Tax to the max and watch the deficit die

Governments do well at these things but there is always room for added taxes, ways to supplement the national coffers.

The deficit could have been done away with in one fell swoop and the budget balanced once and for all with a few more well-chosen ‘levies’ on unpopular institutions and individuals.

Now that the immediate fuss over the budget has died down, and the fuss-budgets have gone for a Bex and a nice lie down, it’s time for some (mostly) sober analysis of this all-important economic document.

As all sorts of exponents of the dismal science have been at pains to point out, governments have 2½ ways to balance a ballooning budget and tame the deficit of doom. They can either cut spending, or raise taxes, or raise taxes cunningly disguised as levies, surcharges, surcharges on levies, highly leveraged levied surcharges and whatever other term the boffins in the bureaucracy can come up with to call a new tax.

Given the constipated state of our sclerotic Senate, where spending cuts go to die while preening independents and assorted unrepresentative swill posture, pose and broker power, the government has taken the only other option available — namely, raising taxes.

After a long and arduous macro, micro and mega and nano-economic analysis, consultations with the Future Fund, which is where the Treasurer sticks a couple of folded pineapples in between his Flybuys card and his Mediscare card and forgets about them, to be discovered with great joy by who ever finds his wallet some years hence, and assorted advice from chief druids, wizards, sages and magisters, they have said, bugger it, let’s whack the banks, because they’ve got plenty of moolah and everyone hates them anyway.

Of course, the banks weren’t happy, and let it be known that they would pass the putative $6.2 billion impost over four years straight back to the mug punters known as their customers.

“Cry me a river,” crooned ScoMo, cocking an eyebrow and assuming his best Elvis sneer as he stared down the bankers.

Mostly, it seemed the plebeians were in favour of the Treasurer’s master stroke, driving the Chevy to the levy that never runs dry, chalking up one for the common people over the Big Brotherly Big Five, those master manipulators of other people’s money, carpetbagging profiteers and imposers of hidden fees and charges.

But it seems to me the government didn’t go far enough. When you are on a good thing, stick to it. It could have done away with the deficit in one fell swoop and balanced the budget once and for all with a few more well-chosen “levies” on unpopular institutions and individuals.

Here then, in no particular order, is the Home Truths list of suggested levies to balance the budget, for the government’s kind consideration:

The Dorothy Dix Tax: A levy on politicians of all parties indulging in Dorothy Dixer questions and filibustering behaviour in question time, proportional to the length and inanity of the question, and the self-serving smarm of the reply.

The Automated Voice Response Levy: Imposed on all companies and brands that outsource their “customer service” to foreign call centres and make it impossible to get a human being on the line to deal with your problem.

The NDIS Levy Surcharge: An extra tax on medical professionals, medical associations and government ministers per minute of hot air expended on trying to explain the inexplicable.

The Smug Pundit Surcharge: Levied on television networks and media outlets proportional to the number of self-appointed know-alls and experts we have to endure telling us how to suck eggs.

The Hipster Levy: A VAT-style tax added to any business using the words “artisanal”, “bespoke”, “boutique” or “curated” in its communications, to be doubled should any outlet persist in serving beverages in retro glass jars.

The Social Media Behemoth Levy: A multi-billion bank-style tax to be charged mainly to Facebook and Google, for their many greedy, world-dominating and annoying features.

The Public Service Fat Cat Tax: Where a couple of hundred thousand will be lopped off the salary of any public servant earning in excess of, say, $400,000 a year for the next four years, if not in perpetuity, and poured straight back into the government coffers.

And finally, rather than subjecting society’s most needy and unfortunate to drug tests before they can get their Centrelink allowances, a rethink is needed here. I propose the government instead go ahead with its work-for-the-dole scheme, but instead of imposing drug tests, bolster the scheme with cut-rate pharmaceutical-grade stimulants available to all who sign on. Attendance will soar, productivity will boom and the government will gain a nifty new revenue stream that never dries up.