Page 4601 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 6 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I think it is unhealthy to have such things dealt with in a political forum. So, for the appropriate body - the Administrative Appeals Tribunal - to be able to review such decisions of the Commissioner for ACT Revenue is, I think, an entirely appropriate process, and I have pleasure in supporting the Bill.
MS FOLLETT (Chief Minister and Treasurer) (8.43), in reply: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the members who have spoken for their support of the Bill and for their comments upon it. As members are aware, the Bill contains a package of measures which are designed for a number of purposes, but first of all to make complying with the Rates and Land Tax Act administratively easier and to ensure that ACT rate and land tax payers are afforded even greater protection. The workload of sellers, transferees and buyers of land will be reduced by the removal of a requirement to provide in transfer of land advices details about the purpose for which the land is used and the value of any goods being transferred with the property. Such information is no longer required by government agencies. So, in line with the Government's policy of streamlining administrative processes, the obligation on people to provide this now superfluous information has been removed.
The extension of objection and appeal rights to take account of administrative decisions which could adversely affect rate and land tax payers who, prior to this Bill, have had no recourse to appropriate review processes certainly demonstrates the Government's commitment to ensure greater access to social justice. Madam Speaker, the change in the definition of "owner" and related provisions ensures that land tax on residential investment properties is applied on an equitable basis by providing an exemption from land tax only to owners of a lease from the Crown who occupy a property as their principal place of residence. So, the change also removes an avenue for avoidance of land tax, and it reduces the opportunities for erosion of the revenue base.
Madam Speaker, the Standing Committee on Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate Legislation raised the issue of retrospectivity, which has been referred to by Mr Kaine and Ms Szuty. That issue arises in respect of the amendment of section 10 of the principal Act in cases where an error occurs in the valuation of land processes. The committee was concerned that the retrospective reassessment of rates and land tax using a new value may affect rate and/or land tax payers prejudicially in some cases. I would respond by saying that owners of land which has been subject to a redetermined value have a right to object to the new value under section 29 of the Act and the right of appeal to the AAT if their objection is disallowed. What that means is that rates and land tax will be assessed or reassessed, based on a value which owners have had several opportunities to ensure is reasonable.
Ms Szuty raised an additional issue about misleading sales information and the question of a clerical error in relation to that kind of information. I am advised that what might occur is that sales of land in a comparable area may have been minimal and further sales may occur which will then assist in establishing values which are more closely aligned to the market evidence. So, I hope that that clears that up for Ms Szuty. It is a matter of there being perhaps insufficient information to establish the value in the first instance and then the production of additional information casting new light on it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .