Whom thinks Jim Chalmers is the worst Federal Treasurer of all time?

Whom would. I would too.

Let's have a look at Division 296:

https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-09/c2023-443986-em.pdf

Whilst Australians continue to be concerned about gender identity politics and equality of outcome, the proposal (Which will surely go ahead) centers around:

1. Not only does it tax unrealised gains, but when an asset is eventually sold and the gain realised, the cost base is not increased for the unrealised tax already paid. The asset is taxed twice, with no credit given to the first tax.

2. On the taxing of unrealised gains, there is no CGT discount for assets held for more than 12 months.
So far, Division 296 is the only new revenue raising plan Chalmers has for 2026. He is counting on the tax to raise $40 billion over the next decade. That assumption is based upon people with more than $3m in their super, of which 80% are over 60. They simply won't sit back and write a cheque to the ATO every year as Chalmers expects, as they're already in pension phase.

He is sorely mistaken. More annoyingly, smug about it. One only has to look at what happened in Norway under the threat of taxing unrealised gains. The wealth fled.

A bit more here:

https://www.taxinstitute.com.au/insights/articles/2025/div-296-poor-design

And a quote from that article:

The Tax Institute’s Head of Tax & Legal, Julie Abdalla, FTI, said, “We absolutely support changes that make our tax system more equitable. No one is arguing against high wealth individuals paying their fair share. We are concerned that Treasury is introducing a legal precedent that says Australians can be taxed on money they do not have and may never have. There’s nothing equitable about that.”
“It’s unconscionable that Treasury is pushing this policy through with blatant disregard for the legal and equitable concerns raised by stakeholders. And it is particularly dishonest and disappointing to hear the Treasurer publicly state that no better solutions have been proffered, when many highly intelligent people and superannuation experts have presented various reasonable and workable alternatives.”

Thoughts?

 

No politician has done anything to fix the contraction industry. Nor have they proposed anything. You could start by deregistering the CFMEU and opening a Royal Commission into their conduct, and relation to the incumbent government. You could also include bribery, thuggery and wastage.

 

From that article:

New dwelling approvals data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show the nation continues to fall spectacularly short of the number of homes it needs to build to keep up with population growth, let alone meet the Federal government’s ambitious housing targets.

The data come as new figures from building consultancy Urbis show the cost of new apartments blew out by an astonishing 24% in the last quarter of 2024 to a new record.

The explosion in apartment selling prices is concerning, as analysts say the only way Australia can meet its housing targets is by building more apartments and encouraging greater density in our capital cities.


Why would a builder work with smaller clients directly, when they can earn 50% more as a subcontractor on some rubbish state funded project? The answer is you would, if your wages could match, or exceed what you'd get as a subby. Workers will go where the money is. That's what's driving up the costs of construction with builders.

Furthermore, if you have a vacant block of land in Victoria, by the time an average house appears on that subdivision, 43% of the cost of the build goes in government taxes and permits. Throw the increased cost of the build itself, and people wonder why housing here is so expensive in relation to wages.

The root cause of such issues in Australia apart from the socialist driven red tape and bureaucracy, is immigration. But that's another story, except that we have it to artificially boost the Federal Governments Ponzi scheme.

You've spent time in Hong Kong. How well do you think the CFMEU would work in Hong Kong? And furthermore, do you know how long it takes to secure a building permit in Hong Kong?

 

You hit the nail on the head:

Budget commitments

I read the budget in detail.

1. Where is the money coming from to fund these "commitments"? I'll give you a hint. The federal Government doesn't have the money to fund those "commitments" presently.

2. Is it your position the Federal Government will therefore fund those commitments from Division 296, since this is the only revenue raising proposal Mr. Chalmers has proposed for the entire calendar year 2026?

You cannot tax your way out of a recession.