It probably is a more efficient way to bring mining to taxation.
We hope Baird isn't forced to drop the other parts of his observations made to The Australian:
A NSW Coalition government would push for radical reform of federal-state relations at the looming tax summit by demanding the states directly receive a greater share of overall taxes. NSW opposition Treasury spokesman Mike Baird said that, if elected on March 26, he would use the federal government's promised summit to address the imbalance in state and federal taxation powers and spending needs.
States were responsible for 40 per cent of service delivery, but raised only 16 per cent of taxes, he said, adding that NSW would operate more efficiently if it had greater responsibility for raising revenue.
We have previously noted the recommendations contained in the Henry Review, and, like Baird hopes that the proposed summit will determine:
1. which level of government should have responsibility for particular public policy areas;
2. what taxation bases should be assigned to the states and territories; and
3. where it is appropriate for the Commonwealth to be the level of government determining policy outcomes but is an area where it has no clear constitutional capacity to act, whether it is appropriate to confer Commonwealth power either:
(a) indirectly, through an agreement made under section 96 of the Constitution; or
(b) through a reference of power by the states to the Commonwealth or directly by constitutional amendment.
The importance of getting the taxation mix right is now more important than ever should the the God Knows What It Will Look Like Carbon Tax ever get up, discussed in our previous post.
Efficient public administration deserves nothing less.