Page 2485 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 18 August 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Clause 31 requires licensees to lodge returns by the 7th of each month. In parallel, the Taxation (Administration) Act has the effect of making payment of the tax due at the same time. Hell hath no fury like a tax-gatherer chasing a missing or late payment. Clause 31 would be fairer if it required lodgment of returns by close of business on the fifth working day of each month. Then the requirement to pay the tax two days later would be reasonable. That is, in effect, what the Bill presently provides, except in a month when the 7th is a public holiday, which then makes the tax due on the 4th.
The careful observer, I am sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, will see a connection here with the Government's broken promise to adjust the dates for payments of rates and land tax so that they would not coincide. This year they are both due by the same day and it happens to be a Sunday. This Government is taking a cavalier attitude to revenue collection that ignores the inescapable realities of the calendar, and asking people to make payments on days which are public holidays will not do it. Providing for payment of the tax in the Gaming Machine Act would be fairer than hiding the provisions in the Taxation (Administration) Act. If there are two different provisions - one that has to do with the lodging of a return and the other which has to do with making the payment - why are they not stated together so that people do not have to go to two different Acts to find out what their responsibilities are?
Mr Deputy Speaker, the Minister will by now, I presume, have observed that there are a number of anomalies in the Bill that need fixing before it becomes law. The Liberals are not opposed to the thrust of this Bill and the accompanying Taxation (Administration) (Amendment) Bill; but we do want our law to be as free of flaws as possible, and this one has a few in it. I suggest that, at the conclusion of the debate in principle, the Government could consider reviewing the Bill in the light of my comments and bringing back a revised version for the detailed debate - one that has these anomalies removed from it, unless they believe that they are not anomalies.
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Berry: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .