<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2021-11-17" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>54</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="4851" />
  <endPage num="4966" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Land Tax</name>
      <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000292">
        <heading>Land Tax</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3404" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. J.A. DARLEY</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2021-11-17">
            <name>Land Tax</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2021-11-17T15:15:09" />
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000293">
          <timeStamp time="2021-11-17T15:15:09" />
          <by role="member" id="3404">The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:15):</by>  My questions are to the Treasurer concerning land tax:</text>
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000294">1.&amp;#x9;Can the Treasurer advise whether all land tax accounts for the 2020-21 financial year have now been issued to property owners?</text>
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000295">2.&amp;#x9;Can the Treasurer advise the estimated total land tax for the 2021-22 financial year based on the Valuer-General's ill-conceived and shambolic revaluation initiative and how this compares with the total land tax due for the 2020-21 financial year?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="605" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. R.I. LUCAS</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2021-11-17">
            <name>Land Tax</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2021-11-17T15:15:44" />
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000296">
          <timeStamp time="2021-11-17T15:15:44" />
          <by role="member" id="605">The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (15:15):</by>  I am sure as the Hon. Mr Darley will acknowledge, the revaluation initiative was an initiative of the former Labor government in 2016-17, when the Valuer-General was provided between $15 million and $20 million extra to conduct the revaluation initiative over a period of years. I will let that lay where it lays.</text>
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000297">In relation to the honourable member's questions about land tax collection, certainly RevenueSA and the budget branch are updating their projections for 2021-22 in the Mid-Year Budget Review, which will be released next month and so it will be publicly available then. Certainly, the early indications are, as the former Labor government budgeted for and we have acknowledged, there will be increased revenue from the revaluation initiative and increased valuations because increased valuations lead to increased land tax and that has been publicly acknowledged.</text>
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000298">It was budgeted for by the former government and it has been acknowledged by this government as an impact of the revaluation initiative. My advice two weeks ago, which was my last recollection of advice on the impacts of the state's most comprehensive land tax reform package, is that we are likely to be collecting less land tax as a result of those land tax reform initiatives than we had originally been projecting.</text>
        <page num="4866" />
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000299">That is, there is more relief being provided to land tax owners as a result of the reform initiatives, in particular, the reduction of the top land tax rate from 3.7 down to 2.4 per cent. The various other reductions in the rates that were approved as part of that comprehensive land tax reform package and the increases in the thresholds have led to, as I said on the last advice I had a couple weeks ago, likely to be a lower level of tax than we were originally projecting as a result of our land tax reform initiative.</text>
        <text id="2021111725d394c40e6d4281a0000300">I hasten to say, the former government budgeted and we acknowledged that there was increased land tax revenue as a result of the revaluation initiative, but if I can get any more information before the Mid-Year Budget Review I will provide it, but it is more likely that when the Mid-Year Budget Review is released will be the next publicly available information on what we collected for 2020-21 and what our latest estimate for collection for 2021-22 will be.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>