Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 261

In Australia, who’s got the money?

[Editor's introduction. In The Sydney Morning Herald on 29 June 2018, columnist and advertising executive Howard Mitchell described how he first met "the brilliant Phil Ruthven" when their businesses were both starting out. "Forty-two years later, his company, Ibis World, has a staff of 450 providing astute forecasts to business and government. Phil’s forecasts about our rapidly changing world have been a key part of my business planning for decades." 

The recent taxation bills in Federal Parliament generated the usual heated arguments from the benches. The legislation was in no way ‘reform’ as some claimed, since it only dealt with personal and business income tax, and the GST was left untouched. Many other indirect taxes, such as payroll tax and stamp duties, were also unchanged recently at the state level.

Income taxes versus spending taxes

The broad principle of wealth creation by going easier on taxing incomes and going harder on taxing spending has been ignored yet again. The current ratio of income taxes to spending taxes (such as GST, customs, excise and stamp duties) is over 2.5:1 in favour of income taxes on wealth creation. Hardly a recipe for higher savings and investment as a share of GDP.

So-called class warfare has become the order of the day. Is there substance to the claim that the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer? Not quite, allowing for the changes in household structures and age groups. More on this shortly.

Wealth and income inequality in Australia

The first chart shows the latest ABS data (FY16) on income and wealth distribution as it applies to quintiles (each one fifth of all households).

Click to enlarge

Yes, the richest and well-off 40% of all households enjoyed 71% of gross incomes and had 83% of the wealth (net worth). But they paid 87% of all income taxes, and the remaining 60% of all households paid 13% of all income taxes. This diluted the disposable income shares of the affluent 40% from 71% to 63%, and lifted the struggle and poorest 40% of households from 13.4% of gross incomes to over 20%.

So, are the poor getting poorer?

Interestingly, no. The next chart shows the changing distribution of gross incomes over the past 20 years. The Struggle and Poorest sectors have kept the same share, virtually unchanged. In disposable income terms, their higher share has also remained constant. If anything, there has been a slight dilution of the middle-income sector, but hardly anything to write home about.

Click to enlarge

Then again, we need to be careful with terms such as ‘struggle’ and ‘poor’. Lest we think of strugglers as being big families with one income, or the poor as elderly pensioners, it isn’t that simple. Among the so-called poor in both income and wealth measures, there are many students at universities with minimal incomes who have not yet had the time to accumulate assets.

Holding up the ‘middle’ quintile’s share are growing numbers of retired baby-boomers, who have had much more opportunity in salaries and wealth accumulation than older generations that experienced the Great Depression of the 1930s and World War II. This is giving them a better lifestyle via their investments. The eventual retirement of the Gen Xers (37-52 years-of-age today) will amplify this trend even more so, given their near-entire working lifetime with superannuation savings. They are more financially savvy too.

The recent tax changes have been about addressing bracket-creep and lowering corporate taxes, in line with overseas trends. The bracket creep issue has not been as great as in the past because of very low inflation and slow-growing incomes, the result of an under-performing economy over the past 10 years.

Are our corporates doing well by global standards?

Some argue that the corporate tax case was not strong considering how poorly our top corporations perform compared with our US cousins, as the final chart shows. Our profitability is half theirs.

Click to enlarge

If our big end of town wanted to make better net profits, then becoming more profitable by global standards would be better than just paying slightly less income taxes.

It seems genuine taxation reform is on the too-hard list along with other overdue reforms to the labour market, energy market, parliament (lack of the democratic-election principle with the unrepresentative Senate and its obstructionist power), and the Budget (balancing the books).

But compared with other western nations, we are still doing better, and we can preserve the moniker of the lucky country. Phew.

 

Phil Ruthven is Founder of IBISWorld and is recognised as one of Australia’s foremost business strategists and futurists.

 

  •   5 July 2018
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

If rising inequality leads to social unrest, we all suffer

Taxing the ‘rich’: the potential tax consequences of inequality

Income inequality and a crumbling model for capitalism

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

2 billion reasons to fix retirement income

A proposal to address Australia's 'stranded balances' in retirement by requiring super funds to transition members to pension phase at 65, boosting retirement income and reframing super as a source of income.

The ultimate superannuation EOFY checklist 2026

Here is a checklist of 28 important issues you should address before June 30 to ensure your SMSF or other super fund is in order and that you are making the most of the strategies available.

Noel Whittaker’s take on the budget

Marketed as a fix for inequality and housing affordability, the latest budget instead delivers a tangle of tax changes that leave everyday Australians worse off.

Australia has no death duties. Technically.

Australia may not levy formal death duties, but a growing web of tax measures is quietly shaping what wealth passes between generations. Now, the 2026 budget adds another layer.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 662 with weekend update

The debate over the budget is increasingly shaped by frustration and perceptions of unfairness, rather than clear-eyed assessment of policy outcomes.

Lithium's rally is real this time – but no-one trusts it

The lithium rally mirrors the early-2010s tech stock surge, with demand set to double by 2030. Supply has been slow to respond, creating a market deficit for future tech like humanoid robotics and solid-state batteries.

Latest Updates

Investing

Markets without a margin for error

From US fiscal pressure to China’s shifting growth model and Australia’s structural constraints, markets are yet to reflect a less forgiving global investment landscape.

Investment strategies

The investment mistake killing your returns

Retail investors face an increasingly complex product environment, but simplicity may be the most overlooked advantage in building a portfolio you can actually live with.

The ticking clock on oil reserves

A sustained disruption through the Strait of Hormuz is forcing a rapid drawdown of global inventories. Without a resolution, the arithmetic points to a supply shock by early August and a sharp surge in the oil price.

Infrastructure

Managing the impact of the Middle East conflict on listed infrastructure

The outbreak of conflict in the Middle East in February 2026 marks an historic shock for oil and gas markets, with major implications for inflation, interest rates and ultimately for listed infrastructure companies.

Economy

Rent inflation and the missing policy

The government plans to remove negative gearing to help renters buy homes. For those who remain renters, the wrong levers are being pulled to try and increase rental unit supply.

Investment strategies

The Risk-Wealth Paradox: Why more money means you should take less risk

As wealth grows, so does the assumption that risk should too. But in reality, the opposite may be true: once you understand how the value of money changes over time, the case for taking less risk becomes far more compelling.

SMSF strategies

SMSF estate planning: Eight things to consider

As super balances grow, SMSFs are becoming central to retirement outcomes. Without proper planning for “Armageddon” scenarios, even well-structured funds can unravel when it matters most.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.