Federal election 2025 as it happened: Jim Chalmers and Angus Taylor go head-to-head in treasurer debate; Trump’s 104 per cent tariffs hit Chinese imports

Thanks for following our coverage of the treasurers’ debate. We’ll have a full wrap shortly from Shane Wright and Millie Muroi. Here’s how Chalmers and Taylor made their closing pitches, edited for brevity:

Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers has locked horns with his opposite number Angus Taylor in a treasurers’ debate on a Wednesday night.Credit: News Corp Australia

Taylor: “Who do you trust to manage the economy? We’ve seen in the last three years, Australians have got poorer, and it’s clear that Australians can’t afford another three years like the last three … We’re bringing out our positive plan to get this country back on track, to beat inflation by cutting waste and slashing red tape to boost growth, by backing business and backing investment in this country, by fixing our energy market, by getting more supply into the market, fixing housing so that young Australians can hope to buy a house … to give relief at the bowser [of] 25 cents a litre, immediate, not in 15 months … and of course, to fix our budget.”

Chalmers: “These are uncertain times, and we’ve got a lot going for us as Australians, but there’s a lot at stake. This is a really important moment in the global economy, and we get to decide whether we go to the world more resilient under Labor or more vulnerable under the Coalition. This debate and Angus’ inability to come clean on his secret cuts to pay for his nuclear reactors has made the choices really clear ... Labor helping with the cost of living, cutting income taxes, strengthening Medicare, building more homes, building Australia’s future, making us more resilient in an uncertain world, or higher income taxes and lower wages and cuts to pay for nuclear reactors. That’s not an economic plan. That’s an ambush, just like 2013, 2014, which is why we’re hearing all of the same rhetoric again. There could not be a worse time to risk Peter Dutton’s Coalition of cuts and chaos, which would make Australians worse off and take us backwards, because when Peter Dutton cuts, every Australian will pay.”

Analysis: Both the treasurer and Taylor used their one shot to ask a question of each other to hit the other where it hurts, but Chalmers used the moment to show how dexterous he is in debate.

Taylor asked Chalmers whether he would apologise to Australians for promising lower energy bills, lower cost of living, and better living standards. But Taylor pointed out moderator Ross Greenwood had asked a very similar question just a minute before.

“Well, first of all, I mean, Angus wrote down that question and then you asked it, and he didn’t have the ability to think up a second question,” he said.

The treasurer then pointed out that net disposable income per person – a common measure of living standards – was falling very sharply when Labor came to office and said the party had turned it around. From there it was into a standard Labor attack on the Coalition’s opposition to the government’s cost-of-living measures.

Chalmers asked Taylor whether he would commit to making no cuts to health or education, drawing on Labor’s traditional areas of strength.

Taylor was prepared for that. He said he would bring a bill into the parliament to guarantee spending on essential services, including health and education, and said savings could be made in other areas: “Manufacturing programs that aren’t about manufacturing, quantum computing projects out of the west coast of the US, housing projects that haven’t delivered a house.”

Taylor says a Labor-Greens government would be “extremely dangerous” while Chalmers has reaffirmed the government is aiming for a majority government and ruled out a formal coalition with the minor party.

“[Adam Bandt] wants to do probably what Jim wants to do,” Taylor says. “He wants to get rid of negative gearing … get capital gains tax on the family home.

“He wants to tax people’s unrealised capital gains, which, of course, is exactly what Jim is doing.”

That’s a reference to Labor’s stalled plans to change tax rules for superannuation accounts of more than $3 million.

In response, Chalmers refuses to label the Greens as “dangerous” but rules out following the Gillard path of governing with the party.

“First of all, we’re not entering into a coalition with the Greens,” he says. “We seek to govern in a majority. The Australian people [have] the ability to elect a majority Labor government under Anthony Albanese … If people want the reliability that comes from a majority Labor government, they can vote for it.”

Chalmers has admitted he gets “a bit grumpy sometimes” but says he has learnt to focus on objective observers.

Asked about suggestions that he has a glass jaw and does not respond well to criticism, Chalmers says: “I think over time, I’ve learnt to understand that you take the good with the bad.

“And I try, and do get a bit grumpy sometimes … I think I’ve learnt over time to focus on the objective observers of the job that I’m doing, and I think ultimately the Australian people will judge that, rather than the kind of partisan commentators from time to time on the opinion pages.”

While Chalmers and Taylor both emphasised the importance of keeping price pressures in check – the treasurer emphasised the need for “enduring” cost-of-living relief, while the opposition spokesman underscored the need for “immediate” relief.

Taylor said the fuel excise cut proposed by the Coalition would help bring down the cost of building a house, producing food and would put downward pressure on prices across the economy.

Peter Dutton gets down on his haunches to reach the diesel fuel tank underneath the truck.Credit: James Brickwood

“Twenty-five cents a litre off at the bowser … we think is immediate and can have a real impact,” he said.

While Chalmers said the government had put immediate cost-of-living relief in place, he said it was important to make long-lasting changes such as the government’s tax cuts which are set to come into play in 15 months.

“If you’re under the pump, Labor is doing more for you to help with the cost of living in an enduring way,” he said.

Chalmers has refused to apologise for Labor’s promise ahead of the 2022 election that energy prices would come down by $275 during its term, but says prices are lower than they otherwise would have been because of the government’s actions.

“I take responsibility for all of the decisions that we’ve taken in our budget, including the fact that energy prices, energy bills last year were $300 cheaper because of our energy rebates that Angus didn’t support,” he said.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers won’t apologise for Labor getting its power price forecast wrong.Credit: Louie Douvis

The government has handed out subsidies for power bills to households after prices spiked.

Pressed on whether he would apologise, Chalmers gave two explanations: “The first one was, Angus intervened to hide a big price rise before the last election.

“And the second thing is, there’s been a major land war in Eastern Europe, which has caused a global spike in energy inflation.”

Chalmers has used his chance to ask a direct question to Taylor to see if he will repeat then-opposition leader Tony Abbott’s vow years ago not to cut health or education, which became a millstone around Abbott’s neck as prime minister.

Taylor responds by saying: “We will bring a bill into the parliament to guarantee spending on essential services, including health and education,” and arguing that the Coalition increased funding to those areas when it was in government. He says government savings will come from “manufacturing programs that aren’t about manufacturing and a quantum computing project out of the west coast of the US”.

Chalmers has spruiked the strength of the budget in response to a question about whether there is room to deal with an economic downturn, while Taylor has refused to answer whether the Coalition would still seek government spending cuts.

“The budget is in a much stronger position now than it was three years ago, and that’s because I’ve delivered two budget surpluses,” Chalmers said. “If there was a downturn, this government’s got the capacity to keep spending to prop up the economy.”

Asked about whether he could find cost savings in the budget if faced with an economic downturn, Taylor said the key was to give people the confidence to invest and “get on with things”.

“Investment as a share of GDP is the lowest since the early 1990s recession we had to have, and the result of that is we’re not where we need to be,” he said.

Analysis: Chalmers has not been rattled in the early moments of the debate. He’s rattling off economic statistics and making his points calmly, as is Taylor. Chalmers is making more attempts to interrupt his rival though, where Taylor is more reserved and a little less poised. There’s a reason Chalmers has a reputation as one of the government’s best communicators.

Moderator Ross Greenwood, who is Sky’s business editor, has pulled up the candidates in an attempt to get them back to the question several times but has largely let the two politicians spar.

Chalmers has compared the Coalition to the Trump administration, saying the opposition is full of “DOGE-y sycophants”, in reference to the Department of Government Efficiency in the US headed by Elon Musk.

“[They] have hitched their wagon to American-style slogans and policies, and especially cuts which would make Australians worse off, and now they wonder why nobody believes them when they desperately try to pretend to unhitch their wagon from some of the policies and cuts that we’ve seen in the US,” he said.

Labor has made repeated implicit links between the Coalition and Trump’s White House during the campaign but avoided making those explicit as it tries to manage the fallout from the president’s tariff plan.

Taylor said the Coalition was well-placed to deal with Trump.

“We’ve heard the first piece of nonsense from Jim tonight, which is that we’re not prepared to take on an American administration,” he said. “We did when we were last in government. We will again, but Jim and the government are trying to pretend that they’ve always been advocates for free markets.”