Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Register

22 January 2026

Home / 18

How much income tax do you pay?

There’s a never-ending debate about income inequality and how much taxes people at varying income levels should pay. This was brought onto the front pages by the Occupy movement, which highlighted in the United States that the top 10% of households had an income 11 times larger than the bottom 10% (sometimes called the 90/10 ratio). In Australia, income inequality is not this extreme, with the top 10% about 4 times larger than the bottom 10%.

This article does not buy into the social or equity arguments about income and tax distribution, but as we approach the end of another financial year where tax has again been high on the agenda, it’s interesting to see where personal income tax receipts come from.

A reminder of the current tax scales (check ATO website for updates):

The latest available statistics on numbers and amount in each tax bracket are from 2010/2011, when the bottom tax scale cut out at $6,000. In coming years, there will be far more people paying no tax than indicated in the diagram below. The top marginal tax rate for taxable income over $180,000 is 46.5%, the same in both reporting periods.

The following graph illustrates the amount of tax paid by tax bracket as at 2010/2011, and perhaps the most surprising statistic is the number of people in the bottom category who pay no personal income tax, even when the cut off was $6,000:

  • 45% of all adults, almost 8 million, pay no personal income tax. Another 17% or 3 million pay an average of $1,800. Therefore, 62% of Australians pay 4% of total personal income tax revenue
  • 26% of personal income tax, worth $35 billion or an average of $139,000 each, is paid by the 1.5% of adults or 260,000 people who earn more than $180,000
  • in the middle, 44% of adults or 7.5 million, pay the balance, 69% of income tax.

 

Ashley Owen is Joint Chief Executive Officer of Philo Capital Advisers and a director of Third Link Investment Managers.

 

  •   7 June 2013
  • 2
  •      
  •   
2 Comments
Kevin Chuah
June 09, 2013

Hi Ashley,

As a statistician, I was also surprised by your findings presented here. In order to better understand your findings, I attempted to reconcile the data that you have presented. However, after looking at the source you quote from, I now realise that the data you have presented is not the data actually published by the ATO. Rather you seem to have re-interpreted what the ATO has published in Table 2.13 in the source you quote in the diagram. (Please correct me if I am wrong.)

This table shows that there were a total of around 9.3mn income tax payers in Australia in the 2010-11 income year. Of that 9.3mn, 2.7% have a taxable income of $180,000 or more, accounting for 26.2% of the income tax raised. You have then assumed that there is around 17mn “adults” in Australia, hence your 1.5% figure above.

In a similar way, you have assumed that any of the 17mn “adults” that do appear in this table pay no income tax and as a result, almost 8mn or 45% of “adults” pay no income tax. Importantly, what you have assumed to be “adults” seems to include anyone of “working age” or above.

Taking the latest data from the ABS, we can see that 66% of the Australian population was of "working age" (ie between 15-64). Further, 16.4% of the population where aged 65 or over. This means that roughly 20% of "adults" were eligible for retirement and far less likely to pay income tax. Additionally, a meaningful proportion of those in the bottom-end of the working age population could be expected to be in full-time education, so would also be unlikely to earn enough to pay income tax.

If you adjust your data for the working age population, the statistics look far less alarming. In fact, your 45% figure above would become 31%. One then needs to consider how many young people are in full-time education and how many households have one adult member staying at home. Once you consider that, I'm sure your figures look far less extreme and much less surprising.

ashley owen
June 10, 2013

Kevin, thanks for the feedback. It's all a question of definition. I start with a simple, everyday definition of adults - people over 18 years of age - ie all those entitled (forced actually) to vote - all those who enjoy the privileges of living in this great country - with clean air, safe water, safe food, safe streets, rule of law, protection of property rights, public institutions, national security, etc, etc. It is not an issue of equity, morality, inaliable human rights to welfare, etc - it is a simple fact that all of this must be paid for. One could argue that all people receiving income - of whatever type, whether of "working age" (whatever that is) or not - enjoy the benefits of this great country and ought to contribute financially in some small token way as a proportion of that income, however small that is. On the other hand if you narrow the definition down to those adults who are liable to pay tax after all of the tax breaks, rebates, subsidies, supplements, tax-free pensions, negative income tax transfers, income-splitting and other paper shuffling tricks - then of course close to 100% of people required to pay tax actually pay tax.
cheers.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Taxation reform: is Canberra serious?

FactCheck: Is 50% of all income tax paid by 10% of the working population?

Firstlinks is sponsored by:
banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, 2025 edition

Two years ago, I wrote an article suggesting that the odds favoured ASX shares easily outperforming residential property over the next decade. Here’s an update on where things stand today.

Building a lazy ETF portfolio in 2026

What are the best ways to build a simple portfolio from scratch? I’ve addressed this issue before but think it’s worth revisiting given markets and the world have since changed, throwing up new challenges and things to consider.

Get set for a bumpy 2026

At this time last year, I forecast that 2025 would likely be a positive year given strong economic prospects and disinflation. The outlook for this year is less clear cut and here is what investors should do.

Meg on SMSFs: First glimpse of revised Division 296 tax

Treasury has released draft legislation for a new version of the controversial $3 million super tax. It's a significant improvement on the original proposal but there are some stings in the tail.

Property versus shares - a practical guide for investors

I’ve been comparing property and shares for decades and while both have their place, the differences are stark. When tax, costs, and liquidity are weighed, property looks less compelling than its reputation suggests.

10 fearless forecasts for 2026

The predictions include dividends will outstrip growth as a source of Australian equity returns, US market performance will be underwhelming, while US government bonds will beat gold.

Latest Updates

Economy

Ray Dalio on 2025’s real story, Trump, and what’s next

The renowned investor says 2025’s real story wasn’t AI or US stocks but the shift away from American assets and a collapse in the value of money. And he outlines how to best position portfolios for what’s ahead.

Superannuation

No, Division 296 does not tax franking credits twice

Claims that Division 296 double-taxes franking credits misunderstand imputation: franking credits are SMSF income, not company tax, and ensure earnings are taxed once at the correct rate.

Investment strategies

Who will get left holding the banks?

For the first time in decades, the Big 4 banks have real competition in home loans. Macquarie is quickly gain market share, which threatens both the earnings and dividends of the major banks in the years ahead.

Investment strategies

AI economic scenarios: revolutionary growth, or recessionary bubble?

Investor focus is turning increasingly to AI-related risks: is it a bubble about to burst, tipping the US into recession? Or is it the onset of a third industrial revolution? And what would either scenario mean for markets?

Investment strategies

The long-term case for compounders

Cyclical stocks surge in upswings but falter in downturns. Compounders - reliable, scalable, resilient businesses - offer smoother, superior returns over the full investment cycle for patient investors.

Property

AREITs are not as passive as you may think

A-REITs are often viewed as passive rental vehicles, but today’s index tells a different story. Development and funds management now dominate earnings, materially increasing volatility and risk for the sector.

Australia’s quiet dairy boom — and the investment opportunity

Dairy farming offers real asset exposure, steady income and long-term growth, yet remains overlooked by investors seeking diversification beyond traditional asset classes.

Sponsors

Alliances

Site Map

About Firstlinks

© 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.