QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia) (15:20): This Labor government is committed to punishing Australians for the consequences of its poor economic management. It is hard to find a group that has not been punished as a result of the government's poor economic management and its desire for higher taxes. It's punished Australian families and households with a cost-of-living crisis that it created.
It has created an increase in inflation—it is now speculated that people will be pushed into higher levels of unemployment—and driven real wages down. And it has punished the charities and not-for-profit organisations that have been at the frontline of the cost-of-living crisis in Australia. Foodbank, the Salvation Army, Anglicare and many, many others have been appealing to the broader community for greater support because more Australian families are now having to go and seek the support of charities and not-for-profits to keep their livelihoods afloat.
And, of course, the government has chosen to punish small businesses at a time when small businesses in our country need much greater support. Small businesses are being inflicted with higher operating costs, weaker margins and falling consumer confidence. As a result of the government's decisions, we are now at record levels of small-business insolvencies.
Now, Labor's changes to discretionary trust laws will make life more difficult for many of the small businesses that use them, remembering that 350,000 small businesses operate through discretionary trusts in Australia. Under the government's reforms, compliance costs are expected to be up to $13.3 billion for Australian small businesses as they start to contemplate new valuations, new engagements of advisers and stamp duty.
It's revealing because, in the House of Representatives this morning, when the opposition said, 'Let's give this a much greater level of scrutiny and put the government's discretionary trust changes in front of the House economics committee,' what did the government do? It rejected the idea. Not only is it punishing small businesses; now, it wants to avoid scrutiny as well.
Most alarmingly, Australian charities are not off the hook. In comments today, charity legal experts have said that alterations to the fixed election regime contained in these laws mean that a business owner would be precluded from giving additional one-off tax-free distributions in response to natural disasters, for example, or from pressing benevolent needs such as in response to a flood in Nepal.
They went on to say that the changes preclude business owners from varying their giving across years to take account of successful or lean years. So charities are going to be punished. They will continue to be punished as a result of the government's discretionary trust changes.
How remarkable—at a time when people need charities, the government continues to punish them. (Time expired) Question agreed to.