Why Gillard should have backed down over Australian carbon tax

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Why Gillard should have backed down over Australian carbon tax

gillard.jpg

COMMENT: Yesterday marked the introduction of Australia’s carbon pricing mechanism, with companies being charged A$23 ($23) a tonne for their carbon dioxide emissions. Prime Minister Julia Gillard has swum against the tide to drive through the unpopular measure, but her efforts might be in vain and could also cost her the premiership.

The government has repeatedly stated that the carbon scheme is essential in continuing the fight against climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, however the measure could be removed as early as next year if the opposition comes to power, and if poll ratings continue to fall, Gillard could be ousted even before then.

The carbon pricing mechanism is scheduled to transition to an emissions trading scheme in 2015, similar to the scheme employed in Europe, if it makes it past the election.

tonyabbott.jpg

Tony Abbott (pictured left), leader of the opposition, has vowed to repeal the tax if his Liberal party wins the next election, due to be held in 2013, and with the incumbent prime minister’s reputation and popularity with the electorate continuing to languish, an opposition victory is looking likely.

Gillard performed a dramatic u-turn by going back on her pre-election promise not to introduce a carbon tax, and resentment has grown from that point, with a Lowy Institute poll recently finding that 63% of voters are opposed to the tax.

And a Neilson survey released this morning indicates that Gillard’s Labor party has 42% support, while the opposition coalition has 58%, suggesting that both Labor and the carbon tax will be gone next year, though Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has warned that repealing the tax will not be as easy as Abbott may think.

Wilkie sees similarities with the GST, saying that despite the tax being controversial and unpopular, once “people have realised the sky hasn’t fallen in, they see the sense in the reform, they live with it a while, I think it becomes increasingly difficult for Tony Abbott to unwind it in the future”.

The uncertainty created by Gillard’s u-turn, and compounded by Abbott’s vow to remove the tax if elected, has had a negative effect on investment and has led to a fierce PR war with both the government and opposition launching expensive campaigns to try and win over the public.

The issue continues to be divisive, but Gillard must now hope that businesses focus on certainty and that by the time of the 2013 election, as Wilkie suggests, they will have grown accustomed to the scheme.

She will be encouraged by the fact that yesterday, as the tax officially took effect, 300 big businesses issued a statement of support for the scheme and bemoaned the opposition’s uncertainty-creating tactics.

But this raised another argument against Gillard’s decision to plough ahead with the carbon price. Estimates indicate that the impact of the tax will equate to $3.30 a week, but the government will be providing over $10 a week in tax relief, which suggests the revenue-raising ability of the measure will be severely limited for now, and that exemptions and other releifs will negate the impact of the green measure. Reports of large polluters receiving between 65% and 95% of their permits for free, among other exemptions, have severely harmed the government’s reputation in the run up to the 2013 election.

The carbon tax is set to be an election-defining issue and, should Abbott be victorious, it could also be one of the most short-lived climate change policies ever to have been implemented. When Gillard looks back on her statement that “There will be no carbon tax under any government I lead”, she will be wishing she had either stuck to that promise, or, more likely, never uttered it in the first place.

FURTHER READING:

Australia’s carbon tax plans fail to please

Australians told carbon tax “manageable”, despite unknowns

Airlines must adapt as Australia’s carbon tax hits

Why Australia’s carbon tax will prove ineffective

Australian steel company wants government handout over carbon tax

Gillard’s indirect tax plans still ruffling feathers

Report suggests Australian carbon tax details as popularity falls further

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article