Land Tax

The Hon. C. BONAROS (14:52): My question to the Treasurer is also in relation to land tax. Does the Treasurer accept that small investors with property portfolios of up to $1.3 million are still going to be paying a rate of land tax which is significantly higher than what they would be paying in New South Wales or Victoria if their properties are aggregated?

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:52): I am happy to take an aspect of that question on notice and bring back a more detailed reply to the honourable member. If the import of the honourable member's question is that the total value of a series of aggregated properties is less than (I think she said) $1.3 million, the new threshold is actually being proposed to be $1.1 million, so I'm not sure why—the $1.3 million was going to be the old threshold but it's now $1.1 million.

The member is genuinely seeking information so I'm happy to provide some answers in relation to $1.3 million, which was the honourable member's question, but it may well be that on reflection it is more appropriate for $1.1 million. I'm assuming from her question that she is talking about someone who owns a series of properties, not a single property, that are aggregated, but I'm happy to clarify the honourable member's question and bring back a response.

Can I indicate that, whilst we have pitched our package at the average for all mainland states, New South Wales and Victoria in some elements have lower rates of tax, both the top rate and rates along the line. Their top rate is still lower as well, so it's not just at the lower end, as the honourable member's question is seeking to refer, that their rate may well be lower, but their rate at the top end is also still lower because it is 2 per cent and 2.25 per cent. We have pitched ours at 2.4 per cent, which is the national average of all the mainland states.

As I said, Queensland is 2.75, Western Australia is 2.67. They actually have a metropolitan improvement levy or tax at 0.14, which we have not included in our calculations, which we could have because it goes out on the land tax bill as well, and that would have taken the average to slightly above 2.4 per cent. We would still be, in South Australia, higher at the top rate, and I suspect the answer to the honourable member's question is, irrespective of the structure of the ownerships, at the lower levels their numbers are lower as well in those particular states.