Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Money

Tax cuts are coming, but not soon, in a cautious budget

Published

on

Today’s budget is a cautious and responsible response to the cost-of-living pressures facing voters.

As noted ahead of budget night, many of the major spending initiatives had already been announced.

But, in the only major surprise, there are income tax cuts for all income taxpayers. Even if we need to be patient. The new tax cuts only start in July 2026, with a second round in July 2027.

And as Treasurer Jim Chalmers himself said, they are “modest” cuts. A worker on average earnings will receive A$268 in the first year, rising to $536 in the second year.

Combined with the government’s first round of tax cuts in last year’s budget, this will add up to $2,190 per year in 2027.

The cost to the budget of the latest tax cuts in 2026-27 will be $3 billion, and over three years will be $17.1 billion. The cuts still need to pass parliament.

But calls by economists such as Chris Richardson and Ken Henry for major tax reform have not been heeded. Major reforms inevitably create losers as well as winners. So, big changes were never likely just weeks before an election.

And there is still bracket creep (increases in tax revenues as taxpayers move into higher tax brackets) over the next decade. Total tax receipts are projected to rise from 25.3% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2024-25 to 26.8% in 2035-36. This will do most of the work in the very gradual windback of the budget deficit.

How concerned should we be about the budget moving into deficit?

In the first back-to-back surpluses for almost 20 years, there were budget surpluses in 2022-23 and 2023-24. This year we are returning to deficit and further deficits are expected for about a decade. Should we be alarmed?

A balanced or surplus budget is not necessarily a good budget. What we want is a budget appropriate to current economic conditions and sustainable in the long run.

The Australian economy has only been growing modestly in recent years and is forecast to grow 1.5% in the current year. Inflation is near the target range in underlying terms. So, a modest deficit is not unreasonable.

The longer run projections show a very gradual return to balance. But this assumes no recession and no further income tax cuts, for a decade. It might be better to rebuild the fiscal position more quickly so as to be better placed to provide fiscal stimulus in the event of a global recession or another pandemic.

‘A new world of uncertainty’

As Chalmers said, we are in a “new world of uncertainty” with “the threat of a global trade war”. The volume of Australian exports is forecast to only expand by 2.5% in 2025-26 and 2026-27, but it could be lower.

In February, the Reserve Bank forecast headline inflation would rebound above the 2% to 3% target range when the electricity rebates expired. The extension of the rebates in Tuesday’s budget as well as the reductions in the price of prescription medicines will help keep inflation below 3%. Headline inflation is forecast to improve to 2.5% in 2026-27.

In the December 2024 budget update, the unemployment rate was forecast to be around 4.5% in mid-2025 and stay around that level for the next couple of years. Given the unemployment rate was steady at 4.1% in February, the reduction to 4.25% seems plausible.

What will it mean for interest rates?

One reason the government went for a modest tax cut rather than a wild “cash splash” is it did not want to undermine the narrative there will be future interest rate cuts by stimulating household spending too much.

If households were given immediate cash to spend, this could drive up inflation.

The Reserve Bank is unlikely to change interest rates at its April 1 meeting. But it would be very unhelpful for the government’s electoral prospects if the minutes showed the central bank had become more concerned about inflation and less likely to cut interest rates at future meetings.

The Reserve Bank is unlikely to feel this budget contains enough government spending to boost economic activity in the near term and therefore change its view on the economic outlook.

So, a further interest rate cut remains possible at the bank’s following meeting on May 20.

And any further relief on interest rates would be welcomed by households – as well as whoever might be in government by then.The Conversation

John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Money

Green finance was supposed to contribute solutions to climate change. So far, it’s fallen well short

Published

on

Simon O’Connor, The University of Melbourne; Ben Neville, The University of Melbourne, and Brendan Wintle, The University of Melbourne

A decade ago, a seminal speech by Mark Carney, then governor of the Bank of England and current Canadian prime minister, set out how climate change presented an economic risk that threatened the very stability of the financial system.

The speech argued the finance sector must deeply embed climate risk into the architecture of the industry or risk massive damages.

It was Carney’s description that stuck, calling this the “tragedy of the horizon”:

that the catastrophic impacts of climate change will be felt beyond the traditional horizons of most actors, imposing a cost on future generations that the current generation has no direct incentive to fix.

He added that by the time those climate impacts are a defining issue for financial stability, it may already be too late.

What happened next

Carney’s speech triggered global financial markets to start accounting for risks related to climate change. Done well, green finance would flow to those companies contributing solutions to climate change. Those damaging the climate would become less attractive.

Governments rolled out strategies to support this evolution in finance, in the European Union, United Kingdom, and Australia’s Sustainable Finance Strategy in 2023.

Carney’s solution to this tragedy lay in better information. In particular, companies must report consistently on their climate change impacts, so that banks and lenders could more clearly assess and manage these risks.

A global taskforce was established that set out standards for companies to disclose their impacts on the climate. These standards have subsequently been rolled out around the world, most recently, here in Australia.

Finance has yet to deliver for the environment

But has Carney’s tragedy of the horizon been remedied by these efforts?

There have been some successes: the global green bond market has grown exponentially since 2015, becoming a critical market for raising capital for projects that improve the environment.

However, beyond some positive examples, the tragedy of the horizon remains. Indeed, the Network for Greening the Financial System (a grouping of the world’s major central banks and regulators from over 90 countries) concluded climate change is no longer a tragedy of the horizon, “but an imminent danger”. It has the potential to cost the EU economy up to 5% of gross domestic product by 2030, an impact as severe as the global financial crisis of 2008.

A report this year found climate finance reached US$1.9 trillion (A$2.9 trillion) in 2023, but this was far short of the estimated US$7 trillion (A$10.7 trillion) required annually. A step change in the level of investment in low carbon industries is required if we’re to achieve Paris Agreement goals.

In the decade since Carney’s speech, other critical sustainability issues have arisen that threaten the financial system.

The continuing loss of biodiversity has been recognised as posing significant financial risks to banks and investors. Up to half of global GDP is estimated to depend on a healthy natural environment.

The economic cost of protecting nature has been put at US$700 billion (A$1.07 trillion) a year, compared with only US$100 billion (A$153 billion) currently being spent.

The finance sector is falling well short of delivering the level of capital needed to meet our critical sustainability goals. It continues to cause harm by providing capital to industries that damage nature.

Dealing with symptoms, not the cause

Despite nearly a decade of action in sustainable finance, the extensive policy work delivered to fix this tragedy has merely subdued the symptoms, but to date has not overcome the core of the problem.

The policy remedies put forward have simply been insufficient to deal with the scale of change required in finance.

While sustainable finance has grown, plenty of money is still being made from unsustainable finance that continues to benefit from policies (such as subsidies for fossil fuels) and a lack of pricing for negative environmental impacts (such as carbon emissions and land clearing).

While policies such as better climate data are a prerequisite to a greener finance system, research suggests that alone they are insufficient.

The University of Melbourne’s Sustainable Finance Hub works to rectify this tragedy, using interdisciplinary solutions to shift finance to fill those significant funding gaps.

1. The tools of finance need to evolve, in terms of the way assets are valued and performance is measured, ignoring negative impacts. Currently, investors disproportionately focus on the next quarter’s performance, rather than the long-term sustainability of a company’s business model.

2. Big sustainability challenges such as climate change and nature loss require a systems-level approach. Chasing outsized returns from individual companies that are creating climate problems can undermine the success of the whole economy. This in turn can erode overall returns across a portfolio.

3. Capital is simply not flowing to sectors critical to our achievement of net zero and a nature-positive economy. These include nature protection, emerging markets, climate adaptation, health systems and Indigenous-led enterprises.

4. “Invisible” sectors in the economy continue to emit greenhouse gases without investor scrutiny. State-owned enterprises and unlisted private companies are essential to decarbonise, but are left out of the regulatory response.

Without a doubt, Carney helped us to recognise that our biggest sustainability challenges are also our biggest economic challenges.

Despite a decade of momentum for sustainable finance, the tragedy of the horizon looms large. New approaches to finance are required to ensure our future is protected.The Conversation

Simon O’Connor, Director, Sustainable Finance Hub, The University of Melbourne; Ben Neville, A/Prof and Deputy Director of Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne, and Brendan Wintle, Professor in Conservation Science, School of Ecosystem and Forest Science, The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Money

Are we in an AI bubble or just a market reality check?

Tech stocks falter as AI boom faces reality; market shifts towards gold amidst growing investor caution.

Published

on

Tech stocks falter as AI boom faces reality; market shifts towards gold amidst growing investor caution.


Global tech stocks are losing altitude as investors question whether the AI boom has gone too far — or if the market is simply returning to earth after years of euphoric growth. With valuations for chipmakers and AI giants stretched to perfection, analysts warn that expectations may finally be colliding with economic reality.

In this segment, Brad Gastwirth from Circular Technologies joins us to unpack the trillion-dollar question: is this a healthy correction or the first crack in the AI gold rush? From hyperscaler capex surges to regulatory risks and fragile market leadership, he breaks down what’s driving investor nerves.

We also explore how the market rotation into gold and real assets reflects growing caution, and what this could mean for the future of AI-driven investing.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#AIBubble #TechStocks #MarketCorrection #Semiconductors #Investing #FinanceNews #AIStocks #TickerNews


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Money

Inflation rise reduces chances of Reserve Bank rate cut

Inflation spikes, drastically reducing chances of a Reserve Bank rate cut amid economic pressures and rising costs

Published

on

Inflation spikes, drastically reducing chances of a Reserve Bank rate cut amid economic pressures and rising costs

video
play-sharp-fill
In Short:
– Rate cut likelihood by the Reserve Bank has decreased due to a rise in annual inflation to 3.2 per cent.
– Significant price increases in housing, recreation, and transport are raising concerns for the Reserve Bank.

The likelihood of a rate cut by the Reserve Bank has decreased significantly after a surge in annual inflation.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported that inflation for the year ending September rose to 3.2 per cent, reflecting a 1.1 per cent increase.

Banner

Trimmed mean inflation, a crucial measure for the Reserve Bank, was recorded at 1 per cent for the quarter and 3 per cent for the year. The bank anticipates inflation to reach 3 per cent by year-end, while trimmed mean inflation is expected to slightly decrease.

The quarterly rise of 1.3 per cent in September exceeded expectations. Governor Bullock noted that a deviation from the Reserve Bank’s projections could have material implications.

Financial markets reacted promptly, with the Australian dollar rising against the US dollar, while the ASX200 index fell.

The most significant price increases were observed in housing, recreation, and transport, indicating widespread price pressures that concern the Reserve Bank.

Despite the unexpected inflation rise, some economists believe the Reserve Bank may still consider rate cuts in December, viewing current price spikes as temporary due to the winding back of subsidies.

Economic Pressures

Broad-based economic pressures suggest that the Reserve Bank may not reduce interest rates at its upcoming meeting. Analysts highlight the need for ongoing support for households facing cost-of-living challenges.


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Trending Now