The Prime
Minister seems to be terribly impressed by his own family tax benefits system at
the moment. He gave a lengthy
answer to a dixer on it yesterday and told the Tasmanian Libs on the weekend that new figures provided “independent,
irrefutable evidence” that the family tax benefits system is a success.

It appears that his backbench mightn’t be so sure. The Australian reports today that the backbench
committee on treasury and finance wants Malcolm Turnbull’s tax plans costed. “The move
is potentially embarrassing for Mr Costello, who mocked Mr Turnbull’s proposals on the grounds they
contained 279 reform options,” it says. Well, yes – and it’s just as
embarrassing for the PM, too.

The
family tax benefits system might be delivering – but it does nothing for the
simplicity of our tax system.

This was
tackled in yesterday’s Australian:
“Malcolm Turnbull’s tax plan exposes the deceptions in Australia’s tax
debate: that we can’t afford personal income tax reform because
of the heavy cost to revenue. Perhaps that is what has so irked the
Treasurer.
The truth is that Treasury’s overflowing coffers have been used to
finance
bigger government and to buy votes,” Louise McBride wrote.

Labor wannabe Craig Emerson fired off a
fresh tax salvo this morning, also in the Oz.
“Our tax system is holding back Australia. It is holding back Australians wanting to move from welfare to work.
And it is holding back Australians in work who want to get ahead. Labor’s
Treasury spokesman Wayne Swan has been
pointing out the crushing disincentives in the tax and welfare systems for
seven years,” he said.

And there was an amusing and eminently
quotable column in The Spectator last week that looked at the
basics of tax reform. You can get the gist from its heading “To make tax
simple, low and compulsory, get at it with the heavy roller.” Amusing – but
full of good advice to finance ministers considering tax reform. Like this:
“Any Chancellor bold enough to take it on must realise that reform implies
redistribution, which is better tackled with some cash in hand. Otherwise the
winners will be mildly pleased and the losers will be furious”.

It seems the backbench may know more about
political timing than the PM and the man who wants his job.