Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Labor continues to dominate on voting intention, though few seem impressed by its stance on Adani.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll has Labor’s two-party lead at 54-46, up from 53-47 last time. Primary vote numbers will be with us later. Also featured are Essential’s monthly (I think) leadership ratings, and they find Malcolm Turnbull little changed at 41% approval (up two) and 41% disapproval (on one), but Bill Shorten improving to 37% approval (up four) and 44% disapproval (down two). Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister is 41-26, compared with 42-25 last time.

Other questions relate to Adani, on which 30% favour the Greens’ position, 26% favour the Coalition’s and 19% favour Labor’s, though it would be important to see the question wording on that one. Other findings related by The Guardian are that 42% support and 39% oppose company tax cuts; that regulating energy prices had 83% support, an “Accord-style partnership” 66% support and boosting Newstart 52% support; and that same-sex marriage is supported by 65% and opposed by 26%. Essential Research’s full report should be with us later in the day.

UPDATE: Full report here. Primary vote gains for the major parties at the expense of other/independent, with the Coalition up one to 36% and Labor up three to 38%, with the Greens down one to 9% and One Nation steady on 8%. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1025.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

2,546 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

  1. bemused @ #2136 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 4:13 pm

    Old Spoke @ #2132 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 4:03 pm

    It’s a long time since the law decided that companies are legal entities, entirely separate from their individual owners.

    Income earned by individuals is taxable subject to a tax free threshold of $18k; profits earned by companies are taxable at 30% with no tax free threshold.

    Dividend imputation was introduced to prevent double taxation of profits when they were passed on as income to individual shareholders; it was not intended to make profits earned by companies free of all tax.

    Effectively a shareholder on a marginal tax rate of 32.5% tops up the tax paid by the company with an extra 2.5%. Arguments that a non tax paying shareholder is “entitled” to be get the tax paid by a company are pure sophistry, ignoring the separate legal (and tax) status of the parties.

    In fact, to be purely correct, labor’s reform should not just ban the cash back but should only allow franking credits to be applied against tax payable on dividend income, not income from other sources.

    Shareholders should not expect to benefit from the many advantages of incorporation but then pretend the separation of identity doesn’t exist when it suits them.

    Excellent post.

    Yes. Absolutely.

  2. @Peg

    I don’t think the ACOSS and Council on the Ageing supports these Pensioners who get additional payments on top of their investments.

    You’re Lies:

    ACOSS
    ‏ @ACOSS
    1h1 hour ago

    In the many stories about ppl losing $1000s from labor’s dividends policy, 1 thing is often forgotten:
    they have assets they can draw upon.
    In examples of ppl losing >$5k a year they have >$500k in shares

    ACOSS
    ‏ @ACOSS
    1h1 hour ago

    Some say labor’s dividend policy wd mean ppl can’t afford health care, eg dental. This is exactly why we need more than 16% of older ppl to pay income tax. Many, many ppl can’t afford to fix their teeth. Many more worry about cost of aged care. We need the revenue to fix this.

  3. So Roman Quadbike is gone.

    https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australian-border-force-boss-roman-quaedvlieg-sacked-following-conduct-review

    DUtton says he doesn’t want to comment as it is a sensitive time.

    Sensitive is an understatement. In my view the biggest boss in border force helping out his girlfriend is more than inappropriate. It surely must be illegal under some act somewhere.

    It is staggering if has taken a year nearly to reach this point. They must have been desperate to find a way to get him off the hook.

  4. In other words Peg, stop you’re bullshit.

    People using dividend policy are not poor, they are rich.

    And the rich are the ones who screaming!

  5. Jackol and PeeBee

    “it is unfair that only one group get the tax credits”

    The above quote is WTTE written by Pee Bee, but Jackol expresses the same sentiments.

    I’m not sure that either of you actually understand what is proposed by Labor. Keating initiated the imputation scheme for one reason. To ensure that tax was only paid once on company profits. So under his scheme which persisted for 13 0r 14 years, taxpayers received a credit for the tax already paid by the company.

    But the hammock dweller, washing around in oodles of revenue ( and with his boss becoming a bit on the nose) gifted the same right to get back company-already-paid tax to non-taxpayers.

    Unlike the Keating’s scheme, when non-taxpayers get the tax credit back as a cash handout, the net effect is that on the non-taxpayers’ dividends no-one pays tax on those dollars. The tax already paid by the company is returned wholus bolus in greenbacks. The ATO gets no tax on that part of their profits, and nor do the <non-taxpayers.

    At the same time with taxpayers, the company tax remains paid, and the taxpayers simply has an extra tax deduction to incorporate into his annual tax return. He pays less tax, as does an taxpayers who has deductibles included in his tax return. But the company tax on the taxpayer’s dividend stays paid.

    If you look at the imputation credit given to taxpayers as a tax deductible item, it has the same effect and the same legitimacy or not as any tax deduction.

    Should I be able to whinge about the fact that my next door neighbour gets a tax deduction (and additional wealth stemming from his relationship with the ATO) in the form of the cost of washing his compulsory work uniform. I also wear a (sports) uniform, so I should get a similar amount back from the ATO (in cash, since I am a non-taxpayer. The answer is clearly no …..non-taxpayers have a qualitatively different relationship to the ATO than taxpayers.

    Having said this, I do understand the negative feelings that ATO / government policy changes give rise to when one is on the receiving end.

    The hammock dwellers decision not to tax superannuation payouts in 2006 cost me several $100Ks, having taken a decision a couple of months earlier to forego a substantial defined benefits pension, and cash it out so that my non-superannuated partner and I could income split. At the time that was a sensible and legitimate thing to do in my circumstances, but it was based on superannuation being taxed. Then Costello shat on my strategy.

  6. ‘briefly says:
    Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 4:06 pm

    Boer…the US cannot subjugate Afghanistan…would have no hope in Iran’

    Of course the US could subjugate Afghanistan. It would have to mean to do so. At the moment it is content to run a limited war for limited war objectives.

  7. Windhover @ #2134 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 3:15 pm

    d

    Mostly I use the scroll wheel but sometimes I have a peek.

    The argument that it could not be the Russians because it is much too clumsy an effort is unconvincing at every level.

    Let’s assume Putin instigated the poisoning. In that event I am prepared to accept Putin would have believed it likely that the British would be able to implicate Russian labs as the source of the poison and blame him. Why would that stop him?

    On the positive side for Putin of being exposed:

    (a) Putin is demonstrating (again) to his own population the real and present danger of opposing him. And that going overseas is no protection.
    (b) Putin is demonstrating (again – think Ukraine, Syria) to the rest of the world his contempt for the rules of war. If a foreign nation opposes Russia they will need to be prepared for every contingency seems morally normative conduct will not limit the Putin response.

    On the negative side for Putin of being exposed:

    (a) There will be some kickback against Russia. World Cup soccer ticket sales will probably drop a bit, for the lesser games anyway. But he will deny it anyway and there will be a whole host of people who will accept his denial or alternatively suspend judgment or don’t care.

    (b) There will be some embassy expulsions and maybe a few trade sanctions here and there to get around.

    So I don’t see why for a ruthless leader like Putin the positives are not seen to heavily outweigh the negatives. Since I seriously believe what I have written I am happy to be described as an idiot by any stable geniuses who scoff at my simplicity.

    Sorry Windhover but what a pack on irrational nonsense

    Firstly why would Putin choose NOW to do this, right before the World Cup and in the midst of delicate negotiations about Syria. Truly this is the problem you have. Timing is all wrong.

    a) I can accept this if there was some sort of sensible methodology to killing them. But not a wacky nerve gas plot. What is wrong the a gun ffs or a car. It is the crazes use of nerve gas that reads Daily Express extra rather than a rational act by Putin or other Russian government officials.

    B) That statement is just hypocrisy triple plus. Now Ukraine re Crimea there may be a case sorta but I have not heard the Crimeans whinging and after all it was just an admin decision made by the Ukrainian Kruschev that gave Crimea to Ukraine, despite the fact that they were very different. The Donbass is just as the US are doing to Syrian rebels. Giving them arms and training but not any actual boots on the ground. So sure you can argue the point, but if you do so you must ALSO argue the point re Turkey, Saudi, Jordan and the US.

    Now in case you have not realised Russia was INVITED into Syria bu the government. No rules of war broken at all. In fact I do not think their is any evidence at all of any Russian braking rules of engagement at all. Possibly the Syrian government forces, possibly mercenaries but Russia has behaved just like Australia in meticulously following the rules of engagement. Moreover while there have been major attacks on urban centres, you cannot call out the Syrians/Russians for say Aleppo without at the same time calling out the USA and the FSA for the appalling destruction and civilian deaths in Raqua.

    As for your other points about kick backs I think you probably are underestimating the World cup effect. But yes the rest of it probably will not be too severe. Conceivably the UK has more to lose if Russia goes in hard in retaliation. Britain should be trying to build new markets rather than lose them.

  8. I’ll bet these are sensitive times!
    The notion that Q does not have bags of dirt on the Coalition (and back to a certain Queensland ex-plod) is laughable.
    Q has been reported as denying everything and keeping his options open.

  9. Quadbike’s demise brings a whole new slant to the meaning of Home Affairs Department.

    I would bet Dutton and Pezullo have already handpicked a replacement who shares their views on policing

  10. Boerwar @ #2158 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 4:38 pm

    ‘briefly says:
    Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 4:06 pm

    Boer…the US cannot subjugate Afghanistan…would have no hope in Iran’

    Of course the US could subjugate Afghanistan. It would have to mean to do so. At the moment it is content to run a limited war for limited war objectives.

    BW, you mean like they subjugated Vietnam. I say bullshit.

  11. “Have you READ what I posted. Only an idiot would seriously believe that the Russians took out the spy. it is much, much, much, much, much too clumsy an effort.”

    The above gratuitous rudeness and rather silly assertion that “it cant be the Russians as they wouldn’t be so clumsy” being why i have learned to mostly just scroll past you posts ddt.

    I wasn’t actually aware that i was responding to anything you may have posted on this. Just my comment on the situation.

    Naff off ddt. 🙁

  12. GG

    Yes the US is self sufficient in oil but not the rest of the world including its allies. Australia and Japan would obviously suffer greatly.

    Europe would be separate if Russia was involved as it would turn off the tap for Germany and Ukraine etc. The US would not be in a position to help them out.

  13. Yabba88

    Of course the US could have subjugated Vietnam. It just did not want to pay the cost. Twenty years before Vietnam the US had 8 million soldiers, tens of thousands of war planes, thousands of warships hundreds of thousands of artillery pieces and related items, and tens of thousands of tanks.

    The US simply did not want to pay the full price of subjugating Vietnam, fought a half-arsed war and lost. Australia was the same. We had at one stage 400,000 men in uniform during WW2. We only ever sent a fraction of that number to Vietnam.

    This issue is important. Australians have been conditioned to think that all wars are limited and symbolic. So we enthusiastically send job lots over to various wars to pretend that make a difference and that the wars we fight are real wars.

    The reason this conditioning is very dangerous is that we have lost touch with the notion of total war with an enemy that will fight a total war on something like even terms.

  14. I wonder what Roman Q’s avenues of appeal are. His appointment is made and terminated by the G-G on the recomendation of Executive Council and what is higher than that?

    I think it was Gough who abolished appeals to the Privy Council. Is Buckingham Palace still in play?

  15. R
    He could appeal directly to Australia’s sense of fair play, decency, humanity and transparency – such as is dealt out to his erstwhile charges in various boats, in Manus and Nauru.

  16. Imacca

    Clumsy Russians. My local KGB agent was only lamenting the other day how hard it is to get good tradies these days. Sparkies, plumbers, assassins …

  17. imacca @ #2165 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 3:48 pm

    “Have you READ what I posted. Only an idiot would seriously believe that the Russians took out the spy. it is much, much, much, much, much too clumsy an effort.”

    The above gratuitous rudeness and rather silly assertion that “it cant be the Russians as they wouldn’t be so clumsy” being why i have learned to mostly just scroll past you posts ddt.

    I wasn’t actually aware that i was responding to anything you may have posted on this. Just my comment on the situation.

    Naff off ddt. 🙁

    Naff off yourself.

    You started with a comment re scrolling by so obviously assumed you would know what I was talking about.

    Sorry if I have upset your ickle ego, but truly sometimes people are just gullible fools. I have no patience for such nonsense.

    Too many of you treat it like a footy match. It IS NOT

    The imbecilic actions of the UK risk nuclear war.

    Did you note Putin’s speech. Did you hear what he said. Attack Russia or her allies and no hold barred.

    Oh and we have some new super duper weapons.

    Even if he is exaggerating on the weapons. there is enough substance there for existing militaries to be scared .

    The people accusing Russia are the same ones who make false allegations about Iraq. A million people died for that LIE and you want to accept the same rubbish and have another 10 million die.

  18. Imacca

    When the topic is war and the risk of it and the millions ho may die, I honestly do not care too much about hurting yours or anyone elses feelings. The issues are too important to play the mealy mouth.

    Scroll by. It is your choice. I do the same for most here only stopping when I see something of note.

  19. Psyclaw –

    non-taxpayers have a qualitatively different relationship to the ATO than taxpayers.

    What a load of bollocks. There is no such distinction as far as the ATO is concerned. I have an income, I lodge an income tax return every year. If I earn a certain amount I am liable for a certain amount of income tax, just like everyone else. It happens that for the last few years my income has been below the tax free threshold. That doesn’t suddenly change my relationship with the ATO or the tax system. And what is this ‘qualitatively’ bollocks? Tax is not a ‘qualitative’ issue, it’s all about numbers and thresholds – that’s what matters, not some ‘qualitative’ nonsense invented by you.

    I assume by using ‘qualitatively’ you’re implying that the distinction you’re drawing is relevant to the (endlessly ill-informed) public debate on this. ie it’s a distinction that you have drawn that you want to make an argument about, not something that the tax system can or should have anything to say about.

    But the company tax on the taxpayer’s dividend stays paid.

    No it doesn’t. The company tax on the franked dividend is refunded as a credit, and the income is reassessed as the recipient’s personal income, and personal income tax levied appropriately on that. That is true for all franked divided recipients in all cases at the moment; the ALP proposal retains this system except for those who have little or no other income tax liability.

  20. Boerwar

    And did his girlfriend get the job and has she still got it? And who dobbed?

    It’s a pretty spectacular way to end a career when you think of it. One of the nations most powerful law enforcers put everything on the line with an extra marital affair.

    In some ways a bigger act of stupidity than Joyce’s.

    Hopefully someone out there knows the background and we will be filled in at some time.

  21. We all know the position of the Greens… head in the sand, bum in the air along with a cheery yoohoo to the reactionaries!
    The rest is mere detail.

  22. Rossmcg
    They tend to develop delusions of grandeur, omnipotence and infallibility: popes, top plods and pollies all alike.
    The sign? Their own rules do not apply to them.

  23. Boerwar @ #2172 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 4:53 pm

    Yabba88

    Of course the US could have subjugated Vietnam. It just did not want to pay the cost. Twenty years before Vietnam the US had 8 million soldiers, tens of thousands of war planes, thousands of warships hundreds of thousands of artillery pieces and related items, and tens of thousands of tanks.

    The US simply did not want to pay the full price of subjugating Vietnam, fought a half-arsed war and lost. Australia was the same. We had at one stage 400,000 men in uniform during WW2. We only ever sent a fraction of that number to Vietnam.

    This issue is important. Australians have been conditioned to think that all wars are limited and symbolic. So we enthusiastically send job lots over to various wars to pretend that make a difference and that the wars we fight are real wars.

    The reason this conditioning is very dangerous is that we have lost touch with the notion of total war with an enemy that will fight a total war on something like even terms.

    Really?
    The US dropped more bombs in Vietnam than it dropped in all theatres of WWII.
    It had total domination of air and sea.
    It had the advantage of highly mobile, helicopter borne forces backed by its air power and artillery.
    It had armour.
    It descended into barbarism of which My Lai was just the tip of the iceberg.
    Had it chosen to turn the whole country into smoking rubble I suppose it could have won some sort of pyrrhic victory. And been despised by the rest of the world.

  24. Boerwar

    Indeed … Power corrupts etc …

    But this is still a spectacular fail . I expect it of politicians but military and police types is a surprise to me.

    Will dutton blame shorten, people smugglers, the CFMEU …

  25. Mark Riley just said that Quadvleig is going to launch an Unfair Dismissal case. With what the taxpayers have given him recently, he can afford to.

  26. daretotread. @ #2100 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 11:18 am


    Absolutely Bemused.

    Someone has to be paranoid. Actually in all seriousness societies survive by there being some overly sensitive “paranoid types” otherwise the wolf will come in the night and eat them all.

    Someone has to be paranoid, because you never know how the paranoid bastard on the other side will react.

    And if no one was paranoid?

    🙂

  27. Duttons yearning for white South African farmers mirrors that of Pell who lobbied Abbott and Howard to let in the good christian black South Sudanese.

    Ironically 15 or so years later Dutton is slurring those South Sudanese on no basis for political purposes and proposes to bring in the farmers facing violence and threats from the blacks in SA and relax gun laws at the same time, is that his solution?

  28. “poroti
    Wet work is not what it used to be.”

    Indeed. Whoever got assigned the hit would not last long in Ankh-Morpork.

    Vetinari would have a quiet word with the head of the guild about something loosely related to education and training standards and …………enough said. 🙂

  29. Jackol @ #2180 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 5:02 pm

    But the company tax on the taxpayer’s dividend stays paid.

    No it doesn’t. The company tax on the franked dividend is refunded as a credit, and the income is reassessed as the recipient’s personal income, and personal income tax levied appropriately on that. That is true for all franked divided recipients in all cases at the moment; the ALP proposal retains this system except for those who have little or no other income tax liability

    Legislatively, when a company pays tax they receive a credit from the ATO of equivalent value. The credit is not a refund of tax paid. It is a credit and when passed to the shareholder is legislatively defined as income to the shareholder. The shareholder is then assessed for tax on their total income (divs + frank credits + other income) and the credits are applied to reduce tax payable (if any).

    It was Howard’s sophistry when he used the (entirely false) “company is just a conduit” story to justify a handout of taxes paid by one group of taxpayers to another legally separate group of taxpayers.

    Jackol and other low income folk benefited from that change but no where near as much as many high wealth individuals. Unfortunately, Jackol et al will suffer from correcting the situation, meanwhile the others will barely notice any difference in their lifestyle. Hopefully, labor has plans to remediate the situation for the Jackols with appropriately targeted measures.

  30. ratsak @ #1434 Thursday, March 15th, 2018 – 3:05 pm

    Blow me down. Scott Ludlam uses his column to promote Greens as fighting the good fight and Labor as hopeless.

    I’m shocked I tells ya.

    Next week from Ludlam – how Labor’s imputation changes smash poor widdle self funded retirees living by the waterfront in working-class Rozelle that the Greens aim to capture to win Grayndler.

    It’s the slap in the face we all need.

  31. dtt overlooks the very obvious feature of the Russian use of nerve agent in the UK. That is, Russia intends to draw attention to itself and to provoke counter-measures, allowing Putin to play up the idea of an “external menace” for domestic consumption.

    Putin is letting everyone know that Russia is restless but will assert itself. Very low cost exercise for Putin.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *