POINT OF CONSUMPTION TAXES -- WHO WINS, WHO LOSES? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



POINT OF CONSUMPTION TAXES -- WHO WINS, WHO LOSES? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: POINT OF CONSUMPTION TAXES -- WHO WINS, WHO LOSES?  (Read 2164 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-05, 08:04 PM Reply #25 »

I plead guilty

......... and, to protect the innocent, can we have a code of practice that requires fixed odds bookmakers to disclose at the front or end of their market prices, the percentage take in those prices?

What would be unfair about that? 

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 5456
« 2019-Jan-05, 09:23 PM Reply #26 »
Peter,

As long as thir prices are up their % is disclosed!

Peter you are competing with people like me who can glance at the prices and know the %.

If you cant do that than a simple copy and paste into an excel sheet with the simple formulae will give you the answer in < than a second.

Fours

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-06, 07:46 AM Reply #27 »
While it may be interesting to know the percentages (and they can also be found on odds comparison sites), your choice may be quoted @ 6.0 in a 130% market and 5.5 in a 120% market

Of course you can wait until both markets drop to < 115% which they will do . . and because of market forces be obliged to take 5.0 . .

Or otherwise . .

It's a matter of judgment



What is at issue here is whether that < 115% will still apply post-PoCT . . and whether punters overall will be worse off . . winners will still be grinners, but their smiles may not be quite as wide   :biggrin:

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 7878
« 2019-Jan-06, 08:13 AM Reply #28 »
The first thing I ever learnt before venturing onto a racetrack was to know the percentage of every odd.  If I was to place a bet would know whether the bookies market was fair or not, for it only took a few seconds to add up the percentage, even today, I still know that 13/8 is 38% and 8/11 is 58% , although I have never any need to know them since odds have been decimalised.
It amazes me that Peter Mair, who has been interested and involved in betting for years, does not to know percentages, then again that might explain some of Peter's problems he seems to have with big fields, long priced winners and "inflated dividends "  or that Monty's four selections in a race might equate to a 90 % chance of success , which, by most, is nothing out of the ordinary, etc. :shy:
« Last Edit: 2019-Jan-06, 08:28 AM by Bubbasmith »

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12236
« 2019-Jan-06, 12:16 PM Reply #29 »
I plead guilty

......... and, to protect the innocent, can we have a code of practice that requires fixed odds bookmakers to disclose at the front or end of their market prices, the percentage take in those prices?

What would be unfair about that?

Pete, part of racenet's form has an odds comparison  tab where current prices from numerous bookmakers are displayed, it's dynamic (live) but not sure on the refresh rate, seems pretty good from what I can tell. It even gives you fluctuations since markets opened and on the day of the race. It also shows market % for each bookmaker & for the best available market  :bulb:

Is it perfect? No but it's a bloody good resource IMHO.

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 20293
« 2019-Jan-06, 03:32 PM Reply #30 »
The POC Tax was started by South Australia.

I don't think that was very well thought through.

Obviously with a tax like that then the states with the biggest populations are going to get more revenue. If the Govt redistributes that revenue back to racing (as was done in NSW and Vic) then those states racing industries are going to benefit more.

The headlines seem to be always NSW v Victoria and their prizemoney wars.

But from an Australian racing perspective this masks the real issues, one of them being the sad demise of a once great South Australian racing industry.

In the 1970's South Australia was home to the Hayes dynasty as well as Bart Cummings.

They also were a leader in the breeding industry.

Racing was conducted at 3 courses (Morphetville, Victoria Park and Cheltenham).

Comparing the SA of the 1970's to today it is a shadow of it's former self.

Back to the question posed in the OP, I have the initiators of the POC tax, South Australia, down as one of the losers.

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-06, 05:09 PM Reply #31 »
You have to blame the government for the crisis. They could have bolstered the prizemoney etc but chose not to give the revenue back. It won’t be long before racing there really crumbles.

The SA Liberals do not go to the polls for another 3 years after their victory in 2018. Thus they will milk it and might reverse it back later closer to the election.

At least some of the other state governments from both sides are putting some of the money back. Interesting to see what final revenue will be over next few years.

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-06, 06:34 PM Reply #32 »
Don't know that PoC is a crisis waiting to happen . .



It doesn't seem so long ago that the federal government lumbered everyone with a 10% tax on everything . .

We seem to have come to accept that  :sad:

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-06, 07:26 PM Reply #33 »
I don’t think POC is a crisis but governments not choosing to give part of the money like SA government will cause a crisis for prizemoney etc.

The trainers and owners will either chase the money elsewhere so SA racing is the real loser.


Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25759
« 2019-Jan-06, 08:05 PM Reply #34 »
Don't know that PoC is a crisis waiting to happen . .



It doesn't seem so long ago that the federal government lumbered everyone with a 10% tax on everything . .

We seem to have come to accept that  :sad:
Don’t remind me of that turd and his government

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-06, 08:30 PM Reply #35 »


Let us have one national racing industry

As a small country in many ways, it is not sensible to still treat local racing industries as a must-have pyramid in each state.

These days with everyone 'not being on-course', and watching racing at home or nearby, it is irrelevant where races are run.

Punters are not appreciating the way rural racing is being propped up with excessive tax takeouts fed into subsidizing racing that should not be promoted.

This is a political con -- and once a state government gets a clean run into the future it will divert the racing tax-take to better things  -- and its erstwhile opposition will never claw it back.

SA is the first mover, Queensland is next and it will not be long before the Victorian government starts to rein in the wasteful funding of rural racing in Victoria.

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-06, 08:42 PM Reply #36 »
In which part of rural Victoria do you reside?



Although, if you don't go to the track, it doesn't really matter if you live in the city or the bush

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-06, 09:00 PM Reply #37 »

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-06, 09:11 PM Reply #38 »
His best guess is the average pensioner couple holds about $50,000 in undeclared $50 and $100 notes in order to get access to the pension.

I'll be having a serious talk about this with my cook when she wakes up tomorrow morning  :shutup:

Offline gunbower

  • Group3
  • User 2463
  • Posts: 811
« 2019-Jan-06, 10:14 PM Reply #39 »
Surely Pete should be back at the Home by now !

Offline pegasyber

  • Group 2
  • User 909
  • Posts: 1485
« 2019-Jan-08, 08:08 AM Reply #40 »
.
« Last Edit: 2019-Jan-17, 05:48 AM by pegasyber »

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-10, 08:16 AM Reply #41 »

The case against $50 and $100 banknotes

Following is the relevant extract from a letter to the RBA in July 2012. While this letter was circulated and the the main points published in an AFR magazine, it was not until September 2012 that the question of the 'missing' $100 notes was raised and the story published in the SMH and AGE.

The published story then gave the story a 'rev up' that attracted attention.

The general idea was however prescient  -- later, in India, their high value banknotes were withdrawn -- in Sweden there is concern that cash is not being used at all -- and the RBA is now more open to the prevalence of 'hoarding'.

Mean time 'notes per head' in Australia has blown out to some $3000 -- still some three-times the situation in NZ.


[EXTRACT] -   the continuing need for cash does not include either $50 or $100 notes

The actual tipping point has already passed, apparently unnoticed, but Australian now has a central bank note-issuing authority embroiled in a very problematic business – issuing $50 and $100 bank notes which are now better regarded as bearer-bond investments for age-pensioners than circulating ‘currency’.

One persuasive illustration of the problem is the marked difference in the per-capita holdings of currency notes as between Australia and New Zealand.  In broad terms the average value of notes held by New Zealanders is about one third of the $A2, 000 held by Australians -- almost all of which, by value, is in the $50 and $100 denominations. An obvious explanation for the difference – means-test free age-pensions in New Zealand -- similarly obviously points to the benefits some age-pension recipients in Australian unfairly take by holding undeclared assets as these hoards of bearer-bonds masquerading as $100 banknotes reported as being ‘in circulation’.

As a policy issue this has all been a bit inconvenient and one which the Bank has, for years, been plainly not happy to see identified and discussed. Nonetheless it is an issue growing in importance and one that will become ever more contentious – it is a public-policy problem for which the Bank could have, and should have, made a better fist of managing.

There are a number of options open. One would see the responsibility for the note issue returned to the Treasury so that the possible attraction, to the Bank, of having first call on the $1.5 billion+ p.a. profit from an over-inflated note issue, does not compromise the Bank’s inclination to better manage the note issue in the national interest. This reform might similarly sensibly work to bring the day-to-day funding of the Bank more clearly within the normal purview of government budgetary decisions. There is a lot to be said for that and the attendant accountability.

That change alone would, however, not address the problem of a grossly inflated currency issue disguising a very substantial dead loss to the national coffers – currency hoarders may not get the 4% p.a. interest, that becomes profit on the note issue, but, being only old and not at all silly, these hoarders are almost certainly taking a much higher return on their bearer bond investments as unfairly claimed entitlements to higher pension payments. One relevant policy question then, is about the Treasury having a stronger incentive to better balance the net costs to revenue against the illusory sense of continuing to issue $50 and $100 notes.

While withdrawing $50 and $100 notes from circulation would be an intriguingly contentious proposal, and most certainly should never be done in any way precipitously, it is a proposal with both merit now and a longer term sense of inevitability -- especially as the retail payments system becomes progressively more exclusively electronic for making payments of any substantial value. A 5-year plan would be sensibly credible.

What would remain in circulation are coins and a modestly expanded issue of currency notes in the $10 and $20 denominations: there is every reason to expect that a national currency issue of this character would soon be adequate to meet the reasonable needs of a community ever more exclusively making substantial payments electronically.

Continuing, though reduced, incentives to hold bulky hoards of $20 notes would be further dampened if notes older than five years were only be redeemable at a progressively larger discount to their face value.

The prospect of gently restructuring the currency issue in this way would have the additional advantage of strengthening the business case for a new national electronic payments clearing hub in addition to the domestic and international payment networks of Visa and MasterCard operating independently but in association with Australian banks.

It is about time to take a couple of short preparatory steps of faith towards the inevitability of conventional cash currency eventually being essentially redundant and similarly stepping away from what was a currency-issue responsibility now become an arrangement irresponsibly facilitating misbehaviour.


Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-10, 09:51 AM Reply #42 »
Pete, your idea has merits to a certain degree but not necessarily to pensioners.

If the government gradually phased out $100 notes, it will make the cash economy a bulkier conveyance and make it a smidgin harder for the tax avoiders.

$50 note is harder to phase out as many people use them compared to a $100 note.

The age of notes is harder to govern as the people with it last will find the process tough plus our ATMs and business will need to have a checking system to ensure they are not caught up with it.

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-10, 11:09 AM Reply #43 »
$50 note is harder to phase out as many people use them compared to a $100 note.

Apart from the fact that everybody has a shoe-box full of $100's under the bed . .

More people use 50's because you can't get 100's from an ATM

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-10, 12:19 PM Reply #44 »
In certain Sydney suburbs and certain ATMs u can withdraw $100  but rare.

Most people only use 50 anyway as retailers hate changing 100s except for self serve but then u end up with $5s at times which is crap.

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-10, 02:16 PM Reply #45 »
Getting way off topic now, but . .

Back in the early 70's(??) when 50's were first issued, mine-host of the pub patronised by 90% of the town's railway workers, refused to accept them; claiming that he had to carry too much 'change' to accommodate them

This resulted in the workers successfully pressuring their paymaster not to include same in their pay-packets



Hands up, if you can remember the days when your pay came in cash, in a little brown envelope


And . .

At about the same time a bookie mate of mine, after picking up his float from the bank, discovered a $50 note that was minus the yellow print. He was all set to go back to do battle with the bank teller until we convinced him that it was probably worth a lot more than $50

He is long dead and I don't know what became of the note


Hands up, if you can remember the days when there were bookmakers at the races

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-10, 02:21 PM Reply #46 »
In certain Sydney suburbs and certain ATMs u can withdraw $100  but rare.

You'd be able to pick them by the long queues of pensioners, just waiting to get their greedy little fingers on the 'Greenies'  :whistle:

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-10, 03:31 PM Reply #47 »
You'd be able to pick them by the long queues of pensioners, just waiting to get their greedy little fingers on the 'Greenies'  :whistle:

No such luck for Peter. It is a few men in suits or baseball caps. Enough said without getting into trouble by identifying the locations
« Last Edit: 2019-Jan-10, 03:35 PM by Jeunes »

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2482
« 2019-Jan-10, 03:37 PM Reply #48 »
Getting way off topic now, but . .

Back in the early 70's(??) when 50's were first issued, mine-host of the pub patronised by 90% of the town's railway workers, refused to accept them; claiming that he had to carry too much 'change' to accommodate them

This resulted in the workers successfully pressuring their paymaster not to include same in their pay-packets



Hands up, if you can remember the days when your pay came in cash, in a little brown envelope


And . .

At about the same time a bookie mate of mine, after picking up his float from the bank, discovered a $50 note that was minus the yellow print. He was all set to go back to do battle with the bank teller until we convinced him that it was probably worth a lot more than $50

He is long dead and I don't know what became of the note


Hands up, if you can remember the days when there were bookmakers at the races

My dad used to tell stories about people who won big and had a few drinks. They went looking for their clothes from previous day but wives washes them and the paper money was pulp.

Bookies were interesting as you see the odds shorten and see people running at full tilt. The colour is not there at times.

Online arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2581
« 2019-Jan-10, 04:16 PM Reply #49 »
wash them and the paper money was pulp.

 :no: . . It would iron up OK  :beer:


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap