Privatisation of state and territory assets and new infrastructure

This inquiry examined incentives to privatise state or territory assets and recycle the proceeds into new infrastructure. Introduction The Economics References Committee examined: Incentives to privatise state or territory assets and recycle the proceeds into new infrastructure, with particular reference to: (a) the role of the Commonwealth in working with states and territories to fund nation-building infrastructure, including: (i) the appropriateness of the Commonwealth providing funding, and (ii) the capacity of the Commonwealth to contribute an additional 15 per cent, or alternative amounts, of reinvested sale proceeds; (b) the economics of incentives to privatise assets; (c) what safeguards would be necessary to ensure any privatisations were in the interests of the state or territory, the Commonwealth and the public; (d) the process for evaluating potential projects and for making recommendations about grants payments, including the application of cost-benefit analyses and measurement of productivity and other benefits; (e) parliamentary scrutiny; (f) alternative mechanisms for funding infrastructure development in states and territories; (g) equity impacts between states and territories arising from Commonwealth incentives for future asset sales; and (h) any related matter

Out of reach? The Australian housing affordability challenge

This report argues that Australia\u27s housing market is not meeting the needs of all Australians, which is reflected in declining home ownership rates, and recommends extensive reforms. Executive summary In this report, the committee underscores the importance of affordable, secure and suitable housing as a vital determinant of wellbeing. But, based on the evidence, the committee finds that a significant number of Australians are not enjoying the security and comfort of affordable and appropriate housing—that currently Australia\u27s housing market is not meeting the needs of all Australians. Sustained growth in median housing costs above the rate of median household income growth in recent decades has made it increasingly difficult for a growing proportion of Australians to afford housing that is safe, secure and appropriate to their needs. Added to the general decline in housing affordability, and indeed compounding the trend, the stock of affordable housing—that is, housing appropriate to the needs of low- to moderate-income households—has failed to keep pace with demand in recent decades. The committee does not believe the issue of housing affordability in Australia is rightly categorised as either a \u27supply-side problem\u27 or a \u27demand-side problem\u27. With this in mind, it is clearly evident that supply is currently not keeping pace with demand in the housing market. In this context, policy interventions that add to demand without addressing or at least accounting for supply-side constraints risk inflating house prices and exacerbating affordability problems. Worsening housing affordability is reflected in declining home ownership rates. This decline is troubling for a number of reasons, not least because home ownership can be an important means for people to achieve financial and social wellbeing. Moreover, high rates of home ownership also provide broader economic and social benefits to the community. As such, while the committee believes governments should work to improve affordability outcomes for all types of housing tenure, it considers it appropriate for governments to promote home ownership. The committee makes a range of recommendations directed primarily toward improving home purchase affordability. They include state governments phasing out conveyancing stamp duties, to be achieved through a transition to more efficient taxes, potentially including land taxation levied on a broader base than is currently the case. Other recommendations are directed at improving the efficiency, effectiveness and equity of infrastructure funding arrangements, which can have a strong influence on the cost of new housing. Similarly, a number of recommendations are made with the intention of ensuring land supply, urban planning and zoning processes have a positive effect on housing affordability

You cannot tax what you cannot see: corporate tax avoidance report part 1

This interim report summarises the findings of the Senate Inquiry into corporate tax avoidance and aggressive minimisation, after holding five public hearings and receiving more than one hundred submissions. Given both the public interest and new issues that have been raised over the course of the inquiry, it will continue through the latter half of the year with a provisional final reporting date of 30 November 2015. This interim report makes 17 recommendations over four areas: evidence of tax avoidance and aggressive minimisation; multilateral efforts to combat tax avoidance and aggressive minimisation; potential areas of unilateral action to protect Australia\u27s revenue base; and the capacity of Australian government agencies to collect corporate taxes. It is expected that the final report will focus primarily on transfer pricing and profit shifting, with a secondary focus on: excessive debt loading; foreign companies avoiding permanent establishment in Australia; the use of tax havens; exemptions from general purpose accounting; and the role of private accounting firms in tax avoidance

Section 46: where we have been and where we are going: a review of the recent debate

Two recent reviews of Part IV of the Trade Practices Act (Commonwealth) (1974) have looked specifically at the operation of Section 46 of this Act and have come to very different conclusions concerning its efficacy. The Dawson review (2003) argued that no change to S 46 was required as the courts were providing sufficient guidance in the application of the legislation in this respect. The Senate Committee review (2004) came to different conclusions arguing that the Act needed clarification in regard to certain sections. These reports highlight the controversy that has surrounded this section of the Trade Practices Act for the past thirty years. The aim of this paper is to consider these reviews and evaluate the extent to which the High Court has been able to provide guidance in the application of legislation that prohibits the misuse of market power.<br /