Screw you Abbott! The silent assassin.

[Liam_snorkel]

They already do tax by ABV%. Hence why DIPA's of >7% are ridiculously expensive here compared to the US. It's also why CUB dropped VB from 4.6% to 4.4% or whatever a few years ago.

Yes, but I thought the rate was also tiered (particularly for 50l kegs)

 

[Dunkelbrau]

It is. Less excise is paid on vessels containing over 48L

 

[verysupple]

Weighing up the revenue collected by the government from alcohol, against the cost of alcohol abuse on society, I doubt if the government would ever come close to squaring the balance sheet, taking into account crime, road accidents, health system, sickies etc.

When you write "revenue collected by the government from alcohol", does it include tax paid by all the workers in manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and retail of alcohol? I'm not sure how far off square they'd be.

It sounds to me like the Libs (needless) crusade for a surplus (which probably isn't going to happen anyway) has just found yet another way to hurt the population financially. Additionally, if they do manage to maintain a budget surplus it will force the dollar up and hurt exports, including booze.

To be objective, it was hawke who brought this in, and Rudd who fiddled with it in order to raise revenue

"Under changes made by the former Rudd government, the tax on cigarettes and tobacco will increase in March and September every year in line with average wages, which is usually a higher measure."

I'd be much happier with Rudd's approach because he would actually spend the money raised. Maybe even on something useful rather than trying to obtain a surplus (code word for not spending on infrastructure, public services, or anything else useful). And don't even get me started on the Libs FTTN NBN, 'cause that's going to be great for Aussie business...

At the end of the day the taxes are taken up by the end user, but I agree that government should do more to encourage any fledgling business, be it micro breweries or any sort of manufacturing that will support a work force, because we are going to need a lot more employment opportunities available in the near future.

Yep, I agree. My mum once asked if I'd considered a career in brewing (I think she was sick of supporting me while I study ). I told her if I lived anywhere else in the world I probably would have thought about it. But not here.

Sorry about the rant, it just pisses me off :angry: . I think I need to RDW(about the economy)HAHB .

 

[verysupple]

Luke Sullivan, 33 of Fawkner
"I'm a hard worker who enjoys a drink."

But to lazy to produce his own beer.
Sorry big boy, you'll get no sympathy from me.
Next time spend your hard earned on a Coopers starter kit rather than tattoos.

Yeah, not a lot of sympathy from me either due to his attitude about "not my problem". But I do believe he works hard. He works so hard that he's so tired he couldn't hold a six pack in his hands and had to carry it on his shoulder. Poor guy.

 

[DJ_L3ThAL]

Yeah, not a lot of sympathy from me either due to his attitude about "not my problem". But I do believe he works hard. He works so hard that he's so tired he couldn't hold a six pack in his hands and had to carry it on his shoulder. Poor guy.

He probably also drops down tools for the day at any Union supported pussy faced b/s excuse.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

(Quote )When you write "revenue collected by the government from alcohol", does it include tax paid by all the workers in manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and retail of alcohol? I'm not sure how far off square they'd be.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi454.html

 

[Liam_snorkel]

that report only mentions the tax on alcohol revenue ($7b in 2010), not "workers in manufacturing, marketing, distributing, retail of alcohol".

 

[verysupple]

(Quote )When you write "revenue collected by the government from alcohol", does it include tax paid by all the workers in manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and retail of alcohol? I'm not sure how far off square they'd be.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi454.html

Good ref. I stand corrected about being square. However they seem to have neglected the benefits to society such as providing gainful employment and supporting local agriculture (more than 95% of barley consumed domestically is used in the brewing industry). I think a cost-benefit analysis (rather than just cost analysis) is more pertinent. Having said that it'd be great if the government actually took notice of this report and used the revenue appropriately.

EDIT: Liam-snorkel is right about income tax not being taken into account but I don't think it would make up the remaining ~$7b.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

you weren't corrected. The report only references the total revenue from alcohol excise.

 

[wide eyed and legless]

I don't think taxes collected from gainful employment of workers in the alcohol manufacturing, retail, and distribution could not be entered into the figures as revenue for the government solely for that industry, we still have to provide for other social benefits from the income tax derived from those workers like hospitals, pensions, dole,etc. etc.
Whichever way it is looked the government is still behind the eight ball trying to recover costs from alcohol abuse as against revenue collected.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

I agree with that. But if (hypothetically) the industry ceased to exist overnight..

 

[DJ_L3ThAL]

Blastphemy!!!!

 

[wide eyed and legless]

If everyone stopped buying liquor, and the associated industries didn't exist the government would be in a win win situation.
As long as the government put money into budding industries to take up the job losses, worst case scenario would be a Vegemite shortage.

 

[Ross]

As a brewer I'd love to see some reduction on excise, especially for small business, this rise though has nothing to do with the current Abbot government, not that the Abbot bashers let the facts worry them h34r:

 

[Yob]

all of his predecessors were no better.. show me one that lowered the tax in the last 30 years... or even said.. you know what Beer industry, have a year off the tax as long as you spend it on development of your business.. or.. well, you know... gave a shit

 

[verysupple]

As a brewer I'd love to see some reduction on excise, especially for small business, this rise though has nothing to do with the current Abbot government, not that the Abbot bashers let the facts worry them h34r:

I think the article is a bit unclear. I read it as the increase this time is larger than under the previous automatic increase scheme, meaning that the current government does have something (everything) to do with it. I could have been wrong, though, as there's no mention of what the previous increase scheme was. Anyone got info on that?

 

[pcmfisher]

I think the article is a bit unclear. I read it as the increase this time is larger than under the previous automatic increase scheme, meaning that the current government does have something (everything) to do with it. I could have been wrong, though, as there's no mention of what the previous increase scheme was. Anyone got info on that?

Not unclear, maybe you were swayed by the title of the thread and expectations of underhanded things from jug ears.

 

[Dan Pratt]

I was thinking of this today - We need Beer Excise Reform!!

This link shows the exise - for beer it means that 99% of what the industry makes, large commercial and small craft beer is hit hard with this excise.

how the hell did they decide the <3%, between 3% & 3.5% and >3.5% - makes no sense and is effecting the growth of the Craft Beer Industry of Australia

http://www.caseysbeer.com.au/?page_id=97

 

[verysupple]

Not unclear, maybe you were swayed by the title of the thread and expectations of underhanded things from jug ears.

So how much was the previous increase? Or any prior increases? How does this increase compare? It certainly leaves a lot of detail out. I just assumed (yeah, I know what they say about assumptions) because people were actually kicking up a stink that it wasn't the same old half yearly increase they're used to. It certainly seems unclear if that is the case or not.

 

[Liam_snorkel]

It's indexed to CPI biannually. see section 6A of the Excise Tariff Act 1921.