Search

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jessica-geraghty-1530733">Jessica Geraghty</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> Sugary drinks cause weight gain and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41574-021-00627-6">increase the risk</a> of a range of diseases, including diabetes. The <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2792842">evidence shows</a> that well-designed taxes can reduce sugary drink sales, cause people to choose healthier options and get manufacturers to reduce the sugar in their drinks. And although these taxes haven’t been around long, there are already signs that they are making people healthier. It’s time for Australia to catch up to the rest of the world and introduce a tax on sugary drinks. As our new Grattan Institute <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/sickly-sweet/">report</a> shows, doing so could mean the average Australian drinks almost 700 grams less sugar each year. <h2>Sugary drinks are making us sick</h2> The share of adults in Australia who are obese has tripled since 1980, from <a href="https://theconversation.com/mapping-australias-collective-weight-gain-7816">10%</a> to more than <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/waist-circumference-and-bmi/latest-release">30%</a>, and diabetes is our <a href="https://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/about-diabetes/diabetes-in-australia/">fastest-growing</a> chronic condition. The costs for the health system and economy are measured in the billions of dollars each year. But the biggest costs are borne by individuals and their families in the form of illness, suffering and early death. Sugary drinks are a big part of the problem. The more of them we drink, the greater our risk of <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41574-021-00627-6">gaining weight</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2963518/">developing type 2 diabetes</a>, and suffering <a href="https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/122/5896049?login=false">poor oral health</a>. These drinks have no real nutrients, but they do have a lot of sugar. The average Australian consumes <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/apparent-consumption-selected-foodstuffs-australia/latest-release">1.3</a> times the maximum recommended amount of sugar each day. Sugary drinks are responsible for more than one-quarter of our daily sugar intake, more than any other major type of food. You might be shocked by how much sugar you’re drinking. Many 375ml cans of soft drink contain eight to 12 teaspoons of sugar, nearly the entire daily recommended limit for an adult. Many 600ml bottles blow our entire daily sugar budget, and then some. The picture is even worse for disadvantaged Australians, who are more likely to have <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/diabetes/latest-release">diabetes</a> and <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/waist-circumference-and-bmi/latest-release">obesity</a>, and who also consume the most sugary drinks. <h2>Sugary drink taxes work</h2> Fortunately, there’s a proven way to reduce the damage sugary drinks cause. More than <a href="https://ssbtax.worldbank.org/">100 countries</a> have a sugary drinks tax, covering most of the world’s population. <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2792842">Research</a> shows these taxes lead to higher prices and fewer purchases. Some taxes are specifically designed to encourage manufacturers to change their recipes and cut the sugar in their drinks. Under these “tiered taxes”, there is no tax on drinks with a small amount of sugar, but the tax steps up two or three times as the amount of sugar rises. That gives manufacturers a strong incentive to add less sugar, so they reduce their exposure to the tax or avoid paying it altogether. This is the best result from a sugary drinks tax. It means drinks get healthier, while the tax is kept to a minimum. In countries with tiered taxes, manufacturers have slashed the sugar in their drinks. In the United Kingdom, the share of products above the tax threshold <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003025">decreased dramatically</a>. In 2015, more than half (52%) of products in the UK were above the tax threshold of 5 grams of sugar per 100ml. Four years later, when the tax was in place, that share had plunged to 15%. The number of products with the most sugar – more than 8 grams per 100ml – declined the most, falling from 38% to just 7%. The Australian drinks market today looks similar to the UK’s before the tax was introduced. Health benefits take longer to appear, but there are already promising signs that the taxes are working. Obesity among primary school-age girls has fallen in <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004160">the UK</a> and <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2786784">Mexico</a>. Oral health has also improved, with studies reporting fewer children going to hospital to get their teeth removed in <a href="https://nutrition.bmj.com/content/6/2/243">the UK</a>, and reduced dental decay <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33853058/">in Mexico</a> and <a href="https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00069-7/abstract">Philadelphia</a>. One <a href="https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00158-7/fulltext">study from the United States</a> found big reductions in gestational diabetes in cities with a sugary drinks tax. <h2>The tax Australia should introduce</h2> Like successful taxes overseas, Australia should introduce a sugary drink tax that targets drinks with the most sugar: <ul> <li>drinks with 8 grams or more of sugar per 100ml should face a $0.60 per litre tax</li> <li>drinks with 5–8 grams should be taxed at $0.40 per litre</li> <li>drinks with less than 5 grams of sugar should be tax-free.</li> </ul> This means a 250ml Coke, which has nearly 11 grams of sugar per 100ml, would cost $0.15 more. But of course consumers could avoid the tax by choosing a sugar-free soft drink, or a bottle of water. Grattan Institute <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/sickly-sweet/">modelling</a> shows that under this tiered tax, Australians would drink about 275 million litres fewer sugary drinks each year, or the volume of 110 Olympic swimming pools. The tax is about health, but government budgets also benefit. If it was introduced today, it would raise about half a billion dollars in the first year. Vested interests such as the beverages industry have fiercely resisted sugary drink taxes around the world, issuing disingenuous warnings about the risks to poor people, the sugar industry and drinks manufacturers. But our new report shows sugary drink taxes have been introduced smoothly overseas, and none of these concerns should hold Australia back. We certainly can’t rely on industry pledges to voluntarily reduce sugar. They have been <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/public-health-nutrition/article/trends-in-sugar-content-of-nonalcoholic-beverages-in-australia-between-2015-and-2019-during-the-operation-of-a-voluntary-industry-pledge-to-reduce-sugar-content/EE662DE7552670ED532F6650C9D56939">weak</a> and misleading, and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/10/sugar-increase-in-fanta-and-sprite-prompts-calls-for-new-tax-on-australia-food-and-drinks-industry">failed to stick</a>. It will take many policies and interventions to turn back the tide of obesity and chronic disease in Australia, but a sugary drinks tax should be part of the solution. It’s a policy that works, it’s easy to implement, and most Australians <a href="https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/6/e027962">support it</a>. The federal government should show it’s serious about tackling Australia’s biggest health problems and take this small step towards a healthier future.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/228906/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-breadon-1348098">Peter Breadon</a>, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jessica-geraghty-1530733">Jessica Geraghty</a>, Senior Associate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-tax-on-sugary-drinks-can-make-us-healthier-its-time-for-australia-to-introduce-one-228906">original article</a>. </div>

Food & Wine

Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dale-boccabella-15706">Dale Boccabella</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ranjana-gupta-1207482">Ranjana Gupta</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/auckland-university-of-technology-1137">Auckland University of Technology</a> There’s a good reason your local volunteer-run netball club doesn’t pay tax. In Australia, various nonprofit organisations are exempt from paying income tax, including those that do charitable work, such as churches. These exemptions or concessions can also extend to other taxes, including fringe benefits tax, state and local government property taxes and payroll taxes. The traditional justification for granting these concessions is that charitable activities benefit society. They contribute to the wellbeing of the community in a variety of non-religious ways. For example, charities offer welfare, health care and education services that the government would generally otherwise provide due to their obvious public benefits. The tax exemption, which allows a charity to retain all the funds it raises, provides the financial support required to relieve the government of this burden. The nonprofit sector is often called the third sector of society, the other two being government and for-profit businesses. But in Australia, this third sector is quite large. Some grassroots organisations have only a tiny footprint, but other nonprofits are very large. And many of these bigger entities – including some “megachurches” – run huge commercial enterprises. These are often indistinguishable from comparable business activities in the for-profit sector. So why doesn’t this revenue get taxed? And should we really give all nonprofits the same tax exemptions? <h2>Why don’t churches pay tax?</h2> The primary aim of a church is to advance or promote its religion. This itself counts as a charitable purpose under the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2013A00100/asmade/text">2013 Charities Act</a>. However, section five of that act requires a church to have only charitable purposes – any other purposes must be incidental to or in aid of these. Viewed alone, the conduct of a church with an extensive commercial enterprise – which could include selling merchandise, or holding concerts and conferences – is not a charitable purpose. But Australian case law and <a href="https://www.acnc.gov.au/for-charities/start-charity/role-acnc-deciding-charity-status/legal-meaning-charity#:%7E:text=Taxation%20Ruling%20(TR)%202011%2F,set%20out%20in%20taxation%20rulings.">an ATO ruling</a> both support the idea that carrying on business-like activities can be incidental to or in aid of a charitable purpose. This could be the case, for example, if a large church’s commercial activities were to help give effect to its charitable purposes. Because of this, under Australia’s current income tax law, a church that is running a large commercial enterprise is able to retain its exemption from income tax on the profits from these activities. There are various public policy concerns with this. First, the lost tax revenue is likely to be significant, although the government’s annual tax expenditure statement does not currently provide an estimate of the amount of tax revenue lost. And second, the tax exemption may give rise to unfairness. A for-profit business competing with a church in a relevant industry may be at a competitive disadvantage – despite similar business activities, the for-profit entity pays income tax but the church does not. This competitive disadvantage may be reflected in lower prices for customers of the church business. <h2>What about taxing their employees?</h2> Churches that run extensive enterprises are likely to have many employees. Generally, all the normal Australian tax rules apply to the way these employees are paid – for example, employees pay income tax on these wages. Distributing profits to members would go against the usual rules of the church, and this prohibition is <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2013A00100/asmade/text">required</a> anyway for an organisation to qualify as a charity. Some churches may be criticised for paying their founders or leaders “excessive” wages, but these are still taxed in the same way as normal salaries. It’s important to consider fringe benefit tax – which employers have to pay on certain benefits they provide to employees. Aside from some qualifications, all the usual <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/hiring-and-paying-your-workers/fringe-benefits-tax/how-fringe-benefits-tax-works">fringe benefit tax rules</a> apply to non-wage benefits provided to employees of a church. Just like their commercial (and taxable) counterparts, the payment for “luxury” travel and accommodation for church leaders and employees when on church business will not generate a fringe benefits taxable amount for the church. One qualification, though, is that a church is likely to be a <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/hiring-and-paying-your-workers/fringe-benefits-tax/fbt-concessions-for-not-for-profit-organisations/fbt-rebatable-employers">rebatable employer</a> under the fringe benefit tax regime. This means it can obtain some tax relief on benefits provided to each employee, up to a cap. <h2>We may need to rethink blanket tax exemptions for charities</h2> Back in an age where nonprofits were mainly small and focused on addressing the needs of people failed by the market, the income tax exemption for such charities appeared appropriate. But in the modern era, some charities – including some churches – operate huge business enterprises and collect rent on extensive property holdings. Many are now questioning whether we should continue offering them an uncapped exemption from income tax, especially where there are questions surrounding how appropriately these profits are used. Debates about solutions to the problem have focused on various arguments. However, more data may be needed on the way charities apply their profits to a charitable purpose, particularly those involved in substantial commercial activities. An all-or-nothing rule exempting the whole charitable sector may no longer be fit for purpose if it fails to take into account the very different circumstances of different nonprofits.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/228901/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dale-boccabella-15706">Dale Boccabella</a>, Associate Professor of Taxation Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ranjana-gupta-1207482">Ranjana Gupta</a>, Senior Lecturer Taxation, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/auckland-university-of-technology-1137">Auckland University of Technology</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-churches-collectively-raise-billions-of-dollars-a-year-why-arent-they-taxed-228901">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> If just one state of Australia, New South Wales, scrapped its stamp duty on real-estate transactions, about 100,000 more Australians would move homes each year, according to our <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">best estimates</a>. Stamp duty is an unquestioned part of buying a home in Australia – you put your details in an online mortgage calculator, and stamp duty is automatically deducted from the amount you have to contribute. It’s easy to overlook how much more affordable a home would be without it. That means it’s also easy to overlook how much more Australians would buy and move if stamp duty wasn’t there. The 2010 Henry Tax Review found stamp duty was <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_2_vol_1_consolidated.pdf">inequitable</a>. It taxes most the people who most need to or want to move. The review reported: "Ideally, there would be no role for any stamp duties, including conveyancing stamp duties, in a modern Australian tax system. Recognising the revenue needs of the States, the removal of stamp duty should be achieved through a switch to more efficient taxes, such as those levied on broad consumption or land bases." But does stamp duty actually stop anyone moving? It’s a claim more often made than assessed, which is what our team at the <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">e61 Institute</a> set out to do. We used real-estate transaction data and a natural experiment. <h2>What happened when Queensland hiked stamp duty</h2> In 2011, Queensland hiked stamp duty for most buyers by removing some concessions for owner-occupiers at short notice. For owner-occupiers it increased stamp duty by about one percentage point, lifting the average rate from 1.26% of the purchase price to 2.27%. What we found gives us the best estimate to date of what stamp duty does to home purchases. A one percentage point increase in stamp duty causes the number of home purchases to decline by 7.2%. The number of moves (changes of address) falls by about as much. The effect appears to be indiscriminate. Purchases of houses fell about as much as purchases of apartments, and purchases in cities fell about as much as purchases in regions. Moves between suburbs and moves interstate dropped by similar rates. With NSW stamp duty currently averaging about <a href="https://conveyancing.com.au/need-to-know/stamp-duty-nsw">3.5%</a> of the purchase price, our estimates suggest there would be about 25% more purchases and moves by home owners if it were scrapped completely. That’s 100,000 moves. Victoria’s higher rate of stamp duty, about <a href="https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/rates-taxes-duties-and-levies/general-land-transfer-duty-property-current-rates">4.2%</a>, means if it was scrapped there would be about 30% more purchases. That’s another 90,000 moves. <h2>Even low headline rates have big effects</h2> The big effect from small-looking headline rates ought not to be surprising. When someone buys a home, they typically front up much less cash than the purchase price. While stamp duty seems low as a percentage of the purchase price, it is high as a percentage of the cash the buyer needs to find. Here’s an example. If stamp duty is 4% of the purchase price, and a purchaser pays $800,000 for a property with a mortgage deposit of $160,000, the $32,000 stamp duty adds 20%, not 4%, to what’s needed. If the deposit takes five years to save, stamp duty makes it six. A similar thing happens when an owner-occupier changes address. If the buyer sells a fully owned home for $700,000 and buys a new home for $800,000, the upgrade ought to cost them $100,000. A 4% stamp duty lifts that to $132,000. Averaged across all Australian cities, stamp duty costs about <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">five months</a> of after-tax earnings. In Sydney and Melbourne, it’s six. <h2>Stamp duty has bracket creep</h2> This cost has steadily climbed from around <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">six weeks</a> of total earnings in the 1990s. It has happened because home prices have climbed faster than incomes and because stamp duty has brackets, meaning more buyers have been pushed into higher ones. Replacing the stamp duty revenue that states have come to rely on would not be easy, but a switch would almost certainly help the economy function better. The more that people are able to move, the more they will move to jobs to which they are better suited, boosting productivity. The more that people downsize when they want to, the more housing will be made available for others. Our findings suggest the costs are far from trivial, making a switch away from stamp duty worthwhile, even if it is disruptive and takes time.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225773/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, Adjunct Fellow, Department of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stamp-duty-is-holding-us-back-from-moving-homes-weve-worked-out-how-much-225773">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"There's no way": Man receives $52 billion tax bill

An American man has been left confused after receiving a letter from the government claiming he owed $52 billion in unpaid taxes. Barry Tangert got two letters in the mail from the state of Pennsylvania, opening the first to find a refund check from the federal government for over $900. His joy was short-lived though as he opened the second letter to find the income billing notice from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue claiming that he owed a jaw-dropping $52,950,744,735.28 ($34,576,826,561.47 AUD). “I knew it was an obvious blunder. I don’t even make over $100,000 a year, so there’s no way I could owe anywhere near that,” Barry Tangert told local outlet News 8. The total sum was so large it didn’t even fit on a single line on the document. Tangert immediately knew it was a mistake, with the astonishing number being more than triple the $11 billion America’s richest man Elon Musk says he owed the government in 2022. How the error made it all the way to his doorstep is still a mystery to Tangert. “I don’t know if it was a computer glitch in the transmission or if it was an input error from my tax preparer,” Tangert said, noting that his tax preparer filed an amendment after noticing an error on his 2022 return. He reached out to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue’s customer service line, which also provided little help to the baffled man. “The first thing he said was, ‘You had a good year.’ And I said, ‘I wish,’” Tangert said. Fortunately, the state department has since resolved the issue, which it chalked up to wrong numbers simply being put into the system. Image credits: WGAL News 8

Money & Banking

What to expect from the federal budget

There's just three weeks left until Treasurer Jim Chalmers unveils the federal budget. With the cost of living crisis still a major issue across the country, we can expect to see some policies aimed at alleviating the pressure. Some policies, have already been announced and here are a few others that we can expect to hear from Chalmers on May 14. Stage 3 cuts announced in January, will form a key part of this year's budget, which will direct more benefit towards low- and middle-income earners – although Australians on high salaries will still receive a tax cut. The decision was made to alleviate the cost-of-living pressures and partly address the bracket creep. The cuts lower the threshold for the lowest two brackets (so they pay less tax on that income), and raise the threshold for the highest two brackets (so they need to earn more to be taxed at a higher rate). This means that someone with average income of around $73,000 will get $1504, but how much you actually receive will depend on your income. The new version of the stage 3 cuts will come into effect on July 1. Superannuation will be paid on government-funded parental leave, with the change due to kick in for parents with babies born after July 1, 2025. They will receive a 12 per cent superannuation on top of their government-funded parental leave, with around 180,000 families expected to benefit from it. The figures will be included in the May 14 budget. Although nothing has been officially announced, there will likely be HECS-HELP debt relief for current and former students. "I think there's a range of areas where we need to do much better with the younger generation, and HECS is one of them," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on radio on April 18. "We've received a review of that... and what that has said is that the system can be made simpler and be made fairer. "We're examining the recommendations and we'll be making announcements pretty soon on that. We, of course, have a budget coming up." There have also been some hints from the government that energy bill relief will continue in this year's budget. "Our government understands that for small business – as for Australian families – energy bills remain a source of financial pressure," Albanese said, citing the existing policy that gives eligible families up to $500 off their power bills and eligible small businesses up to $650. "Our government understands that for small business – as for Australian families – energy bills remain a source of financial pressure," he said. "That's why the energy bill relief package I negotiated with the states and territories delivered up to $650 in savings for around 1 million small businesses, along with 5 million families. "And as we put together next month's budget, small businesses and families will again be front and centre in our thinking." Energy bills are also set to go down, or remain stable for the most part from July 1. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Survey unveils Aussies thoughts on tourism tax

Earlier this year, Bali launched a controversial tourism tax, which meant that every traveller entering the island would have to pay a $15 fee, which the Indonesian province have said will be used for environmental and cultural projects. Now, Aussies have shared their thoughts on introducing a similar system here, and survey results have revealed that many are keen for the tourism tax to be introduced here. Travel provider InsureandGo conducted the survey and found that 60 per cent of Australians would support the government introducing a tax to combat the rising environmental toll of tourism. "Tourist taxes are a relatively new concept, but as travel demand swells, we are seeing more countries adopt the levy," InsureandGo Chief Commercial Officer Jonathan Etkind said. "What's heartening is that only a minority of 37 per cent of respondents don't support tourism taxes, demonstrating just how many Australians support the concept of sustainable travel." The response comes amid increased sustainability concerns on our flora and fauna, which are being threatened by over-tourism. The tax is particularly supported by younger Aussies aged between 18 to 30, with 73 per cent of them saying yes to tourism taxes. Etkind said that this may be because younger Aussies are typically more aware of the environmental impacts of travel compared to the older generation, who may be less accustomed to the tax. Along with Bali, other cities and countries have started introducing similar fees to combat overtourism, with Venice set to charge day-trippers a fee of 5 Euros ($8.20) per visit. Amsterdam, Netherlands has the highest tourism tax in Europe, with the former 7 per cent hotel tourist levy rising to 12.5 per cent this year. New Zealand also charges international visitors excluding Aussie citizens and permanent residents $25 levy ($32.64 AUD) to address the challenges created by tourism in its conservation areas. Image: Getty

International Travel

Millions of phones at risk of being cut off from calling triple-0

Over a million Aussies may be unable to contact triple-0 as two major telcos cut their 3G networks. Telstra's network will be closed on June 30 this year followed by Optus, which will shut their 3G network in September. While most late model phones are now serviced by either 4G or 5G networks, there are many devices that still rely on 3G. Approximately 113,000 Telstra customers have not upgraded their 3G handsets, while Optus have not disclosed a figure. The greater concerns lie for older 4G-enabled handsets that may not be able to call triple-0 once the 3G networks are switched off, because of the way those phones are configured. In March, Communications Minister Michelle Rowland was informed that 740,000 Australians were in that category. A month later, that figure was revised to over a million. "I welcome the industry’s first report to government but am concerned around their disclosure of around one million potentially impacted consumers,” the minister said. “I am considering the detail provided and next steps, and the government will have more to say about the 3G switchover soon.” She also said that they were open to delaying the switchover "if warranted in the public interest”. “Options exist under law for the government to consider proposals to delay the planned switchover, subject to consultation and procedural processes,” she said. Telstra has informed customers about what to do if they are affected, and how they could check. “If your mobile device doesn’t have Voice over LTE (VoLTE) technology, even if it uses 4G data, it will not be able to make voice calls on our network after 30 June 2024,” they informed their customers. “Not all VoLTE enabled devices support emergency VoLTE calling, meaning they will not be able to make an emergency call to triple-0 once 3G closes." “Without taking the recommended action you won’t be able to connect to a network after 30 June 2024,” they warned. Customers who are worried that they might be impacted, are encouraged to text 3 to the number 3498, so that the telco can inform the customer on their connection status. Optus have also encouraged customers to contact them if they think they may be affected. Image: Getty

Legal

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/graeme-coulson-1378778">Graeme Coulson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helena-bender-98800">Helena Bender</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> There’s almost no warning. A dark shape appears on the side of the road, then you feel a jolt as something goes under the car. Or worse, the shape rears up, hits the front of your vehicle, then slams into the windscreen. You have just experienced a wildlife-vehicle collision. This gruesome scene plays out <a href="https://www.bbcearth.com/news/australias-road-kill-map">every night across Australia</a>. When these collisions happen, many animals become instant roadkill. An <a href="https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/23121/Thesis%20updated%20for%20library%20submission.pdf?sequence=1">estimated 10 million</a> native mammals, reptiles, birds and other species are killed each year. Others are injured and die away from the road. Some survive with <a href="https://theconversation.com/10-million-animals-are-hit-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-how-you-can-help-them-and-steer-clear-of-them-these-holidays-149733">terrible injuries and have to be euthanised</a>. The lucky ones might <a href="https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/who-should-i-contact-about-injured-wildlife/">be rescued</a> by groups such as <a href="https://wildliferescue.net.au/">Wildlife Rescue</a>, <a href="https://www.wildlifevictoria.org.au/">Wildlife Victoria</a> and <a href="https://www.wires.org.au/">WIRES</a>. Wildlife-vehicle collisions also increase the risk to whole populations of some threatened species, such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1071/WR17143">Lumholtz’s tree-kangaroo</a> on the Atherton Tablelands in Queensland. People are affected, too. Human <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13361">deaths and injuries</a> from these collisions are rising, with motorcyclists at greatest risk. Vehicle repairs are <a href="https://www.mynrma.com.au/-/media/wildlife-road-safety-report--final.pdf">inconvenient and costly</a>. Added to this is the distress for people when dealing with a dead or dying animal on the roadside. How can we reduce the wildlife toll on our roads? Many measures have been tried and proven largely ineffective. However, other evidence-based approaches can help avoid collisions. <h2>Evidence for what works is limited</h2> Many communities are worried about the growing impacts of wildlife-vehicle collisions and are desperate for solutions. Recent reports from <a href="https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1822182/FULLTEXT01.pdf">Europe</a> and <a href="https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/4w7576_Huijser_etal_WVC_ConnectivityLiteratureReview_PooledFundStudyFinalReport_2021.pdf">North America</a> review the many methods to reduce such collisions. Do these findings apply to Australia’s unique fauna? Unfortunately, we don’t have a detailed analysis of options for our wildlife, but here’s what we know now. Well-designed fences keep wildlife off our highways but also fragment the landscape. Happily, animals will use crossing structures – overpasses and <a href="https://theconversation.com/good-news-highway-underpasses-for-wildlife-actually-work-187434">underpasses</a> – to get to food and mates on the other side of the road. Fences and crossings do work, but are regarded as too costly over Australia’s vast road network. As for standard wildlife warning signs, drivers <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494358/">ignore most of them</a> after a while, making them ineffective. Signs with graphic images and variable messages get <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3041142">more attention</a>, but we need road trials to assess their effect on drivers and collision rates. <h2>Whistling in the dark</h2> Some drivers install cheap, wind-driven, high-pitched wildlife whistles on their vehicles. Tests in the United States 20 years ago found humans and deer <a href="https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1582071">could not hear any whistling sound</a> above the road noise of the test vehicle. Yet these devices are still sold in Australia as kangaroo deterrents. The Shu-Roo, an Australian invention, is an active wildlife whistle. It is fitted to the bumper bar, producing a high-pitched electronic sound, which is claimed to scare wildlife away from the road. Sadly, <a href="https://rest.neptune-prod.its.unimelb.edu.au/server/api/core/bitstreams/3c3154e0-2f48-5b73-a6cd-a7423c2a75ee/content">our tests</a> show the Shu-Roo signal can’t be heard above road noise 50 metres away and has no effect on captive kangaroo behaviour. We also recruited fleets of trucks, buses, vans, utes and cars to field test the Shu-Roo. Nearly 100 vehicles covered more than 4 million kilometres across Australia over 15,500 days. The drivers reported just over one wildlife-vehicle collision per 100,000km travelled, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.7882/AZ.2021.042">there was no difference in the rate</a> for vehicles fitted with a Shu-Roo versus those without one. The virtual fence is the latest attempt to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions. It uses a line of posts spaced along the roadside, each with a unit producing loud sounds and flashing lights aimed away from the road. Vehicle headlights activate the units, which are claimed to alert animals and reduce the risk of collision. Early results from Tasmania were encouraging. A 50% drop in possum and wallaby deaths was reported, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.1071/AM19009">this trial had many design flaws</a>. Recent trials in <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/9/10/752">Tasmania</a>, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/12/10/1323">New South Wales</a> and <a href="https://www.redland.qld.gov.au/downloads/download/292/virtual_fence_to_reduce_vehicle_collisions_with_wallabies_on_heinemann_rd_-_final_report_2020">Queensland</a> show no effect of virtual fencing on collisions with possums, wallabies or wombats. Our concern is that this system is being <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/wildlife-fence-trial-underway-in-queensland-and-phillip-island/12268110">rolled out</a> in <a href="https://www.townsville.qld.gov.au/about-council/news-and-publications/media-releases/2023/june/councils-innovative-trial-helping-keep-local-wildlife-safe">many</a> <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/nsw-south-coast-council-first-virtual-fence-to-protect-wildlife/101571600">parts</a> of <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/the-stealth-tech-aiming-to-stop-roos-from-becoming-roadkill-20231222-p5etda.html">Australia</a>. It gives the impression of action to reduce collisions with wildlife, but without an evidence base, solid study design or adequate monitoring. <h2>A very messy problem</h2> The problem has many dimensions. We need to consider all of them to achieve safe travel for people and animals on our roads. At a landscape level, collision hotspots occur where wildlife frequently cross roads, which can help us predict the collision risk for species such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13465">koalas</a>. But the risk differs between species. For example, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01530">on Phillip Island</a> most wallaby collisions happen on rural roads, while most involving possums and birds are in urban streets. Traffic volume and speed are key factors for many species, including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2306">kangaroos</a>. Driver training and experience are also important. In the Royal National Park in New South Wales, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/6/6/40">half the drivers surveyed</a> had struck animals, including wallabies and deer. Yet most still <a href="https://theconversation.com/10-million-animals-are-hit-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-how-you-can-help-them-and-steer-clear-of-them-these-holidays-149733">weren’t keen</a> to slow down or avoid driving at dawn and dusk. Road design has a major influence on wildlife-vehicle collions too, but the planning process too often <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.959918">neglects wildlife studies</a>. Smarter cars are <a href="https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1822182/FULLTEXT01.pdf">being developed</a>. One day these will use AI to spot animal hazards, apply automatic emergency braking and alert other drivers of real-time risk. To explore potential technological solutions, Transport for NSW is running a <a href="https://www.eianz.org/events/event/symposium-using-technology-to-reduce-wildlife-vehicle-collisions">symposium</a> at the University of Technology Sydney on May 21. The symposium will cover wildlife ecology and the evidence base for options to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions in Australia. <hr /> If you see an injured animal on the road, call <a href="https://www.wildliferescue.net.au/">Wildlife Rescue Australia</a> on 1300 596 457. for specific state and territory numbers, go to the <a href="https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/who-should-i-contact-about-injured-wildlife/">RSPCA injured wildlife site</a>.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222367/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/graeme-coulson-1378778">Graeme Coulson</a>, Honorary Principal Fellow, School of BioSciences, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helena-bender-98800">Helena Bender</a>, Senior Lecturer, Environmental Social Sciences, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/10-million-animals-die-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-what-works-and-what-doesnt-to-cut-the-toll-222367">original article</a>.

Domestic Travel

Tax boost announced for 1.2 million people

Low-income earners will receive a tax boost with the Medicare levy threshold set to rise. The income threshold at which taxpayers will have to pay a two per cent Medicare levy will increase by 7.1 per cent, in line with inflation. Currently single people who earn below $24,276 do not have to pay the levy. Under the changes, the two per cent levy only has to be paid by anyone earning over $26,000 The Medicare levy threshold for seniors and pensioners will increase to $41,089, up from the initial benchmark of $38,365. For families, this threshold has increased to $43,486 up from the previous $40,939. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said that the increase was part of the broader measures taken to relieve the increase in cost-of-living. “This will ensure people on lower incomes continue to pay less or are exempt from the Medicare levy,” he said on Tuesday. “It means 1.2 million Australians get to keep a bit more of what they earn.” The boost in the Medicare levy threshold was announced alongside changes to income tax cuts, with those earning under $150,000 set to receive greater benefits. “This is about doing what we responsibly can to ease some of the pressure being felt by Australians right around the country, but especially for people on lower incomes, young people, seniors and women,” Chalmers said. This comes just days after Medicare celebrated it's 40th anniversary, with an exhibition launched at Parliament House. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Stage 3 stacks up: the rejigged tax cuts help fight bracket creep and boost middle and upper-middle households

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866">Ben Phillips</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> The winners and losers from the Albanese government’s <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-01/tax-cuts-government-fact-sheet.pdf">rejig</a> of this year’s Stage 3 tax cuts have already been well documented. From July 1 every taxpayer will get a tax cut. Most, the 11 million taxpayers earning up to A$146,486, will also pay less tax than they would have under the earlier version of Stage 3, some getting a tax cut <a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-tax-plan-will-give-average-earner-1500-tax-cut-more-than-double-morrisons-stage-3-221875">twice as big</a>. A much smaller number, 1.8 million, will get a smaller tax cut than they would have under the original scheme, although their cuts will still be big. The highest earners will get cuts of $4,529 instead of $9,075. But many of us live in households where income is shared and many households don’t pay tax because the people in them don’t earn enough or are on benefits. The Australian National University’s <a href="https://csrm.cass.anu.edu.au/research/policymod">PolicyMod</a> model is able to work out the impacts at the household level, including the impact on households in which members are on benefits or don’t earn enough to pay tax. <h2>More winners than losers in every broad income group</h2> We’ve divided Australian households into five equal-size groups ranked by income, from lowest to lower-middle to middle to upper-middle to high. Our modelling finds that, just as is the case for individuals, many more households will be better off with the changes to Stage 3 than would have been better off with Stage 3 as it was, although the difference isn’t as extreme. Overall, 58% of households will be better off with the reworked Stage 3 than they would have under the original and 11% will be worse off. Importantly, there remain 31% who will be neither better off nor worse off, because they don’t pay personal income tax. <hr /> <iframe id="0CWXE" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0CWXE/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> But it is different for different types of households. In the lowest-earning fifth of households, far more are better off (13.5%) than worse off (0.2%) with the overwhelming bulk neither better nor worse off (86.3%). <hr /> <iframe id="KC5zy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/KC5zy/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> In the highest-earning fifth of households, while more than half are better off (54.4%), a very substantial proportion are worse off (42.3%). Very few (only 3.1%) are neither better nor worse off. <hr /> <iframe id="WSkSL" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WSkSL/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>But high-earning households go backwards on average</h2> In dollar terms, the top-earning fifth of households loses money while every group gains. That’s because although there are more winners than losers among the highest-earning fifth of households, the losers lose more money. The biggest dollar gains go to middle and upper-middle income households with middle-income households ahead, on average, by $988 per year and upper-middle income households by $1,102. The highest-income households are worse off by an average of $837 per year. As a percentage of income, middle-income households gain the most with a 1% increase in disposable income. Lowest income households gain very little, while the highest-income households go backwards by 0.3%. <hr /> <iframe id="kAPmC" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kAPmC/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>The rejig does a better job of fighting bracket creep</h2> And we’ve found something else. The original version of the Stage 3 tax cuts was advertised as a measure to overcome <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-2-main-arguments-against-redesigning-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-are-wrong-heres-why-221975">bracket creep</a>, which is what happens when a greater proportion of taxpayers’ income gets pushed into higher tax brackets as incomes climb. We have found it wouldn’t have done it for most of the income groups, leaving all but the highest-earning group paying more tax after the change in mid-2024 than it used to in 2018. The rejigged version of Stage 3 should compensate for bracket creep better, leaving the top two groups paying less than they did in 2018 and compensating the bottom three better than the original Stage 3. <hr /> <iframe id="YG0cT" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/YG0cT/1/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Not too much should be made of the increase in tax rates in the lowest income group between 2018 ad 2024 because some of it reflects stronger income growth. We find that overall, the redesigned Stage 3 does a better job of offsetting bracket creep than the original. It is also better targeted to middle and upper-middle income households. Having said that, the average benefit in dollar terms isn’t big. At about $1,000 per year for middle and upper-middle income households and costing the budget about what the original Stage 3 tax cuts would have cost, its inflationary impact compared to the original looks modest.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221851/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866">Ben Phillips</a>, Associate Professor, Centre for Social Research and Methods, Director, Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stage-3-stacks-up-the-rejigged-tax-cuts-help-fight-bracket-creep-and-boost-middle-and-upper-middle-households-221851">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

"Proud to pay more": The billionaires who want to pay more tax

Over 250 millionaires and billionaires have issued an <a href="https://proudtopaymore.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">open letter</a> to global leaders encouraging them to implement wealth taxes to combat the cost-of-living crisis. This comes just as a report by the <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/money-banking/shocking-amount-australia-s-richest-people-earn-per-hour" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Oxfam Charity</a> revealed that the global wealth of billionaires have only grown in the last three years despite inflation. The open letter, signed by super-rich individuals from 17 countries, includes signatories like Abigail Disney, the grand-niece of Walt Disney, Succession actor Brian Cox, and American philanthropist and Rockefeller family heir Valerie Rockefeller. They said that they would be "proud to pay more taxes" in order to address the inequality. "Elected leaders must tax us, the super rich," the letter read. "This will not fundamentally alter our standard of living, nor deprive our children, nor harm our nations' economic growth. "But it will turn extreme and unproductive private wealth into an investment for our common democratic future." Austrian heir Marlene Engelhorn is also among the voices demanding that they pay more in taxes. "I've inherited a fortune and therefore power, without having done anything for it. And the state doesn't even want taxes on it," Engelhorn, who inherited millions from her family who founded chemical giant BASF, said. The letter was released just as global leaders gather in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. Abigail Disney, whose net-worth is measured at more than $100 million, said that lawmakers need to come together to make a meaningful economic and social change. "There's too much at stake for us all to wait for the ultra rich to grow a conscience and voluntarily change their ways," she said. "For that reason, lawmakers must step in and tax extreme wealth, along with the variety of environmentally destructive habits of the world's richest." A recent <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/63fe48c7e864f3729e4f9287/t/6596bfb943707b56d11f1296/1704378297933/G20+Survey+of+those+with+More+than+%241+million+on+Attitudes+to+Extreme+Wealth+and+Taxing+the+Super+Rich.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> of almost 2400 millionaires found that 74 per cent of them supported the introduction of a wealth tax to fund improved public services and deal with the cost-of-living crisis. The open letter also said that one-off donations and philanthropy "cannot redress the current colossal imbalance" of societal wealth. "We need our governments and our leaders to lead," the letter said. "The true measure of a society can be found, not just in how it treats its most vulnerable, but in what it asks of its wealthiest members." Images: Getty

Money & Banking

$280 million lotto winner cuts ties with "greedy" family

Scotland resident Gillian Bayford went from rags to riches in an instant when she won the equivalent of a $278.36 million jackpot in August 2012. Thinking luck was finally on her side, Bayford didn't expect the amount of drama that came with the life-changing prize. It all began just 15 months after her lucky win with then-husband Adrian, who she split with allegedly due to the stress of managing the jackpot. Not long after, she spent $1,324,304 to pay off her family's debt, which included money that her late father Ian McCulloch and her brother Colin owed over a series of failed business ventures according to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/woman-won-187m-lottery-severed-ties-greedy-family-2023-12" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Business Insider</a>. “My dad and brother built up one company after another and then closed them down,” Bayford said. “I’ve bailed them out of every debt.” She continued to keep her family financially afloat spending a total of $37.31 million on them, and even bought her parents - who were broke and living in a caravan at the time - a $522,388 penthouse apartment in eastern Scotland. But, according to the Mirror, that wasn't enough and her father insisted that she should give her brother around $1.5 million, for a new play-centre business. She obliged, and instead of thanking her, Colin now drives Audis with private plates, owns a $546,000 house and reportedly stopped talking to his sister. He even got married to his girlfriend without inviting Bayford to the wedding. “They have lost touch with where they’ve come from,” Bayford told The Sun. “They’re rubbing people’s noses in it by flashing their cash, which I think is downright nasty.” At one point her father even tried to take control of her winnings and even take a piece of her business. “It’s upsetting and raw,” she told the publication. “The money was supposed to make everybody happy. But it’s made them demanding and greedy.” She added, "they brought our name into disrespect in the village, and we had people threatening to torch the family house.” Bayford said that despite it all she takes pride in herself "because I know I’ve taken them out of a situation.” The lotto winner officially cut ties with her family in 2016 after they called her an embarrassment, while her mum Brenda McCulloch claims she’s heartbroken over the lack of contact with her daughter and grandchildren. “Gillian says that we didn’t try and get in touch with them, but if I’d tried she wouldn’t have let me,” she said. Her mum also claimed that while her daughter was “generous,” the actual amount she gave her family was much lower. “Every word that comes out of their mouths is a lie. I wish them a happy life, but there will be no reconciliation now," Bayford refuted. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

"I'm officially cutting ties": Sunrise star quits media for glittering new career

Former Weekend Sunrise TV presenter Talitha Cummins is embarking on a new chapter in her life, bidding farewell to her 20-year-long media career. Cummins, widely recognised for her role as a newsreader on Weekend Sunrise and more recently as a newsreader on Triple M Sydney, recently shared on social media her decision to step away from the media industry. Her departure is driven by her passion for a new venture in the world of jewellery. In a heartfelt Instagram post, the 43-year-old former journalist reflected on her two decades in journalism and television while also announcing her exciting shift toward launching her own diamond and jewellery business: "It’s a big day for me today," she wrote. "I’m officially cutting ties with a 20 year career in journalism/television + media consulting and launching my business in diamond and jewellery creating. "It’s a big shift, but the move to launching my own business has given me an energy and drive like never before. "Our family has been creating diamond jewellery for 50 years and I’ve joined forces with my uncle Craig and cousin Kara to create @thecutjewellery - Bespoke diamond ring and fine jewellery using lab diamonds - all crafted by our team of jewellers in Sydney.... "I’m excited to be a part of what’s proving to be the biggest disruptor to the jewellery industry." Cummins gained widespread acclaim as a member of Seven's Weekend Sunrise team in 2014, where she assumed the role of newsreader following Jessica Rowe's departure. However, her journey took an unexpected turn in early 2017 during her maternity leave with her first child, Oliver. She received a call from Seven News chief Craig McPherson, who informed her that her contract as a newsreader on the show had been terminated. This abrupt decision was met with astonishment and disappointment, especially as Cummins had anticipated resuming her role on the popular weekend breakfast show. Instead, she was offered a weekday 5am time slot, leaving her feeling blindsided by the sudden change. The timing of this development was particularly challenging for Cummins, as she was gearing up to promote her episode on Australian Story, aired on ABC, in which she candidly shared her personal battle with alcoholism and her remarkable four-year journey to sobriety. Cummins contested her dismissal, asserting that it had been unjust. In a mere four months, the Seven network and Cummins reached a confidential settlement, putting an end to the legal dispute. Cummins' departure from the media world marks the beginning of a new and exciting chapter in her life as she immerses herself in the world of diamonds and jewellery, following in her family's tradition and pursuing her passion. Images: Instagram

Does private health insurance cut public hospital waiting lists? We found it barely makes a dent

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuting-zhang-1144393">Yuting Zhang</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jongsay-yong-10803">Jongsay Yong</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ou-yang-937801">Ou Yang</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> The more people take up private health insurance, the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate/community_affairs/completed_inquiries/1999-02/pubhosp/report/c05">less pressure</a> on the public hospital system, including <a href="https://www.privatehealthcareaustralia.org.au/australians-sign-up-to-private-health-insurance-in-record-numbers-to-avoid-hospital-waiting-lists/#:%7E:text=%22Private%20health%20insurance%20is%20the,and%20keep%20pressure%20off%20premiums.">shorter waiting lists</a> for surgery. That’s one of the key messages we’ve been hearing from government and the private health insurance industry in recent years. Governments <a href="https://www.privatehealth.gov.au/health_insurance/surcharges_incentives/index.htm">encourage us</a> to buy private hospital cover. They tempt us with carrots – for instance, with subsidised <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Medicare-and-private-health-insurance/Private-health-insurance-rebate/">premiums</a>. With higher-income earners, the government uses sticks – buy private cover or pay the <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Medicare-and-private-health-insurance/Medicare-levy-surcharge/">Medicare Levy Surcharge</a>. These are just some of the <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-greg-hunt-mp/media/delivering-australias-lowest-private-health-insurance-premium-change-in-21-years#:%7E:text=Home-,Delivering%20Australia's%20lowest%20private%20health%20insurance%20premium%20change%20in%2021,be%202.70%20percent%20in%202022">billion-dollar strategies</a> aimed to shift more of us who can afford it into the private system. But what if private health insurance doesn’t have any meaningful impact on public hospital waiting lists after all? That’s what we found in our <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/publications/working-papers/search/result?paper=4721936">recent research</a>. Our analysis suggests if an extra 65,000 people buy private health insurance, public hospital waiting lists barely shift from the average 69 days. Waiting lists are an average just eight hours shorter. In other words, we’ve used hospital admission and waiting-list data to show private health insurance doesn’t make much difference. <h2>What we did</h2> Our <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/publications/working-papers/search/result?paper=4721936">work</a> looked at data from 2014-2018 on hospital admissions and waiting lists for elective surgery in Victoria. The data covered all Victorians who were admitted as an inpatient in all hospitals in the state (both public and private) and those registered on the waiting list for elective surgeries in the state’s public hospitals. That included waiting times for surgeries where people are admitted to public hospitals (as an inpatient). We didn’t include people waiting to see specialist doctors as an outpatient. The data was linked at the patient level, meaning we could track what happened to individuals on the waiting list. We then examined the impact of more people buying private health insurance on waiting times for surgeries in the state’s public hospitals. We did this by looking at the uptake of private health insurance in different areas of Victoria, according to socioeconomic status. After adjusting for patient characteristics that may affect waiting times, these differences in insurance uptake allowed us to identify how this changed waiting times. <h2>What we found</h2> In our sample, on average <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/4721936/wp2023n09.pdf">44% of people</a> in Victoria had private health insurance. This is close to the national average of <a href="https://www.apra.gov.au/private-health-insurance-annual-coverage-survey">45%</a>. We found that increasing the average private health insurance take-up from 44% to 45% in Victoria would reduce waiting times in public hospitals by an average 0.34 days (or about eight hours). This increase of one percentage point is equivalent to 65,000 more people in Victoria (based on <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3101.0Main+Features1Jun%202018?OpenDocument">2018 population data</a>) taking up (and using) private health insurance. The effects vary slightly by surgical specialty. For instance, private health insurance made a bigger reduction to waiting times for knee replacements, than for cancer surgery, compared to the average. But again, the difference only came down to a few hours. Someone’s age also made a slight difference, but again by only a few hours compared to the average wait. Given the common situation facing public and private hospitals across all states and territories, and similar private health insurance take-up in many states, our findings are likely to apply outside Victoria. <h2>Why doesn’t it reduce waiting lists?</h2> While our research did not address this directly, there may be several reasons why private health insurance does not free up resources in the public system to reduce waiting lists: <ul> <li> people might buy health insurance and not use it, preferring to have free treatment in the public system rather than risk out-of-pocket costs in the private system </li> <li> specialists may not be willing to spend more time in the public system, instead <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1753-6405.12488">favouring working</a> in private hospitals </li> <li> there’s a growing need for public hospital services that may not be available in the private system, such as complex neurosurgery and some forms of cancer treatment. </li> </ul> <h2>Why is this important?</h2> Government <a href="https://www.privatehealth.gov.au/health_insurance/surcharges_incentives/index.htm">policies</a> designed to get more of us to buy private health insurance involve a significant sum of public spending. Each year, the Australian government spends about <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-greg-hunt-mp/media/delivering-australias-lowest-private-health-insurance-premium-change-in-21-years#:%7E:text=Home-,Delivering%20Australia's%20lowest%20private%20health%20insurance%20premium%20change%20in%2021,be%202.70%20percent%20in%202022">$A6.7 billion</a> in private health insurance rebates to reduce premiums. In the 2020-21 financial year, Medicare combined with state and territory government expenditure provided almost <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/hospitals/australias-hospitals-at-a-glance/contents/spending-on-hospitals">$6.1 billion</a> to fund services provided in private hospitals. There might be an argument for this public spending if the end result was to substantially take pressure off public hospitals and thereby reduce waiting times for treatment in public hospitals. But the considerable effort it takes to encourage more people to sign up for private health insurance, coupled with the small effect on waiting lists we’ve shown, means this strategy is neither practical nor effective. Given the substantial costs of subsidising private health insurance and private hospitals, public money might be better directed to public hospitals and primary care. In addition, people buying private health insurance can skip the waiting times for elective surgery to receive speedier care. These people are often <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/4682822/wp2023n08.pdf">financially well off</a>, implying unequal access to health care. <h2>What’s next?</h2> The Australian government is currently <a href="https://consultations.health.gov.au/medical-benefits-division/consultation-on-phi-studies/">reviewing</a> private health insurance. So now is a good time for reforms to optimise the overall efficiency of the health-care system (both public and private) and improve population health while saving taxpayer money. We also need policies to ensure equitable access to care as a priority. When it comes to reducing hospital waiting lists, we’ve shown we cannot rely on increased rates of private health insurance coverage to do the heavy lifting.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211680/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/yuting-zhang-1144393">Yuting Zhang</a>, Professor of Health Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jongsay-yong-10803">Jongsay Yong</a>, Associate Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ou-yang-937801">Ou Yang</a>, Senior Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-private-health-insurance-cut-public-hospital-waiting-lists-we-found-it-barely-makes-a-dent-211680">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rico-merkert-90253">Rico Merkert</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-li-1460445">David Li</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Our climate is changing, and airlines are under pressure to reduce emissions from air travel. For many of us, especially in Australia, flying is an essential form of transport, so how can we reduce its environmental impact? Getting to and from the airport is an overlooked aspect of air travel that offers an immediate way to cut total carbon emissions from the trip by a surprisingly large amount. Our newly published <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920923002468">research</a> shows for an average economy passenger flying from Sydney to Melbourne, the carbon emissions from using a fossil-fuelled car to get to and from the airports make up a staggering 13.5% of the total door-to-door emissions. At a global scale, this number reaches 12.1% for long-haul flights and up to 22.8% for short-haul air journeys. For comparison, in the International Air Transport Association’s <a href="https://www.iata.org/en/programs/environment/roadmaps/">2050 net-zero emission roadmap</a>, 13% of global airline decarbonisation will come from electric and hydrogen propulsion. A further 65% is to come from mass adoption of sustainable aviation fuel. This is fuel produced from non-petroleum-based renewable sources such as some municipal solid waste, woody biomass, fats, greases and oils. Each of these big lifters requires a mammoth level of investment and technological breakthroughs, and comes with limitations and risks. Some solutions might make air travel prohibitively expensive. Airlines are moving mountains to decarbonise, but there are increasing concerns their net-zero plans might not stack up. In contrast, a 13.5% emission reduction on a Sydney-Melbourne door-to-door journey today may sound like a dream. Yet our research shows it’s easily achievable if travellers can be persuaded to change how they get to and from the airport. <h2>So how can travellers be convinced to switch?</h2> <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/agricultural-and-resource-economics-review/article/future-of-carbon-labeling-factors-to-consider/FDBC62244F2ACA29A7602886085B4A91">Research</a> has shown carbon “labelling” helps shift consumer behaviour towards greener choices. It’s a bit like how the nutrition label on the back of our cereal box helps us choose healthier options. For instance, when searching for a flight on online travel platform Skyscanner, all flight options are displayed with carbon emissions, so consumers can make a more informed choice. Two <a href="https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5n53672m">recent</a> <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/03611981211046924">studies</a> at the University of California, Davis, suggest showing consumers the emission outcomes of different gate-to-gate flight choices, such as aircraft types and transit stops, can prompt them to choose greener flights, reducing emissions by up to 3.8%. But air journeys don’t start or end at airports. They start at home and end at destinations, or vice versa. Our air-travel carbon emissions are divided into ground and air segments and counted as airport and airline emissions respectively. While airlines focus on gate-to-gate decarbonisation through future technologies, the door-to-door emissions produced by travel to and from airports can be reduced immediately. Let’s look at an example of a Sydney-to-Melbourne trip. Say you travel from North Sydney to Sydney Airport by car, then fly to Melbourne Airport and catch a taxi to the city centre. That trip emits 82 kilograms of CO₂ door-to-door. But if you use a train, bus or electric vehicle (charged from a renewable source) to travel to and from the airport, the emissions from your trip drop to 71kg: a 13.5% fall door-to-door. Although travel platforms are increasingly communicating gate-to-gate emissions to consumers, we’re not aware of any that are including door-to-door emissions. Helping climate-conscious consumers understand the door-to-door carbon impact of airport ground connections could drive them to choose greener options such as public transport and electric vehicles. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Google Flights chart of air travel options showing emissions and cost" /></a><figcaption>Travel aggregator search platforms are now labelling carbon emissions when offering flight options. Google Flights</figcaption></figure> <h2>Give airlines an incentive to inform passengers</h2> Governments and airports have long collaborated in driving consumers towards greener ground transit options. For instance, Transport for NSW has set a 50% emission-reduction <a href="https://www.future.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-09/Future_Transport_Strategy_2.pdf">target</a> for 2030. However, consumer adoption of these options has remained low. <a href="https://www.ttf.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TTF_Accessing_Sydney_Airport.pdf">Most airport trips</a> in Australia today are still made by conventional car. As consumers, we have relationships with airlines that we don’t have with airports. When it comes to flying, we choose our airline carefully. Yet we rarely think about how we get to the airport. Airlines are experts in customer communication and engagement. They operate some of the largest frequent-flyer programs in the world. Last time we checked, Qantas had <a href="https://www.finder.com.au/frequent-flyer/qantas">15 million</a> program members and Virgin had <a href="https://newsroom.virginaustralia.com/release/velocity-frequent-flyer-soars-11-million-members">11 million</a>. Through these channels, airlines learn about us and how we tick when it comes to making flying choices. This puts them in an ideal position to keep us informed about door-to-door travel and drive the transition towards greener airport ground-connection options. To give them an incentive to do so, their efforts should be recognised through emission accounting. <h2>A cost-effective way to cut emissions</h2> Travellers using the Sydney Airport train station must pay an <a href="https://www.opal.com.au/en/opal-fares/airport_station_access_fee/">access fee</a>, which adds <a href="https://airportlink.com.au/trip-information/price/">A$15.74</a> to the cost of the journey. As our <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920923002468">paper</a> highlights, the average customer using the airport train removes 2.7kg of CO₂. Achieving the same amount of decarbonisation during the flight using more sustainable aviation fuel – which is more expensive – would cost the customer about the same: between $10 and $16. So there is an opportunity for airlines to highlight this decarbonisation outcome as a way to persuade travellers to reconsider driving a car or catching a taxi, and instead take the airport train or bus. Airlines could also consider collaborating with airports to build airport charging facilities for electric vehicles as uptake in Australia approaches a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jul/31/australian-electric-vehicles-ev-sales-rise-increase">double-digit share</a> of new vehicle sales. This overlooked opportunity to cut door-to-door emissions from air travel has a substantial upside. It deserves far more attention from airlines, airports and consumers.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211099/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rico-merkert-90253">Rico Merkert</a>, Professor in Transport and Supply Chain Management and Deputy Director, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies (ITLS), University of Sydney Business School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-li-1460445">David Li</a>, PhD Candidate, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-air-travellers-can-cut-their-door-to-door-emissions-right-now-by-as-much-as-13-on-the-sydney-melbourne-route-211099">original article</a>.

Domestic Travel

myTax is fast and free – so why do 2 in 3 Australians still pay to lodge a tax return?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jawad-harb-1441668">Jawad Harb</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-morton-1218408">Elizabeth Morton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Ten years ago, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) created the “myTax” portal, an easy way to lodge your tax return online. There was an “e-Tax” filing option before the 2015-16 tax year, but this was quite complicated and barely better than filling out a form online. In comparison, myTax <a href="https://resources.taxinstitute.com.au/tiausttaxforum/acceptance-of-mytax-in-australia">is simpler</a> and more automated. It’s available 24 hours a day, is free to use, and you will typically get your refund within <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Your-tax-return/How-to-lodge-your-tax-return/Lodge-your-tax-return-online-with-myTax/">two weeks</a>. But the chances are you won’t be using it. In fact, slightly less than <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Taxation-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2020-21/?anchor=IndividualsStatistics#IndividualsStatistics">36%</a> of Australia’s 15 million taxpayers used the myTax portal in 2020-21 – the most recent tax year for which the tax office has published data. About <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Taxation-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2020-21/?anchor=IndividualsStatistics#IndividualsStatistics">64% of tax returns</a> were lodged through tax agents. This is one of the highest rates among 38 <a href="https://www.oecd.org/about/">Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development</a> nations. Meanwhile, just 0.6% of Australians still used the paper-based form. <hr /> <iframe id="5Kdz0" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5Kdz0/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> So why have Australians – who have quickly embraced the internet for everything from shopping to dating – been so slow to embrace myTax? For some, particularly older people, it’s about being intimidated by the technology. Others may be concerned with cybersecurity risk. But for most it’s about the perceived complexity of the tax system and the process, regardless of the technology. They see using a tax agent as easier and the way to maximise their tax refund. While in some cases this may be true, in many instances it’s simply a perception – but one the tax office will need to address if it wants to promote use of myTax. <h2>Reasons for the low uptake of myTax</h2> <a href="https://resources.taxinstitute.com.au/tiausttaxforum/acceptance-of-mytax-in-australia">Our research</a> suggests most people who have used the myTax portal think it is easy to use. We surveyed 193 taxpayers who have used the system. About three-quarters agreed the system was clear and understandable, and said they would keep using it. But of course these are people who have chosen to use the system, so their responses don’t shed much light on the reasons people don’t use myTax. Answers to that come from other published research, in particular from the <a href="https://www.igt.gov.au/">Inspector-General of Taxation</a> (the independent office investigating complaints about the tax system) as well as the House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue. Evidence submitted to these bodies indicate that Australians prefer tax agents to avoid errors in claiming deductions. The parliamentary committee’s <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportrep/024169/toc_pdf/TaxpayerEngagementwiththeTaxSystem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">2018 inquiry</a> into the tax system was told the use of tax agents ballooned from about 20% in the 1980s, peaking at about 74% of all taxpayers: "The Tax Commissioner considered that the size of the TaxPack had probably contributed to that rise, driving many people with simple tax affairs to a tax agent because it looked daunting." In short, habits are hard to break. Having come to rely on tax agents, most Australians keep using them, despite the system being vastly improved. For example, the myTax system now simplifies the process by <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Your-tax-return/How-to-lodge-your-tax-return/Lodge-your-tax-return-online-with-myTax/Pre-fill-availability/?=redirected_myGov_prefill">pre-filling</a> data from government agencies, health funds, financial institutions and your own employer. About 80% of our survey respondents said this was helpful. <h2>Taking care of the digital divide</h2> This suggests the main barrier to increasing use of the myTax system is mostly habit and the perception the tax system is too complicated to navigate without an expert. There is also a small percentage of people who feel uncomfortable with computers. This is reflected in the minority of respondents in our study who said they were unlikely to use myTax again, as well as the tax office’s data showing some people continue to stick with paper lodgement. Those more likely to find the system daunting are the elderly, those with low English skills, people with disabilities and those with low educational attainment. These people’s needs should not be forgotten as the Australian <a href="https://www.dta.gov.au/digital-government-strategy">Digital Government Strategy</a> aims to making Australia a “world-leading” digital government by 2025, delivering “simple, secure and connected public services”. Even with the greatest online system in the world, it’s unlikely there will ever be a complete transition.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207305/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jawad-harb-1441668">Jawad Harb</a>, PhD Candidate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-morton-1218408">Elizabeth Morton</a>, Research Fellow of the RMIT Blockchain Innovation Hub, Lecturer Taxation, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/mytax-is-fast-and-free-so-why-do-2-in-3-australians-still-pay-to-lodge-a-tax-return-207305">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Can you lend a paw this tax time to help cats in need?

With a proud reputation of caring for cats for more than 60 years, the Cat Protection Society of NSW runs Sydney’s only no-kill shelter just for cats, as well as providing feline welfare programs to help cats and the people who love them. Cat Protection began in 1958 as a small group of people dedicated to reducing the number of street cats and while our organisation has grown over the years, our vision remains the same; that every cat deserves a loving and responsible home. Over the years, Cat Protection has helped literally hundreds of thousands of cats, kittens, and people. We’ve led the way in setting the standards for best-practice feline sheltering, and our health and welfare services extend far beyond our adoption centre. And while technology means we can offer a great range of free cat care resources online, we’ve never lost our human touch and we still help thousands of people every year with advice and tips on cat care by phone or in-person, at no cost. Our subsidised desexing, vaccination and microchipping programs promote cat health and welfare in the community and our newest program, Adopt-a-Stray, offers a complete and affordable package for those who wish to fully welcome a street cat into their heart and home. What sets us apart from many other animal shelters is our holistic approach to each individual cat or human client. Cats are not given a time limit, although most are adopted within days or weeks. Every cat is individually assessed and provided with a care plan to meet their unique needs. If they need complex surgery, allergy trials or behavioural interventions our highly qualified team will work with veterinarians and specialists to ensure the cat gets everything they need to set them on the path to living their best life. A kind person found Snake, a four-week-old sickly orphaned kitten. In addition to cat flu, our vets identified corneal scarring in his right eye, a blocked tear duct, and an adhesion on his eyelid restricting the normal movement of his third eyelid. Treatment resolved the flu and improved his eye, but Snake will live with limited vision in that eye. This has not dampened his playfulness or zest for life. As well as poor physical health, orphaned kittens miss out on the important lessons of being a cat from their mum and siblings, and this can lead to behavioural issues. Where we can, we will make sure such kittens get to join a stepfamily, but in cases such as Snake’s, illness means that isn’t always possible. It is then up to our human team to work with these little ones to help them learn to navigate the world with good manners! In contrast, Banjo had all the behavioural benefits of his brother but alas at seven weeks of age Banjo weighed only 560 grams while his brother Clancy weighed 900 grams! Banjo was diagnosed with a rare form of congenital hypothyroidism. Because his condition was diagnosed early, his prognosis is very good. He was started on a medication called Thyroxine and went back into foster care so that we could monitor his progress and adjust the dose of his medication as necessary with follow-up blood tests. After six weeks in foster care, Banjo graduated to the adoption centre. He will need to be on Thyroxine for the rest of his life, but that didn’t daunt his new family who’ve told us Banjo is now thriving in his loving forever home. From individualised TLC and veterinary care for every cat and kitten, to helping human clients resolve cat challenges (from furniture scratching to strata bans) and strategic research and advocacy on behalf of people and cats, Cat Protection’s impact is so much greater than our budget. As an independent registered charity for cats, we’re dependent on donations and bequests to do our work. We are compliant, open and transparent; on our website you can see our audited annual reports for details of what we do and what it costs. We have a strict “no harassment” fundraising policy which means under no circumstances will your information be sold on, and we do not employ pressure-tactics or door-to-door solicitations. We don’t spend money paying fundraising companies to ring you at dinner time asking for money or send you five-page long letters insisting you give more. And we never will. Donations are invested in helping our feline friends and nurturing the unique bond between cats and people. Your generosity will mean that we can continue to help thousands of cats and people each year. If you can lend a paw, please <a href="https://www.givenow.com.au/catprotectionsocietynsw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">make your tax-deductible donation here</a>! For general advice on cat care and everything feline, call the Cat Protection Society of NSW on 02 9557 4818 or visit <a href="https://catprotection.org.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">catprotection.org.au</a> Images: Supplied. This is a sponsored article produced in partnership with the Cat Protection Society of NSW.

Family & Pets

King Charles cuts ties with TV host over affair revelations

King Charles has cut all ties with UK television host Phillip Schofield, after he lied about having an affair. Schofield has been dumped from his hosting gig at This Morning, which he has been the face of for 21 years, after he admitted he had an affair with a much younger man who worked at the ITV network. The 61-year-old resigned from the network after lying about the “consensual on-off relationship", admitting in a statement that the affair was "unwise" but stressed it was "not illegal". He added that he was "deeply sorry" for having lied to his wife and to ITV about his relationship with the man reportedly 30 years his junior and who he first met as a teenager. “Contrary to speculation, whilst I met the man when he was a teenager and was asked to help him to get into television, it was only after he started to work on the show that it became more than just a friendship,” he said in his recent statement. In light of the affair, Schofield has been dropped by The Prince's Trust, after being an ambassador for several years. A spokesperson from the King's charity told <a title="The Telegraph" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/30/phillip-schofield-dropped-princes-trust-this-morning-affair/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Telegraph</a> UK that it was mutually agreed it was "no longer appropriate to work together". "In light of Phillip's recent admissions, we have agreed with him that it is no longer appropriate to work together," a Prince's Trust spokesperson said. All references to Schofield have been removed from the charity's website and also his own page. It previously read, "Outside of work, Phillip is an ambassador for the charity The Prince's Trust, dedicating time to further the work of supporting vulnerable young people in the UK". The Prince's Trust was created in 1976 by then-Prince Charles to help young disadvantaged people in the UK, with the hugely successful charity helping more than one million young people by providing them with business grants, education and training. Following the bombshell revelation of Schofield's affair, ITV said it had investigated the allegations of his affair "several times" from early 2020, but said it didn't find any evidence. It's been a trying time for the ex-presenter with his brother Timothy recently being jailed for 12 years over child sex offences. Image credits: Getty Images

News

Why being married cuts your risk of skin cancer

A new study has found that married couples are less likely to die of skin cancer because they spot warning signs earlier than singles. The study, which observed 50,000 American skin cancer patients, found that 45.7 per cent of those who were married, had stage 1 tumours – which have a 98 per cent survival rate. The chance of catching skin cancer early dropped 32 per cent for singles, 38 per cent for divorcees and 70 per cent for widowers. The researchers from the University of Pennsylvania said they were stunned by the striking difference in diagnoses. The researchers believe these findings should help dermatologists adjust their advice to patients based on their relationship status, suggesting screening at an earlier age for single patients and encouraging home-screen training for those in relationships. Victims of melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, are expected to increase by seven per cent by 2035. For those diagnosed with stage 1 disease, the five-year survival is reportedly 98 per cent. The five-year survival drops to 62 per cent for those diagnosed with stage 3 disease The study, published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, aimed to investigate how lifestyle and relationships could impact patients’ early detection chances. “Spouses likely facilitate early detection of melanomas by assisting in identification of pigmented lesions that may have otherwise gone unnoticed,” said corresponding author Dr Cimarron Sharon, a dermatologist at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. “They may also provide support and encouragement to see a physician for evaluation. “Thus, married patients are likely to receive a better prognosis because of earlier surgical management.” The study also found that married patients were more likely than single, divorced or widowed patients to have a sentinel lymph node biopsy. SLNB is linked to survival as the sentinel lymph node is closest to a tumour and is the first place it would spread. Dr Sharon said this could be “associated with the spouse's role in supporting the patient and engaging in further discussion”. A partner also reduces the difficulty in travelling to and from a hospital and finding a carer post-surgery. This study is the largest of its kind to find the influence of marriage on the detection of melanoma. Dr Sharon said, “These findings support increased consideration of spousal training for partner skin examination and perhaps more frequent screening for unmarried patients. “Marital status should be considered when counselling patients for melanoma procedures and when recommending screening and follow-up to optimize patient care.” Image credit: Shutterstock

Body

ATO cracks down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns

The Australian Taxation Office (ATM) has plans to crack down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns after an interview found nine in 10 made mistakes and wrongfully claimed expenses. Those working at home, including those who run home-based businesses and people who earn via short-term rental sites like Airbnb or Stayz, will also be under the thumb this year to file returns correctly, in a new bid to eliminate tax fraud. The review comes in the wake of a major funding boost to the ATO, announced in the 2023 federal budget, which saw an $89.6 million injection. The ATO claims there was a tax gap of $9 billion in the 2019-2020 financial year. Taxpayers paid 94.4 per cent of the whole amount theoretically owed to the Commonwealth, with deductions for rental expenses, including those incorrectly claiming negative gearing deductions, contributing $1.4 billion to the gap. Australian Tax Commissioner Tim Loh said the ATO will be taking action in 2023. "We encourage rental property owners and their registered tax agents to take extra care this tax time and review their records before lodging their return," Loh reportedly told The Age. "You can only claim interest on a loan used to purchase a rental property to earn rental income – don't forget, if your loan also includes a private expense, such as for a new car or a trip to Bali, you can only claim an interest deduction for the portion relating to producing your rental income.” Loh warned Australians who work from home and advised against the “copy and paste" tax return method. He said, ” We know a lot of people are working back in the office more compared to last year”, and the method the ATO uses to calculate working from home expenses has now changed. Image credit: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed?

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

"There's no way": Man receives $52 billion tax bill

What to expect from the federal budget

Survey unveils Aussies thoughts on tourism tax

Millions of phones at risk of being cut off from calling triple-0

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

Tax boost announced for 1.2 million people

Stage 3 stacks up: the rejigged tax cuts help fight bracket creep and boost middle and upper-middle households

"Proud to pay more": The billionaires who want to pay more tax

$280 million lotto winner cuts ties with "greedy" family

"I'm officially cutting ties": Sunrise star quits media for glittering new career

Does private health insurance cut public hospital waiting lists? We found it barely makes a dent

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

myTax is fast and free – so why do 2 in 3 Australians still pay to lodge a tax return?

Can you lend a paw this tax time to help cats in need?

King Charles cuts ties with TV host over affair revelations

Why being married cuts your risk of skin cancer

ATO cracks down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

A tax on sugary drinks can make us healthier. It’s time for Australia to introduce one

Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed?

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

"There's no way": Man receives $52 billion tax bill

What to expect from the federal budget

Survey unveils Aussies thoughts on tourism tax

Millions of phones at risk of being cut off from calling triple-0

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

Tax boost announced for 1.2 million people

Stage 3 stacks up: the rejigged tax cuts help fight bracket creep and boost middle and upper-middle households

"Proud to pay more": The billionaires who want to pay more tax

$280 million lotto winner cuts ties with "greedy" family

"I'm officially cutting ties": Sunrise star quits media for glittering new career

Does private health insurance cut public hospital waiting lists? We found it barely makes a dent

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

myTax is fast and free – so why do 2 in 3 Australians still pay to lodge a tax return?

Can you lend a paw this tax time to help cats in need?

King Charles cuts ties with TV host over affair revelations

Why being married cuts your risk of skin cancer

ATO cracks down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns

Our Partners

Join Over60