September 09, 2004


Will we have the tax-cut election of our dreams? Yes, says Terry McCrann, writing after Mark Latham’s announcement of $8-per-week breaks for those earning below $52,000:

It will, it has to, prompt a response -- something that John Howard has shown he is well aware of, with his sly hints of tax cuts for May's "forgotten" people.

But the SMH says matching cuts won’t happen:

John Howard will resist the temptation to match Mark Latham's tax relief for low-income earners but plans to deliver his own election lures for these voters, including child-care support.

The hell with that! Pressure for a big fat Howard tax cut must be maintained. The Australian is leaning on the PM:

Pressure is building on the Howard Government to counter Labor's $11.2 billion tax and family plan after the Opposition survived an onslaught on the vote-chasing policy.

They haven’t survived just yet, but might do if we don’t get some $$$ returned to us from the government. Last word to the Daily Telegraph’s editorial:

Yesterday, mixed in with the social policy and tax tinkering, there were actually some tax increases in Mr Latham's policy statement. Are we supposed to be cheered about that?

At election times particularly, politicians are practiced at the art of what have become known as "small target" offerings. Mr Latham's outline yesterday seems to fit that category. How refreshing it would be to hear – from either Mr Latham or Mr Howard – of a "big target" plan for significant taxation reductions. What about it?

Posted by Tim Blair at September 9, 2004 05:38 AM