Land Tax and Stamp Duty

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (14:50): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Treasurer about land tax bills and stamp duty.

Leave granted.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: Following delays caused by the Department of Treasury and Finance having to grapple with complexities of this legislation, land tax bills are finally going out in the mail. As you would expect, they are causing grief and panic among some mum-and-dad investors as well as some commercial landholders, who tell me they are now having to engage professional land valuers to challenge the government-assessed values placed on their properties.

One landowner told me, 'It's going to be a valuer's picnic as more bills flow.' However, an accountant I know has also told me one of her clients has just received a big land tax bill for their own family residence. I didn't think you could be slugged land tax on your own home, but it seems to be happening. My question to the Treasurer is:

1. Is it correct that land tax bills are being sent in error to home owners?

2. Can you provide us with the number of bills that have been sent out in error?

3. Can you provide figures on how many landlords are now challenging their land tax bills?

4. Has your department prepared an amended estimate of how much land tax is likely to be collected in the current financial year, and how much does it differ from original estimates?

5. Can you provide the chamber with how much stamp duty the state government has been able to rake in since property prices ballooned, from March last year to October this year?

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (14:52): The second question will be released in the Mid-Year Budget Review next month. That will outline that there have been significant increases in conveyance duty nationally as a result of the huge success of the commonwealth government's HomeBuilder campaign. Literally tens of thousands of young Australians have been assisted into first-home ownership as they have clamoured for support from federal and state governments. They have clambered over each other to line up for the largesse from federal and state governments.

In South Australia, federal Treasury estimated, when the scheme was first announced, just under—their view—2,000 applications for HomeBuilder grants. Our advice to them was that if you combine a $25,000 federal grant with a $15,000 state grant that $40,000 in the Adelaide market means something, it doesn't mean quite so much in the Sydney market or in the Melbourne market, and that they had massively underestimated the extent of interest in these HomeBuilder grants.

To be fair, our state Treasury people thought that maybe there might have been, instead of 2,000, 3,000 or 4,000. Everyone was massively wrong. I think the last number, when we checked, was about 13,000 or 14,000 applications. As a result of that, the huge success of the HomeBuilder campaign has seen a massive expansion in transactions and significant increases in conveyance duty for all state and territory governments last year but also this year with the flowthrough of the impact of the HomeBuilder grants.

In relation to land tax, the first issue the member has raised is really not an issue for state Treasury. I would suggest he have a quiet word in the shell-like ear of the Hon. Mr Darley sitting just behind him, because the issue of the Valuer-General and valuations is the issue to which the honourable member is expressing some concern. That is, if there are people employing valuers to challenge their valuations then that's an issue for the Valuer-General. The Valuer-General is the person and the office, together with the privatised contract that the former Labor government entered into with LSSA, responsible for the valuations upon which state taxing authorities use the issue. So that's an issue for the Valuer-General.

In relation to the problems that RevenueSA within Treasury have experienced in terms of getting bills out, I am happy to take advice in relation to the number of actual land tax bills which are being challenged on the basis of the land tax rulings as opposed to the valuation of the properties, because the valuations of properties, as I said, are not issues that we have direct control over.

Certainly if someone has a principal place of residence they do get a principal place of residence exemption, so if he or she has received a bill for a principal place of residence they should immediately raise that issue with RevenueSA and, almost inevitably, that will be corrected in terms of, if that's their only property, the principal place of residence is clearly an exemption together with various other exemptions which exist within the land tax legislation.

In relation to the many other questions that the member raised about numbers of errors and complaints, I am happy to seek advice from RevenueSA on those issues and, to the extent that I can, provide him with some sort of detailed response.