Reworked Petroleum Resource and Rent Tax raising $4 billion less than first thought
The tax on oil and gas profits is expected to raise $4 billion less than the government forecasted when it first announced a rework of the tax in 2023.
Last year Treasurer Jim Chalmers amended the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax, which applies to offshore petroleum projects including the recently-extended North West Shelf, in a measure the government said would raise an additional $2.4 billion over the four years from the 2023 financial year.
Mr Chalmers said the changes would mean "offshore LNG industry pays more tax, sooner".
In that year's budget the forecast was that $10.8 billion would be raised over those four years — but the federal budget handed down just days before the election was called reveals the government now expects to raise just $6.3 billion over that same period.
It is also now forecasted to raise less each year than what was expected before the government's plans to rework the PRRT.
The government's amendments to the PRRT came after a Morrison-era review of the tax found it needed to be updated, in part because it was designed for oil but liquid-natural gas now dominates.
Mr Chalmers has previously said from the PRRT's inception in the 1980s to 2024, not a cent of Petroleum Resource Rent Tax had been paid on LNG facilities.
That is because under the PRRT, tax only becomes payable once projects become cash flow positive, meaning all expenditure has been deducted, and LNG facilities have a large number of up-front costs.
But Independent Senator David Pocock said the government had picked the weakest option put forward by Treasury, and now that appeared to be failing to deliver.
"This is an absolute rort," Senator Pocock said.
"In the last parliament Labor looked at PRRT, they had a range of options and they went with the very weakest one, and got that through with the Greens.
"We are now getting less for our gas and still not a single cent of PRRT from offshore LNG, we are the second biggest exporter in the world, it is a total scam on Australians.
"We're paying international prices for our own gas, and I think one of the shifts in this last election was finally the Coalition came out and said, 'Well actually we don't have a gas shortage, we have a gas export problem,' these companies have been taking the piss."
Senator Pocock said the PRRT must be revisited.
The federal government is deepening its investment in gas, having recently approved the extension of the North West Shelf by 40 years to 2070.
A further decision whether to approve Woodside's proposal to open up the Browse gas field, which could produce an additional 11.4 million tonnes each year largely for export, also sits under assessment.
The amount raised from the PRRT fluctuates with oil prices, and revenue raised in previous years has closely followed price fluctuations.
The high water mark for tax paid through the PRRT was just under $2 billion in 2021-22, which the Australian Tax Office said reflected increased profitability due to higher oil prices cause by Russia's invasion of Ukraine in that year.
But despite the government expecting to raise significantly more than that in the years since, it has not done so and is no longer projecting it will do so.
Mr Chalmers did not respond to a request for comment, but in recent days has pointed to the PRRT reforms as one achievement of the last term.
Independent MP Zali Steggall said the government has the opportunity to be more ambitious.
"I don't accept that that was difficult reform to achieve, it was a long overdue loophole that needed to be closed for the sector," Ms Steggall said.
"It was a bare minimum of what needed to be achieved.
"I think the treasurer had a lot of lobbying from the fossil fuel and gas sector in particular."
Ms Steggall said Treasury put forward as one option that at least 20 per cent of LNG revenue remain eligible for PRRT, about double the amount the government ultimately adopted.
She said looking at that would be a good starting point for revisiting the PRRT.
"At a time of record profits, I think that would be a much more equitable outcome for the Australian people," Ms Steggall said.
"You can't on one hand talk about budget repair and needing to increase revenue but only target individual endeavour ... all tax has to be on the table."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
‘Should not be punished': Queensland decries GST carve up
Cash-strapped state governments are looking west with envy as Western Australia pulls in its large slice of the GST carve up despite the healthiest books in the country. Resource-rich WA posted a $2.5bn operating surplus on Thursday – it's seventh budget surplus in a row. From Friday it is set to receive its share of the GST pool of 75 cents in the dollar, despite its strong revenue stream from its resources sector. State premiers and treasurers have been agitating for changes to the GST distribution, since the final figures were announced in March, and ahead of the funds formally being dished out on Friday. WA is still enjoying the windfalls of a 2018 GST deal struck under previous Coalition government by then-treasurer Scott Morrison and backed in by the Albanese government, where WA is guaranteed 75 cents of every dollar paid in GST. Without this benchmark, WA would have received as little as 18 cents back. The WA Premier and Treasurer credited their economic management for this week's operating surplus and healthy debt forecasts. Iron ore prices are hovering at $US95 while the state government has done its forecasting with an expectation of $US72 a tonne. But every state and territory except WA has been posting deficits since the 75 cent distribution reforms in 2018. The Queensland Treasurer feels short-changed, as strong coal royalties pad the state coffers. Victoria and NSW's slices of the GST pie are set to expand while Queensland's portion gets a trim. 'This money belongs to Queenslanders and we should not be punished because of our support for industries that underpin our national wealth,' state Treasurer David Janetzki said. The impending Queensland state budget, to be delivered on Tuesday, will show the effects of a dip in coal prices after an $8.8bn royalties windfall during the past four years. Despite the Sunshine State's royalty take coming down, Queensland's GST payout this year falls by $1.1bn to $16.5bn. In a speech to the National Press Club on Wednesday, federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who has historically opposed raising the GST rate, left the door slightly open to raising it from 10 per cent – the amount the excise has remained for the past 25 years. 'I've, for a decade or more, had a view about the GST,' he told The Conversation. 'I repeated that view at the Press Club because I thought that was the honest thing to do, but what I'm going to genuinely try and do, whether it's in this policy area or in other policy areas, is to not limit what people might bring to the table.' This year, Queensland is the only state or territory getting less than previous years, while every other jurisdiction is getting more. Victoria is set to become a net-recipient of the GST pool for the first time as well. 'It used to be the case that our friends in Victoria would help us shoulder the burden in supporting all the other states,' NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said last month. 'Victoria is now a recipient state, to quite a large degree, $1.07 (per dollar taxed) is what they're getting. 'I'm going to continue to speak out, particularly about the fact that NSW is now carrying the federation when it comes to GST distribution.' The Northern Territory receives $5.15 for every dollar it contributes, far and away the largest return. Despite having the second largest population, Victoria receives the largest portion of the total pool, getting 27.5 per cent; with a $3.6bn year-on-year increase this time around.
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
Australia's social media ban is approaching, but questions remain over whether it will work
April Willis says young people need a seat at the table for figuring out how to implement the teen social media ban. Source: SBS News / Ash Minchin Like many, April Willis has been using social media since her early teens. As she grew up on the platforms, she says she didn't immediately understand the impact it was having on her. She says that in hindsight, though, she can see that a lot of her "behaviours" and "the content and interactions" she had on social media platforms were "definitely not great" for her mental health. But the now 22-year-old ReachOut youth advocate says she doesn't think a ban would have stopped her. "I think the hard truth is that a lot of us are thinking, 'I would've found a way around it', as I'm sure many young people will." Whether she actually would have is one of the many questions experts are wondering six months out from the implementation of Australia's social media ban for those under the age of 16. And as of 11 December this year, social media companies will be required to take "reasonable steps" to prevent Australian children and teenagers under 16 from using their platforms. A government-commissioned trial into the potential technologies used to assess the ages of users presented their preliminary findings on Friday. Their key finding was that "age assurance can be done in Australia and can be private, robust and effective". "The preliminary findings indicate that there are no significant technological barriers preventing the deployment of effective age assurance systems in Australia," project director Tony Allen said in a statement. "These solutions are technically feasible, can be integrated flexibly into existing services, and can support the safety and rights of children online." With details about the accuracy of the technologies tested left for later release, experts are wary of the trial's initial claim. Daniel Angus is a professor of digital communication at the Queensland University of Technology and the director of its Digital Media Research Centre. "One of the key concerns that we have is how the industry often will inflate their accuracy and the utility of these approaches when we know that there are still significant issues when it comes to both gender and also racial biases, but also the general lack of efficacy of these approaches," he said. According to the Department of Communications, a government-commissioned report from the Social Research Centre found nearly nine in 10 adults were supportive of age assurance measures. Only two of those 10 had heard of at least one potential method to check a person's age online. 'This research shows Australians widely support our world-leading age restrictions on social media for under 16s and have strong expectations of platforms when it comes to data protection and security," Communications Minister Anika Wells said in a statement. Angus says the general public has not been adequately informed about the likely impacts of these technologies. "I think Australians are in for a very rude shock when this actually perhaps, gets implemented, and they all of a sudden are being forced to hand over [their] data to access services that they've freely been able to access up to this point," he said. "It's absolutely everything you would expect to find in the midst of a moral panic where people have been sucked along with this idea that, 'Yeah, this thing is really, really bad and we need to prevent it,' but have not stopped to think critically about this, and then not been properly informed about the fullness of that risk." John Pane, chair of digital rights organisation Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), is a member of the stakeholder advisory board for the trial. He says the EFA has "concerns about the rollout of this technology because it's not simply about restricting access to social media platforms for children 15 and under". "It requires all adults who participate in the online environment, who wish to access social media platforms to either have their age authenticated or establish their identity as a means of, or part of that age authentication. "So from our perspective, it's the Trojan horse for getting people to get used to providing more and more credentials online." Amid these concerns, some remain supportive of the ban, including Kirra Pendergast, another member of the stakeholder advisory board. "Initially, I was only against the ban purely because of the technical workarounds that are possible for some kids who are more technical than others," she said. "But after having lots of conversations with parents in particular, it became abundantly clear that the ban was making parents have a conversation that we've needed to have for a very, very long time." Pendergast is the founder of Safe on Social, an online safety advisory group for schools and businesses, and chief digital safety strategist at the global Ctrl+Shft Coalition. "I get contacted almost every single day by parents that are struggling with this," the cybersecurity expert said. "They don't know how to say no." Pendergast said parents and educators would have "a lot more time to get it right". "It's like all aspects of technical security, cybersecurity, and cyber safety. It's never ever going to be 100 per cent. This is never going to be the silver bullet. "It's a really, really good start because, again, it sparked all of the conversations that we needed to have at every level of society." Professor Tama Leaver, an internet studies academic at Curtin University and the chief investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, says the ban responds to a "very real fear that parents have that social media is an unknown space". "If this is world-leading, we need to be quite clear on what the legislation is actually doing." He warned that the implementation of the policy may not address all the issues that have been discussed. "Some harms, for example, such as cyberbullying, were very much touted as one of the big problems to be solved," he said. "There is nothing in this legislation that addresses cyberbullying meaningfully at all. "This at best addresses algorithmic amplification … of young people's experiences of social media, but … we expect from what's been said already that most messaging apps are exempt from this legislation. "So, the spaces where we imagine cyberbullying is most likely to happen are not being touched by this legislation at all." Leaver was a signatory on an open letter from more than 140 academics and civil society organisations against the ban. "If the rest of the world is watching Australia and hoping that this might be a blueprint, we're going to have an awful lot of work to do in the next few months to actually have a blueprint to practically do this rather than simply aspire to giving parents some reassurance," he said.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Budget reveals WA oil and gas royalties shrinking as North West Shelf earnings drop
When the nation's largest mainland gas project was given provisional approval to keep running until 2070, the West Australian premier heralded it as an economic boost for the state. "It's not just important for our overall economy, it's important for regional WA," Roger Cook told reporters. But the most recent state budget papers show the shared revenue, or royalties, the project is generating for WA is in rapid decline. A royalty is a fee charged for the right to extract a mineral resource. In the 2022-'23 financial year, royalties from the North West Shelf (NWS) gas project on WA's north-west coast, delivered more than $1.3 billion to the state's coffers. That number is now tipped to drop by more than 70 per cent to $365 million in the 2025-'26 financial year. That amounts to 0.7 per cent of the state's $50.2 billion revenue, and just 6 per cent of the $6.6 billion generated by iron ore royalties. The drop in revenue is because the project's original gas fields are depleting. When the NWS began production in 1984, it was required to give 10 per cent of the revenue from each gas well to the Commonwealth. A legal change four years later meant future offshore projects would not pay royalties, but a 40 per cent tax on profits, known as the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT). Two-thirds of the revenue from the NWS is redirected to WA. But as those gas fields deplete, so does their revenue, and there have been new gas sources processed at the NWS since 1988 that do not generate royalties. "The North-West Shelf project [is] forecast to process higher volumes of gas sourced from areas outside the revenue-sharing agreement," the 2025-'26 state budget papers read. Principal adviser to progressive think-tank The Australia Institute Mark Ogge said he had not seen any evidence the new gas sources required to extend the NWS would have royalty agreements attached to them. "Australia is being robbed of its resources and our governments are entirely complicit," he said. Mr Ogge said West Australians reading the latest budget should be outraged. Oil and gas analyst and consultant Jeanette Roberts believed it was likely new revenue-sharing agreements would be signed if the NWS extension was finalised. "I think that's the most likely scenario," Ms Roberts said. A spokesperson for Environment Minister Murray Watt would not comment on whether royalties had featured in the negotiations over the NWS extension because the decision was not final yet. Ms Roberts pointed said the oil and gas industry made other contributions to the Australian economy through taxes. "Tax is more than just Petroleum Resource Rent Tax and state royalties, it's also GST, corporate taxes, a whole bunch of contributions gas companies pay," she said. The industry's peak lobby group, Australian Energy Producers, claimed the sector paid $17 billion in taxes and royalties nationally in the 2023-'24 financial year. A spokesperson for Woodside, which manages the NWS, said the project had contributed $40 billion to Australia since beginning production in 1984. "Including more than $18 billion to the WA government," the spokesperson said. They would not comment on any future royalty-sharing agreements. According to the Australian Taxation Office's corporate tax transparency report, the company paid $2.6 billion in income tax in the 2022-'23 financial year. Mr Ogge from the Australia Institute said the public should still expect more from the industry given there were large offshore gas fields near WA where royalties were not being charged. "Vast amounts of gas are processed in Western Australia from offshore fields and exported, making tens of billions of dollars every year for these companies," he said. "I just cannot understand why the federal government doesn't charge royalties on the vast majority of gas being exported from Western Australia." Treasurer Jim Chalmers was approached for comment but did not directly respond to questions. Last year, the federal government made changes to the PRRT, which it claims has brought in more tax revenue from the oil and gas sector.
