So it would appear that both sides of politics is in on the great mining scam of the ATO. Won’t hear anything about it in the Murdoch press!
No indeed Pedro. If anything, acclamation. The ALP has a long and dirty history in this area. Marn Ferson, for example, was clapped enthusiastically by Libs AND Labs for good reason on his departure. He was well inside the conservative tent. M. Newman would have loved him. Good riddance.
that can’t possibly a net figure, including the revenue of royalties, native title, corporate and payroll tax coming back the other way.
At any rate, aren’t all the people who are ‘left’ and pro renewables all about subsidies when justified? if that is the total spent by governements across australia over 6 years for the return in revenues generated by the industry, that’s a wonderfully good investment
I guess we would have to see what the total revenue from royalties, corporate and payroll tax is coming back in over that period is. I wonder what impact it would have on mining sector royalties, tax etc if there was no mining sector welfare?
The other big issue is why the hell should tax payers be paying/subsidizing already profitable mining multinationals to extract resources that essentially belong to Australia depleting non renewable resources that future generations may not have the benefit of?? It is like paying a robber to steal your car and then having your car licence revoked for the rest of your life.
Michael…
“Mark Parnell MLC:
I should have mentioned that this is ONLY State & Territory subsidies, NOT Federal, so doesn’t include diesel fuel rebates, tax concessions and other direct Federal subsidies.”
on the even the figures provided in their own report it shows how shallow the analysis is. Take WA, figure 8 puts subsidy at $1.4B and revenue from this same industry at $5.8B… a $4.4B dollar return on that subsidy (investment). where would that $4.4B come from otherwise? let’s not get started on that fact they are including spending on something like port infrastructure as a one off subsidy, instead of the state building an asset which the industry then pays to use in the future and will generate very large returns. yep, this one was just a paper trying to get a reaction.
Those numbers are dodgy as, just went through them.
Care to provide some proof of that assertion juxx0r?
Or are you just trolling?
Just curious.
No, they’re there for all all to see. Check em out yourself.
Care to clarify if you mean dodgy as in “crazy the State Government is providing all those subsidies”, or dodgy as in “The Australian Institute’s figures on subsidies are dodgy”?
Dodgy as, as in didn’t know of any mining operations on the Kwinana freeway etc.
Just had a look at the methodology and the numbers too. So you are dismissing the whole report on the understanding that a 0.6m petroleum related subsidy for a freight management system on the Kwinana Freeway is not related to a mining project?
The figures in this report come from the budget papers of the State Governments and the methodology is explained in detail. Pretty thorough and transparent in my view.
$3B spend on QR is treated as a subsidy prior to sale… interesting logic. WA spending on port a subsidy… interesting logic. NSW in FY13-14, $134M assistance against $1.5B in royalties… this is bad? that’s not even taking into account the taxes on top of royalties. what an indeed shoddy piece of work.
Industry group slams anti-mining think tank
Blair Price
Monday, 15 September 2014
THE New South Wales Minerals Council has slammed the Australia Institute for its “fraudulent” claim that the mining industry receives $A17.6 billion in government subsidies.
Stephen Galilee
The claim, made in Australia Institute’s Mining the age of entitlement report released in June, was taken apart by Castalia Strategic Advisors managing director and former NSW treasury secretary Michael Schur.
He found that the Australia Institute grossly exaggerated the level of subsidy to the mining and resources sector and conducted “fundamentally flawed” analysis of state and territory budgets with government subsidies “amounting to no more than a few percentage points of the $17.6 billion claimed by the institute”.
“The Australia Institute has been clearly caught attempting a massive economic fraud to attack the mining industry,” NSWMC CEO Stephen Galilee said.
“This should confirm once and for all that the Australia Institute is an antimining campaign organisation masquerading as a think tank.
“The revelation of this $17 billion fraud means that the economic credibility of the Australia Institute is now in tatters.”
“The Australia Institute should now apologise to the hard working miners of NSW and their families for campaigning against their jobs, and drop once and for all their attempts to put working people into unemployment.”
Schur also had some words for the left-leaning organisation.
“Shining a spotlight on corporate welfare is a good thing, Australia can illafford it,” he said, with his full report available on the NSWMC website.
“However, the Australia Institute’s claims are based on a flawed analytical framework and are in the main unfounded.”
The Australia Institute has not yet responded to the NSWMC/Schur claims on its website.
The Australian Greens party-linked think tank was founded by environmental economist Clive Hamilton.