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

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

The investment that sidesteps the new tax traps

Tax rules have changed, but many investors are still using yesterday’s strategies. Insurance bonds may offer advantages for those seeking greater control, tax efficiency and certainty about their wealth.

Testamentary trusts have secured the CGT exemption

Treasury’s latest CGT reform draft delivers a win for testamentary trusts and deceased estates, exempting estate-derived gains from the 30% floor. However, questions on death and divorce rollovers remain unresolved.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Latest Updates

Planning

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Investment strategies

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Economy

Population growth masks Australia’s productivity problem

For years, investors have benefited from a seemingly reliable growth story. But recent national accounts raise uncomfortable questions about what has really been driving Australia’s economy and whether that can continue unchecked.

Investment strategies

Why tomorrow’s winners may not be today’s index leaders

The stocks that built retirement balances over the past decade now dominate many portfolios. The new challenge is whether these companies can continue meeting the increasingly high expectations embedded in today's share prices.

Investing

What earnings surprises reveal about future returns

Sometimes the most important information in an earnings result isn't the number itself. It's the possibility that the market's assumptions have been fundamentally wrong and future earnings may look very different.

SMSF strategies

Individual SMSF Trusteeship directly liable for ATO fines

A rarely discussed detail buried in SMSF structures could dramatically change who wears the cost when something goes wrong. With penalties rising, a decision many dismissed as administrative may deserve a second look.

Investment strategies

The currency bet you didn’t know you made

Buying global shares means making two bets: on the companies and on the Australian dollar. Most investors consciously choose only the first. Last financial year, the second bet cost 8.5% in returns for many investors.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 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.