Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 27 May 1998
Page: 4038


Mr MILES (12:38 PM) —in reply—I thank the member for Wills (Mr Kelvin Thomson) for his contribution, although some of the comments I could not agree with on this area. I would just like to say that there is a difference between the opposition and the government, particularly at this stage, in regard to reforming an outdated and outmoded taxation system in Australia. Basically, the coalition believes that it has to be reformed—there needs to be change; it needs to be done as a gradual evolutionary change—whereas the Labor Party really wants to stick with an archaic dinosaur which is really out of date and outmoded. It is a matter of going ahead as a country in regard to taxation reform. I think that the overwhelming majority of Australians believe that we have to move forward into the third millennium with a reform in taxation which is appropriate for this stage in Australia's development.

I just want to very quickly summarise this particular debate in regard to the Taxation Laws Amendment (Company Law Review) Bill 1998 . The changes made in the Taxation Laws Amendment (Company Law Review) Bill 1998 make various consequential amendments to the taxation laws as a result of changes to the Corporations Law made by the Company Law Review Bill 1997 , which will abolish the concept of par value for shares and the associated concepts of share premiums as well as make it easier for companies to return capital to shareholders. The amendments will ensure that the provisions in the tax law that are currently dependent on the concept of par value can continue to operate appropriately in the future and introduce an anti-avoidance measure to prevent companies entering into capital streaming and dividend substitution arrangements. Mr Deputy Speaker, I will be moving a number of amendments in the consideration in detail stage. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.