This bill became law on Mar 5th, 2024.
Budget, tax & economy
People on low incomes will not pay the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. until their taxable incomeThe part of your income that tax is worked out on after allowed deductions and other adjustments. is above $26,000, up from $24,276.
Cost-of-living pressures left some low-income earners, families and seniors facing Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. bills at outdated income thresholds. The bill raises those thresholds from 2023-24 so fewer people pay the levy, or pay less, as incomes rise.
Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low-income thresholds were already part of the tax system, but as cost-of-living pressures squeezed household budgets, outdated cut-offs meant some low-income earners, families and seniors could start facing levy bills or higher levy payments as their incomes rose. The bill responded by lifting those thresholds for the 2023-24 income yearThe tax year the measure applies to, which in this bill starts with 2023-24. so more people on modest incomes would pay less or nothing, and after Parliament passed it and Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a passed bill into law. was given, the higher limits became law.
The debate split three ways. Coalition speakers said they would not stand in the way of the tax and Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. relief, but attacked Labor for breaking its stage 3 tax promise and offering only delayed, modest cost-of-living help. Greens speakers and Pauline Hanson opposed the package from different directions, arguing it still gave too much benefit to higher earners or broke the original promise.
Jim Chalmers MPAn elected federal parliamentarian, often shortened to MP in the speeches and explanatory material. 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
2 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
People on low incomes will not pay the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. until their taxable incomeThe part of your income that tax is worked out on after allowed deductions and other adjustments. is above $26,000, up from $24,276.
Families will not pay the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. until family income is above $43,846, and that limit rises by $4,027 for each dependent child or studentA child or student who counts towards the family threshold and lifts the amount a family can earn before the levy applies..
Older Australians who qualify for the seniors and pensioners tax offsetA tax offset that can reduce tax for eligible older Australians and pensioners, and in this bill it also affects when the Medicare levy starts to apply. will not pay the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. until their taxable incomeThe part of your income that tax is worked out on after allowed deductions and other adjustments. is above $41,089.
Families who qualify for the seniors and pensioners tax offsetA tax offset that can reduce tax for eligible older Australians and pensioners, and in this bill it also affects when the Medicare levy starts to apply. will not pay the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. until family income is above $57,198, plus $4,027 for each dependent child or studentA child or student who counts towards the family threshold and lifts the amount a family can earn before the levy applies..
The higher thresholds apply from the 2023-24 income yearThe tax year the measure applies to, which in this bill starts with 2023-24. onward, which can reduce or remove Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. bills that would otherwise have applied.
The individual threshold amount (specified in paragraph (c) of the definition of the ‘threshold amount’ in subsection 3(1) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986) increases from $24,276, to $26,000.[Schedule 1 to the Medicare Levy Bill, item 5, paragraph (c) of the definition of ‘threshold amount’ in subsection 3(1) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986]Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) explanatory memorandum
The level of the ‘family income threshold’ referred to in subsections 8(5), 8(6) and 8(7) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986 increases from $40,939 to $43,846. For each dependent child or student, the family income threshold increases by a further $4,027, instead of the previous amount of $3,760.[Schedule 1 to the Medicare Levy Bill, items 6, 7 and 8, the definition of ‘family income threshold’ in subsection 8(5), and subsections 8(6) and (7) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986]Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) explanatory memorandum
The threshold amount for individual taxpayers eligible for the SAPTO (specified in paragraph (a) of the definition of the ‘threshold amount’ in subsection 3(1) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986) increases from $38,365 to $41,089.[Schedule 1 to the Medicare Levy Bill, item 4, paragraph (a) of the definition of ‘threshold amount’ in subsection 3(1) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986]Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) explanatory memorandum
The threshold amount for families eligible for SAPTO increases from $53,406 to $57,198. For each dependent child or student, the income threshold increases by a further $4,027, instead of the previous figure of $3,760.[Schedule 1 to the Medicare Levy Bill, item 9, subsection 8(7) of the Medicare Levy Act 1986]Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) explanatory memorandum
The amendments made by this Schedule apply in relation to assessments for the 2023‑24 year of income and later years of income.Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Act 2024 final Act text
Context
Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low-income thresholds were already part of the tax system, but as cost-of-living pressures squeezed household budgets, outdated cut-offs meant some low-income earners, families and seniors could start facing levy bills or higher levy payments as their incomes rose. The bill responded by lifting those thresholds for the 2023-24 income yearThe tax year the measure applies to, which in this bill starts with 2023-24. so more people on modest incomes would pay less or nothing, and after Parliament passed it and Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a passed bill into law. was given, the higher limits became law.
Government introduces Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. threshold increases as cost-of-living relief
The Treasurer presented the bill as tax relief for Australians on modest incomes by adjusting Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low-income thresholds so lower-income people would continue to pay less or be exempt.
Hansard ↗Cost-of-living pressures dominate the early debate on the bill
Speakers backed the measure as a response to Australians feeling the pinch, with household budgets under pressure from everyday costs including groceries, energy and housing.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, clearing the way for the higher Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low-income thresholds to be enacted.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a passed bill into law. makes the threshold increases law
Royal AssentThe final formal step that turns a passed bill into law. turned the bill into an ActThe legal form a bill takes after it receives Royal Assent., locking in the higher thresholds from the 2023-24 income yearThe tax year the measure applies to, which in this bill starts with 2023-24. onward.
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 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 final formal step that turns a passed bill into law., turning the bill into an ActThe legal form a bill takes after it receives Royal Assent..
Key criticism
The debate split three ways. Coalition speakers said they would not stand in the way of the tax and Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. relief, but attacked Labor for breaking its stage 3 tax promise and offering only delayed, modest cost-of-living help. Greens speakers and Pauline Hanson opposed the package from different directions, arguing it still gave too much benefit to higher earners or broke the original promise.
The Coalition supported passage while criticising Labor’s broken promise; the Greens and Pauline Hanson opposed the bill.
Relief is too limited
Some MPs argued the higher Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. thresholds and related tax cuts were only partial relief and would not do enough for people under the greatest pressure, especially those on very low incomes.
Coalition backed relief but attacked the broken promise
Coalition speakers said they would not block tax relief, while arguing Labor had broken its election promise and shifted the long-term tax burden back onto some taxpayers.
Greens and One Nation opposed the package
Greens senators argued the package still delivered too much to high-income earners and should fund services instead, while Pauline Hanson said she would not support the bill because Labor had broken its tax promise.
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.
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
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.
This vote tested whether the Senate would endorse the government’s revised tax relief package at the second-reading stage before the bill proceeded. Its defeat left the bill without that extra statement of support.
Defeated 10 to 29. Support came from Greens. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.
This was a test of whether the Senate would attach a critical statement to the bill, rejecting the government’s tax package as still too generous to higher earners. Its defeat meant the bill kept moving without that criticism attached.
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 supports the bill, saying it will give more tax relief to Australians on modest incomes by lifting the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low-income thresholds.
Read in Hansard ↗McCormack opposes the bill, saying Labor betrayed voters by changing the promised stage 3 tax cuts after claiming they were locked in.
Read in Hansard ↗Hume says the Coalition will support the bill's Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. tax cut, but argues it is a cynical Labor response to a cost-of-living crisis and not a genuine long-term fix.
Read in Hansard ↗Scamps supports the bill, saying the Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. changes help make the cost-of-living tax package fairer because most low and middle income earners get the same or a bigger cut while higher earners get less.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
37 speakers · 39 contributions · 32 support · 5 unclear
“One of the other things that we are doing is we are introducing the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 to increase the Medicare levy low-income thresholds for 2023-24, which will benefit more than a million low-income Australians as well. This will ensure that people on lower incomes continue to pay a reduced levy rate or be exempt from the Medicare levy. That's a good cost-of-living relief and a practical thing to do. We're implementing the government's cost-of-living tax cuts and changes to the Medicare levy to ensure more people get more help when they are under pressure. At the same time, we're seeing inflation come down. We're seeing that, and the most recent figures are very encouraging, but there's more work to be done.”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
Jenny McAllister supports the bill, saying it will lift Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. low income thresholds and give targeted cost-of-living relief to Australians on modest incomes. She argues it will help lower-income workers, families, seniors and pensioners keep more of what they earn.
“This is another way that the Albanese Labor Government is providing more tax relief to Australians on modest incomes, to help with the costs of living.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McAllister supports the bill and wants it passed, saying it delivers meaningful cost-of-living relief and tax reform for every taxpayer. She argues the tax cuts will help people under pressure and commends the bill to the Senate.
“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 ↗
“Further, the changes, I should note, to Medicare, ensure that, as to the levy, people on lower incomes pay less on or are exempt from the Medicare levy, which is also an additional relief for those people. I'm proud to be part of this government that is taking this action. Policymaking can be complex, but sometimes, at its core, it's really quite simple. In this case, it's about ensuring more Australians are supported through this tax cut for every taxpaying worker. It's about a simple proposition: look after those who need it the most with the greatest support.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It has a very different view, as the member for Macarthur reminds me. 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 ↗
“This is why we have done things such as increasing the Medicare threshold. We've done that so that people on low incomes won't be paying that, but they'll still get that great Medicare that Labor stands up and believes in, the Medicare that we have fought for for 40 years, to make sure it's there and to make sure people can get health care where they need it and when 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 is a dynamic policy that will help every single Australian, every single Australian. It gives every single Australian a tax cut, it helps with their cost of living and it also let's them have more of what they earn in their own pockets.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We have been clear and upfront about the changes we are making and how those changes will benefit all Australian taxpayers. I am pleased that from 1 July our government's decision means every taxpayer will benefit from a tax cut. I'm pleased and proud to be in here supporting these changes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We're giving young families extra help. Lifting the low-income Medicare thresholds, which are part of those plans as well, means that more very low income earners get additional tax relief on top of the tax cuts we're providing.”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 other change that we're making is around the Medicare levy. This bill sits alongside the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill. I think what a lot of people have missed is we want to further support low-income households, because households with taxable incomes below the relevant statutory low-income thresholds will not be liable for the Medicare levy. The change is that we're going to increase the income threshold for the partial Medicare levy to $26,000 a year and for the full Medicare levy to $32,500 a year. For a single person earning $30,000 a year, it means they're going to keep an extra $170 in their pocket. That's another small part of the change which is going to yield widespread benefit.”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 Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 is also an important piece of legislation which will affect most Australians. This is another way that the Albanese Labor government is providing tax relief to Australians on modest incomes to help with the cost of living.”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 ↗
“The Albanese government wants people to earn more and it wants people to keep more. We want for no-one to be left behind and nobody to be held back. The Labor tax cuts mean that 84 per cent of Australian taxpayers will get a bigger tax cut from 1 July, just a few months away. These measures are fair and responsible. They provide support; they provide reform. This is something I'm proud to get behind, and I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation will see, from 1 July, the tax bracket from $18,200 to $45,000, the 19 per cent rate, reduce to 16 per cent; the $45,000 to $135,000 bracket, the 32½ per cent tax rate, reduce to 30 per cent; the 37 per cent rate threshold will increase from $120,000 per annum to $135,000 per annum; and the 45 per cent rate threshold will increase from $180,000 to $190,000 per annum. We're also increasing the Medicare low-income threshold to provide more relief for those low-income Australians from the payment under the Medicare levy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and what our new tax cuts will mean for the people that I represent in this place, the people of Cowan.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“From 1 July this year, the Albanese Labor government will also reduce the 32.5 per cent tax rate to 30 per cent, increase the threshold above which the 37 per cent tax rate applies from $122,000 to $135,000 and increase the threshold above which the 45 per cent tax rate applies from $180,000 to $190,000. The increase in threshold above which the 37 per cent and 45 per cent tax rates apply will ensure that the middle-income earners in my electorate of Holt will receive a fairer share of tax relief. In Holt, the average tax cut will amount to a substantial $1,321 a year, offering significant relief to families grappling with the rising cost of living. A minimum wage worker on $45,000 will save $800 under Labor's plan. A nurse or a primary school teacher on $76,000 a year will save $1,600. The average truck driver on $80,000 a year will save nearly $1,700. A welder who earns $110,000 will save nearly $2,500. Those who earn $180,000 and above will still get a tax cut. In fact, those who earn over $180,000 will receive the biggest tax cut of all, 4½ thousand dollars.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“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 ↗
“It is indeed a great pleasure to be speaking on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. It is also a pleasure to follow the member for Sturt, whose greatest contribution to this place so far has been sleeping through a vote a year ago. His speech just then demonstrated that he makes more sense when he keeps his mouth closed, because his argument was fundamentally contradictory. If this is such a bad policy, why is he going to vote for it? That's the ultimate question he and every member of the opposition have to answer. They can come in here and bleat and carp, but, ultimately, if they think this is a bad policy and the wrong move, they should vote against it. Go to the election and pledge to roll it back. Go to the election and pledge to increase taxes on low- and middle-income earners in this country, just like your deputy leader did before she even saw the policy.”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 am proud to be part of the government that is delivering real cost-of-living relief targeted to where it is needed most. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Labor's tax cuts are about making sure you can keep more of what you earn by putting cash back into people's pockets when they need it most.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It is a fair and equitable distribution of people's tax dollars to help them with extreme cost-of-living pressures that many people find themselves under today. 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 ↗
“Bennelong asked me to fight for changes to block Morrison's tax cuts, and they asked for more help with cost-of-living pressures. On behalf of them, I fought for the changes we see here today in this legislation. 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 is not for governments to not act when circumstances change, and what we have done here is to listen to communities, including mine, who wanted to see a fairer plan for tax relief and tax cuts that will help more taxpayers with the cost of living through a bigger tax cut.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In closing, I know families in my electorate of Corangamite and across the country are being hit hard by the cost of living, and that's why our Albanese government's No. 1 priority is to deliver cost-of-living relief. This is a bill that will support all Australians. It will help manage inflation and benefit Australian families. It supports small business by increasing labour supply and, importantly, it will benefit all women, many of them in jobs where they are paid less than the average. I'm proud that it will have a great impact for women. I'm very proud to support our government's approach to reducing cost-of-living pressures whilst also managing inflation. I do urge all those on the crossbench and in the Senate to support these bills. Let's embrace cost-of-living relief, and let's embrace this tax reform. It makes absolute sense. I commend the bill to the House.”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, saying it delivers tax relief because people are under sustained cost-of-living pressure and need more help than the earlier plan would have given them. She argues the changes will put more money in taxpayers' pockets and especially help working women and workforce supply.
“This cost-of-living problem has proven to be more stubborn than we hoped for, demanding that we do more. 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. A total of 13.6 million Australian taxpayers will be receiving a tax cut, and 85 per cent of taxpayers will be getting a bigger tax cut under our plan compared to Scott Morrison's plan.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ananda-Rajah supports the bill and says Labor is changing course because the old tax plan no longer fit current economic conditions. She argues the new Medicare levyA tax added to many taxpayers' income tax bills that helps fund Medicare. and tax settings give better cost-of-living relief, especially for workers, women and younger Australians, without worsening inflation.
“When there is clearly a better option for cost-of-living pressures, workforce participation, women and the economy, not making the change is irresponsible.”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 changes that Labor are attempting to push through this Senate today will also mean that more Australians get an even bigger tax cut than that which was promised before.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill returns bracket creep for all taxpayers and does more to reduce the impact on those most burdened by it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is another way that the Albanese Labor government is providing more tax relief to Australians on modest incomes, to help with the costs of living.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Treasury has been clear that our changes are broadly revenue neutral and won't add to inflation. Our changes will reduce inequality and they'll increase opportunity.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“If things need to be changed in the future, then that's what a good government should do, just as we have done in this case, when Australians are facing increased cost-of-living pressures and knew full well that they were getting a dud deal from those opposite in the tax package that they put forward. It is time for childcare workers, tradies, truckies, teachers, nurses, disability carers and healthcare workers to get the tax cut that they deserve.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
28 speakers · 31 contributions · 15 support · 2 oppose · 3 mixed · 8 unclear
“I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, and I move:”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will always stand for lower, simpler and fairer taxes, and we will always stand by our principles. That's the reason we will support taking the 19 per cent bracket down to 16 per cent. But we deeply oppose Labor weaponising the politics of envy, in a cost-of-living crisis, after all the assurances in the last two years from the Prime Minister to Australians who were waiting for a tax cut—Australians who had looked at their budget, looked at the law, heard what the Prime Minister had said and made plans because they trusted their government. That trust has been broken, irrevocably. These are the Australians that the Prime Minister has let down. This is cynical politics, and it's focused on slicing and re-slicing an ever-diminishing pie, not growing the pie so that all Australians benefit.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“'Tax cuts'—they are words that ring a very happy tune in my brain. It was actually tax that drove me to run for politics—in particular, lower and fairer taxes for all Australians.”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 ↗
“I rise to talk on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. As we have said, the coalition will be supporting this bill but, obviously, moving amendments as well.”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. We are committed to go to the next election with a tax reform package that is in keeping with the stage 3 tax reforms. Unlike those opposite, we remain committed to fighting bracket creep—that thief in the night that takes more Australian taxpayer dollars than any other form of government legislation and sneaks up on Australians, takes more money out of their pockets and no-one knows about it—and we are committed to enshrining aspiration.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The $15 a week in five months time is absolutely better than nothing, because who knows how expensive it will be to live in Australia in another five months under this government?”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 ↗
“As I said, the coalition will always support lower taxes, but we will take a tax reform package to the next election that will deliver lower, simpler and fairer taxes to help fight bracket creep to enable and encourage and foster aspirational Australians to keep more of their own money. I know that the policies in this tax space and others will actually have a major impact on regional and remote parts of Australia.”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 ↗
“When people despair that the one legislated bit of tax reform we've had in recent memory has been torn up, they can also despair at the capacity of this place to move beyond the Punch and Judy show that is the political cycle.”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 welcome that the Labor Party have decided to cut some taxes, but what I don't welcome is the manner in which the Prime Minister of this country has dealt with this issue. What we are debating here today may be called the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, but the subtext of this bill is about the nature, the beliefs and the values of Prime Minister Albanese, someone who looked down the camera at Australians and said, 'My word is my bond.'”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 ↗
“The stark reality, friends, is that our Prime Minister has his priorities, unfortunately. They're not priorities about addressing the cost of living. It's not about road safety. It's not about business confidence or food security. Sadly, my observation of the first period of the Albanese prime ministership is that we have a Prime Minister whose only priority is maintaining the office of Prime Minister.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I know, Member for McEwen, it must pain you to be reminded of these atrocities. It must pain you when you talk about cost-of-living pressures on that side and I come in and talk about cost-of-living pressures in relation to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak about this Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and a related bill, addressing the cost-of-living tax cuts. There are very mixed feelings about this. It's like the old chestnut with the two nuts under three half shells. There's a lot of moving around here, and I think the government benches are hoping that no-one has realised.”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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak today on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. I note the comments of Senator Pocock and I think they're important—the tax has to come from somewhere, but it doesn't all have to come from everyday Australians.”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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As an opposition, it is imperative we focus on the things we can change, not the impossible, regardless of the moral merit. Of course, going to the next election promising to increase taxes as a commitment to reverse Labor's tar-baby tax cuts would ensure failure.”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 bill, so it should pass, but he argues Labor has broken promises and that the broader tax package leaves taxpayers worse off. He frames the measure as a short-term relief step while attacking the government for higher taxes and poor economic management.
“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 bill offers welcome temporary relief, but argues it does not fix the bigger problems with housing, incomes and job security. He supports the immediate relief only as a stopgap and says Australia still needs broader economic reform.
“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
Sam Birrell opposes the bill, saying it is a political response rather than genuine tax reform or a serious cost-of-living fix. He argues the government should have kept or extended the low and middle income tax offset instead of letting families lose out.
“As I said, I don't believe this is about tax reform or fairness or the future of Australia's economy. I think it's about political expediency and it's populism over pragmatism.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Birrell says the coalition will not oppose the bill's tax-rate reduction, but argues Labor has broken its promises and swapped proper tax reform for a short-term sugar hit. He says the government should have kept the earlier offset and focused on lower, simpler taxes that do more to tackle bracket creep.
“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.”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, arguing that the government is breaking a fundamental promise on tax policy and using the package to reverse its earlier position. He says the measure sits against a backdrop of worsening cost-of-living and Medicare pressure, including fewer bulk-billing doctors in his region.
“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.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Scarr says the coalition will not stand in the way of the bill because it delivers tax relief during a cost-of-living crisis, but he argues Labor cannot be trusted on tax because of what he calls a broken promise. He also criticises the government for spending heavily on marketing the measure instead of prioritising 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. But Australians must always remember that this bill which we're debating today means that Australians cannot take the Labor government at its word with respects to any tax matter. Remember when the Prime Minister said, 'My word is my bond'? This bill demonstrates that the Prime Minister's word is not his bond. This bill demonstrates that Labor cannot be trusted with respect to whatever it says and whatever it commits to with respects to taxation, whether it's in relation to negative gearing, capital gains tax, franking credits or superannuation. Whatever it is, this bill demonstrates and is evidence—exhibit A—that the Albanese Labor government cannot be trusted with respect to anything that it says in relation to tax. It will promise one thing before an election and then do something else after an election.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
11 speakers · 12 contributions · 8 oppose · 1 mixed · 2 unclear
“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 ↗
“This bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, is this much better—slightly better—than the bill that was first introduced by the Liberal government five years ago. The Australian Greens have been fiercely opposed to the stage 3 tax cuts from the start. We've been the only political party to consistently call on the Liberals and Labor to abandon this unfair and ridiculous policy.”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
Nick McKim opposes the bill and foreshadows a second reading amendment, arguing the tax cuts hand large benefits to high earners while blocking spending on Medicare, income support, and other public priorities. He says the Greens should have pushed Labor to make the tax system more progressive instead.
“I foreshadow my second reading amendment as circulated in the chamber.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
McKim opposes the bill as drafted, saying the revised tax cuts still worsen inequality and drain revenue from public services. He wants the government to redesign them so the biggest benefits do not go to the wealthiest people and instead support Medicare and cost-of-living help.
“(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 ↗
“The Greens are the only members of this parliament who opposed the stage 3 tax cuts from day one. We were right to oppose them in 2018 and we are right to continue to call out their unfairness today. It took years of pressure from the Greens, the community and civil society organisations to finally shame Labor into amending stage 3. We were elected to resist Labor's worst tendencies and to push them to go further and faster on the issues that matter, and that is what we will continue to do. These tax cuts are not a win for Australia. While many Australians will gratefully welcome some more money in their pockets, the vast benefit of these cuts will go to the wealthiest Australians, who don't need it. Less than half of one per cent of the total value of these cuts will go to the poorest 20 per cent of Australians, while the wealthiest 20 per cent will bank half of the total value. Politicians and CEOs on incomes of more than $200,000 will pocket three times the value of tax cuts compared to the average worker. The tax cuts will widen the gender pay gap, with 42 per cent of the tax cuts going to women and 58 per cent to men.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Greens are the only ones in here who have, from day one, continuously opposed the coalition's tax cuts for the billionaires and the politicians which the crossbench at that time backed in, and Labor followed.”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 ↗
“I speak today on the stage 3 tax cut bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, and the related bill. There are many parts of the world where people are willing to pay higher taxes—particularly income taxes—than we do in Australia. Think about that; there are parts of the world where people are willing to pay more and higher taxes than we do in Australia because they actually trust that the government will spend those funds in a way that benefits the majority—housing, education, health care. There are many examples of these countries—Iceland, Finland, Sweden, Denmark. These are all nations with a higher level of income tax than we have in Australia. They are also all countries that beat Australia in last year's world happiness index.”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.”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 · 7 support · 1 mixed · 2 unclear
“However, it must be noted that these tax cut changes are only the start of the work that the government should do to alleviate the cost-of-living pressures for the most vulnerable Australians.”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. We must ensure that we can fairly and equitably raise the revenue that we need to provide the services and the infrastructure that Australians expect and deserve. I urge both major parties to put politics aside and to be open to reasonable, expert led tax reform. I commend this bill to the House.”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.”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 ↗
“Of course not everyone earns an income and pays tax, so not everyone benefits from a tax cut. Those on a disability support pension, JobSeeker or an age pension are still seeing the seven per cent increase in the cost of groceries and a 10 per cent increase in rents. The government will need to find different ways to provide them with some cost-of-living relief, through addressing health costs or other essentials. The Medicare levy adjustment announced this week does provide some additional relief to more than a million lower-earning Australians.”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.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“People in communities across the country have been calling for the stage 3 tax cuts to be redesigned since before the election. People knew this was a bad idea. And this has only got worse. We've seen a large proportion of people who would have benefited from these stage 3 tax cuts actually now saying, 'This is not the right direction for Australia.' The majority of Australians have a strong sense of fairness and believe in looking after each other. Reflecting what Australians believe and what we've been hearing from our communities, the crossbench have consistently called for a redesign of these cuts. 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 ↗
“We have to talk about tax reform, and we have to act on it. Fixing the stage 3 tax cuts doesn't count as reform. It's not even close.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“My amendment would allow the government's proposal to pass in full without a fuss from me, but it would also ensure that the government honours its promise. My proposal is that we abolish the 37 per cent tax bracket in two years time, which is pragmatic and fair, and I think it's a reasonable compromise.”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 · 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 Whole 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 final formal step that turns a passed bill into law., turning the bill into an ActThe legal form a bill takes after it receives Royal Assent..
