Menzies House

Payroll tax

Henry Innis explains the inequities of the NSW State Payroll Tax system.

Without a doubt, payroll tax is one of the dumbest taxes I have ever seen. Here in New South Wales it is set at a rate of 5.45% of wages that are over a certain monthly threshold (depending on the number of days). The threshold varies from $52,855 (28 days) to $58,518 (31 days), with variations on wages paid interstate, wages paid for part of a year, and so on and so forth.

The question is, however, why do we even have payroll tax in the first place?

If you think about it, payroll tax in the form described above is little more than a tax on employment. To tax employers a percentage of what they pay out sounds more like a disincentive for companies to employ, if anything.

Take a company with over 20 employees that exceed the threshold. Given that they will have to pay 5.45% of their wage value as tax, they functionally are paying out for 21 employees. That isn’t to mention high levels of corporate tax rates, income tax, the Goods and Services tax, the Carbon Tax and the myriad more hidden ones that don’t immediately come to mind.

Of course, one of the main arguments for supporting the tax is too raise revenue, particularly for often-vulnerable State Governments (when it comes to revenue, Australia is anything but a nation of federalists). But the solution should never be to create more taxes and to draw more money out of the economy where possible.

It’s simple: we need more trains

Henry Innis believes revelers to Kings Cross become trapped in close quarters at exit time and those pressures could be eased through more available transport.

In the wake of the tragic death of Tom Kelly, there has been a surge towards restrictions and crackdowns in the Kings Cross precinct. Assistant Police Commissioner Mark Murdoch said to a forum that “it’s the abuse and availability of alcohol… and that is the problem.”

Let’s face it, its good politics to simplify the issue that way. With hordes of young people entering the Cross every weekend, there is bound to be excessive alcohol consumption that causes some less than desirable behavior.

But it isn’t the real issue at play here. The major problem the Cross faces is a simple one: transport.

Don’t defend marriage, deregulate it

Henry Innis argues we need to get the government out of marriage:

The gay marriage debate is once again raging in Australia. It’s an issue which is pervasive in the minds of many, and stands as one of the great moral divides that exists in today’s political landscape. We can see the arguments made for preserving the traditional family unit, just as the arguments for ending the divisions between relationships.

 But really, that’s not what this argument should be about. This argument should be about asking why a particular group, in this case the LGBT community and their supporters, are advocates of a further intrusion by the state on their lives.

 Let’s look at the current status quo: currently, the government defines the terms, relationship and even the stringent regulation of how a committed, long term relationship ought to function. This is, to my mind, a shocking indictment of the addiction to government that has emerged in our culture.

 So let me propose an alternative: don’t legislate gay marriage, and abolish the Marriage Act entirely. It seems bordering on ridiculous that a bunch of grown adults, capable of committing themselves to another, need their hands held as to the terms and definitions of what that commitment will be.

It’s up to us to end the debate in terms of giving the government yet more authority over the people it governs. Let’s turn our heads to how we can get government out of more individual decisions and commitments. 

Henry Innis is a Vice President of the Sydney University Liberal Club. He "dabbles in entrepreneurial pursuits" and writes in his spare time, and can be found on twitter @henryinnis

Boat People: It's About A Fair Go

Henry Innis discusses why you should be morally appalled about boat people:

You know, for all the pontificating people do over boat people, they really don't represent much of our intake for refugees.

Which is funny, really, because it has always been such a hot button issue with Australians. The idea of someone approaching our shores illegally has never really sat that well with anyone. And I think I have a pretty good idea of why that is.

Australian's can't seriously look at boat people and think they are the end of the world. That they are the single greatest cause of destruction to our economy that there can be. That doesn't seem right, particularly given how low level of an impact they are.

So why is this such a hot button issue? Why don't Australian's want boat people arriving in Australia?

I'll tell you why: because it isn't fair.