BludgerTrack: 53.7-46.3 to Labor

BludgerTrack returns from hibernation, albeit with only one new poll result to play with.

The return of Essential Research provided the BludgerTrack mill with its first grist for the new year, but the model is at its least robust when it only has one data point to play with after a long gap. This means BludgerTrack strongly follows the lead of a poll that was less bad for the Coalition than their usual form, resulting in a substantial reduction in Labor’s still commanding lead on two-party preferred. Labor is also down six on the seat projection – one in each mainland state and two in Queensland. The Essential poll also included a new set of numbers for the leadership ratings, and these produced a weak result for Bill Shorten that has blunted his recent improving trend. Full results through the link below.

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.

3,129 comments on “BludgerTrack: 53.7-46.3 to Labor”

Comments Page 60 of 63
1 59 60 61 63
  1. Just so i can be informed on the proposed ALP CGT changes:

    If asset is held for >1 yr currently 50% of realised cap gain is taxable, am i correct that ALP want 100% taxability in all cases?
    This will apply ‘retrospectively’ in the sense that assets held today that would be taxed at 50% will instead be taxed at 100% if sold post change?
    Any realistic chance of this being abandoned when in govt?
    Any realistic chance of greens opposing it in the senate? I spose a higher chance with indep bop senators?

    This is the one policy of theirs im not excited about, could drive a tax minimisation fire sale that otherwise wouldnt happen. I’d be delighted if i have this wrong and can be set straight…

  2. Clem
    Take your own advice and calm down. You’ve said plenty more than is necessary and its moronic. Your next post will decide your fate.
    Stop, think, keyboard.

  3. Goll, you’re the one telling people to shut up. I don’t know what the problem is. Do your worst. You are confusing me with someone who actually cares what you think… guess what… I don’t!

  4. Morrison showed his incompetence as Treasurer … so now is no surprise to me.

    Begs the question … did thy make him PM to get him away from being Treasurer?

  5. Expat follower

    Just so i can be informed on the proposed ALP CGT changes:

    If asset is held for >1 yr currently 50% of realised cap gain is taxable, am i correct that ALP want 100% taxability in all cases?
    This will apply ‘retrospectively’ in the sense that assets held today that would be taxed at 50% will instead be taxed at 100% if sold post change?
    Any realistic chance of this being abandoned when in govt?
    Any realistic chance of greens opposing it in the senate? I spose a higher chance with indep bop senators?
    _______________________________________

    1. Labor policy is to reduce discount from 50% to 25% (not zero, as implied by your question)

    2. There is no retrospectively. I don’t know when the change will kick in, but certainly not before the election. If you own a taxable asset now, and it has been held for at least 12 months at time of disposal, then the capital gain will be reduced by 50% before tax applies.

    3. Can’t answer, but it is unlikely.

    4. I would not expect the Greens to oppose. Anything is possible though.

  6. Ps even if the current coalition thoughtleaders don’t appear blessed with great judgement at the moment, even they cannot be so stupid as to consider separate senate and house elections? That just risks a senate hiding as well as a reps one… though even in a half senate election with baseball bats out i dont think lab-green could pick up enough to form a senate majority?


  7. Expat Follower says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 8:33 pm

    Just so i can be informed on the proposed ALP CGT changes:

    If asset is held for >1 yr currently 50% of realised cap gain is taxable, am i correct that ALP want 100% taxability in all cases?

    -It takes it back to where Keating had put it; the discount was part of Howard’s all out effort to burn the mining boom.
    -The capital gain is adjusted for inflation.
    -It was a very good policy to replace death duty.

    It will effect me, and to a very large tune and I have been trying to convince my better half to sell before the election; she will not be in it.

    I still believe putting it back to where it was, is the right thing to do. It completely unjust that people get taxed on the income produced by working, while people don’t get tax on income from holding assets.

    Budget repair means fixing up the tax distortions introduce by Costello, not pinching dimes from pensioners, or destroying the education of our children.

  8. TPOF… your #2 answer… what level of certainty do you have in its correctness?

    Just to drill a bit further if you dont mind, if one acquires an asset between now and the tax change and holds for a year (but the year is after the change) then even if law changes the 50% will apply on disposal?

    If yes, think ALP need to communicate this more clearly. Vulnerable to a bit of a scare campaign on this one imho

  9. Davidwh says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 8:48 pm

    Expat I was wrong Labor will grandfather existing capital items.

    I didn’t know that, I had assumed the discount would be removed and that was that.


  10. Expat Follower says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 8:50 pm


    I am interested in your arguments to justify taxing salaries and incomes and not gains made from holding assets?

  11. Frednk even if i agree as a matter of principle, i think its human nature to act in one’s self-interest if such an adverse change is coming and can be mitigated?

    Its the consequence of mass activity of that sort that im not sure have been accounted for…

    I’d also maybe point to first home owners who want to upgrade as their family grows whose purchasing power gets significantly reduced. I think there are arguments for some exemption or means test relief…

  12. Horse’s mouth:

    Capital gains tax

    Labor will halve the capital gains discount for all assets purchased after a yet-to-be-determined date after the next election. This will reduce the capital gains tax discount for assets that are held longer than 12 months from the current 50 per cent to 25 per cent.

    All investments made before this date will not be affected by this change and will be fully grandfathered.

    This policy change will also not affect investments made by superannuation funds. The CGT discount will not change for small business assets. This will ensure that no small businesses are worse off under these changes.

    Labor will consult with industry, relevant stakeholders and State governments on further design and implementation details ahead of the start date for both these proposals.

    https://www.alp.org.au/negativegearing

  13. I heard someone protesting to Faine on the ABC that they were self funded retirees and “were not a burden to government” because they receive nothing from government (monetary obviously)

    Then they launched saying 25% of their income was from dividend imputation

    The question not put was, if you fully support yourself from having worked throughout your life, who puts 25% of your income into your bank account?

    And why, given you have not paid tax in the first instance so the 25% of your income being put into your bank account is not a tax refund?

    So, because of the provisions surrounding the payment of the Aged Pension (or part thereof) you do not qualify for the payment of the Aged Pension BUT you get 25% of your income paid to you by government (not reimbursed to you because of the tax you have paid)

    Because you can so arrange your tax affairs AND are rich enough to buy Shares in Australian Companies that pay fully franked dividends (hence you do not qualify for the Aged Pension or part thereof – noting the family home is exempt from the Assets Test).

    The sooner we have a functioning economy where those with savings receive more than the minimal interest rates currently on offer the sooner people will not enter into such manipulations of their affairs to obtain a reasonable return on their liquid assets – because of the interest rates on offer on savings

    The collateral benefit is that your capital is secure – unlike if you purchase Shares in our banks or Telstra

  14. Expat Follower says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 8:50 pm
    TPOF… your #2 answer… what level of certainty do you have in its correctness?

    Just to drill a bit further if you dont mind, if one acquires an asset between now and the tax change and holds for a year (but the year is after the change) then even if law changes the 50% will apply on disposal?

    If yes, think ALP need to communicate this more clearly. Vulnerable to a bit of a scare campaign on this one imho

    ___________________________________

    I’m pretty certain (say 99%) about answer no 2. I can’t see anything else would be politically sane. The thing I don’t know is precisely when ALP policy will take effect: whether some time after election, but before the legislation is enacted, or when the legislation is enacted or some other specified date (say assets purchased after 1 July 2019).

    Labor has been at great pains to say the change would be prospective. It is people with an interest in the current system who are at pains to obfuscate.

  15. Expat Follower
    I could be wrong and stand to be corrected but to my knowledge the family home as never been subjected to capital gains tax.

  16. frednk says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 9:00 pm
    Expat Follower
    I could be wrong and stand to be corrected but to my knowledge the family home as never been subjected to capital gains tax.

    I don’t know the full detail, but it can be subject to capital gains tax if it has been let for an extended period. For example, if you bought it in 1996, lived in it until 2006, and then rented it out until you sold it in 2016, any capital gain over the 20 year period would be halved to take into account the period you lived there. You would, of course, be able to claim outgoings while it is rented out as tax deductions.

    So, if you bought the house for $300,000 and sold it for $700,000, there would be a $400,000 capital gain. As you lived in the house for half the time you would declare a $200,000 capital gain which would be discounted by 50% to $100,000 in your taxable income.

  17. Itzadream thank you, that confirms TPOFs take. Gives me quite some comfort fwiw.

    Frednk of course you are right re family home… bad example. I do think tax on asset purchases made with after tax money can be treated differently to tax on income?

    I have some concerns around unintended consequences driven by making different choices due to this change in tax, but my self-interest concerns appear to be assuaged with this feedback. Much appreciated to all

  18. Itzadream thank you, that confirms TPOFs take. Gives me quite some comfort fwiw.

    Frednk of course you are right re family home… bad example. I do think tax on asset purchases made with after tax money can be treated differently to tax on income?

    I have some concerns around unintended consequences driven by making different choices due to this change in tax, but my self-interest concerns appear to be assuaged with this feedback. Much appreciated to all

  19. Timing of NG implementation:

    With the election locked in for either May 11 or May 18 next year, due to the government’s decision to hand down a federal budget on April 2, Labor, if it won government, would face a stiff task to legislate the changes before the start of the financial year.

    Party sources would not confirm plans either way but agreed the ability to introduce the changes in just six weeks after an election would not just be a question of timing but whether the Senate would allow passage.
    :::
    More likely than not, the tax changes would not start until July 1, 2020. Any property negatively geared before then would be exempt from the changes.

    https://www.afr.com/news/politics/oneyear-delay-to-labors-negative-gearing-changes-20181205-h18qla

  20. I think John Howard made some tax laws retrospective in the wake of the bottom of the harbour business.
    His name was mud in WA business circles for a long time afterwards.
    May still be.

  21. Here’s a cutie.

    There’s no such thing as retrospective taxation because you are not paying in the past, you’re paying in the present !!

    Indeed, as Fuller noted, taxation legislation is never, strictly speaking, retroactive, because it does not create an obligation to pay tax in the past. Retrospective tax legislation refers to past acts, but imposes an obligation to pay tax in the present.[107]

    https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/laws-retrospective-operation-0
    (scroll down to Taxation Laws)

  22. Expat Follower
    It is my view labor has made it clear they are going to fix the mess Costello made of the tax system; but that is not why people are going to vote Labor.

    They are voting Labor because the raiding of treasury has gone to far. The mismanagement is too blatant. Labor stating they are going to do something about the tax system distortions feeds into the hope that Labor will stop the raid and start managing the show a little better.

    The problem the Liberal party now face is every little bit of tricky policy or book work feeds in the impression of their complete dishonesty.

  23. Expat Follower @ #2985 Tuesday, January 22nd, 2019 – 9:09 pm

    Itzadream thank you, that confirms TPOFs take. Gives me quite some comfort fwiw.

    Frednk of course you are right re family home… bad example. I do think tax on asset purchases made with after tax money can be treated differently to tax on income?

    I have some concerns around unintended consequences driven by making different choices due to this change in tax, but my self-interest concerns appear to be assuaged with this feedback. Much appreciated to all

    For completeness, Negative Gearing is also quarantined, grandfathered. But after a yet to be specified date, the only new property purchases that will benefit from negative gearing will be new builds.

  24. The thing about the Labor changes are that they are intended to be structural, rather than just a quick and dirty way to generate more funds, the way the current government has been operating. It doesn’t matter in the middle to the long term what precise date these changes take effect. What is far more important is that unsustainable tax concessions are taken out of circulation over time.

  25. Itza… yes what im talking about is not strictly retrospective as defined there… but you know what i mean, when you are expecting one tax rate on an existing asset yet find yourself subject to another.

    Applying this law to assets acquired post enactment is clear and unambiguous (and welcome!)

    Gosh now i have some reason for ScoMo to hang on a bit longer… just to push this law coming into effect only in (mid?) 2020 lol

    Steve777 really 81 seats? Are you anticipating an effective Lib campaign/narrowing? If election were held today surely ALP would be pushing 90 if not more i reckon…

  26. I recollect a problem around the introduction of GST.
    A party to a contract signed and enacted lease before the introduction of the GST was required to pay a GST on payments that became due after the imposition of GST. I believe it required special provisions within the legislation. Some matters in some cases resulted in legal disputes. Those without the resources to make a legal case found it less expensive to settle.


  27. Expat Follower says:
    Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 9:09 pm

    Frednk of course you are right re family home… bad example. I do think tax on asset purchases made with after tax money can be treated differently to tax on income?

    I strongly disagree, income is income and letting such a view creep into the tax system is how inequality takes hold. Please leave it there; as I come from a family with assets I have heard all the counter arguments before; none of which has changed my view.

  28. Retrospectivity in tax law has happened. But only where the law change was dealing with unconscionable exploitation of loopholes, such as the bottom of the harbour scheme that Howard attacked.

    It would not be used where there is a legitimate, but unsustainable, concession that is being changed.

  29. Expat Follower,

    Frednk even if i agree as a matter of principle, i think its human nature to act in one’s self-interest if such an adverse change is coming and can be mitigated?

    Novel thought in this day and age in Australia, I know, but some people might just think that the balance of benefit from the taxpayer needed to be tilted away from them who had done so well since the Howard and Costello government and that maybe it was time to give a bit more to those that deserve it now. Like Newstart recipients.

    Just a thought you might like to meditate on.

  30. Fred fair enough… interestingly, coming from a family with no assets and trying to provide for my kids i come to the opposite view on this! But that happens in society. I think TPOF’s point around structurally sound than opportunistic tax policy is common ground we can all meet on

  31. C@tmomma @ #2998 Tuesday, January 22nd, 2019 – 5:31 pm

    Expat Follower,

    Frednk even if i agree as a matter of principle, i think its human nature to act in one’s self-interest if such an adverse change is coming and can be mitigated?

    Novel thought in this day and age in Australia, I know, but some people might just think that the balance of benefit from the taxpayer needed to be tilted away from them who had done so well since the Howard and Costello government and that maybe it was time to give a bit more to those that deserve it now. Like Newstart recipients.

    Just a thought you might like to meditate on.

    But C@t, it’s mine!

Comments Page 60 of 63
1 59 60 61 63

Leave a Reply

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