Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

What will the tax cuts mean for households?

By Andrew Leigh - posted Thursday, 9 June 2005

Oliver Wendell Holmes, of the US Supreme Court, once said that he paid his tax bills more readily than any other bills, knowing that they were the price of “civilised society”. Conservative British politician Edmund Burke took a contrary view: “To tax and to please, no more than to love and to be wise, is not given to men.” Announcing $22 billion of personal income tax cuts over the next four years, Treasurer Peter Costello was clearly happier to throw his lot in with Burke than Holmes.

But how will the tax cuts be distributed across families, and what will their impact be on inequality? Australia taxes individuals, but welfare measures are based on comparisons between households. So to really see how the tax cuts will affect the distribution of incomes, we need to go beyond a simple comparison of tax tables, and also take account of household composition. For example, a couple with a combined income of $100,000 received a bigger tax cut in the recent budget if they had one $100,000 earner than if husband and wife both earned $50,000.

To perform the analysis, I took a sample of individuals across 7,000 households interviewed for the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey, and compared their after-tax incomes under the current tax system with their after-tax incomes under the proposed tax schedules.


Affluent households will do extremely well out of the tax cuts. The richest 10 per cent of households, with an average pre-tax income of $179,000, will get 27 per cent of the 2005-06 tax cuts, and 33 per cent of the 2006-07 cuts. The top 5 per cent of households, with an average income of $230,000, do even better: garnering 15 per cent of the total tax cut pie in the next financial year, and 19 per cent the year after. And the richest 1 per cent of households - average income a cool $433,000 - get 3 per cent of the first year’s tax cuts, and 4 per cent of the second year’s tax cuts.

By contrast, poorer households, since they pay less tax, gain only a small share of the tax cuts. The share of the tax cuts going to the poorest 50 per cent of households is a mere 17 per cent in 2005-06. In 2006-07, the poorest half will get just 11 per cent of the total tax cuts, a smaller share than the richest 5 per cent. The middle 20 per cent of households also receive a less than even share: 13 per cent in the first year, and 9 per cent in the second year.

In proportionate terms, these tax cuts are more regressive than the personal income tax cuts that accompanied the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax in 2000. Indeed, it is difficult to think of a more regressive set of tax reforms in recent Australian history. Their effect on the income distribution will be small, but not insignificant. My estimate is that the ratio of the disposable incomes of households at the 90th percentile to those at the 10th percentile (the so-called 90:10 ratio) will be pushed up from 7.4 under the current tax system to 7.5 in 2005-06 and 7.6 in 2006-07.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

Article edited by Patrick O'Neill.
If you'd like to be a volunteer editor too, click here.

First published in the Australian Financial Review on May 29, 2005.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

2 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Andrew Leigh is the member for Fraser (ACT). Prior to his election in 2010, he was a professor in the Research School of Economics at the Australian National University, and has previously worked as associate to Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia, a lawyer for Clifford Chance (London), and a researcher for the Progressive Policy Institute (Washington DC). He holds a PhD from Harvard University and has published three books and over 50 journal articles. His books include Disconnected (2010), Battlers and Billionaires (2013) and The Economics of Just About Everything (2014).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Andrew Leigh
Related Links
ANU Research School of Social Sciences

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Andrew Leigh
Article Tools
Comment 2 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy