinning so hard he loses all memory of his own past media releases

It has become increasingly difficult to take this Australian Treasurer seriously.

He treats the economy as his political plaything.

Joe Hockey on Tuesday 4 December 2012

http://www.joehockey.com/media/transcripts/details.aspx?s=409

Joe Hockey on Tuesday 5 May 2015

http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=481

Australian Politics 2015: Hey, big spender!

The only advantage to be a senior citizen in Abbott’s Australia is that those over 65 years of age will have less years than younger folk to live in the midst of any social and economic hardship this scenario below may bring down on communities the length and breadth of  the land.

The Kouk 28 March 2015:

The Abbott government has no intention of ever repaying government debt. None. It has, quite quietly, announced that it plans to keep borrowing so that government debt remains at 13 per cent of GDP right out to at least 2054-55 which means government debt will be $1.6 trillion. Yes $1.6 trillion of government debt.

The decision to keep government debt at this level was buried in the recent Intergenerational Report. The IGR announced that the Abbott government intends to keep borrowing for at least the next 40 years and therefore maintain government debt "at a level equivalent to 13 per cent of GDP... where it will remain over the projection period [to 2054-55]" (See page 83 of the IGR).

Based on the assumption that Australia's GDP will be around $12.5 trillion in 2054-55, at 13 per cent of GDP, the Abbott government is aiming to have government debt at over $1.6 trillion by 2054-55. It currently is around $365 billion. (This is the level of GDP … implied in the IGR based on the assumption of nominal GDP growth of 5.25 per cent per annum.)

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey needs to come up with a better argument concerning the federal Goods and Services Tax

David Pope in the Canberra Times, 30 March 2015

Brisbane Times 30 March 2015:

Treasurer Joe Hockey says Australian consumers have changed their behaviour so much in recent years, through online shopping and choosing more GST-exempt goods, that they are putting pressure on the GST as a revenue-raiser.

Apparently Joe Hockey is upset that this consumption tax raised $47.4 billion in 2012-13, $50.7 billion in 2013-14 and, is expected to raise $53.7 billion this financial year, $57 billion in 2015-16, $60.4 billion in 2016-17 and another $63.8 in $2017-18.

That’s not good enough for our millionaire Liberal treasurer.

It appears he is rather perturbed that people are still buying GST-exempt basic fresh food, simple dairy products and unprocessed cooking ingredients in their local shops or purchasing online second-hand, handmade or other goods worth less than $1,000.

This is the rather weak excuse he is offering for encouraging the states to believe there should be more in the federal Goods & Services Tax kitty.

The GST is a regressive tax when applied to low income households and no amount of vague talk in the mainstream media about possible ‘compensation’ for pensioners will change that.

In which Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop suffers silently

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey tries the patience of his colleague, Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop, when in the middle of what was supposed to be a tribute to the late Malcolm Fraser he alluded to the current razor gang within the party which has so enthusiastically reduced her department's foreign aid budget.

ABC Vine 23 March 2015:

Of course, he was the great initiator—and we will be forever thankful—of the Expenditure Review Committee. That committee has endured, much to the chagrin of my colleagues. But it has endured and it is one of his many lasting legacies.

Mr. Eleventy puts his foot in it again

The Guardian 2 March 2015:

Last Thursday, during Question Time, Joe Hockey was asked to “outline how the government is building jobs, growth and opportunity and how will this assist all Australians.” Bizarrely, he chose to respond by suggesting “there has been more good news today” in reference “average weekly earnings” despite Australians’ earnings growing by less now than they have for over 20 years.

In delivering the “good news” Hockey told parliament that “the average wage in Australia has now increased to $76,800 a year. It increased by 2.8% this year”. He noted that this meant the average wage for Australians “works out at $1,476.30 a week”.

Firstly, Hockey got a bit confused. The 2.8% growth referred to the original data, while the $1,476.30 referred to the trend data – which only grew by 2.7%. He was referring to full-time employment only, not the average earnings of all workers – that is just $1,128.90 a week.

But what is worse is the treasurer’s suggestion that these growth figures were in any way “good news”.

They were, in fact, terrible.

The 2.8% growth (or 2.7%, to use the trend data) was the second worst annual growth going back to 1994. And the worst result occurred in the 12 months to May 2014 which saw just 2.4% growth…

Of course even these corrected November 2014 figures hide the fact that while average weekly earnings for males (total earnings all industries) was $1,371.50 which represented a growth in males earning of est. $46 a year since November 2004, for females average weekly earnings (total earnings all industries) was the much lower $887.90 which represented a growth in female earning of less than est. $30 a year since November 2004.

In New South Wales in November 2014 total weekly cash earnings for males was $1,404.90 and for females $944.10, figures which are higher than every state except West Australia for that period.

See http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0 for more information.

So you think you're hard done by because Abbott & Co told you so?

The top 20 per cent of people have five times more income than the bottom 20 per cent, and hold 71 times more wealth. Perhaps the gap between those with the most and those with the least is most starkly highlighted by the fact that the richest seven individuals in Australia hold more wealth than 1.73 million households in the bottom 20 per cent. [The Australia Institute, Income and wealth inequality in Australia, Policy Brief No. 64, July 2014]

This year sees tax rates and tax reform debated in the media once more, with Prime Minister Abbott reiterating that his is a government that believes in lowering taxes and Treasurer Hockey repeating that Australian workers pay almost half their earnings to government as tax.

So do Australians spend the first six months of the year working for the government with tax rates nearly 50 cents in the dollar as Joe Hockey asserts?

If the Australian Taxation Office Individual income tax rates for Australian residents is correct this would only come close to happening if your personal taxable income is many millions of dollars per year.

At half a million in taxable income annually, tax payable by an individual worker without family (including the Medicare and Temporary Budget Repair levies) would only reach an est. 42.05% and, in fact would be less than that once any Australian Tax Office (ATO) refund is deducted.

For many workers their personal income tax might look something like this.

Estimated individual tax payable in 2014-15

Income of $18,200 – pay no income tax as this amount is the upper limit of the tax free threshold applicable to all individual taxpayers before taxable income can be calculated

Taxable income of $37,000 – pay $3,610 income tax (before any ATO tax refund)

Taxable income $80,000 – pay $17,332 income tax (before any ATO tax refund)

Taxable income $180,000 – pay $54,547 income tax^ (before any ATO tax refund)

Taxable income $250,000* – pay $86,047 income tax^# (before any ATO tax refund)

Taxable income $500,000* – pay $198,547 income tax^#  (before any ATO tax refund)

* taxable income in highest individual tax rate after the first $180,000 of taxable income

^ does not include the 2% Medicare Levy surcharge applicable at this level of taxable income

# individual taxpayers with a taxable income of more than $180,000 per year will have additional tax withheld by their employer (2% Temporary Budget Repair Levy) from 1 July 2014 to 1 July 2017

+ the majority of all tax refunds range between $1 and $1,999, the second largest refund band is between $2,000 and $3,999, with the highest refund band being $10,000 dollars or more

NB. All figures based on Australian Tax Office Individual income tax rates for Australian residents 2014-15 and Taxation Statistics 2011-12 (refunds)

Can no-one in the Liberal Party put a brake on these fools?

This week regional Australia woke to find that the foundation statistics used by local government, community groups or individuals lobbying for an increase in government services/funding are now under threat.

The Sydney Morning Herald 19 February 2015:

The controversial proposal to axe the 2016 census has originated from the Bureau of Statistics rather than the Abbott government, the bureau has revealed.

The ABS has asked the government to legislate to remove the requirement that it conduct a census every 5 years and replace it with a requirement to conduct the survey only once every 10 years as happens in Britain and the United States.

The political spin on the proposal to abandon the 2016 national census and change the period between census nights from five to ten years, is that the 109 year-old Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has requested this.

Various journalists point to the fact that the ABS was without a chief executive for almost a year, has had to reduce staffing numbers, is behind in its preparation for the 2016 national census, while its computer system is old and in urgent need of replacement.

However, one doesn’t need to look far for the underlying reason for the bureau’s malaise.

Successive federal governments have starved it of funds and resources. A fiscal position the foolish Abbott Government continued with relish, when in May 2014 it increased the ABS annual funding reduction (Efficiency Dividend) and included a reduction in staffing numbers of est. 100 employees.

Will no-one in the Liberal Party put a brake on Messrs. Abbott, Hockey and Cormann before their mindless and destructive cost-cutting destroys yet another vital institution?

BACKGROUND

Australian Financial Review 29 January 2014:

The ABS needed government support if it was to continue to produce its current workload, Mr Pink says in the annual report.

He warns that without action, the ABS will no longer be able to maintain its mandated functions in the future “as the trusted and respected statistical leader” in Australia.

“Our constrained budget situation may require hard choices in the coming year as we ensure the next phase of our business and infrastructure transformation strategy, which is so critical to our future sustainability, proceeds in 2014–15,” Mr Pink says.

In his final annual report as Australian statistician, Mr Pink thanked his staff for their work in “an increasingly difficult, constraining and frustrating environment in which to operate”.

Mr Pink has not yet been replaced and Ian Ewing is acting Australian statistician…..

Bank of America Merrill Lynch Australia chief economist Saul Eslake said he had no reason to believe the funding crisis had yet materially affected the quality of the ABS statistics, “but I have no trouble believing that at some point it will”.

Australian Government Treasury Portfolio Budget Statements 2014-15, May 2014:

	MEDIA RELEASE
5 June 2014	Embargo: 11.30 am (Canberra time)	71/2014

ABS announces planned changes to future work program

The acting Australian Statistician, Jonathan Palmer, today announced planned reductions to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) work program. 
The ABS must reduce expenditure by about $50m over three years. While the ABS has been able to implement efficiencies in its operations, these are insufficient to meet the expenditure target. As a result, the statistical work program will be reduced from 2014-15. 
Mr Palmer said the revised work program, developed after consultation with key Australian Government agencies, will continue to meet Australia’s core statistical needs. 
“Our highest priority was to maintain activities that are critical to effective government decision making and deliver the most public benefit.
“While the revised forward work program retains core statistical elements and outputs, we have had to discontinue or reduce outputs in areas that are valued by the users of those statistics. If funding is provided for the work we are ceasing, we will reinstate it.

“The quality, integrity and relevance of our statistics are critical to informing effective decision making and we must not lose sight of that as we plan for the future,” Mr Palmer said.

The work program changes, which will be implemented from 1 July 2014, are:

Discontinue

* Environment collections from Australian Households

* Waste Account

* Measures of Australia's Progress

* Australian Social Trends

* Survey of Tourist Accommodation

* ABS funded component of Culture, Sport and Recreation statistics 

Reduce

* Industry statistics research, development and reporting in selected areas

* Social conditions statistics research, development and reporting in selected areas

* State and territories statistical services engagement and analysis activities

* Regional statistics analysis and development

* Macroeconomic research and development engagement in international activities

* National information and referral services response times

* External statistical education development programs

Review

* Review the House Price Index, with the view to discontinuing it pending identification of alternative sources to meet the Australian National Accounts and other requirements

Further details of the work program changes will be advised to affected users in due course.

As Australia’s national statistical agency, the ABS provides official statistics on a wide range of topics relevant to government, business, and the Australian population.

The Sydney Morning Herald 13 February 2015:

When his predecessor as Australian Statistician Brian Pink left in January 2014, he wrote that the bureau had barely enough cash to "keep the lights on".

Instead of replacing him promptly, the Treasurer and the Prime Minister's offices tossed around options and deferred the decision until December when they finally gave the job to Kalisch, one of the original applicants from earlier in the year.  

NOW we have a budget in trouble and it's all the fault of Abbott, Hockey, Cormann and the rest of those mindless ideologues

Herald Sun 1 December 2014:

Forget Treasurer Joe Hockey's prediction of a balanced budget in 2017-18 because it's "well and truly toast".

That's the assessment of Deloitte Access Economics economist Chris Richardson, who is predicting bigger budget deficits across the forward estimates in the mid-year economic and fiscal outlook.

Mr Richardson, who has long criticised both sides of politics for their handling of the budget, expects the 2014-15 deficit to blow out to $34.7 billion, about $5bn more than forecast.

Deficits will be $10bn larger in each of the following three years.

"Red ink will once again be the new black," Mr Richardson said about the MYEFO on Monday.

Australian Financial Review 1 December 2014:

Around half the policies in the May budget will never see the light of day and will have to be recast or replaced.

Economic conditions mean that the Coalition’s boasts that it could fix the budget faster than Labor are in tatters. The budget bottom line deteriorates by the day.

Hand up, the one person in Australia who didn't see this coming?

According to The Sydney Morning Herald on 11 November 2014:

Treasurer Joe Hockey has declined to deny independent analysis indicating a $51 billion hole in his budget, blaming tumbling iron ore prices for putting pressure on the bottom line….

The mid-year economic update is due to be released in December.  It is likely to contain some new government spending measures and further cuts to the ABC and SBS's funding.

Only two months into the government’s first term Hockey admitted in December 2013 that an increase in Abbott Government borrowings had increased Australia’s national debt. See MID-YEAR ECONOMIC AND FISCAL OUTLOOK 2013-14 (MYEFO)

From day one the Abbott Government has spent like a drunk on payday and borrowed like there was no tomorrow, so it comes as no surprise to find that the its first budget is now terminally ailing.

BACKGROUND

So how is Federal Coalition Treasurer Joe Hockey handling Australia’s national budget?

Where is Australian Federal treasurer Joe Hockey sourcing his financial advice?

So how much budget pain is the Abbott Coalition Government inflicting on Clarence Valley residents?

Women will bear the brunt of the Abbott government's budget cuts
Hockey accused of punting with taxpayer dollars
Australia pays a high price for MH370 search

Now Abbott wants to spend an est $250 million on his own VIP air transport
G20 Brisbane: $100 million to protect world leaders

Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey in danger of becoming a walking talking sovereign risk

Joe 'my middle name is entitlement' Hockey and the public purse

This is the federal treasurer who in his first federal budget was determined to turn the divide between the rich and poor in Australia into a yawning chasm…..

Media reports put Joe Hockey's current parliamentary income at $365,868 - a base salary of $195,130 plus an 87.5% loading for his position of Treasurer. 

According to the Remuneration Tribunal Determination 2014/16: Members of Parliament –Travelling Allowance from 31 August 2014 Hockey will also receive $91 a night for staying in his own house in Canberra and $271 when he stays in commercial accommodation. 

If his wife happens to be staying in their house at the same time, Hockey receives an additional $10 from taxpayers.

Excerpts from article in The Daily Telegraph on 17 August 2014:

* The Hockey family’s astute purchase of the property in one of Canberra’s premier suburbs is a well-known story in political circles. The home is worth an estimated $1.5 million according to local real estate agents. But the Hockey clan picked up the property for a song, purchasing it for just $320,000 in 1997.

In his recently published biograph Not Your Average Joe, a former Liberal MP Ross Cameron boasts that Mr Hockey struck a golden deal, spotting the house when driving in Canberra.

“The house was a piece of Hockey mercantile genius,’’ Mr Cameron said.

Biographer Madonna King writes that the seller, who according to ACT lands title records was called Robert Hamilton wanted “no part in lawyers or agents.’

“So Joe, the lawyer, called his father, the real estate agent, who took the owner out for a beer,’’ Ms King writes.

“The Hockey’s scored the house for land value. Joe’s father didn’t mention he was a real estate agent, buying the property on behalf of his lawyer son.’’

When it was purchased in 1997, Mr Hockey was listed on sales documents as owning 5 per cent, his wife Melissa Babbage 61 per cent and his father Richard Hockey 34 per cent….

The double dipping of MPs who claim travel allowance to stay in properties owned by themselves or their wives and in some cases reduce their tax by negatively gearing property is well-known in Canberra. In 2007, it was revealed Malcolm Turnbull, then regarded as Australia’s richest MP, rented a house from his wife Lucy when in Canberra. It was reported Mr Turnbull paid $10,000 a year to his wife under the arrangement and claimed another $10 a night when she stayed in Canberra. In response, Mr Turnbull said the story was a “beat up.”

*The Treasurer has legitimately claimed $108,000 in travel allowance for 368 nights over the last four years including many nights for parliamentary sitting weeks where he has stayed at the Canberra house.

The Daily Mail 14 August 2014:

Mr Hockey and his millionaire banker wife Melissa Babbage, own four properties between them, including a five-bedroom harbourside family home in Hunters Hill, one of Sydney's wealthiest harbourside suburbs, believed to be worth more than $5 million, which they bought for $3.5 million in 2004.

Their $10 million property portfolio also includes a 200 hectare cattle farm in Queensland and a beautiful six-bedroom coastal retreat with 180-degree views of the beach in Stanwell Park, an hour south of Sydney. Mr Hockey's statement of registrable interests, made in 2010, also lists him as joint owner of a property in the prestigious Canberra suburb of Forrest.

Joe Hockey either told a political lie to the Australian Parliament and voters then or is doing so now

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey continues to alter facts to suit the questions being asked or the audience he is addressing and, if that means telling untruths to Parliament and voters then that is what he will do.

THEN

Australian Government Budget 2014-15 Overviews - Health presented to the Australian Parliament on 13 May 2014 by Joe Hockey:

ABC Q&A program on 19 May 2014:

Given that of the $7, $2 goes to the doctor…

NOW

House of Representatives House TV Joe Hockey speaking during Question Time on 26 August 2014:

It is a payment for a service….We are asking Australians to pay $7 when they go and visit a GP. That goes to the GP. The bottom line is it’s a payment for service. [my red bolding]

If the total $7 doesn’t go to the GP then it is not a genuine payment for service – it is a payment with an indirect tax attached.

So does the GP keep the money, Mr. Hockey? Or have you introduced another tax?

"What is Joe playing at?" asks The Daily Examiner editor

David Moase, editor of The Daily Examiner echoes popular sentiment in this opinion piece on 15 August:

I’m convinced Joe Hockey is a good man, a highly intelligent man.

Which makes his recent comments - highlighted by this week's "the poorest people either don't have cars or actually don't drive very far in many cases" - so difficult to understand.

That comment is not just a one-off, either. Recently, the treasurer was arguing the rich deserve more benefits from the budget because they pay more tax.

It seems he is struggling with the concept that has underpinned Australia's taxation system for, well, forever - the rich should be paying more of the burden because they have more.

In the case of his car comments, there are three enormous problems - apart from the small detail that if you are talking about what the rich and poor would pay in excess as a percentage of their income, he is just plain wrong!.

Firstly, most people who are less well off, and particularly those in country areas in the Clarence Valley, do own cars and don't have any alternatives but to use them.

Secondly, there is an economic theory my Year 12-student son tells me is Marginal Propensity to Consume. It indicates how much of your income you are likely to spend and save.

Poorer people have to spend more of their income to survive than the rich, and as a result, any extra costs affect them more than those who are better off.

Thirdly, of all the rotten aspects of Coalition Budget that Joe Hockey and his colleagues are struggling so badly to sell, the fuel excise impost is probably one of the more unremarkable, but Mr Hockey has now put it into the spotlight.

What confuses me is trying to understand what audience Mr Hockey is playing to. Surely, if his Budget is to have any chance of being accepted, it is rural residents and those in working class suburbs who he has just insulted that he most needs to get onside.

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey - arrogant and deliberately misleading

This was Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey being quoted by ABC News 13 August 2014:

This morning Mr Hockey defended the budget measure to reinstate a biannual increase to the excise by saying that high income earners will be hit hardest.

"The people that actually pay the most are higher income people, with an increase in fuel excise and yet, the Labor Party and the Greens are opposing it," he told 612 ABC Brisbane.

"They say you've got to have wealthier people or middle-income people pay more.

"Well, change to the fuel excise does exactly that; the poorest people either don't have cars or actually don't drive very far in many cases."…

"If you look at total usage out of the ABS stats you can see that the higher the income the more the fuel taxes are paid by those households," he said.

Yes, he really said that and here’s the proof:

http://youtu.be/bxqUolxETHo

A research paper in the Australian Parliament’s own reference library gives a lie to his claim that the all those on higher incomes will feel the impact of the fuel levy more than poor people:

Moreover, petrol and diesel excises are regressive in that people on low incomes pay a higher proportion of their incomes in the form of excise than people on high incomes, given the same level of fuel use.

While Greg Jericho tweeted a very effective visual (based on an Australian Bureau of Statistics 2009-10 Household Expenditure Survey) which shows those with the lowest incomes pay out a higher percentage of their total household expenditure on petrol than do those with the highest household incomes:

Even News Corps national economics editor Jessica Irvine disputed Hockey’s assumptions. With the lowest quintile in her 13 August tweet representing an average disposable household income of $16,328 per annum (est. $19,084 average gross household income), the second quintile $27,248 (est. $40,820), the third quintile $37,492 (est. $69,004), the fourth quintile $50,700 (est. $105,248) and the fifth quintile $88,608 (est. $204,724):

The crunching of Joe Hockey's numbers continues

Eighty-three days after Budget Night and the country was still crunching Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey’s numbers, as is demonstrated by this Inside Story of 5 August 2014:

The most comprehensive analysis of the distributional effects of the budget was undertaken by the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, or NATSEM, at the University of Canberra. Using Australian Bureau of Statistics data on the distribution of household incomes, NATSEM divided the community into five segments or “quintiles,” each made up of a little over 2.5 million households. It found that the poorest 20 per cent – those with $35,000 or less in disposable annual income – would forgo $2.9 billion over four years thanks to changes to family benefits, pensions and other payments. More than one-third of the budget cuts, or $6 billion worth, would fall on the middle quintile of households, those earning between $45,000 and $63,000. The wealthiest 20 per cent of households, meanwhile – those earning $88,000 or more after tax and benefits – would lose $1.78 billion, some 40 per cent less than the lowest income families.

Given that the most recent official ABS figures show that the poorest 20 per cent of households receive about 7.5 per cent of disposable income while the richest 20 per cent receive 39.5 per cent, it is clear that the impact of the budget in relative terms is much greater on low-income households than it is on high-income households. The poorest 20 per cent of households, which receive less than 8 per cent of total income, are the source of at least 16 per cent of the expenditure savings.

The impact on different income groups can also be gauged by considering which sectors the budget savings are coming from. In a speech to the Sydney Institute after the budget, Joe Hockey emphasised the fact the government will spend $146 billion – “35 per cent of the federal budget” – on welfare in 2014–15. That might be true, but this sector provides a larger share of the proposed cuts. Budget Paper No. 2 shows out of total projected expenditure cuts of $29.4 billion between 2014–15 and 2017–18, $15.4 billion, or 52 per cent, comes from programs of the Department of Social Services. (This compares with revenue measures estimated to raise an extra $8.7 billion over the period, not including fiscal drag.)

Even more striking is the budget’s impact on spending on the unemployed. Support for the unemployed costs around $10 billion annually, or less than 2.5 per cent of the budget. Of people receiving the two benefits – Newstart and Youth Allowance (Other) – around 37 per cent are under the age of thirty; given that Youth Allowance recipients are paid less than Newstart recipients, we can conservatively estimate that payments for this group account for around 0.9 per cent of the budget. From next year, unemployed people under twenty-five will get Youth Allowance rather than Newstart, and people under thirty will wait up to six months before getting unemployment benefits, and will then have to participate in Work for the Dole to be eligible for income support. The projected savings from these changes amount to about $2.8 billion over the period 2014–15 to 2017–18, or about 9.5 per cent of the total budget spending cuts. In other words, unemployed people under thirty receive less than 1 per cent of total budget spending but are the source of close to 10 per cent of total expenditure savings.

Almost 40 days later and Australian voters still not convinced that the Abbott-Hockey-Cormann federal budget is fair

Nielsen Poll of 1,400 voters on 19-20 June 2014 in the Australian Financial Review on 23 June 2014

On 11 June 2014 Treasurer Joe Hockey told guests at a Sydney Institute function that; The average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian.

He also admitted to basing his welfare ‘bill’ per average worker on an average monthly income of $4,800 to $6,500 per person and the projected $140.6 billion welfare spend for the 2014-15 financial year.

So let’s look at the welfare spend and income taxes paid in the last financial year to place this alleged $6,000 cost to workers in perspective.

The 2014-15 Budget Papers show that the Federal Government spent $140 billion on social security and welfare and expects to collect a total of $354.8 billion in tax in the 2013-14 financial year [Statement 5 – Revenue (continued)].

Personal income tax accounted for 63.23 per cent of total taxes collected.

However, as the government estimates it will be paying out $26,800 million in personal income tax refunds, the real total amount of personal income tax retained in treasury coffers will be 55.68 per cent of all taxes collected.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics there were an estimated 11.4 million people in paid employment during the 2013-14 financial year and, of these it is likely that around 10.2 million would receive a tax refund.

Approximately 1.1 million of those paying income tax would receive refunds in excess of $6,000. With an est. 477,970 of these taxpayers receiving refunds of $9,999 or over. While the remaining 9.1 million would receive refunds of somewhere between $1 to $5,999. [based on Budget Papers 2011-12 & 2012-13]

These figures indicate that in doing his calculations Mr. Hockey: (i) also assigned incomes to people not in the workforce; (ii) did not take into account the fact that the federal government collects taxes other than income tax; (iii) did not factor in that many workers are/will be receiving tax refunds which cancel out their supposed $6,000 cost in days worked to assist other individuals he classifies as ‘leaners’; and (iv) failed to recognise that some of the “average working" Australians he mentions would also be receiving welfare payments in the form of Family Tax Benefit.

With rubbery figures such as these, created by the old ‘back of an envelope’ method, Hockey seeks to convince voters that his first budget is fair.

Rural Doctors Association says Medicare co-payment turns rural doctors into tax collectors bogged down in red tape

Media release

Tuesday 20 May 2014

Co-payment to turn rural doctors into tax collectors,

create more red tape

The Rural Doctors Association of Australia (RDAA) says the Federal Government’s proposed Medicare co-payment will see the already significant pressure on rural doctors increase as they are forced to collect the co-payment on behalf of the Government, meet red tape requirements associated with it, and be called more frequently to their local hospital to treat patients who can’t afford to pay it.

RDAA is also concerned that rural doctors and patients will be caught in the crossfire as the federal and state governments step up their fight over health funding post-budget.

“At a time when the Federal Government is talking about the need to ensure doctors are spending their time treating patients and not filling out endless paperwork, last week’s Medicare co-payment announcement is irony…in capital letters and underlined” said RDAA President, Dr Ian Kamerman.

“Rural doctors and their practice staff will now be forced to negotiate the Medicare co-payment with nearly all the patients they see—including those in nursing homes and from disadvantaged backgrounds—causing yet more stress on doctors and staff, more time lost due to government red tape while waiting times get longer, and quite possibly more financial stress as doctors opt to lose money rather than charge the co-payment to needy patients.

“Then there’s the increased pressure not only on rural hospital emergency departments, but also on the rural doctors who are called to the hospital—at all times of the day and night—to treat patients who can’t afford to be seen by the very same doctor at their general practice due to the co-payment.

“The doctor, already working long hours, may then also need to assess whether they must charge the patient a co-payment at the hospital.

“And once they treat the patient, and finally get to return to their practice or get home from the hospital, they will no doubt need to fill in more forms explaining why they did or did not charge the patient co-payment and the reasons for this.

“There is a real danger that the introduction of co-payments will discourage more doctors from staying in rural practice, and place a further bureaucratic load on those doctors remaining in the bush.

“Coupled with the Federal Government’s decision to scrap the very successful Prevocational General Practice Placements Program (PGPPP)—which many rural doctors have found to be a great way of attracting more doctors to rural practice—this budget risks negating the gains made in rural practice in the past ten years.

“While we appreciate a number of initiatives for rural practice that have been funded in this budget—namely additional funding for those practices teaching medical students and young doctors, and additional funding to support rural practices in building infrastructure to enable that teaching and training to occur—the introduction of the Medicare co-payment and scrapping of the PGPPP has real potential to undo the good work.

“We urge the Federal Government to reconsider the Medicare co-payment proposal and keep the PGPPP. And we urge the federal and state governments to be very mindful of the tremendously damaging impact that any horse-trading around health funding could create for rural practices, rural doctors, rural communities, and rural patients.”

________________________________________________________________________

http://www.rdaa.com.au/

So how much budget pain is the Abbott Coalition Government inflictng on Clarence Valley residents?

Millionaire Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann 

enjoying their cigars in a Parliament House courtyard, May 2014

The absence of any estimates of distributional impacts for different household types in the Abbott Government's 2014-15 Budget Papers means that there is no collated reference point one can go to in order to easily evaluate how progressive or regressive this federal budget is and, I suspect that this is a deliberate attempt to make the facts as difficult to find as possible for both voters and the media.

However, this post is an attempt to broadly outline how some of the budget measures are likely to impact on the 51,043 people living in the Clarence Valley on the NSW North Coast. [Profile.id,Clarence Valley Estimated Resident Population, 30 June 2013]

In the Clarence Valley there are up to an estimated 330 individuals who may possibly have personal taxable incomes (as opposed to gross incomes) above $180,000 per annum and therefore over the next four years may be subject to the 2% ‘deficit’ levy on their taxable incomes in excess of that amount. This is likely to total between $400 to $10,000 per person by 2017-18, with the majority probably paying under $3,000. [Australian Tax Office, 2011-12 Individual Tax Table 6, updated April 2014]

However, there are an est. 8,248 individuals receiving Centerlink or Veterans Affairs age pensions and an est. 3,711 receiving disability support pensions who will see changes to eligibility, indexation and deeming rules for these pensions under recently announced budget measures. [Australian Bureau of Statistics, National Regional Profiles by LGA 2007-2011]

The new pension indexation will see the real value of these pension payments fall by an est. $4,352 to $5,853 per person between 2017-18 and 2020-2 if the Abbott Government is re-elected. [Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association of NSW, media release, 15 May 2014]

Further, there are an est. 5,459 individuals under 30 years of age living in the Clarence Valley and many of these people may not be eligible for unemployment benefits for up to six months if they lose their jobs after 1 January 2015, as well as an estimated 3,906 one income families receiving Tax Benefit B who will have their payment frozen at 2014 levels for the next two years and who lose this payment after June 2015 if none of their children is under 6 years of age or their annual income is above $100,000. [Australian Bureau of Statistics, National Regional Profiles by LGA 2007-2011]

From 1 January 2015 unemployed people under 25 will get Youth Allowance not Newstart. This is a reduction in unemployment benefit of $96 per fortnight for a 22-24 year old single person with no children and $93 per fortnight for a married couple with no children in that same age group. [Australian Dept. of Human Services, 28 March 2014]

Single income families with a disposable income of $2,014 per week in 2016-17 will lose between $18 to $82 per week due to new budget measures, depending on the number of children in the family. [Whiteford, P & Nethery, D, Sharing the budget pain, May 2014]

Finally, every household receiving the renamed energy supplement will find it permanently frozen at the 1 July 2014 payment level, even though household energy costs are still predicted to rise over time.

When one adds increased medical/pharmaceutical costs, reduced Medicare rebates on a number of services, loss of some other tax and welfare related concessions, then the est. 73.6% of the local population with incomes under $46,000 per annum (and the 50% of households with weekly incomes under $769 per week) will be doing it hard under this Federal Government. [Profile.id, Clarence Valley Community Profile, individual incomes 2011 and Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011 Census QuickStats - Clarence Valley]

Background:

2014-14 Budget Papers