IT was an interesting experiment to undertake – determining how many days of the year you work for the tax man.
IT was an interesting experiment to undertake – determining how many days of the year you work for the tax man.
Perhaps we should not be surprised to find that high income earners spend almost twice as long as their cousins in the lowest bracket working off their annual debt to tax.
Tax is always an issue and this year, with a federal election looming, the subject has again grabbed the limelight.
The GST has dominated the headlines but more recently the impact of tax-effective investment schemes has further fuelled debate.
In this context, how many days we work for ourselves and how much goes to tax is relevant.
And this has nothing to do with how much people earn in monetary terms.
Only a few diehards would disagree with the argument that we should pay a percentage of our income in tax to cover the many services that maintain the fabric of society and provide a secure environment for us to live, and do business.
However, just how much we pay is a subject of perpetual debate.
Some countries demand far higher levels of tax while others, notably financial capitals to our north, charge significantly less.
As the world globalises, these rates become far more relevant.
Why would you work for close to half a year for everyone else when you can go offshore under better conditions?
In the case of Australia, the argument of lifestyle does apply. But not for everyone, and more often people are willing to sacrifice lifestyle for the financial gains of working in a low-tax environment.
When a high-salaried Australian looks at how much of their year is spent working for the greater good of society, there is a point where charity ceases to be of interest.
Remember, someone on a high salary paying 30 cents in the dollar would still be paying far more tax than a low-income worker at the same marginal rate.
It is not a system that is going to change overnight but these sorts of calculations will help people see the system in a simple, undisguised manner.
Until things change, tax will always be a big issue and tax minimisation will continue to be a favourite sport of Australians.
A viable choice
IT is fascinating to see the rapid evolution of renewable energy.
After decades of solar races across the Nullarbor and colourful talk of exotic projects, renewable energy is suddenly being seen as viable.
In fact there is a new race on, with companies seeking to position themselves to take advantage of this development as new technology allows it to emerge from the shadow of fossil fuels.
Perhaps it is government-led quotas and emission controls that have sparked this new interest. Or maybe the market dominance of traditional energy giants has forced entrepreneurial players to seek new ways to compete.
Whatever the case, WA is blessed with an abundance of potential renewable energy sources and we are wealthy enough to afford to experiment with such a process which would complement our existing energy industry.
Perhaps we should not be surprised to find that high income earners spend almost twice as long as their cousins in the lowest bracket working off their annual debt to tax.
Tax is always an issue and this year, with a federal election looming, the subject has again grabbed the limelight.
The GST has dominated the headlines but more recently the impact of tax-effective investment schemes has further fuelled debate.
In this context, how many days we work for ourselves and how much goes to tax is relevant.
And this has nothing to do with how much people earn in monetary terms.
Only a few diehards would disagree with the argument that we should pay a percentage of our income in tax to cover the many services that maintain the fabric of society and provide a secure environment for us to live, and do business.
However, just how much we pay is a subject of perpetual debate.
Some countries demand far higher levels of tax while others, notably financial capitals to our north, charge significantly less.
As the world globalises, these rates become far more relevant.
Why would you work for close to half a year for everyone else when you can go offshore under better conditions?
In the case of Australia, the argument of lifestyle does apply. But not for everyone, and more often people are willing to sacrifice lifestyle for the financial gains of working in a low-tax environment.
When a high-salaried Australian looks at how much of their year is spent working for the greater good of society, there is a point where charity ceases to be of interest.
Remember, someone on a high salary paying 30 cents in the dollar would still be paying far more tax than a low-income worker at the same marginal rate.
It is not a system that is going to change overnight but these sorts of calculations will help people see the system in a simple, undisguised manner.
Until things change, tax will always be a big issue and tax minimisation will continue to be a favourite sport of Australians.
A viable choice
IT is fascinating to see the rapid evolution of renewable energy.
After decades of solar races across the Nullarbor and colourful talk of exotic projects, renewable energy is suddenly being seen as viable.
In fact there is a new race on, with companies seeking to position themselves to take advantage of this development as new technology allows it to emerge from the shadow of fossil fuels.
Perhaps it is government-led quotas and emission controls that have sparked this new interest. Or maybe the market dominance of traditional energy giants has forced entrepreneurial players to seek new ways to compete.
Whatever the case, WA is blessed with an abundance of potential renewable energy sources and we are wealthy enough to afford to experiment with such a process which would complement our existing energy industry.
