Xenophon laments missed chance as Senate rejects car tax
Posted
Updated
Steve Fielding: voted with Coalition. (AAP: Alan Porritt, file photo)
The Federal Government's luxury car tax bill has been defeated in the Senate after Family First Senator Steve Fielding and the Opposition combined to vote against it.
Independent Senator Nick Xenophon, who had agreed with proposed Greens amendments to the bill, lamented a "lost opportunity" to make the failed luxury car tax bill greener and fairer.
The vote had to be taken again this morning after Liberal Senator Sue Boyce missed the first division last night.
If the bill had succeeded it would have increased the tax for some cars worth more than $57,000.
Earlier Senator Fielding defended his decision to vote against the legislation, saying he had wanted it to include exemptions to help farmers and tourism operators who need more expensive vehicles for their work.
"The Government could do something if they wanted to to get this measure through," he said.
"There's no way that Family First can vote for a bill that's going to put up a tax for farmers and tourism, that's just crazy.
"They're already doing it so tough at the moment."
Treasurer Wayne Swan told Radio National that Senator Fielding's requested amendments would have been a "compliance nightmare."
Senator Xenophon says the crossbenchers missed a chance to make the failed luxury car tax bill greener and fairer and there needs to be more discussion between crossbench senators in the future.
"I can't speculate on the negotiations between Senator Fielding and the Government, I just don't know what happened there," he said.
"Steve knows that I'm always willing to talk to him, my door is always open to him and I think the only way this is going to work is for the crossbenchers to work as cooperatively as they can to keep the lines of communications open."
Opposition industry spokesman Eric Abetz said the proposed tax increase was bad policy.
"The defeat of that is a great win for the Australian car manufacturers, for tourism and the bush," he said.
"It was bad policy because it was going to impact very heavily in a negative way on those three sectors that are doing it particularly tough," he said.
Medicare defeat likely
The Federal Government's changes to the Medicare surcharge levy also look likely to be defeated in the Senate.
Senator Fielding wants changes to the bill before he will vote for it.
Government ministers launched an attack on the Opposition over the changes yesterday, accusing it of blocking a tax cut for middle income earners.
But Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson was unmoved, saying the measure would encourage more people to quit private health insurance and add to pressure on public hospitals.
"What the Government is doing is effectively taking money out of health care, out of hospital funding," he said.
"It will also turbocharge the private health insurance premiums for pensioners, retirees, and families that will remain in private health insurance.
"That is why we're opposed to it."
A Federal Labor MP has raised the prospect of an early election if the Government fails to get important legislation through the Senate.
Labor backbencher Brett Raguse says a lack of numbers in the Senate is making things tough for the Government.
"We got a mandate at the last election," he said.
"Just because of the numbers within the Senate right now it's very tight.
"I'd suggest that if we have to go back to the people at some stage to get a further mandate that's an issue for the future."
Search for news
Comments (96)
Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.
-
Dave:
04 Sep 2008 10:07:47am
If the Labor Government were serious they would have a tax based on emmissions, not the price of the vehicle.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Neal:
04 Sep 2008 10:24:36am
It is a measure to further protect the Australian car manufacturing industry. It has nothing to do with environment etc. It is all to do with protecting union members working on the production lines of ineffecient Australian car manufacturers.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:33:00am
That makes sense. It's simple, easy to administer, in line with other government policy.
Where's the fun in that?
No wonder it wasn't raised as a policy option by either party.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Greg H:
04 Sep 2008 10:47:48am
Labor party reckless policies of classwarfare has been stopped.
Well done senators.
As far as luxury cars go, their buyers already pay tax like everyone else.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Tan:
04 Sep 2008 10:09:23am
Fielding is a fool. I think his reasons are lame. Since when do poor farmers drive expensive vechicles? the same with tourist operators. I think he is protecting the interests of the rich rather than the battlers.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Sparky:
04 Sep 2008 10:17:50am
Check out how much a decent Four Wheel drive is that is designed to go off road, and then come back, a lot are well over $57,000. And i don't mean those crappy "family SUV's" I mean a real offroad vehicle. A landcruiser with the full setup will set you back about $80,000 these days!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
04 Sep 2008 10:24:27am
"The full setup" on a landcruiser actually makes it a luxury car that is pretty useless if you are planning on jumping into it after walking around in the dirt.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Sparky:
04 Sep 2008 11:05:18am
Gavin, not sure what you have seen but my landcruiser has the full setup, roof racks, bull bar, radio, 1.5" lift, fog lamps and all of the electronic cruise/break assist stuff and it cost my family well above $57000, thought he is right if you could write the tax off under this new tax scheme as a work vehicle to minimise the tax, as i currently do i wouldn't care if they brought in this ruling. I have Never seen a landcruiser that couldn't take someone with dirty boots etc? Its not a freakin sports car or something it is expected to get damaged over time!! I sweep out the floor mats every few weeks and give it a hose and it looks almost brandspanka even after 3 years of use.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Tan:
04 Sep 2008 10:27:18am
Country people should be entitled to a discount for Four Wheel drives but certainly not city folk who drive them around just because they are fashionable. Four wheel drives chew up gas and are bad for the environment. Episodes of Top Gear show these Four Wheel drives are not all that good.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
steve:
04 Sep 2008 10:24:21am
57k isnt an expensive car not for a farmer.. not when they need a decent motor for hard grafting off road. i dont fancy going up some of those tracks in a getz...
as for the emmisions based tax, it would be fairer and it would surprise people just how efficient some of these 'gas guzzling' 4wds actually are. i have one.. and i get better fuel usage than most family cars. just because they are big and heavy does not mean that burn through huge amounts of fuel.
as was mentioned on the previous article.. it should be based on a total lifecycle of the vehicle.. there are numerous studies about the dust to dust cost (environmentally) of vehicles, and you will find some of the 'green' cars are about as far from green as you can possibly get. its time to stop looking at the short term (actual usage) and start looking at the manufacturing, longeivity, and recylability. emissions are a small part of the damage done by cars.
surely a car that burns 20% more fuel but lasts for 30 years and is built using a minimum of high tech environmentally unfriendly materials is better than a high tech car full of nasty materials that last 5 years, but burns a bit less fuel?
i'll stick to what i have... it will last is cheap to run, and uses less fuel than most..Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
NT boy:
04 Sep 2008 10:27:54am
The downfall of Family first has started.. Mr Fielding, a lot of hobby farmers who have a farm as a tax dodge would benifit from your idiotic hairbrained idea.. Get with the program.. families across Australia who you assume to represent just lost out in you voting with the Coalition.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
renn:
04 Sep 2008 10:30:54am
Farmers drive landcruisers with roo bars on the front because as they drive to town, which in most cases is 60+klms to collect the weekly rations (there isnt a milk bar down the road) and cart it all home, they might encounter a cow,deer, kangaroo or wombat sharing the road.
They might have to tow an auger down the road to the paddock. Cant do that in 4cylinder mazda3.
They need reliable cars because there isnt road side sevice out where they are.
They need cars that can cross creeks, water over the road.
They have cornering to do at 100klms an hour hence a well made reliable car.
The list goes on and on.
Tan,do you ever drive in the country at 100 klms per hour?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Mick:
04 Sep 2008 10:42:57am
i think you'll find the tax wasn't on aftermarket fitments such as bullbars, winches, extra spare tyres etc... it's about the price of the car in the showroom, you get the bullbars and stuff after you purchase the vehicle unless its part of a package which the bullbars on offer are more of a nudge bar, to get a proper bullbar to knock a bull over you'd have to go aftermarket such as ARB and get a full steel 5 mill plate bullbar
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Owen:
04 Sep 2008 10:31:22am
You have no idea what you are talking about, most proper offroad 4WD's (Landcruiser/Patrol/Land Rover, not the junk city people buy that is no good in really rough terrain) , that have actual towing capacity, easily cost more than $57,000.
Patrol starts at $57,000 for the base no frills version and goes to 77k.
Land cruiser starts at $70k.
Farmers NEED these vehicles, especially in the highlands.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
NT boy:
04 Sep 2008 10:49:10am
Toyota Hi Lux start at $48k - whats your point?
If 4x4 companies want more ppl to buy their cars they would drop their prices to fit under the cut off point.
And you dont need wall to wall carpet and all the extras in the bush... Trust me.. i live there.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
RuAlright:
04 Sep 2008 10:34:22am
What do you think the prices on FARMING VEHICLES eg; Tractors etc ? Im sure you'll see them well over $57,000 so fielding has his eyes set on the bigger picture as the government didn't have any specifics other than the dollar value.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
NT boy:
04 Sep 2008 10:50:37am
They are not included in the tax as they come under farm equipment not automobile
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Captain Kevin:
04 Sep 2008 10:53:35am
Fielding (and Xenaphon) are soon going to find out what happens when they need Labor support for some of their pet projects. Good luck fellas.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Adam F:
04 Sep 2008 10:11:05am
Why would requiring someone to show the vehicle they want to purchase is for work purposes be a compliance nightmare? We already have different vehicle classes.
Sure there might be grey areas around, say Range Rovers vs Land Rovers, but I doubt it would be too hard to prove you're a farmer or a tourism operator and the mooted exemption could just be based on that (unless you're buying a tiny sports car or something).
Beginning to wonder if the govt actually wants the extra revenue....Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Bruce:
04 Sep 2008 10:28:28am
Because while there are farmers out there doing it tough, there are also plenty doing very nicely who might well like to drive Cayennes, X5s, Toureg V10s etc. and why should they be exempt ?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
JC:
04 Sep 2008 11:10:36am
Owen & RuAlright have it right. Bruce you are off the mark. Fielding was talking about Primary Producers and also Tourism operators that were going to be caught in an "unintended consequence" (his words) of the tax. It would have been easy for Swan to put an exemption clause for these people. Exemptions are in just about every piece of legislation out there.
I want to now know what is going to happen to the tax that Swan has illegally collected? How is that going to be returned? What a lovely burden for vehicle dealerships.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
michael:
04 Sep 2008 10:12:14am
What a total waste of our money. next it will be six months of arguing over plain or choccy bikkies in the tea room.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
cam:
04 Sep 2008 10:12:46am
Oh well, that's $555 million that will need to come off road spending.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
twobob:
04 Sep 2008 10:21:48am
I thought that it would be more likely to come of family spending.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
DOVIF:
04 Sep 2008 10:30:19am
That is $555 million coming off the budget surplus
With such a large surplus, why do we need increase in tax?
Farmers need larger cars to drive off road and drive further, this is taking money from the least well off in society.
And people who makes our FOOD!!!
Stupid LawAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:30:24am
You're not seriously suggesting that tax received on new car sales goes directly into road funding are you? Or for that matter the excise on petrol?
It's all one giant slush fund Cam.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
cam:
04 Sep 2008 10:46:50am
No, it's not direct, but spending on roads, health, education, etc has to come from somewhere.
It's only fair that a reduction in planned revenue doesn't come off planned spending on schools and hospitals (and other non-road spending) since motorists don't cover the full costs they impose on society in the form of road spending, injuries, pollution, etc.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 11:36:37am
...and therein lies the problem with saying it will come off road funding.
Somebody else claims it will come of some other part of government spending, and pretty soon this relatively minor amount of money (on the scale our governments get through it) is going to be the death of us all.
Whilst the pollies prattle on about wrecking the economy and blowing holes in budgets, the reality is that this is a storm in a tea cup.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
renn:
04 Sep 2008 10:35:14am
Gee, there must be lots of wealthy people out there buying luxury cars to raise that much revenue!
The gst on the increase in the price of fuel this year alone would go a long way to fixing the roads.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
NT boy:
04 Sep 2008 10:52:27am
State governments get GST revenue not the federal government
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
tony:
04 Sep 2008 10:40:19am
No its $555milion that wont be squirted up against the wall.
Cut taxes and sack these a lot of these bums in the public sector that sponge of everybody else.
Well done Steve.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Bruce:
04 Sep 2008 10:12:49am
I haven't studied the legislation to see what sort of vehicles would have been covered. Trucks ? Otherwise, what sort of vehicle does a farmer who is "doing it tough" need to buy which costs more than $57K ?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
RuAlright:
04 Sep 2008 10:35:36am
What about crop farmers ? did you all forget that drive VEHICLES to gather their crops ?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Kev.:
04 Sep 2008 10:15:36am
What a win for democracy! All those struggling familes will be able to thank Senator Steve Fielding for making sure they can now afford their new sports car to park in while they sip latte's and watch Quinten and Felicity play under 10's soccer on their private school oval!!!
And people wonder why we think poli's are all about sucking up to the big fish???
How about an act of parliment to make it easeir for people, who's gross annual wage is less than one of these cars, to take a weekend to watch thier kids play football or maybe even actually have a life themselves!!!!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Mitch:
04 Sep 2008 10:25:19am
oh yeah poor struggling families won't be to afford another XR8 thank god for the senate!,
honestly all it's done is take money from improving our roads, hospitals, schools, infrastructure
good one family first and libs, always looking towards a better future for the country (not)
if you can afford to pay 57k for a car, honestly whats a couple of grand extra for your countries future
watch the libs all rush out to buy Mercs/BMW'sAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:27:57am
Nice rhetoric Kev, but the reality is that the rich aren't going to be bothered one way or the other about a price rise on the new Range Rover.
It will make a difference to those at the margin of whether to buy or not buy.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
bemused:
04 Sep 2008 10:47:19am
Very true. At the end of the day, the "rich" can still afford their luxury cars, it's the more average joe who would find themselves being the most adversely affected. It would just stretch the class gap that little bit wider.
Oh, but the "rich" would be paying more tax, so the left and jealous are happy, even if it is themselves that they are ultimately hurting.
Unpopular suggestion - raise the fuel excise if you need the money that badly. User pays. Or increase sales tax on new cars across the board. And no, that won't hurt the battlers as they could always buy a used car, and it will help discourage people from buying cars with short lifespans and will still ping the "rich" people who like to upgrade regularly.
But then new car sales might drop and car makers might get upset...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 11:39:35am
I seem to recall that new car sales have dropped off considerably. I'm not sure whether that is a good thing or a bad thing overall, but dislocation of employment is never a good thing.
Things are going to get bumpy and despite what they say neither side of politics can do anything but hand out sick bags.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Kathy:
04 Sep 2008 10:35:24am
Well the govt has a choice to increase tariff.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Gavin:
04 Sep 2008 10:17:02am
Senator Fielding is just annoyed that he hasn't got the luxury car he thinks he deserves.
might have been different if he had bought it already.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jeff Poole:
04 Sep 2008 10:18:34am
I hope the ALP is very pleased that it gave Senator Fielding its preferences in order to prevent the Greens from getting a Senator in Victoria.
Far better to give your preferences to a hard-line rightwing christian fundamentalist organisation like Family First. After all if a progressive, socially inclusive party like the Greens were elected it would show up the ALP for the corporate shill that it has become.
It seems that Families all need BMWs and Bentleys in Senator Fielding's eyes...
Cheers
JeffAgree (2) Alert moderator
-
Willster:
04 Sep 2008 10:19:45am
Well done to the senate for fulfulling their function and voting down Labor's blatant tax grab.
Interesting to see the greens whining about Fielding. Pot kettle black indeed.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
04 Sep 2008 10:21:09am
Looks like the senate will be held to ransom by the Religious extremist wing of the liberals.
Betwees Sen Fielding and sen Xeno there will be no chance of reasonable discussion in the senate.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:38:28am
No chance of a reasonable debate?
Not when Labor insists its my way or the highway.
The very first message in this debate puts forward a rational alternative to basing tax on the price of cars.
Labor isn't after rational debate. It's on a mission from God.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
04 Sep 2008 10:51:22am
If you lOok at the other article about this you will find that concessions were made and that there was debate.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
rock:
04 Sep 2008 10:21:55am
Isn't the bigger question why are any taxes being increased or new taxes introduced (eg alcopops)? The Federal government is already swimming in our money. Surely they should be looking to decrease taxes across the board and reduce their revenue to what is actually needed, rather than just boost the coffers. C'mon Australia, wake up and revolt!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
john in bris:
04 Sep 2008 11:03:59am
No I disagree. There have been several rounds of tax cuts in recent years while an overwhelming majority of people (approx 80%) preferred improvements to services and to investment in the future. We spend less of kids education than Korea and mobs like the Universities, CSIRO and the DPI have been cut back massively. Given the cheap labour all around us, all we have to compete with is our brains and some natural resources. Returning proper spending to the forward looking and health promoting fields is essential I believe. People earning over 100K have enjoyed massive tax cuts in recent years yet I am proud to say that most of them (in polls) preferred the investments mentioned above. cheers John
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Nigel:
04 Sep 2008 10:22:02am
Tariffs were reduced on 4-wheel-drives for the benefit of farmers many years ago. As a result, many city dwellers now have become "farmers" courtesy of the tax subsidies.
Whilst the legislation is misdirected and flawed, Senator Fielding's position is just as rediculous. Business already get exemptions to operate their vehicles and GST credits. The individual does not.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Roberto:
04 Sep 2008 10:22:11am
Could someone explain the point of law (or Rule of Order?) to us. If the Lib Senator missed the first division last night, then couldn't the gov't have passed the bill with enough votes? Or is the Senate not allowed to vote if someone is missing?
The way the story has been presented, it seems like the second vote was done today by 'courtesy' of the gov't allowing it. If so, it suggests they wanted the bill to fail??Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jason:
04 Sep 2008 10:22:55am
With the cost of an executive commodore being about $40k on the road, how could anyone argue that a $57k car was a luxury. Maybe $150k, certainly not a mere $40k
In response to the comments about farmers I think they meant that because they travel large distances every year (trips to the city etc), farmers on average would use a larger car and probably use 4wd's to do it. You can't travel on a country road in a Holden Barina.
Why should they, Kev and his mates all nip around the smallest city in Australia in Holden Caprice's which are worth $85k, something to think about there?????Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
John:
04 Sep 2008 10:36:00am
One of the most amusing things about some city folk is their belief that you need a 4WD to travel on a dirt road.
Obviously no experience so clearly not qualified to comment.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Hugh Jampton:
04 Sep 2008 10:53:03am
" You can't travel on a country road in a Holden Barina. "
Oh really? You must tell that to the woman I worked with who grew up in a farm and regularly took her Festiva way out back of Bourke hundreds of miles from any sealed road.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Guy:
04 Sep 2008 10:26:57am
Forget it and move on. In any case how much would this new tax actually raise, that is including leakage via admin and collection costs.
Swan needs to stop making a big deal over it, the ALP doesn't control the Senate - get use to negotiation!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
tony:
04 Sep 2008 10:27:06am
Family First will now get my vote next time around.
Good on you Steve for standing up to these commos that just want to tax the crap out of everything.
Taxes in Australia have never been higher and the last thing we want to do is increase them or introduce new ones.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
John:
04 Sep 2008 10:41:06am
I suppose the recent 30 Billion in tax cuts were a figment of my imagination.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:45:49am
It's just returning bracket creep John. It's the tax cut you get when you don't get a tax cut.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
twobob:
04 Sep 2008 10:27:23am
Send it back unchanged. Fielding will vote for it second time around because if a double dissolution comes around fielding knows that he wont get elected. What about letting governments govern fielding? Does that only apply to appalling family laws like workchoices? Look up the meaning of hypocrite in the future and you will see a photo of fielding
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Neal:
04 Sep 2008 10:39:22am
There have been six double dissolutions in our history. With 3 returning the incumbent government and 3 causing changes of government. The last was in 87 and was done so Labor could control both houses. It failed to achieve that aim. All double dissolutions do is frustrate the general public, but considering the two party stats, Labor won't get the upper house and Stephen Fielding won't lose his seat.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:43:00am
A double dissolution would be a most unwise thing for the Government to do. The electorate has spoken and does not take kindly to being forced back to the polls, especially over something it will see as trivial as an increased tax on cars.
Remember Gough retaining the rage? On ya bike was the response.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jim Bendfeldt:
04 Sep 2008 11:06:53am
A double-dissolution would see Families First well and truly dumped, with the Greens gaining one Senate seat in each mainland state and two in Tasmania, and neither Labor or Liberals witha majority in the Senate. Xenophon would be returned in S.A.
Labor won't want this though, because it will show them up for what they are, Liberals in pink shirts.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
John:
04 Sep 2008 10:28:04am
At least it provided one of the comedy highlights of the year yesterday when one of the Liberal senators didn't make it on time to vote. What an incompetent rabble the Libs are, wasting valuable time in parliament and vandalising the budget for the sake of "rage". And as someone has pointed out, this 555 million dollars will now have to come from everyones pocket so that a select few can save some tax on their new Merc or Lambho.
Family first? what a joke!Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Guy:
04 Sep 2008 10:43:18am
Really, how many Lambos are sold in Australia each year? I would imagine it would be less than 30.
Why is the threshold $57k? Is there some logical basis for this or is it a number dreamed up by Swan and Kev?
How much more tax does the Govt want?
Very soon they'll be coming for you!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
John:
04 Sep 2008 11:07:22am
You should note that Labor could have forced the vote that was held yesterday without the Lib senator to be the final vote.
This shows us a few things.
Labor are not so desperate to pass legislation that they would deny someone a democratic vote. Contrast that to the introduction of workchoices where the Libs gave the senate one day to debate 1,400 pages of legislation via the GAG motion.
Labor has shown they could be trusted with a senate majority, unlike the Libs.
Labor know they are holding all the cards.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
geoff:
04 Sep 2008 10:28:13am
why doesn't fielding be honest and just join the liberal party. it's people like him gives Christianity a bad name.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
joe:
04 Sep 2008 10:28:46am
Appearance it what really matters, and doesn't the Honourable Senator Fielding look every inch the politician and statesman in his fine suit of clothes. His tie is sporty yet business like and dignified, and so beautifully set off by the snotrag in his breast pocket. The understated badge in the lapel can be assumed to signify something that is dear to the esteemed Honourable Senator's heart and gives a touch of elegant conviction to this paragon of parliamentary propriety. Well done Honourable Senator Fielding.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jayson - Melbourne:
04 Sep 2008 10:45:01am
Half of these comments are ridiculous and I would like my 10 minutes it took to read them! Rich this, Rich that - get over it.. What, are we in a communist country now - oh thats right - Rudd the Dudd does speak a forced "Chinese" language. $57k for a car is not luxury! The best "comment" i have just reda is to tax based on car emissions! Brilliant idea! The rest of the whingers - thats all you seem to have down with your "comments". Work harder, smarter and set goals for yourselves.. Gee, perhaps if we were in a "communist country you might actually be worse of than you are now! Rewards for hard work not - same same and even stevens!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Hugh Mann:
04 Sep 2008 10:30:39am
Until people start looking out for each, The government has us screwed.
We have no control. They make decisions that are totally against the majority.
They get a little bad publicity, then its back to business as usual.
They get away with it and the cycle repeats.
Our response/action is going to have to be much faster, we cant always wait until the next election to show these fools we dont accept thier policies.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
tonyg:
04 Sep 2008 10:31:06am
The nightmare will be the claims for reimboursement for people who have paid the tax, plus interest.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Paul Smithers:
04 Sep 2008 10:31:24am
I fantastic result for the fight against the politics of envy. Wll done chaps.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
g:
04 Sep 2008 11:36:10am
what is it with this concept "politics of envy"?
if you are wealthy, good on you. but are you really that conceited as to believe that any one envies you as you live out your paranoid life terrified that someone is going to come along and take away your toys?
if so, if anything you are to be pitied, as you have quite obviously no idea as to what your life is actually to mean.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
NT boy:
04 Sep 2008 10:32:38am
many farmers are happy to have decent off road 4x4's that are under $57k ... IE hilux - you know, working vehicles - anything more that that deserves to be taxed as luxury..
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Owen:
04 Sep 2008 10:55:05am
A ute is a fine work vehicle, but its no good if you need a family car as well as a work vehicle. A lot of farmers that survived the drought are doing it tough, and cant afford two vehicles.
I have no problem with a luxury car tax, but it needs to be targetted correctly. Senator Fielding's got it right on this one.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Sean:
04 Sep 2008 10:33:13am
A trigger or two for a double dissolution would be a handy thing for Kev to have in his pocket, and a troubling prospect for the coiffed non-entity on the other side.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
garibaldi's sister:
04 Sep 2008 10:34:28am
time for a double dissolution to clear out the 'unrepresentative swill' from the senate.
The nation chose a Labor government less than 12 months ago; now the senate should let them govern.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Doh:
04 Sep 2008 10:49:42am
The next logical step from your argument is to abolish the Senate. Let's see Labor run that one up the flag pole to see who salutes.
Labor did this in Queensland and what was the result? The Bjelke-Peterson years.
Don't wish too hard and don't get too angry. You might get what you want and then find you don't like it at all.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Andrew:
04 Sep 2008 10:35:35am
This is a tax and Labor are on about the Liberals being the highest taxing government in history. So what are labor trying to do increase taxes. There is something very hypocritical about this by Labor but I guess that is just politics.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
P Q:
04 Sep 2008 10:35:52am
Looks like Independent senators are really Liberals who are to cowardly to show their true colours.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
esquared:
04 Sep 2008 10:44:10am
Senator Fielding - Rich Family First?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Jim:
04 Sep 2008 10:46:13am
Bring on a double dissolution. This bill won't trigger it, obviously, but something very well might in the coming year. Then this joker Fielding and his fundamentalist rabble will not be re-elected, and the wheels of federal government can continue without his facile and poisonous meddling.
Talk about Heath Ledger winning a poll for best villain. What about Fielding's portrayal of the Joker - much more scary than Ledger ever was!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
briggs:
04 Sep 2008 11:08:03am
The luxury car tax (envy tax) was already not going to achieve the extra revenue as sales of all cars is falling, In recessionary times new taxes are not good fiscal policy
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
rumtytum:
04 Sep 2008 10:50:44am
I agree that the government should base its tax rates upon emissions (which has one "m") but it should also base them upon safety. Otherwise we'd have a crop of vehicles made from bamboo that used hardly any fuel but were lethal in the event of a collision. As far as the farm vehicles are concerned, the government could jack up the registration on 4WDs, giving a greatly reduced rate only to buyers whose gas-guzzlers were garaged on farms. To persuade people to comply, they should insist that the place where the vehicles are garaged is the owner's principal private residence for the purposes of capital gains tax. A bloke with a $10,000,000 house in Mosman or Toorak would hardly want to pay capital gains on that house rather than on the weatherboard out in the bush.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
quadfan:
04 Sep 2008 10:53:30am
Don't know if it has been mentioned yet but 4WD's already have a tax concession - to do with duty or something. And the reason they do have this is because of the rural lobby. The only problem is the 95% of 4WD users do not go off road or near a farm but also get this concession - which is a very sore point.
The tax does not just include 4WD and I would not support a farmer getting a tax concession on a Porche
Also the reason the Greens supported it is because the government included an emissions requirement.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Farmers:
04 Sep 2008 10:53:46am
"There's no way that Family First can vote for a bill that's going to put up a tax for farmers and tourism, that's just crazy.
If they are doing it so tough why would they be buying expensive luxury cars anyway??Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
1SQ:
04 Sep 2008 10:54:55am
Good on you Senator Fielding you have some common sense. I drive what is now termed to be a luxury car and its not European, Its a Aussie Ford!
The inept & irresponsible Rudd Govt talks about keeping Aussie car manufacturing but on the other hand they could have placed the final nail in the coffin! Mr Rudd that wont keep your union friends happy!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
mikey:
04 Sep 2008 11:00:10am
This just shows how divided this country is - both in the parliament and the general population. Half the population (and pollies) want to do the right thing and minimise harmful consumption and excessive spending. The other half don't care about anything apart from their own selfish agenda.
Any other 'enlightened' society would have embraced this proposal with open arms. If we can't get this sort of legislation passed then we don't have a hope of tackling the big environmental issues into the future. Senator Fielding can burn in his own fire and brimstone! Disgusting!Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Main Man:
04 Sep 2008 11:05:37am
It's good to see this tax was blocked. Last thing we need is another tax. What then another tax. I think it sends a clear message to the government that we do not want to be taxed anymore. The goverment needs to be a bit more careful with how they the tax they do receive.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
David:
04 Sep 2008 11:06:03am
Family First was deemed by the press to be a "Liberal". So what's new ?
So, Steve why not investigate how the "working man" can claim his travel to work expenses, as I assume most of those that purchase a vehicle over $57 can. This will help the FAMILY.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Kathy:
04 Sep 2008 11:07:00am
Good on ya Steve. You'll get my vote again...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Tank:
04 Sep 2008 11:46:21am
Fielding saw poorly drafted legislation and voted accordingly. Just what a good representative does. A pity Labor's inexperience in government shows so clearly in all of this.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
joey:
04 Sep 2008 11:09:38am
When will Rudd & Co wake up and realise they don't control the senate , nor do the greens. This tax along with the alcopops tax were not taken to the electorates during election time so it serves the labor mobs right for getting them rejected. Rest assure many more bills will go down in the senate in the near future. Long live democracy....
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Willster:
04 Sep 2008 11:10:47am
All this talk of "if you can afford that car then you should be taxed more". Well some news for people who don't seem to realise it. The GST, that broad based consumption tax so vehemently opposed by the working family's beloved ALP, taxes consumption. You buy an expensive so called luxury car and you are paying a hell of a lot more tax than poor old struggling Mr Smith who buys a $15k Daewoo or whatever. GST on a $75K car, approx $6,800. GST on $15K pov pack, approx $1,350.
So on top of that Labor's tax thieves want to take an even bigger slice by increasing the LCT. So now they'll take an approx $12000 tax grab on the $75K car and the $15K pov pack is untouched at approx $1350.
It's criminal. GST already takes care of collecting more tax on the more expensive vehicle. The LCT is un-necessary and is just playing upon the politcs of envy to raise more taxes.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
zeb:
04 Sep 2008 11:10:49am
Fielding's decision to block this bill is totally disgraceful and it will be another nail in his coffin. Its obvious that his mate Barnaby has been a hugh influence in his decision. Farmers have been sucking taxpayers dry for the last ten years and to say they cannot find four wheel drive vehicles suitable for farming under 56k is absolute crap. On one hand farmers like to be seen around town in their luxury european vehicles and on the other, cry poor. Lets hope for a double dissolution so real families can finally rid the Senate of grandstanders like Fielding. Bring it on PM.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
lean:
04 Sep 2008 11:12:02am
This is a little policy on the over all problems Aus are facing. Its been defected, let's move on and stop wasting time on it. Rudd government should spend more time on larger issues like the economy, Murray river, drought proof and what we may facing when the mining boom comes to an end.
Democracy.thats what the Senate is about. People get angry with Family first should look hard at themselves. Liberal had to do it tough after they won the election in 96 and rode through the tough time. Labor can do the same thing by negotiating, NOT by crying loud like babies when they get what they want.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
What the....:
04 Sep 2008 11:15:22am
Lets get real ....the vast majority of 4WDs have little to do with off road driving. The tax laws are complicated enough without the two so called