commission on fiscal imbalance 合集

Victoria has already moved in this direction and nsw

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ussed in Searle (1998) and Commonwealth Grants Commission (1999:1). The results, in terms of the translation of these relativities into actual Federal untied grants distribution is presented in Table 19. This Table also presents, for the purposes of comparison, data on what the distribution would have been had it been undertaken purely on the basis of State populations. This table provides a broad indication of the redistributive impact of fiscal equalisation in Australia. TABLE 19 EFFECT OF HORIZONTAL FISCAL EQUALISATION, 2001-02 (in million of dollars) GMA distributed under HFE Total Difference (1)-(2) Population (million) Per capita redistribution (3)/(4)($) (1) NSW Victoria Queensland W Australia S Australia Tasmania ACT NT Equal per capita distribution (2) (3) (4) (5) 9,401.1 6,394.2 5,411.3 2,823.6 2,766.8 1,163.1 583.7 1,379.8 10,425.7 7,340.9 5,297.0 3,000.2 2,285.8 729.0 484.4 360.6 -1,024.6 -946.7 114.3 -176.6 480.9 434.1 99.3 1,019.2 6.6 4.9 3.7 1.9 1.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 -156.1 -195.1 31.3 -91.8 319.5 924.7 316.8 5,086.9 29,923.6 29,923.6 0.0 19.5 n.a. Source: Budget Paper No 3, 2001-02, Table 12. 7. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS As is to be expected after such a major reform, the year since the implementation of the IGA has seen stability in Australian federal fiscal arrangements. My perception is that, as the States come to fully understand the implications of the IGA there is increasing unease in some States and increasing satisfaction in others. With understanding of the redistributive implications of the transitional arrangements has come a realisation that, if the States are to abolish or reduce taxes prior to 2005 they would be wise to act on those taxes slated under the IGA for possible abolition in that year (business stamp duties and the debits tax). Victoria has already moved in this direction and NSW has recently announced that it will abolish the debits tax from January 2002. 137 Commission on Fiscal Imbalance What has been surprising has been the apparent lack of appreciation by federal politicians on both sides of the House of the fundamental nature of the IGA – that, once the transitional period is over, all increases in GST revenue benefit the States not the Commonwealth. The most recent example of this was a speech in July 2001 by the Federal Treasurer in which he said. Obviously if a country wants a competitive taxation regime and a decent level of social services then it needs a taxation base to sustain it. To stay competitive the weight must be kept off direct tax – income tax and company tax- and the indirect tax base must carry the burden of funding social services (Costello, 2001). The difficulty with this statement is that, under the IGA, GST revenue is hypothecated to the States but the funding of social services is largely a federal responsibility. How can State revenues fund federal expenditure responsibilities unless other federal fiscal arrangements change? In a similar vein, the Federal Opposition has as a main plank in its policy platform for the next federal election, due late this year, som...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/06/2013 for the course ECON 220 taught by Professor Paulo during the Spring '13 term at University of Liverpool.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online