Author: admin

This paper draws on findings from a research project examining dissent in High Court revenue law cases. The paper initially outlines the findings in relation to the differences in the incidence of dissent that can be identified between different High Courts led by different Chief Justices. Drawing upon research relating to the changing jurisprudence of the High Court, particularly during the latter part of the 20th Century, the paper then further explores whether this changing jurisprudence can be said to be reflected in a changed incidence of dissent in revenue cases before the High Court, concluding that there is arguably some evidence that when the Court adopts excessively narrow jurisprudence, or alternatively an activist jurisprudence, this may be reflected in an increased incidence of dissent in revenue cases.

The changes to the R&D tax concession in 2011 were touted as the biggest reform to business innovation policy in over a decade. Three years later, as part of the 2014 Federal Budget, a reduction in the concession rates was announced. While the most recent of the proposed changes are designed to align with the reduction in company tax rate, the Australian Federal Government also indicated that the gain to revenue from the reduction in the incentive scheme will be redirected by the Government to repair the Budget and fund policy priorities. The consequence is that the R&D concessions, while designed to encourage innovation, are clearly linked with the tax system.

Constitutional specialists and political economy scholars commonly believe (wrongly) that federalism is a matter of constitutional divisions of powers and responsibilities and the political and legal processes of reconciling overlaps and lacunae arising from those divisions. Political realists know it’s all about the money – specifically which level of government gets to tax what. The constitution may give lower tier governments responsibilities for constructing highways, establishing universities, building hospitals, regulating superannuation systems and funding schools and disability programs. The true power, however, lies with the government that has the cash.