Save Search

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

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 27 May 1998
Page: 3151


Senator COOK (9:42 AM) —Last night, when this debate was drawing to the witching hour, there was some ambiguity in the position of the opposition in the sense that I said I was disposed. Let me clarify the ambiguity: I support the proposal of the government and I do not support the proposal of the Greens. I have great admiration for the tenacity and fighting spirit of Senator Margetts. It is on display again this morning, and one should admire and respect that. However, from the opposition's point of view, large remitters are not downtrodden people and are, by definition, large organisations remitting big licks of money to the Australian tax system.

The time value of that money that is remitted is important and cannot be swept aside in this argument. If it comes by way of cheque, the Tax Office does not actually receive the money until it is cleared, which may be several days or a week or more after the cheque has been signed. That might seem to be a small point. Given the volume and amount of money concerned, it is actually quite an important point. To transfer these funds in an efficient way is what the amendment is about.

I do not think that anyone will argue that large remitters lack the capacity to do this. In fact, the government has just announced that 98 per cent of them do have the capacity to do this, and I do not think we are imposing an unfair imposition on the other two per cent by doing it this way. In any case, it is with the approval of the Tax Commissioner. Therefore, one imagines an interactive process between the larger remitter and the Tax Commissioner so that the efficiency elements are best dealt with having in mind the capability of the company concerned. But on what side of the argument do you fall—for it or agin it? We fall on the side for the government's position because we do not see the particular imposition. We do think the time value of money is important. This guarantees that that issue is best addressed here.

We are moving forward, too, in terms of electronic commerce. This is an element of electronic commerce that is being implemented through the tax system. If anything, one praises the tax system for being aware of modern technological and business practice and in moving with the times in this amendment, not against it. We therefore support it.