Would you support a fishing tax?

[Lovey80]

I was talking to my local tackle shop bloke on Monday and he told me in the US there is a 1% or 2% tax put on all boating and fishing products sold. These taxes are used to put back to the fishing community by the way of fish stocking, boat ramps, arti reefs etc etc (the things we would all like to see more of).

I thought to myself that would be a far better option than Rec fishing licences as everyone that bought anything to do with fishing or boating would be paying their way towards keeping our fisheries the best in the world and keeping the best facilities towards it. Think about the amount of money that would be raised that could be put to good use. Grant's to stockng groups, new boat ramps and car parks, grants for atri reefs. The possibilities would be near on endles and 1 or 2 % would not be missed. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Cheers Chris

[breamnut]

I was talking to my local tackle shop bloke on Monday and he told me in the US there is a 1% or 2% tax put on all boating and fishing products sold. These taxes are used to put back to the fishing community by the way of fish stocking, boat ramps, arti reefs etc etc (the things we would all like to see more of).

I thought to myself that would be a far better option than Rec fishing licences as everyone that bought anything to do with fishing or boating would be paying their way towards keeping our fisheries the best in the world and keeping the best facilities towards it. Think about the amount of money that would be raised that could be put to good use. Grant's to stockng groups, new boat ramps and car parks, grants for atri reefs. The possibilities would be near on endles and 1 or 2 % would not be missed. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Cheers Chris
only if it got rid of those netters

[Lovey80]

With a bit of cash in the buget it couldnt hurt. NSW did well with the rec fishing licences being used to buy them out so I can't see why we couldnt????

Cheers Chris

[sid_fishes]

the only thing wrong with it the way i see it would be that the goverment would see all this money coming in,then not do what it was intended for , just like everything else . are we getting better roads? better transport?do they get pay rises when they feel they need them? do we? its a great idea , but i dont /cant outlay anymore as i need to live sid

[tunaticer]

It will just be another grab for money that will be mis spent and misplaced and we will get no return from it. It needs to be done not via retailers but via lisencing with one revenue source to be controlled via one govt agency.

If retailers are supposed to pass on the 2% tax to the govt they will simply categorise tackle as hardware items etc.

Jack

[Kleyny]

I theory it would be a good idea but as others have said the money would not go to what it was intended. Just look at our rego then look at our roads. Need i say more

neil

[darryl13]

all boat owners already paid to look after the fisheries its part of your rego payment(its just not high lighted)

[Lovey80]

I can't see how it could be seen as a grab for money. If it went to a similar body as the NSW fishing licences money goes to there should'nt be a problem.

Tunaticer I cant see the local tackle shops doing that as its not comming out of their pocket and growing the fishing community will only benefit the tackle shops in the long run.

Sid, you've been paying through the nose on fishing gear in Australia up til now i dont think 1 or 2 percent will be too far missed

Cheers Chris

[bushbeachboy]

No way! I already pay an exorbitant amount in tax. Consider income tax, capital gains tax, stamp duty, GST, fuel excise, etc etc etc>:(

The government already gets a huge slice of what everyone earns, and they handle that wastefully. All the things you mentioned should already be in existence.

And I am opposed to the introduction of any kind of fishing licence in Qld - it's just another bloody tax!

[Adamy]

Hi Chris,

Like a lot of things - this sounds like a good idea "in principle" however I think some of the previous replies have hit the nail on the head.

I have just obtained a policy analyst's position in the federal treasury... so while I dont know everything, I do have an inkling on a few of these types of economic issues...

If you were to imply such as tax and it wasnt directly going into consolidated revenue (which means it definitely wouldnt be directed into the right places) then you would have to create a whole department just dedicated to regulating and appropriating the money to the various sources for reinvestment into fishing. So the first thing a government would do is to create such a department - staffed by bureaucrats then you would need bureaucrats to supervise those bureaucrats and so on.

THEN there would be competing interests for the funds such as local dam stocking groups, fishing education and greenies (to clean up the waterways) etc. so these guys would be forced to either become political lobbyists - or hire them. And it goes on and on - once you introduce a tax and then a distribution method - you create an "ecosystem" of feeders with only a very small percentage of the money actually hitting the ground - where its needed most.

I know it sounds cynical - but its a simplistic model of how it works.

So although it seems like a great idea in principle - I'd would have to be against it... but keep them coming mate - I really like how you actually think about things. Maybe you could arrive at some solutions for the problems described above... that being the case run for Prime Minister - you have my vote.

Cheers,

Adam

[Lovey80]

Thanks Adamy you have really opened my eyes. I'm just a little pissed off how the average Rec fisho seems to be constantly getting Shat on by the stated bureaucrats and we are seeing nothing for it. The Gov't only seems to listen to the greenies, all our money is spent on anything but us.

I'm just sitting here tring to think of ways to get us a bit of power back, and if the whole fishing community were contributing small amounts of money to a body that the Gov't couldn't touch then they may be able to fight the good fight for us.

As far as the competing interests go, thats kind of my point. If there was a small body with a boot load of cash then the competing interests would have to put in submissions on why they want the cash and the body could make the choice not the Gov't making the choice on what will get the most votes for them.

At the end of the day people see "TAX" and their blood boils and so it should be. It does for me too and thats the reason i think the NO will get the vote. I bet the NSW fishing licences had the same respose of sceptisism but now they are reaping the rewards.

P.S. Can I be the bureaucrat that gets paid a PS wage to allocate funds and fund projects???? ok im dreaming again.

[Adamy]

Like I said Chris... you're a thinker and thats a rare commodity in this day and age - keep it up, if you get a winner - I'd be happy to help you write the submission.

Cheers,

Adam

[Chas & Clarry]

Hey Lovey80 thanks for throwing this curley one up for discussion. I think Adamy is right on this, the bureaucracy required to manage special purpose taxes is a crippler. A few people have expressed a cynicism that I also share, ie that the money would never get to where you would like to see it spent, or if it did, an equivalent amount that currently comes from consilidated revenue would be syphoned off by the govt, so we wouldn't gain anything. I recon there are 3 other reasons why I’d say no

If recreational anglers have to pay a special tax it could be like saying that we “owe” more than we already contribute for enjoying our particular interest as opposed to all of the other interests that are out there (do cyclists-who need cycle paths-, footballers-who need sports grounds-, bushwalkers-who need parks and tracks, etc etc pay a special tax? No.. and neither should they, because they like us already pay all kinds of taxes through income, GST, rego, stamp duty, fuel excise etc)
The govt isn’t short of cash, just short of creativity and long on bureaucracy. We already pay 10% GST on everything we buy for fishing plus all of the other taxes on our boats, fuel, licenses etc. As a consequence of these taxes, governments at various levels keep boasting of their budget surpluses. They even keep giving us income tax cuts because of the money that they are raking in through the GST...doesn’t seem to be a lack of revenue that is the problem.
Our expenditure on our hobby also supports an enormous industry of boating, fishing, camping, leisure, tourism etc etc, the social and economic benefit of which is enormous, and reaches way beyond just people who fish...so the fishing infrastructure costs are legit for the govt to cover.Now you might think I'm crazy, but I do think that if we can afford it we should pay a bit more tax to improve infrastructure generally (health, education, disabililty support etc)... So long as the govt reduces bureaucratic waste too. BUT not a specific fishing or cycling, or footy tax.

From the Chas part of C&C (Clarry is asleep...so I better not assume that I am speeking for her!;) )

[Lovey80]

Thanks Chas for a usefull and sensible post. I totally get your point and am equally in agreement of how our money doesnt get used as we would want. The bureaucratic crap that we as citizens of this great country have to put up with is an absolute joke. I wonder exactly how much of the GST etc etc on our fishing products actually comes back to us....... I recon bugger all!!! Maybe if a small organisation was to receive a percentage of that GST to spend on behalf of REC Fisho' (maybe we get 2% and the gov't gets the other 8 or 9% or what ever it is these days) like i stated that the Gov't had no say over where it was spent then we would start to see some value for money for our hard earned cash. I doubt that we would be seeing anything near that at the moment.

Would that sound like a better idea???

Cheers Chris

[Chas & Clarry]

Hmmmm good question. I'd think that the percentage would have to be a bit lower than that...there are lots of legit and good causes and lifestyles in Aus appart from fishing, that also need their slice.

I've got to say that I'm not an economist or a social planner, and wouldn't have any idea re what percentage of the GST would be needed and equitable for fishers while still being fair to other people's needs. Certainly haven't got a clue re what the amount of money is needed for our infrastructure.

Even though the bureaucracy is over the top, I do recon that the public service is full of skilled and hardworking people (thumbs up Adamy), who have a better idea of what is reasonable on the state/country scale than I have. What we need to do is to keep our voice in front of the politicians who make the decisions to ensure that the right thing is done with that information. Now there is a big task!!

Keeping our profile positive and demonstrating our contribution (take a look at the "fishing for a cause" thread on the general fishing chat board for a great example of that) and voicing up to the pollies...I recon that's the way to go.

Thanks again for putting this one up and for your ongiong thoughts on it.

Chas

[captain snapper]

totally agree

[craig51063]

sounds good to me . i live in sydney and i think the biggest problem we have down here is policing [ is that how you spell it ]of the state fishing rules .ie not enough fisheries staff. a 1 or 2 % tax on ALL fishing gear and boating gear to me makes more sense as long as they abolish licencing as well .and ALL moneys raised is put BACK into the fishery .this would im sure raise more revenue for the industry than licences as i reckon not everyone has a fishing licence down here .

lie loud enough and long enough and eventually the masses will believe you .

[Tailortaker]

G'day Mate, Good question indeed, My answer would be NO no no no no, For all the reasons allready stated. I feel that the funds would not entirely be spent in the intended matter and it would also cause a lot of debate. If I could be assured that this would'nt be the case and I didnt pay so much god dam tax allready I would consider it.
Cheers TT ;D
________
VAPORIZER MADE IN CANADA (http://vaporizer.org)

[Kleyny]

Maybe a similar Charity to the apex group could be started for the fishos.
Every tackle shop could have a donation bucket or even put say your 2% on top of the items to get the moneys this way.
I know i would personally go to the tackle shop with this facility in the knowing that some of my money is going back into the fisho community eg. ramps etc.

Just a thought

neil

P.S. You could even try and get major companies to maybe sponsor things like ramp up grades with a sign of who donated/sponsored it. Good advertising for the companies target group in my opinion. It would even help with their tax:P

[RASA]

The Fishing Party has, since its inception pushed this issue in every forum

I'll repeat again and get up the industry nose.

Recreational Fishing generates over $3 BILLION to the National economy giving the states and territories $300 million to share (from rec fishing related) in GST

NSW gets 28% = $84 mil of that and Qld gets 21% = $63 mil

The issue is that a % of that money should be returned to the rec resource.

Pretty simple but for some reason including industry more taxes and levies are sought ?????


The rec lic in NSW collects about $8-9 mil so what a simple solution would be is to commit $10 mil of the GST to the same cause and no need for any fee.
Should be end of story but the arguments come.


Bob Smith

[Charlie]

De we have a choice?

"Recfish Australia Projects progress and updates

A Scoping Study on the concept of independent revenue sources for the Recreational Fishing
Sector in Australia

For many years it has been difficult to find a means whereby the recreational and sport fishing sector of the fishing
industry can secure a reliable and equitable source of revenue to provide the capability for the sector to develop and
grow.
Historically the sector has always relied on the governments of the day to provide resources to develop and promote
the sector. This scoping study will identify funding options that if implemented will see the funds paid by the anglers go
back into the industry with direct benefits returned to the fisheries, fishers and the sector.
A reliable revenue source will allow the sector’s representative groups to develop long term plans for capacity building,
succession planning, growing the participation, R D & E, restoration projects, etc which in turn will deliver direct
benefits to the fishing public.
This project will provide a comprehensive analysis of the benefits/detriments of levies and the processes that need to
be addressed in considering their introduction and identify additional or alternative options not as yet explored by the
sector. Identifying alternatives will be researched congruently with stakeholder interviews and a preliminary assessment
of their practicality provided to determine the value of further investigation.
A number of potential uses of a levy or alternative funding options have already been identified and the scoping paper
will further develop these. Alternative funding options identified in the paper will be assessed for equity, effectiveness
and ease of implementation.
This project has been funded through the Recreational Fishing Community Grants Program.
Contact the CEO John Harrison ceo@recfish.com.au for further discussion on this project."

[Phoenix]

I agree.

Do many of you guys have any idea the kind of dollars we are talking about - this is a huge industry.

2% should easily cover the costs necessary for fish restocking, environment regeneration, pollution & rubbish removal, improvements & maintenance of boat ramps and parking facilities etc.

I also think a % would be a lot fairer than a license (in some respects). As some people only fish now and then - others a few times a week.

But I do believe that an annual license should be considered because some people claim - I didn't know that size limits or bag limits had changed.....

2% could also cover the costs for either a greater police presence or some kind of professional, full-time Coast Guard. I would also like to see this being transparent. Ie - at the end of the year, the gov. says ok we raised $X,000,000 through this scheme and we invested X% on this and X% on that and X% here.

[PinHead]

The Fishing Party has, since its inception pushed this issue in every forum

I'll repeat again and get up the industry nose.

Recreational Fishing generates over $3 BILLION to the National economy giving the states and territories $300 million to share (from rec fishing related) in GST

NSW gets 28% = $84 mil of that and Qld gets 21% = $63 mil

The issue is that a % of that money should be returned to the rec resource.

Pretty simple but for some reason including industry more taxes and levies are sought ?????


The rec lic in NSW collects about $8-9 mil so what a simple solution would be is to commit $10 mil of the GST to the same cause and no need for any fee.
Should be end of story but the arguments come.


Bob Smith

That would have to be one of the most simplistic and stupid statements I have ever read from someone supposedly dealing in politics. The money is not even being spent on the necessities like health and water and you expect them to put it into rec fishing..that is not going to happen. It is called consolidated revenue..where all the taxes go and then dealt out to each department. If you dispersed the funds according to income from each sector then there would be a major problem..Police Dept would collapse as they have no income generation at all.

I am not in favour of any form of further taxes be it called a tax or a license fee...when someone can tell me where the income the State Govt is receiving at the moment is going then I might listen..untill then..no chance at all.

[Chris Ryan]

That would have to be one of the most simplistic and stupid statements I have ever read from someone supposedly dealing in politics. The money is not even being spent on the necessities like health and water and you expect them to put it into rec fishing..that is not going to happen. It is called consolidated revenue..where all the taxes go and then dealt out to each department. If you dispersed the funds according to income from each sector then there would be a major problem..Police Dept would collapse as they have no income generation at all.

I am not in favour of any form of further taxes be it called a tax or a license fee...when someone can tell me where the income the State Govt is receiving at the moment is going then I might listen..untill then..no chance at all.

Could agree more Pinhead. How rediculous for these statements to be made from a rep of a so-called party.

[pickers]

Lovey80
We would only see 2% of that 2% go to where it was intended to go and the polly's would tell us where to go once they have our money.
Dam good theory but it's stacked against us to get that one going , would be easier to organise a group to build our own arti reefs instead of involving polly's and the likes.
pickers

[goldfish]

NO MORE TAX... we already pay 10% on everything & more on fuel. since this money isn't being spent on roads, education, hospitals, eldly, ect we must already have dams choc a block with fish as they have to be spending it somewhere & there's no fish in the bay. :-(

[mylestom]

With a bit of cash in the buget it couldnt hurt. NSW did well with the rec fishing licences being used to buy them out so I can't see why we couldnt????

Cheers Chris
Sounds ok, but in reality the netters (Beach hauler) wait to the spawning run and catch the same fish at the mouth of the system.

Only if when they buy out the estuary netters and then do proper research on what happens with the fish after that. Seems like they used our money (Rec Fish Licences) to buy out one lot of pros to the the benefit of other pros netter.

There is no regulation that you can properly track down in NSW on beach haulers, fisheries, Etc (dont want to know). Don't respond to complaints and just are not interested.

It all sounds good in practice, but the pros still go up the river to spot the fish and then just sit at the mouth and harvest everything.

It was just a ploy, a feel good (Pat the Politician on the Back) and at the moment to us on the ground, it doesn't matter when they harvest the fish. They are still pillaging the system of breeding, spawning fish.

Regards
Trev

[gone_fishing]

a good idea in therory but were does it stop as proven time and time again the money raised through such a scheme would be lost in red tape paper work and wages for some one to look after it more jobs for the boys really
so in my opinion a good idea yes
a practical and logicial way to assist in any way NOT A CHANCE !!!
already pay rego boat and trailer
licences boat and fishing
fuel levels
and gst on top
so there is plenty of money going into the pockets of goverment

ps i am happy to pay tax $14000 worth this finacial year and do benifit from this
tax keep it simple keep it fair

[Lovey80]

Currently at 26% for and 74% against. Sounds like the bottom line is people don't want to pay any more out of their pockets which is fair enough but would like to see a better distribution comming back to the sector. How do we get this?

Cheers Chris and thanks for the input.

[BAT]

What NSW is doing is working! Thank our southern counterparts.
Cheer's BAT

[alleycat]

I would gladly pay it mif it actually went into my sport but for instance lets take a look at our bout and trailer rego, this is supposed to go into providing adequate boat ramps and parking areas for boaties, ok so lets take the jumpinpin region for example, what extra ramp or parking or fish cleaning facillities have been added in the last 20 years?, none!!, and just how many more tax paying boaties is there now compared to 1987?, so it might be a good idea to get them to start putting some of those tax dollars meant for facillities back into boating and not into the govt coffers.

[Rodman]

I would support it but I do not trust the government
Look at the medicare extra levy for the gun buy back and East Timor
they have never revoked the half percent increase

Tackle Rat

[RayDeR]

G'day!

There is no way I would support one.

I think we should put pressure on the government - Local, State and National - to provide better facilities for RECREATIONAL fishermen.

We already contribute through GST on everything from bait to boat. Pay $30,000 for a boat and the Governement gets $3,000 plus registration, etc. What do we get for this? And then there is the ongoing costs which are also taxed.

Don't overlook the fact that this is a huge industry (employing how many?) already supported by RECREATIONAL fishermen.

I intentionally put RECREATIONAL in caps to emphasise that this is spending by choice not necessity.

We cannot leave it only to our Associations and specialist fishing parties, etc., to do all the work in contacting all the pollies. Wwe ned to do our part.

When the pollies turn up at our shopping centre, our school fete, or out up their signs in our street, we should have a brief and courtesious word in their ear. Or we can write to them and give them a phone call or send an email to remind them that "We are voters who fish RECREATIONALLY and we want facilities".

Don't forget that when they are on radio talkback we can "get to them" then, too.

Don't leave it to the guy in the next boat to do it for us.

Regards

RayDeR