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

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 1 July 1926


Senator NEEDHAM - I am anxious to provide that a partner in a business shall pay taxation on the profits he made as the result of the war. I do not want any one to amass wealth as the result of the spilling of human blood, and then to escape taxes which were imposed to meet our war obligations. Unless Senator Elliott can prove that his amendment will not benefit certain wealthy persons I intend to oppose it.

Senator ELLIOTT(Victoria) [8.101.- I dealt with this question fairly exhaustively on a previous occasion, but in view of the debate which has arisen I think it necessary to repeat what I said on a former occasion. In addressing himself to the bill in another place, the Treasurer said -

The position of ex -soldiers who became partners in undertakings after they went away is more difficult. Now that the war is over, and we are looking retrospectively on the position, the difficulty is to find a form of words to express what is intended without including some who are not entitled to the relief proposed, and excluding others who are just as much entitled to it as are those mentioned.

The Treasurer further stated -

In regard to the case mentioned, the commissioner, while recognizing that an anomaly exists, cannot suggest any form of words that would meet such cases.

Apparently the officers of the Taxation Department fell down on the job, because they could not draft a clause to meet the position. I have, however, had an amendment drafted which should meet the case, but the Minister has objected to it. I have endeavoured to meet his criticism on a previous occasion, and permanent officials of the department are of the opinion that the amendment is in proper form. The Minister now says that it is contrary to the principles of the principal act.


Senator Crawford - I said that repeatedly when the measure was previously before the committee.







Suggest corrections