Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Wombat000]

Its not like a mining super profits tax could have been usedcto create a soveriegn wealth fund

As an aside (not too much I hope), I am mightily confused as to why we tax our resource exports so poorly?
Dunno what the motivation is/was?
Who decided it?
Wonder what it would take to correct it?

Also, it’s nice to have our fuel predicament get more attention, and if we wish to have influence on our SLOC, the rationale for AUKUS.

 

[hauritz]

As an aside (not too much I hope), I am mightily confused as to why we tax our resource exports so poorly?
Dunno what the motivation is/was?
Who decided it?
Wonder what it would take to correct it?

Also, it’s nice to have our fuel predicament get more attention, and if we wish to have influence on our SLOC, the rationale for AUKUS.

Gina Rinehart is a big advocate for boosting defence spending to 5%. I am sure she will have no issues with increasing resource taxes.

Rinehart calls for defence spending boost to 5pc of GDP

Australia’s richest person, Gina Rinehart, has called for the federal government to increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP and invest in an Israeli-style missile defence shield to protect the continent.

www.ginarinehart.com.au

 

[iambuzzard]

Its almost like we needed more than three ships to replace nine.

It really is too bad we didnt have something like a mining construction boom at the time we needed to build these ships to pay for builing more of them.

Its not like a mining super profits tax could have been usedcto create a soveriegn wealth fund that could have beeb used to build the required infrastructure, train and retain the workforce and pay enough to recruit and retain crews.

Its not like being smarter twenty five years ago would have made any difference today.

I remember a past treasurer created a future fund. That was raided pretty quickly by his successor.

 

[old faithful]

As an aside (not too much I hope), I am mightily confused as to why we tax our resource exports so poorly?
Dunno what the motivation is/was?
Who decided it?
Wonder what it would take to correct it?

Also, it’s nice to have our fuel predicament get more attention, and if we wish to have influence on our SLOC, the rationale for AUKUS.

one factor could be the royalty system in place for traditional owners, mining companies negotiate with the TOs , its a significant amount in some cases, I know of one NT community that is paid $17000 per man woman and child per month. Now that's how the figure is worked out, that sum then goes into a trust fund, and is distributed by the elders how they see fit. The same community has "lost $34million" one elder was sent to prison for roughly $500K of it, but the rest is unaccounted for. Its well documented, easy to google. Now the mining company is not going to be happy paying a mining tax and royalties are they? So if a mining tax was set at XXX% , then the government would then need to pay the royalties, not the company, because they are not going to pay both.

 

[Volkodav]

one factor could be the royalty system in place for traditional owners, mining companies negotiate with the TOs , its a significant amount in some cases, I know of one NT community that is paid $17000 per man woman and child per month. Now that's how the figure is worked out, that sum then goes into a trust fund, and is distributed by the elders how they see fit. The same community has "lost $34million" one elder was sent to prison for roughly $500K of it, but the rest is unaccounted for. Its well documented, easy to google. Now the mining company is not going to be happy paying a mining tax and royalties are they? So if a mining tax was set at XXX% , then the government would then need to pay the royalties, not the company, because they are not going to pay both.

I would say the untaxed billions going to multinational companies and Australian billionaires, and those companies and billionaires investing millions on political influance and public political campaigns is a far greater issue.

Yes there is fraud in indigenius communitees, and yes some of the perpitrators are indigenous, the majority are not. The majority are the same scum you see insinuating themselves into NDIS, aged care, childcare, strata management, home insulation, home solar & batteries, school halls, defence (and government in general) infrastructure, facilities, estate and various non operational support contracts.

We have a layer of rent seeking excrement, many of whom become millionaires, some billionaires, who leach off money intended for others. As a nation we tend to kick the person who the money was intended for, but who didnt get it, whiles cellebrating, and sucking up to the thieving parisites who scam the system.

Gina wants more money spent of defending her assets? She can start by paying a fair rate of tax. Why am i mentikning Gina specifically,? Well considering how much she is investing in australias version of maga, she obviously has money to burn.

 

[old faithful]

You are missing the point Volk, Im not saying scamming is the problem. What I was trying to say, by taxing the mining sector, the royalty payments will need to come from the tax instead of the mining company paying the community. Otherwise you are double dipping, expecting the mineing companies to pay both the royalty to the TO and the tax. The Mabo decision gave the traditional owners the rights to the wealth on their land, its not every Australians resources as some try and say.
There are communities that get nothing as well, as their land does not have oil, gas, gold, bauxite etc. Its not really a fair system atm, and maybe a mineing tax is a better way, but that is a matter for the high court. Wonder why its not discussed publiclly.
I am not taking sides here, just giving one of the reasons that a resource tax is not already happening, I like what Norway has done, there must be reasons why the tax is not introduced, I dont buy its because of Gina. She does not yeild that much power over the Labor govt, maybe within Palmer , ON and libs, but why then dont labor introduce it?

 

[Volkodav]

You are missing the point Volk, Im not saying scamming is the problem. What I was trying to say, by taxing the mining sector, the royalty payments will need to come from the tax instead of the mining company paying the community. Otherwise you are double dipping, expecting the mineing companies to pay both the royalty to the TO and the tax. The Mabo decision gave the traditional owners the rights to the wealth on their land, its not every Australians resources as some try and say.
There are communities that get nothing as well, as their land does not have oil, gas, gold, bauxite etc. Its not really a fair system atm, and maybe a mineing tax is a better way, but that is a matter for the high court. Wonder why its not discussed publiclly.
I am not taking sides here, just giving one of the reasons that a resource tax is not already happening, I like what Norway has done, there must be reasons why the tax is not introduced, I dont buy its because of Gina. She does not yeild that much power over the Labor govt, maybe within Palmer , ON and libs, but why then dont labor introduce it?

Fair call.

Im sick of Australians in general being ripped off by wealthy grifters, who then turn around and demand the government ,(i.e. the tax payer) give them more and do more for them.

I read recently that wealth inequality has reached the point globally that if billionaires were taxed 5% on their annual increase in wealth, it would pay off the national depts of most countries. So if they were taxes at one seventh to one eigth the maximum income tax rate for a mid to high salary earner most countries would have no debt and could afford to fully fund their budgets and provide services for their populations.

I have no problem with my tax going to defence, education, health, infrastructure etc. It makes me sick that im forced to subsidise billionaires. Even worse Aussie billionaires tend to be fat ugly slugs who dont even bother to hide their repulsiveness, but their are still dumb arses who out them on pedestals.

 

[Arclighy]

one factor could be the royalty system in place for traditional owners, mining companies negotiate with the TOs , its a significant amount in some cases, I know of one NT community that is paid $17000 per man woman and child per month. Now that's how the figure is worked out, that sum then goes into a trust fund, and is distributed by the elders how they see fit. The same community has "lost $34million" one elder was sent to prison for roughly $500K of it, but the rest is unaccounted for. Its well documented, easy to google. Now the mining company is not going to be happy paying a mining tax and royalties are they? So if a mining tax was set at XXX% , then the government would then need to pay the royalties, not the company, because they are not going to pay both.

 

[Arclighy]

one factor could be the royalty system in place for traditional owners, mining companies negotiate with the TOs , its a significant amount in some cases, I know of one NT community that is paid $17000 per man woman and child per month. Now that's how the figure is worked out, that sum then goes into a trust fund, and is distributed by the elders how they see fit. The same community has "lost $34million" one elder was sent to prison for roughly $500K of it, but the rest is unaccounted for. Its well documented, easy to google. Now the mining company is not going to be happy paying a mining tax and royalties are they? So if a mining tax was set at XXX% , then the government would then need to pay the royalties, not the company, because they are not going to pay both.

I assume this is referring to Groote Eylandt / Anindilyakwa, because that is the NT community most obviously associated with the Groote Eylandt Aboriginal Trust scandal — the case where ABC reported about $34 million went missing and Rosalie Lalara was later jailed over theft from the trust. (ABC) On that assumption, the $17,000 per man, woman and child per month claim does not stack up. The ABS 2021 QuickStats for Anindilyakwa (Groote) show 1,574 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. (ABS) Paying 1,574 people $17,000 a month would require about $321.1 million a year.

That is almost the same as the NT Government’s entire mining and petroleum royalty take, which the NT Budget 2025–26 puts about $298 million for 2024–25 and about 340 million in the future. (NT Budget)

By contrast, the Anindilyakwa Land Council Annual Report 2022–23 lists Section 64(3) Royalties — Receipts during the year: $59,153,861 and Negotiated Royalties — Receipts during the year: $21,270,723, for about $80.4 million combined. (Anindilyakwa Annual Report) Even if that whole amount were divided equally across 1,574 people (which it is not) it would come to only about $4,258 per person per month, not $17,000. The ABS figures also point the same way: 355 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander households, 4.3 people per household, and median weekly household income of $856, which is only about $3,700 per month. (ABS) If every person were really receiving $17,000 per month, a typical household would be taking in roughly $68,000 to $73,100 per month, which is plainly inconsistent with the published household-income profile for the community. Obviously, median household income and a claimed per-person royalty payment are not identical measures, but the gap here is so extreme that it strongly suggests the quoted payout figure isn't accurate. The Land Council’s own material also makes clear that much of the royalty money is channelled through Aboriginal corporations for community, organisational and operational purposes, rather than being mainly distributed as direct payments to individuals. The claim that elders simply distribute the money as they see fit is also not supported by the ALC’s own material, which describes a formal statutory and corporate process involving applications from Aboriginal corporations, consideration by the ALC Finance Committee, and recommendation to the ALC Board, alongside defined eligibility rules for any direct cash distributions. (anindilyakwa.com.au)

 

[old faithful]

I assume this is referring to Groote Eylandt / Anindilyakwa, because that is the NT community most obviously associated with the Groote Eylandt Aboriginal Trust scandal — the case where ABC reported about $34 million went missing and Rosalie Lalara was later jailed over theft from the trust. (ABC) On that assumption, the $17,000 per man, woman and child per month claim does not stack up. The ABS 2021 QuickStats for Anindilyakwa (Groote) show 1,574 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people. (ABS) Paying 1,574 people $17,000 a month would require about $321.1 million a year.

That is almost the same as the NT Government’s entire mining and petroleum royalty take, which the NT Budget 2025–26 puts about $298 million for 2024–25 and about 340 million in the future. (NT Budget)

By contrast, the Anindilyakwa Land Council Annual Report 2022–23 lists Section 64(3) Royalties — Receipts during the year: $59,153,861 and Negotiated Royalties — Receipts during the year: $21,270,723, for about $80.4 million combined. (Anindilyakwa Annual Report) Even if that whole amount were divided equally across 1,574 people (which it is not) it would come to only about $4,258 per person per month, not $17,000. The ABS figures also point the same way: 355 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander households, 4.3 people per household, and median weekly household income of $856, which is only about $3,700 per month. (ABS) If every person were really receiving $17,000 per month, a typical household would be taking in roughly $68,000 to $73,100 per month, which is plainly inconsistent with the published household-income profile for the community. Obviously, median household income and a claimed per-person royalty payment are not identical measures, but the gap here is so extreme that it strongly suggests the quoted payout figure isn't accurate. The Land Council’s own material also makes clear that much of the royalty money is channelled through Aboriginal corporations for community, organisational and operational purposes, rather than being mainly distributed as direct payments to individuals. The claim that elders simply distribute the money as they see fit is also not supported by the ALC’s own material, which describes a formal statutory and corporate process involving applications from Aboriginal corporations, consideration by the ALC Finance Committee, and recommendation to the ALC Board, alongside defined eligibility rules for any direct cash distributions. (anindilyakwa.com.au)

Its easy when you look at 1 island as 1 community isnt it?
Groote is several communities, Umbacumba for example is not included in the figures I gave.
There are 751 people that live in that community, some married from outside the family, some contractors, police, health proffessionals, teachers etc...not all 751 people get royalty payments or are enculded in the payment factor. Its way more complicated than it seems. Also, the cheques which are co signed by the accounts, and agreements with lawyers etc need to be taken into account. Every cheque is signed by two people present at the meetings, and are not signed for free, it was back in 2006 I think $100 per signature.
Much more into the calulations than numbers and a spread sheet.
I cant publicly disclose why I know what I know, sorry, but I have read the letter to a person who cannot read.

 

[old faithful]

Here you go, some more numbers for you to get your head around.

If they paid the numbers I quoted you, @$204000 per man woman and child, x 41, it comes to about $8.6 million a year in royalty payments, not the alarming $300+ M you came up with.

 

[Bob53]

I get annoyed with the portraying of large companies as owned by billionaires. Yes wealthy people own shares in then but it’s rare that a single person owns more than a few %. The vast majority of shareholding’s in large mining, gas and oils companies are held by superannuation funds …yes some of those are owned off shore and there is certainly offshore share holders but it’s a stretch to flap about on rich people paying little no royalties ripping off the Australia. I hate the idea of foreign ownership of our resources and I agree more royalties should be paid but save us the blather. In the end what’s happened in the past 15-20 years is any extra tax just gets wasted or spent on more public servants. The same people that negotiated these deals on behalf of our governments. I see recently our finance minister saying they saved $114 billion…well if we have that much spare now where is it?