This bill became law on Mar 5th, 2024.
Budget, tax & economy
Australian residents pay 16% tax on the part of their income between $18,201 and $45,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, cutting the lowest tax rate from 19%.
Cost of living pressures left Australian taxpayers needing relief. The bill cuts income tax rates and reshapes tax brackets from 2024-25 so people keep more of what they earn.
Australia already had legislated stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. scheduled, but by early 2024 rising living costs had shifted the political focus towards giving broader relief to people feeling pressure on household budgets. The bill responded by replacing that earlier plan with lower rates and reshaped thresholds from 2024-25 so every taxpayer would receive a cut, and it then passed Parliament and received Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law. in March 2024 so the new settings could start from 1 July.
Critics said the bill gives only modest tax relief while leaving some low-income people out, and that the money would be better spent on services or could be clawed back later through bracket creepWhen inflation or wage rises push people into higher tax brackets even if their real buying power has not improved; critics say the bill could be offset this way later. and higher taxes elsewhere. Those objections came mainly from the Greens and Coalition speakers, but both major parties still backed the bill and no party represented in the debate opposed its final passage.
Jim Chalmers MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 05 Mar 2024
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
7 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
28 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australian residents pay 16% tax on the part of their income between $18,201 and $45,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, cutting the lowest tax rate from 19%.
Australian residents pay 30% tax on the part of their income between $45,001 and $135,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, extending that rate further up the income scale.
Australian residents pay 37% tax on the part of their income between $135,001 and $190,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, creating a new band before the top rate starts.
Foreign residents pay 37% tax on the part of their income between $135,001 and $190,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, instead of moving straight from 30% to 45%.
Working holiday makers in Australia pay 30% tax on the part of their working income between $45,001 and $135,000 from the 2024-25 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24. onward, with higher bands then starting earlier than before.
subject to tax at a rate of 16 per cent on the part of their taxable income that exceeds $18,200 but does not exceed $45,000;Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) explanatory memorandum
subject to tax at a rate of 30 per cent on the part of their taxable income that exceeds $45,000 but does not exceed $135,000;Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) explanatory memorandum
subject to tax at a rate of 37 per cent on the part of their taxable income that exceeds $135,000 but does not exceed $190,000; andTreasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) explanatory memorandum
subject to tax at a rate of 37 per cent on the part of their taxable income that exceeds $135,000 but does not exceed $190,000; andTreasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) explanatory memorandum
subject to tax at a rate of 30 per cent on the part of their working holiday taxable income that exceeds $45,000 but does not exceed $135,000;Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia already had legislated stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. scheduled, but by early 2024 rising living costs had shifted the political focus towards giving broader relief to people feeling pressure on household budgets. The bill responded by replacing that earlier plan with lower rates and reshaped thresholds from 2024-25 so every taxpayer would receive a cut, and it then passed Parliament and received Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law. in March 2024 so the new settings could start from 1 July.
Government introduces a new cost-of-living tax cut plan
The Treasurer introduced the bill as a cost-of-living measure aimed at giving more tax relief to workers across the income scale.
Hansard ↗Cost-of-living pressures drive the case to replace stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped.
During the House debate, speakers said families were feeling the pinch and described the bill as replacing the previously legislated stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. with a broader tax cut for every taxpayer.
Hansard ↗House passes the bill
The House agreed to the bill at third reading, completing its passage through the first chamber and sending the tax changes to the Senate.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for the revised tax rates and thresholds to become law.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law. makes the tax cuts law
Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law. turned the bill into an Act, locking in the new tax settings that speakers said would begin from 1 July 2024.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
Critics said the bill gives only modest tax relief while leaving some low-income people out, and that the money would be better spent on services or could be clawed back later through bracket creepWhen inflation or wage rises push people into higher tax brackets even if their real buying power has not improved; critics say the bill could be offset this way later. and higher taxes elsewhere. Those objections came mainly from the Greens and Coalition speakers, but both major parties still backed the bill and no party represented in the debate opposed its final passage.
Most criticism targeted fairness, funding and the lack of wider tax reform, not the basic idea of tax relief.
May worsen inequality and miss the poorest
The sharpest policy criticism was that tax cuts do little for people below the tax-free thresholdThe part of income that is not taxed; the page uses it to explain who gets no benefit from the tax cuts. or others who need direct help most, and may worsen inequality compared with spending the money on services and targeted support.
Relief may be offset by bracket creep and other taxes
Coalition speakers argued the tax cuts were badly designed because the government was giving relief with one hand while relying on bracket creepWhen inflation or wage rises push people into higher tax brackets even if their real buying power has not improved; critics say the bill could be offset this way later. or higher taxes on other Australians to fund it, limiting the real benefit.
Too narrow without broader tax reform
Some supportive crossbench MPs said the bill was only a limited step and would not fix deeper problems in the tax system or fully address cost-of-living pressure, especially for people who get little or no benefit from income tax cuts.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
Defeated 5 to 88. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Nationals, Liberal Party, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the amendment, so the bill's second-reading motion remained unchanged.
Defeated 51 to 87. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the amendment, then agreed to the original second-reading question.
Defeated 51 to 84. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the amendment, so the bill kept its original short title.
Defeated 51 to 83. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the amendment, so the bill retained its original title.
Defeated 51 to 83. Support came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the amendment, so the bill's title was unchanged.
Senate
Defeated 22 to 30. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, One Nation, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, and minor parties and independents. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The Senate rejected the amendment, so the government's second-reading motion remained as drafted.
Defeated 10 to 29. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.
The Senate rejected the amendment, so the second-reading motion was not altered.
Senator McKim moved this on voices, seeking to note the tax cuts would worsen inequality and to redirect the money to services like mental health, dental care, aged care, disability support, and help for low earners.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Hume moved this on voices, adding a statement that criticised the government, backed the lower 16c rate, and outlined the Coalition’s plan for lower, simpler, fairer taxes.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate Journal records this outcome as defeated on voices.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Roberts moved this on voices, proposing yearly indexation of income tax thresholds from 1 July 2025 and requiring the Commissioner to publish the indexed amounts.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senator Babet moved this on voices, proposing to push the later tax rates and related schedule back to 1 July 2026 so the new rates would start in the 2026-27 income yearThe tax year the rules apply to; the bill changes rates from the 2024-25 income year onward, with some related Medicare levy changes applying from 2023-24..
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
These are amendment votes, not the final passage vote on the bill itself. The bill passed both chambers on the voices.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Chalmers strongly supports the bill and wants it passed, saying it will deliver bigger tax cuts for more people and help with the cost of living.
Read in Hansard ↗Whish-Wilson opposes the bill in its current form because he says the tax cuts mainly benefit high earners and will worsen inequality.
Read in Hansard ↗Taylor says the opposition will support the bill’s tax relief, but argues it comes only because Labor has mismanaged the economy and will be funded by higher taxes on other Australians.
Read in Hansard ↗Scamps supports the bill, saying the redesigned stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. are fairer and better targeted to the cost-of-living crisis.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
37 speakers · 39 contributions · 37 support
“We're providing meaningful cost-of-living relief in a responsible way that doesn't add to inflationary pressures. It's laying the foundation for a stronger, more resilient and fairer economy and retaining the progressive nature of our tax system which has been there a long time. Those opposite will vote for it, notwithstanding their protestations.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Jenny McAllister, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Moved amendment
McAllister strongly supports the bill, saying it delivers cost of living tax cuts for every taxpayer and gives bigger relief to middle Australia. She argues it is a better, more responsible reform because it eases pressure without adding to inflation or the budget.
“The tax changes contained in this Bill are the right thing to do, for the right reasons and at the right time.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McAllister supports the bill and says it delivers meaningful cost-of-living tax relief, arguing it should pass because every taxpayer will get a tax cut and most will receive a bigger one. She commends it to the Senate and looks forward to the committee stage.
“I simply wish to thank the members who have contributed to the debate. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 provide meaningful, sustainable cost-of-living relief and will deliver substantial tax reform to the tax system. They will support the hardworking Australians who keep our economy and our country strong. I am looking forward to the debate in the committee stage. It is important that we get these bills passed, because our tax cuts mean every taxpayer, no matter what they earn, will get a tax cut.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“This bill includes policy reforms that are fair for working Australians. The Labor government is, and always will be, the party of progressive policy and reform. That's why every single Australian will get a tax cut under Labor's tax cuts. The two amendments to the Treasury laws are being introduced for the purpose of ensuring more Australians are better off. That's what we're focused on.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In speaking in favour of these tax cuts in the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, I'll also speak against the amendment which was moved by the member for Hume.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“What you will always get with this Labor Party, this government and this Prime Minister is people that are out there trying to help workers and families. We want to do this because we know people are doing it hard and because it's ingrained in us to stand and say, 'We've got to help people who need the help when they need it.' It means that we don't get as big a tax cut as we might have got. So what? I am much happier to know that money that is coming out of government receipts is going into helping people who need the help the most. It's not just the fair thing to do; it's the right thing to do. In fact, you'd sit there and you'd say, 'It's the moral thing to do to make sure we help people when they need it and where they need it.'”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In contrast, we are bringing a constructive, well-calibrated policy response to a very complicated situation, one that is very necessary and one that this House needs to pass urgently.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This week we have introduced Labor's tax cut legislation which will provide tax cuts and cost-of-living relief from 1 July. These tax cuts will deliver relief that is fiscally responsible and that does not add to inflationary pressures.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This tax plan is the work of a responsible Labor government. We have listened to Australians, to people in communities like mine, who are feeling intense cost-of-living pressures at the moment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm proud of our government's changes. They benefit my electorate greatly, with 90 per cent of Macarthur taxpayers better off under our proposal. That is really important. It means people can afford to go to a doctor and it means people can afford to buy medicines, together with the other important cost-of-living measures that our government has done. It means young mothers can eat properly and have their kids eat properly. It means people can provide school clothes for their kids. Every suburb in my electorate of Macarthur will be better off. It means real relief to some of the households doing it the toughest.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“You cannot get past the fact that this delivers for everybody. It is the right thing to do. I'd encourage those opposite to stop being so negative about it. You're voting for it, so embrace it. You're being really disingenuous going back to your electorates and saying: 'Yes; I voted for it. I'm glad you're getting a little bit extra, but I didn't really like it. I didn't really support it. We're going to go back and do more.' Don't. Just be proud to be here in this parliament and support good economic policy that delivers fairness, restores integrity to our tax system and makes sure that every taxpayer gets some tax relief on 1 July.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Albanese government is providing meaningful cost-of-living relief in a responsible way. We are not adding to inflationary pressures, and we're laying the foundations for a stronger and more resilient economy. As Richard Denniss from the Australia Institute said, Anthony Albanese's decision to recast Scott Morrison's 2018 tax cuts to suit the economy of 2024 is 'the biggest and most honest piece of tax reform' in Australia for decades. I am so proud to be supporting this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Albanese Labor government's cost-of-living tax cuts for middle Australia are all about putting more money back into household budgets. We want Australians to be able to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. We are getting on the job that we were elected to do—providing good stable decent government that always puts the national interest first and that is just what we are doing. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Albanese government is 100 per cent focused on getting the cost of living and inflation under control. What would be really mature is to see everyone in this chamber supporting these two pieces of legislation. If you're really interested in making real changes for every Australian and what they take home in their pay packet and how they're able to deal with this cost-of-living pressure that they're experiencing at the moment—and no-one denies that. No-one denies that. We know that. We feel that. I listen to people in the community. I know how hard it is. I go to the supermarket and I see that people are thinking twice: 'Do I take this and put this in my trolley or don't I?' We are being responsible and addressing the imbalance of the former stage 3 tax cuts. I commend these two pieces of legislation to the chamber and I hope they're supported.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Ensuring middle Australia can get ahead is central to our economic plan, as are getting wages moving again, bringing inflation under control and driving fairer prices for Australian consumers. I'm really proud to be part of a government that takes its responsibility to its community and to its nation seriously. Our government is ambitious, aspirational and unapologetic when it comes to supporting more Australians to keep more of their hard-earned wages, and I'm really proud to support this bill today.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm very happy to rise in support of Labor's Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. I'm very happy because I know the amendments to the tax cuts will directly help the constituents of my electorate of Moreton and, indeed, every single Australian taxpayer from 1 July this year.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The tax cuts delivered under this treasury laws amendment will provide welcome relief for Australians, particularly those with a mortgage, who have faced successive interest rate increases from the independent Reserve Bank. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 provides a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer from 1 July this year. The government has listened, it has consulted and it has acted on behalf of the Australian people. We've heard the message about the struggles of Australian households to deal with cost-of-living pressure.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is the parliament's big chance to provide bigger tax cuts for more people to help with the cost of living.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our changes, our better way, our tax reforms, ensure that every working person in Australia, every taxpayer, gets a tax cut. I'm proud to be part of an Albanese Labor government that is delivering real cost-of-living relief to families in the community of Cowan and in every community across the country.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today with pride to support the passage of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. In Melbourne's outer south-east, where families are grappling with steep housing costs, soaring energy bills and rising childcare expenses, the cost-of-living crisis is deeply felt. Working Australians have shouldered the burden of these issues, struggling to make ends meet despite their tireless efforts. This bill represents a leap forward in our nation's journey towards economic fairness and social equity. It is a testament to the Albanese Labor government's unwavering commitment to the welfare and prosperity of all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I know that what we're doing is not a panacea for everything, but it certainly will go a long way in putting a few extra dollars in people's pockets. That's why I support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, and I hope everyone on the other side supports it as well. It is a very important bill that will put extra money into the pockets of the people who need it the most.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The truth is that what we're talking about now is providing cost-of-living relief to every single Australian taxpayer. Every single Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut. Let me repeat that: every single Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut. We have been very clear with the Australian people that we are laserlike in our focus on providing cost-of-living relief to those who need it most—to low- and middle-income families in this country—and that's why I'm proud to speak in favour of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why Labor's tax plan is so important. The plan is responding to the concerns of every single Australian, not just a select few, as was proposed by the former government. Tax cuts are part of a major suite of cost-of-living policies that we know are making a huge difference to people's lives.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm really excited to be here today to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Medicare Levy) Bill 2024. Any change that is going to leave 87 per cent of people in my electorate of Gilmore better off is great news for local people, and I will celebrate that every way I can.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Since the Prime Minister's announcement that he was pulling this lever, I've been on the ground listening to my constituents about how they feel about the proposed bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. Ted came to my mobile office at Stafford City Shopping Centre and told me that Labor's tax cuts were just 'common sense'. Nicholas from Shorncliffe told me that he will be directly impacted by the changes, but he doesn't mind, because it shows that he has a strong government, with strong leadership, who do not mind making the tough decisions. Doug from Wavell Heights said Labor's tax cuts were a rational and pragmatic approach that recognises that, when circumstances and evidence change, decisions may need to change. And Leanne from Chermside West said: 'Times have changed and everyone knows it. The changes you have proposed are more equitable, and the vast majority of Australians will thank you.'”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So I rise to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's cost-of-living tax cuts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This isn't about politics; it's about people. And that's why I stand here wholeheartedly supporting these tax cut measures—”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I stand here proud to be part of a government that is delivering real cost-of-living relief to families in my community. We're happy to respond when the circumstances demand it, providing support to every community right across the country. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So, on behalf of Bennelong, I thank the Treasurer, the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the entire Labor caucus for listening to us. There is, of course, much more work to do but, with our cost-of-living support and with these cost-of-living tax cuts, we are showing that we are a government that wants you to earn more and to keep more of what you earn. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's with great pleasure that I rise today to talk about the fact that the Albanese Labor government will be delivering a tax cut to every Australian taxpayer from 1 July this year. This is truly great news for all Australians. The original stage 3 tax cuts under Scott Morrison were legislated five years ago, before Australians experienced a global pandemic, catastrophic bushfires and a global inflation spike with higher interest rates and witnessed wars and global conflicts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This reform also responds to cost-of-living pressures facing Australians right now, and that's why I stand today to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our No. 1 priority is addressing cost-of-living pressures, and that's precisely what we are doing through our tax plan that sees all taxpayers paying less tax. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Michelle Ananda-Rajah on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Michelle Ananda-Rajah supports the bill and says Labor changed the stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. because households are under sustained cost-of-living pressure. She argues the revised cuts give every taxpayer relief, with bigger benefits for most workers and women, and will also help workforce supply and productivity.
“Labor's tax cuts will deliver more bang for buck at a time when people are under sustained pressure. On 1 July, the Albanese government will be delivering a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ananda-Rajah supports the bill and argues it gives more cost-of-living relief to more taxpayers, including young workers, nurses and middle-income earners, without adding to inflationary pressure. She says the government was right to replace the old stage 3The earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. plan because the new approach is more responsive to current economic conditions and still gives tax relief across the income scale.
“We are being responsive to challenging economic times by applying the same agility that is demanded, in fact expected, in every other field, whether it be business, medicine or finance, by delivering better tax cuts that come with an economic dividend. We owe it to all Australian taxpayers and, most importantly, to each other to do more.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“This was the politically difficult decision to make, but we made it because it was the right thing to do. These tax cuts are better for all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Labor Party gets it, and this compares starkly with the reaction of the Liberal and National parties. They've had more positions than a game of Twister. At first they claimed not to know what it was, but decided they were against it; next, they said they didn't have a position; and, finally, they decided, actually, it's a good idea, but through gritted teeth they have articulated a very slow and reluctant 'yes' to this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and the associated bill. What we see in the Senate today is the continuing whingefest that Labor would dare to make sure that you earn more and keep more of what you earn.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our tax cuts are good for the majority of Australians, for the majority of women and for the majority of people in my state, who will benefit from this relief. These are tax cuts which will not be inflationary; these are tax cuts which are economically responsible. They are tax cuts which will make a real difference in the lives of people in my state. This is the right thing to do. It's the fair thing to do. And I wholeheartedly support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“All Australian taxpayers will get a tax cut on 1 July, and the top tax threshold will come down for the first time since Labor was last in office. Labor's bigger, better, fairer tax cuts are going to ensure that everyone gets a tax cut. Previously, those earning under $45,000—apprentices, childcare workers, hairdressers—were going to miss out. Now they too will get a tax cut. Treasury estimates that this will have a big impact on labour supply, twice the impact on labour supply as the previous plan. Our tax cuts will boost labour supply by nearly a million hours a week, the equivalent of 25,000 full-time jobs. Our tax cuts are better for women, with 90 per cent of taxpaying women getting a bigger tax cut under our plan. That means teachers, nurses, aged and disability carers and early childhood educators.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our nation does need tax reform, but it doesn't need the kind of tax reform those opposite have prioritised and put forward. The tax package readjustment the Labor government has put forward, in the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and the associated bill, will see bigger tax cuts going to those that need them most. A median income earner in the electorate of Canning—and the median income in the electorate of Canning is fairly close to the national average—will now have $1,059 per year in extra income. This can be compared with a tax cut of just $255 under the previous government's plan. That is about a 315 per cent increase: 315 per cent extra income compared with what the coalition offered. Importantly, it is real cost-of-living relief. It equates to about five months worth of petrol for a car with a 37-litre tank, five weeks of groceries for a $200 weekly grocery shop or more than 12 months of an $85-a-month home internet and phone bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
28 speakers · 31 contributions · 23 support · 4 oppose · 1 mixed
“This is where we stand. We stand in a situation where Australian households are in a dire situation. It's certainly far worse than anything we've seen in my lifetime. Perhaps it was as bad during the Depression, but this is really next level. That's why we are supporting the tax relief in this legislation—because that's what's left. There is nothing else this government is offering. When they fail on economic management, that's what you have to do. We won't get between Australians and lower taxes because we are ultimately the parties of simpler, lower, fairer taxes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That's the reason we will support taking the 19 per cent bracket down to 16 per cent.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“But I digress. We are talking about tax cuts here and about the need to protect the individual.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I understand the member opposite asked me how we're going to vote. We'll vote for these changes for this reason—I'll explain to you why. I told you that part. Hang on. It's because the $804 that will be given will benefit a lot of people, obviously. Because of the $8,000 that they've been hit with since you got into government, they're really struggling—really struggling every day. I put up posts on my social media. They are hurting right now. Your government needs to do better—a lot better.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will not stand in the way of this bill. We will support it in order to support struggling Australians, not to support the Prime Minister's broken promise. We acknowledge that Labor's decisions in government have made life much harder for Australian families, and this bandaid solution will do little to fix the mess that they have made.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will support the bill, because we support lower taxes, but the government has been very deceitful in their behaviour on this.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said earlier, the coalition is committed to lower, simpler and fairer taxes, which is why will not oppose the reduction in the 19c tax rate to 16c. But the Prime Minister's broken promise means that delivering the stage 3 tax reforms, which had been legislated and supported by those opposite, is now simply impossible.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will support a tax cut.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“What we are seeing with this debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and all the associated arguments with it is a betrayal. It is an absolute outright betrayal by those opposite, particularly the Prime Minister, on Australian voters. Because prior to the election and even after the election, even up to when Treasury decided to model these figures, he and those opposite said that stage 3 tax cuts were enshrined in legislation. They were in law.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will always support lower taxes. Like my colleagues, I respect and value the Australians who work and pay the taxes that fund so many of the government-delivered services and programs that people rely on. But Labor have deliberately broken a promise they repeatedly made to the Australian people. The Prime Minister looks shifty in this instance. It was a promise made around 100 times—before, during and after the election. Australians now know they cannot trust anything that comes out of the mouths of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer or any Labor member or senator.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So it's here tonight that we find ourselves debating Labor's tax cuts, which the coalition will not stand in the way of. Just a few weeks ago, I asked when Labor would begin fulfilling its election mantra not to leave any Australians behind. It is 18 months since being elected, so it's pleasing that this legislation will support individuals and families in need, and I wouldn't block any measure that would help my electorate of Bass. While it's truthful that more constituents in my electorate will benefit from these proposed changes than they would have under the previous iteration, it's still a drop in the bucket for my community as cost-of-living pressures increase. Housing, healthcare affordability, education expenses, child care—these are all daily factors putting pressure on households.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Our history—our DNA—is that, whenever there is a chance to lean into giving more to and supporting Australians, we will take it, and we will support you.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024. And I rise here today as a conservative, and as a conservative I support the passage of these bills, because I support tax cuts. I do have some qualifications, though, and some caveats, because there are some things that have been outlined by my colleagues and others here—and I'll do the same—that deeply concern me about the agenda of this government and the way they have approached this issue, and I'll seek to lay that out before you now.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We're supporting this change not to support his lie but to support the families who need help right now, because Labor has made decisions that have made it much harder for families to make ends meet.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I will always support the lowering of taxes. We should lower taxes because it's good for the economy. It's good for families. It's good for jobs. But what disappoints me is that we have a prime minister in this country who has knowingly and repeatedly misled the Australian people in relation to the stage 3 tax cuts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In relation to our position on this legislation—this has been well canvassed and flagged—we will not be standing in the way of tax relief for any Australian, because we've always supported lower taxes. But it is important that people are aware of what this tax cut actually is. It's a tax cut today, but it's a tax increase tomorrow, because this locks in permanently higher taxes. It locks in bracket creep. By reintroducing the 37c in the dollar threshold, it guarantees that more Australians will pay higher taxes on a permanent basis. It is unbelievable that we are going to pass a bill that is going to reintroduce a tax bracket which was abolished in the name of eliminating bracket creep, but that is what is going to happen because of this government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I began my contribution by saying that my electorate is a place where your word is still your bond to the honest folk of Barker. Now, I don't think Barker is unique in that regard. There are 150 other electorates in this place for which each and every member of parliament could say exactly the same thing. Because, as Australians, deep down we say what we mean and we do what we say. Deep down Australians want leaders who say what they mean and do what they say. That's why trust is everything. And that's why, with respect, this decision to rip up the trust statement between the now Prime Minister of Australia and the voting public across this nation is crazy brave. They won't forget that he was so quick to commit to a me-too approach on the then coalition's tax policy—not just before the election, but after the election—and yet so quick to rip it up for the short-term sugar hit that he's hoping to achieve at the Dunkley by-election.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will be supporting this tax because we understand the cost-of-living pressures on the Australian public at the moment. We are disappointed that it's taken so long to bring it in. We would love to have seen it introduced earlier. But at the end of the day, for those other taxes that Labor have said that they won't introduce into this place, I will just remind Australians how many promises we have seen those from the other side consistently broken. On 200 different occasions Labor said you were was supposed to get a $275 electricity boost—didn't happen. The list goes on and on and on and on—'my word is my bond'.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Getting back to what I was saying about the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, as I mentioned earlier, sure, the coalition is supporting cutting the tax rate from 19c to 16c. We support a simpler, fairer tax system but this isn't fairer. It is just moving tax cuts that were allocated to people who have worked hard, got ahead and been caught by bracket creep.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation will pass the parliament, and we welcome reducing the tax burden on Australians. It is appalling that it is being funded by increasing taxes on other Australians, and we will have more to say about that in the lead-up to the next election. In the meantime, it is absolutely appalling that a solemn commitment to the people of this country was made by the Labor Party in a campaign and they are now legislating to break that promise.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We need a better balance in our tax system. That is why the coalition—whilst not standing in the way of these tax cuts, because we recognise households are doing it tough—will take a policy proposal to the next election that will simplify our tax system, restore incentive and rebalance our tax system away from our dependence on income tax.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Now, while I do have issues with this legislation, it does seek to reduce the tax threshold for incomes between $18,200 to $45,000 from 19 cents in the dollar to 16 cents. Because of our commitment to lower, simpler and fairer taxes, we will not oppose this reduction or stand in the way of this bills package. I acknowledge that there will be many in Durack who will benefit from this. However, it is also because of this commitment that we remain determined to deliver a tax package that is in keeping with the original stage 3 tax reforms. The tax package that we take to the next election has to include lower taxes and ensure people keep more of their money, because we are really ambitious for Australian people. We want them to keep more of their money. We will fight bracket creep and enshrine aspiration in the tax system. I think that's what we all want. We want people who are earning $40,000 to aspire to earning $50,000 or $60,000 or $70,000, knowing that they will be able to keep more of that hard-earned money in their pocket.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We are supporting the bill currently because it would be wrong to deny hardworking Australians out there—particularly those in my Western Sydney community—some tax relief in a few months time. This is despite the fact that this government repeatedly misled the Australian people about keeping all of these tax cuts in place, both before and after the federal election. But rather than keep talking about the consistently broken promises of this government, which are effectively their trademark, I'm going to use my time here to discuss these measures and how, if left in place over the medium and long term, they will end up costing hardworking Australians and Australian small businesses even more.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why we will support tax cuts. The Liberal Party always supports people being able to retain more of their hard earned money. But the elephant in the room in the context of broken promises—ahead of a Dunkley by-election—is inflation and the pressure that inflation has put on the small businesses and families of Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is not sound policy. It lacks any concept of a plan for the future. As a decision in isolation, it is not reversible. Australians need to elect a government with a comprehensive understanding of the taxation system, an understanding of international competition for finance and how other jurisdictions are fashioning their tax systems to respond in a changing world.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Julian Leeser on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Leeser says the opposition will not stand in the way of the tax cuts, but argues the government has broken trust with voters and is using a tax package that still leaves Australians worse off overall. He says the bill is a short-term relief measure in the context of wider Labor economic failure and higher taxes.
“The opposition knows how much Australians are hurting. It's why we will not stand in the way of these tax cuts. But Australians are paying a terrible price for the inflationary largesse of state, territory and federal Labor governments and the lack of any long-term economic plan from the Treasurer.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Leeser says the opposition will support the bill because the tax changes provide welcome temporary relief for Australians, but he argues they do not address the deeper problems of housing, incomes and job security. He says the government still needs broader economic reform to make the economy stronger and reward aspiration.
“These tax changes offer many Australians some temporary relief. My concern is that, without economic reform and a culture committed to encouraging effort and aspiration, Australia and Australians will continue to go backwards. The temporary relief is welcome, but this government needs to make changes to make our economy stronger.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Sam Birrell on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Birrell says the bill provides some extra tax relief, but argues it is politically driven and still leaves many low- and middle-income earners worse off because the government let the earlier offset lapse. He criticises it as expedient rather than real tax reform, but does not clearly state a final position on passage.
“Even with additional tax relief under this legislation, a farmer or factory worker in my electorate earning $70,000 will still be worse off than they were when this government took office, because they were getting the low and middle income tax offset. I sit here in question time and I listen to all these ministers get up and talk about their portfolios and say, 'Such and such is getting $800 of tax back that they wouldn't have gotten under the coalition.' It's simply not true, because they were getting $1,500 extra under the low and middle income tax offset when the coalition was in government. There is every likelihood that, had the coalition been re-elected, that might have been extended—if the cost-of-living crisis were as bad; I believe it wouldn't have been as bad under the coalition policies.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Birrell says the coalition will not oppose the tax cut, but argues the bill is a broken-promise substitute for the stage 3The earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. tax reforms and does nothing to fix bracket creepWhen inflation or wage rises push people into higher tax brackets even if their real buying power has not improved; critics say the bill could be offset this way later. or deliver proper tax reform. He supports lower taxes in principle, yet says the government has chosen a short-term sugar hit instead of a fairer and more coherent package.
“The coalition is committed to lower, simpler and fairer taxes, which is why we will not oppose the reduction in the tax rate. But the Prime Minister's broken promise means that delivering the stage 3 tax reforms as they were intended and legislated is now impossible. These were stage 3 tax reforms that, I might remind people, came on top of stage 1 and 2—that's been forgotten—and that were voted for, agreed to and promised several times by the then opposition in the lead-up to the election.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Paul Scarr on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Scarr opposes the bill, saying Labor is breaking its promise on stage 3 tax cutsThe earlier tax cut plan this bill replaced; on this page it is the old schedule that many speakers say was reshaped. and misleading Australians about the change. He treats it as part of a broader pattern of the government worsening cost-of-living pressure.
“With the proposal of these bills, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024, the Labor government, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are breaking that fundamental principle. But it wasn't just broken before the election; it was broken after the election.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Scarr says the coalition will support the bill because it delivers tax cuts during a cost-of-living crisis, but he argues Labor cannot be trusted on tax after breaking its earlier promise. He also condemns the government for spending far more on marketing the bill than on food relief.
“We are in a cost-of-living crisis. There is absolutely no doubt about it, and that is why the coalition is not going to stand in the way of providing tax cuts to Australians who are in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis—from 19 per cent to 16 per cent. We can't stand in the way of that tax relief for Australians who are doing it tough.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
11 speakers · 12 contributions · 1 support · 10 oppose
“The Greens put forward sensible suggestions—that for those on incomes over $200,000, like most of us in this chamber, that money go towards directly benefitting Australians who are doing it tough. There are a whole range of things I'll mention in a second that we could fund if we amended this legislation to make a cut-off at $200,000.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is time we started putting the public first. This bill says that politicians and billionaires should get tax cuts three times the size of those given to everyday people. Well, the Greens think there's a different way. If we're going to spend $300-odd billion, do it in a way that lifts people out of poverty; do it in a way that doesn't put the politicians and billionaires first but puts everyday people first. It is time to start putting the public interest, not vested interests, first.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“While it's encouraging to see Labor finally accept that the stage 3 tax cuts as they were first put together are unfair, this bill will still make economic inequality in Australia worse. Under these rejigged cuts, politicians and CEOs on incomes more than $200,000 will be given three times the value of tax cuts than the average worker, whilst the lowest 40 per cent of income earners will receive just nine per cent of the benefits. And this bill provides absolutely zero cost-of-living relief for people struggling to survive on income support payments or earning less than $18,000 a year—nothing.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“While the government cheers on these revised tax cuts—and they are an improvement—if we step back and look at them, they are still remarkably unfair and will result in poor public services, by blowing an incredibly huge hole in the budget. People who need aged-care services or disability services and those who rely on the public health system or the public school system are the biggest losers from these cuts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Nick McKim on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
McKim says the Greens oppose the bill because it still gives large tax cuts to people earning over $200,000 while giving nothing to people on income support. He argues Labor should have used the change to make the tax system more progressive and fund better support for ordinary Australians instead.
“Labor could have actually used the opportunity of changing its position. That's something they should have done—and something the Greens were calling on them to do, I hasten to add. They should have used that opportunity to make our income tax system more progressive or to do some of these other things that would actually help people, including raising income support. The fact that they didn't again shows a lack of vision and a lack of political courage. The Australian Greens are the only people in this parliament who opposed Mr Morrison's tax cuts from day one. Those tax cuts were supported by many in this place, and, once the Labor Party indicated its support for them, as I said earlier, they became law.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McKim opposes the bill and moves an amendment arguing that the tax cuts will worsen inequality and drain revenue from public services. He says the cuts should be redesigned to direct the money to health, mental health, dental care and support for low-income people instead.
“(b) calls on the Government to redesign the tax cuts to not give the wealthiest in society $4,529 a year and instead redirect this largesse to expanding public services like more mental health and dental into Medicare and financial support for those earning below the tax-free threshold in this cost of living crisis".”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“Make no mistake: the revised version of these tax cuts still widens the inequality gap. The top 20 per cent of income earners will get 50 per cent of the benefit of these tax cuts; the bottom 20 per cent will get just 0.4 per cent, not even a whole per cent.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The lowest 10 per cent of taxpayers will receive about 10 per cent of the benefits of these tax cuts. So the people who need it most get the least. That's the design of Labor's slightly-less-crap-than-the-coalition's tax cuts. The people who most need income support and tax breaks get the least. And Labor wants us to cheer them on in this. Well, we're just not going to.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“During the election campaign, Labor promised us a country where no-one is held back and no-one is left behind. Giving massive cash handouts to the rich and crumbs to everyone else seems like a pretty perverse way of delivering that. By proceeding with the stage 3 three tax cuts in the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, even after finally caving to pressure and making amendments, Labor has signed the death warrant on its own claims to progressivism. The single remaining virtue that the modern ALP can claim is that they are marginally less terrible than the Liberals—a party which in 2024 resembles a loose collection of culture war grievances more than a political organisation. Substantively, there is very little separating the old parties anymore. Friendly to big business, backing in more coal and gas, torturing asylum seekers and cutting taxes for the rich, they are on a unity ticket. At a time when we need to be investing more into our public services to support people, Labor is continuing the bipartisan, neoliberal project of shrinking the government and redistributing public money upwards into the hands of the rich.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Labor has given us completely the wrong answer. It has failed the test of basic fairness once again. Labor's answer to the cost-of-living crisis is to give 50 per cent of the $300-odd billion in tax cuts to the wealthiest 20 per cent of society and to give just 0.4 per cent of the money to the poorest 20 per cent.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a welcome change, but they should have scrapped these tax cuts entirely and funded universal services. So much for 'no-one left behind'. I foreshadow that I'll be moving a second reading amendment in relation to the conduct of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The stage 3 tax cut bill as originally proposed by the Morrison government did the opposite of benefiting the majority. It benefited a tiny minority of high-income earners, most of whom were pulling in $180,000 a year. As someone who would have benefited from the original plan, we should have never, ever been the focus of that legislation. We should not have been the priority. Odds are we would have been more than fine without it. The relief that this government didn't proceed with that plan is palpable. It would have been ridiculous and devastating in terms of its consequences, and that's why the Greens will be supporting Labor's amendment.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 1 support · 1 oppose
“We support this bill. It's being dishonestly represented by Labor as a tax cut; it's a tax fiddle. We can change that by passing my amendment to remove bracket creep. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I recommend that, instead of fiddling with the tax system, we fix the tax system. Reform the tax system for the benefit of all Australians, all families, our economy and our grandchildren's economic future and security.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Anyway, as I said, I don't support your bill. I won't be supporting it. I support the fact that it's giving those tax cuts to the people, but, in full, you've lied to the Australian people. It was a promise made. You've taken that promise. But I will fight for the Australian people, if we get control of this Senate at the next election, to give those full tax cuts to all Australians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
10 speakers · 10 support
“While the changes to the stage 3 tax cuts are fairer and respond to the current cost-of-living crisis, there is much more that needs to be done to address growing poverty and intergenerational inequality in this country and also to grow productivity. There needs to be a serious debate in this country about broader tax reform that sets our country up for a more prosperous and fairer future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“My community has been clear with me. It is supportive of these changes to the stage 3 tax cuts in order to make them less inflationary, in order to make them fairer, and I support these changes, too. But what Australia really needs is a broader discussion about intergenerational inequity and about our economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The amendments to the stage 3 tax cuts are a step in the right direction, but they fall short. The average benefit of $15 a week does not cover the wide array of increases we have endured. Why have insurance premiums risen significantly more than inflation? Why is petrol excise relief not being considered? Who is profiteering, and what is the government doing to address it? Despite a significant drop in wholesale electricity prices, ordinary Australians are yet to see a reduction in their electricity bills. These are all areas where the government could and should take immediate action.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill will result in a small but better outcome for the majority of taxpayers in the electorate of Mayo. I support the bill, but I call on the government—in fact, I call on everyone in this parliament—to consider broader taxation reforms so that everybody can be rewarded for their hard work.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In summary, I support the cost-of-living support delivered by this reshaping of the stage 3 tax cuts, because it is fair, is likely to stimulate greater workforce participation, particularly for women, and is much needed at the moment. But I challenge the government to be brave, to look more broadly at our tax system and to take on the challenge of working out how we will pay for the things we think we deserve as we get older, as decarbonisation puts our exports at risk, as our productivity continues to decline and as people in their 20s see owning a house as increasingly out of reach.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“However, these bills—the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill—are important steps in supporting Australians who are doing it tough in this cost-of-living crisis. The cost-of-living tax cuts bill will ensure that tax cuts benefit more taxpayers in my electorate of Indi, not just the very small number of high-income earners there. As the Independent member for Indi, I am proud to vote in the interests of the majority of my constituents.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We've been calling for the cuts to be made more equitable since before the government started saying, 'Our position on stage 3 has not changed.' I applaud the government for doing the right thing in the end, and I applaud both the major parties, Labor and the coalition, for capitulating to the crossbench on this issue—for capitulating to Australians on tax reform, on changes that do not make sense for our circumstances and do not make sense for the future that Australians want.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“There is no doubt that this version of the tax cuts is fairer than stage 3 mark 1. According to Treasury data, fully 71 per cent of the 77,000 taxpayers in Goldstein will be better off than they would have been had the original version remained in place.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Since March last year I have been calling for the stage 3 tax cuts to be rejigged so that low- and middle-income earners can get some relief—and that was the right thing to do. If a government or leader gets something wrong, they should fix it. But there are other things that need fixing in our tax system, and it will take real courage.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Obviously, I'm not going to stand in the way of the government's revised tax cuts bill. I won't stand in the way of any tax cuts, because, like I said before, I hate all taxes. It's theft. Tax cuts are a good thing. But what I will do is stand firm and ask the government to honour its word.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the WholeA stage in the Senate where detailed amendments are considered; the page labels several amendment proposals with CW. debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe formal step that turns a passed bill into an Act; on this page it marks when the tax changes became law., turning the bill into an Act.
