Our survey panel has given strong support to the Rudd Government’s announcements about super and company tax. They are less enthusiastic about the resource rental tax, particularly if they are swinging voters.

Resource Rental Tax

 50% supported this tax, compared to 40% who opposed it. This indicates a high level of certaintyand it was heavily polarised in line with voting intentions.

However, a snapshot of swinging voters showed that they were less likely to support the proposal than the overall group with only 42% approving and 44% disapproving, and those who neither approved nor disapproved were more likely to express concerns than support.

Reasons given for supporting the tax included:

Community-owned resource and should be shared

• Most miners are foreign-owned
• Finite resource
• Miners are too profitable

Those opposed to it thought that it:

• Was at an excessive level
• Would destroy the mining industry
• Would hurt ordinary Australians who were shareholders or lived in communities who benefited from mining

“I am sure the mining companies are getting a disproportionate benefit from Australia's natural wealth and ordinary Aussies should get a greater share.”

“It is outrageous to think that foreign companies can come into our country, strip it of natural resourses and we are only minor beneficiaries of the venture.”

“As I understand it, the tax will be levied on excessive profits. Therefore it shouldn't have a detrimental affect on the companied concerned. The resources they mine belong to all Australians so there is nothing wrong with taking a little more…”

“Because the coal and other minerals they mine do actually belong to the people of Australia. The Government went out on a limb by spending so much money for infrastructure and saved our economy going into recession.. This money has to be returned…”

“40% seems high and I am not sure of the details, ie is it 40% of all profit or 40% of profits above a certain level. If it is the former then it is definitely too high, if the latter it will depend on the cut in point.”

“I don't have sufficent information yet to have an informed opinion.  What I've heard from Rudd so far is only gobbley-gook, while Swann doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.  Also, the mining company reps will obviously slant their side…”

“1 effective tax rate is uncompetitive in international market2 superprofits do not start at the edge of the long term bond ratedisplays complete lack of understanding by government of how business works”

“Another of Rudd's short-sighted or "shoot from the hips" policy aimed at trying to get more votes for his re-election. This polciy can cause losses in the share markets for amny retirees and also potential job losses in the industry.”

“Cheap populist revenue grab that might have been acceptable as part of a comprehensive tax reform package as set out in the Henry Review, but as a standalone stunt, the policy is questionable. “

“don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg!”

“I have concerns about the economic and social impact on regional centres if mining companies either downturn operations or move offshore entirely.”

Superannuation Guarantee Charge

This was supported by 64% and opposed by only 23%. There was evidence of partisanship with Liberals split more or less evenly on the question while Labor and Greens voters were 90% and 87% in favour of it.

Those in favour cited:

• Need for provision for individuals for a proper retirement
• Inability of government to fund pensions for all

Those against were concerned at the impact on business of an additional cost without an increase in productivity.

Company Tax

Again, most supported the decrease in company tax, but not as enthusiastically as the changes to super. Labor and Greens voters were more likely to disapprove, and Liberal voters were equivocal (only 53% approved). Nationals voters were opposed.

There was generally a view that lower tax rates were better for the community, and to be internationally competitive, and that this helps small business. It was also seen as being good for employment.

Those who neither supported nor opposed the change thought it was not particularly significant in size, and there was also a feeling that it might just be an election gimmick.

Criticism of the move came from two directions – those who thought it wasn’t enough (Liberals), and those who thought it was too much (Greens).

Note: the sample was 638 people weighted to reflect voting intentions as per the latest Newspoll federal results and randomly selected from a larger pool of 1026 respondents. They responded to an online survey on 5th or 6th of May, 2010

Share this article on your favourite social bookmarking sites: