Jump to content

Constitutional basis of taxation in Australia

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Enthusiast01 (talk | contribs) at 11:53, 6 May 2016 (→See also). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The constitutional basis of taxation in Australia is predominantly found in Sections 51(ii), 90, 53, 55, and 96 of the Australian Constitution. Their interpretation by the High Court of Australia has been integral to the functioning and evolution of federalism in Australia.

Constitutional Provisions

Sources of Commonwealth taxing powers

Section 51(ii): taxation power

Australia is a federation and legislative power is distributed between the Commonwealth and the States. Section 51 enumerates areas of Commonwealth power. These powers are concurrent, and states can legislate on them, or on any topic not specifically prohibited them by the Constitution (e.g. Section 53 specifically enumerates areas, such as the federal public service, where states may not legislate), but Section 109 provides that Commonwealth laws prevail in circumstances of inconsistency.

Section 51(ii) allows the Commonwealth to enact laws in respect of:

taxation, but so not as to discriminate between States or parts of states.

The non-discrimination limitation repeats the more general prohibition found in Section 99 that the Commonwealth cannot discriminate between states in laws on trade, commerce, or revenue.

The broad Commonwealth power to impose "taxation" must be read subject to the start of Section 51 which grants the enumerated powers "subject to this constitution". Section 51(ii) must also be considered in combination with Section 90.

Section 90: duties of customs and of excise

Section 90 gives the Commonwealth the exclusive, as opposed to concurrent with the States, power to impose "duties of customs and of excise". Any state taxing law which can be characterized as a duty of customs or excise is unconstitutional.

The definition of "customs and excise" has been considered by the High Court of Australia on a number of occasions. Generally, a customs duty is a tax imposed on goods entering a jurisdiction. An excise is a type of sales tax on goods, and the High Court has interpreted what constitutes an excise broadly. The High Court has found that any tax that imposes a tax up to and including the point of sale is an "excise", thereby striking out State sales taxes. For example, in Ha v New South Wales (1997) a State licence fee, which consisted of a fixed amount, plus an amount calculated by reference to the value of tobacco sold, was struck down as an excise.

The major purpose of Section 90 was to achieve objectives of federation, including uniform trade relations with other countries and free trade between the states. However, Section 90 limits the states' ability to raise money, when they have considerable funding obligations (e.g. schools and hospitals). Therefore, Section 90 and Section 96 — which allows the Commonwealth to impose "terms and conditions" on grants. These have led to a vertical fiscal imbalance.[citation needed]

Section 114

Section 114 provides that the Commonwealth cannot tax state property, nor States tax Commonwealth property without the consent of the other.

Procedural requirements of tax legislation

Section 53 and Section 55 prescribe procedural requirements on tax laws.

Section 53: Senate not amend money bills

Section 53, in part, prevents the Senate from introducing or amending any bill dealing with taxation, revenues or appropriation. This section limits the power of the Senate and reflects a constitutional distinction between the House of Representatives, as the house of the people and the chamber to which the government is responsible, and the Senate, as the house of the states. However, the Senate may still request omissions from or amendments to any such bill (in which case the House of Representatives deals with the request as it sees fit), or block its passage entirely.

Section 53 does not apply to bills imposing or appropriating fines or other pecuniary penalties, or fees for licensing or services. The question of when a charge (e.g., an airport entry charge) is a tax, as opposed to a fine or a fee, has been a litigated issue.

Section 55: taxation bills to only deal with taxation

Section 55 requires that legislation imposing tax deal only with imposing tax and that other purported provisions in a piece of taxation legislation be of no effect. Furthermore, laws imposing taxation (except customs duties or excise) shall deal with 'one subject of taxation only', while laws imposing customs shall deal only with customs, and laws of excise only excise. The purpose of this section is to protect the powers of the Senate to amend bills. According to Section 53, the Senate cannot amend or originate taxation bills (see above). Thus, without the restrictions imposed by Section 55, the House of Representatives could prevent the Senate from amending any bill simply by putting something into it concerning taxation. This section effectively prohibits riders on money bills, such as are common in the United States, and also results in Australian tax law being made up of several pieces of legislation: for example, some Acts setting out how and when tax is to be calculated and paid, while others actually impose the tax.

Vertical fiscal imbalance: redundancy of State taxing power

Main article: Fiscal imbalance in Australia

Although the Australian Constitution allows both States and the Commonwealth to raise revenue, subsequent constitutional interpretation and political developments have limited state taxing powers and led to a vertical fiscal imbalance. Vertical fiscal imbalance means that the revenue-raising abilities of the governments do not coincide with their spending responsibilities. As Section 51 and other provisions of the constitution (such as section 52 and section 90) prescribe only limited legislative powers to the Commonwealth, Australian states have considerable obligations. For example, primarily, Australian states fund schools and hospitals. The result of the limitations on state taxing power is that the Commonwealth collects the money through taxes, and distributes that money to states. The power to distribute funds to states, on conditions, is contained in Section 96 of the Australian Constitution. As a result, the sphere of Commonwealth power has expanded through dictating policy through conditional grants. This limits the autonomy and power of the states in controlling policy.

Loss of State income taxing power

Before 1942, consistent with the concurrent power in section 51(ii), both the states and the Commonwealth levied income taxes. However, in 1942 the Commonwealth attempted to gain a monopoly on income taxes by passing the Income Tax Act 1942 and the States Grants (Income Tax Reimbursement) Act 1942. The first act purported to impose Commonwealth income tax. The latter act said Commonwealth funding would be provided to the States only if they imposed no income tax. This latter act was premised on Section 96 of the Australian Constitution Act.

Section 96 of the Australian Constitution provides:

… the Parliament may grant financial assistance to any State on such terms and conditions as the Parliament thinks fit

The States Grant Act therefore placed the "term and condition" that states did not tax at all as a pre-requisite to funding. The Income Tax Act 1942, by setting high tax rates (i.e. that would reflect the combined current Commonwealth and State taxes) made imposing current tax rates unattractive or impossible for State governments. This was because the Income Tax Assessment Act 1942 said that individuals had to pay Commonwealth tax before State taxes. In effect, the scheme meant either the States had to accept grants and stop taxing, or decline grants and try to collect tax at rates which were unsustainable.

The High Court has interpreted "terms and conditions" very broadly. In South Australia v Commonwealth (1942) 65 CLR 373 (the First Uniform Tax case) the scheme was upheld. There is an opinion that the scheme, introduced in 1942, was upheld on the basis of the defence power in Section 51(vi). The Commonwealth re-enacted the scheme after the war. There was a second constitutional challenge and the scheme was upheld on the basis of Section 96, in Victoria v Commonwealth (1957) 99 CLR 575 (the Second Uniform Tax case).

Since 1942 no state has imposed income taxes; instead the states have largely relied on Section 96 grants. In introducing the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the Commonwealth agreed to distribute GST revenues to the States according to a formula.

State sales taxes, Section 90, and the interpretation of "excise"

As a result of the loss of income taxing powers, states turned to other taxation powers such as sales taxes. As "excise" taxes are an exclusive Commonwealth power in Section 90 of the constitution, the interpretation of excise became a critical issue.

See also

Sources

  • Michael Kobestky, Income Tax: Text, Materials and Essential Cases, (Sydney: The Federation Press 2005) ISBN 1-86287-545-6
  • Cheryl Saunders, The Australian Constitution (annotated), (Carlton: Constitutional Centenary Foundation) ISBN 0-9586908-1-2
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Constitutional_basis_of_taxation_in_Australia&oldid=718914068"