Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

 

A ‘PERVERSE’ arrangement which sees millions of Australian taxpayer dollars funnelled to New Zealand wine producers every year looks set to be abolished.

 

Wine and alcohol industry groups have joined with government backbenchers in calling on the loophole in the Wine Equalisation Tax rebate scheme to be closed in the upcoming review of Australia’s tax system.

 

The New Zealand rebate scheme was introduced in 2005 under the Howard government. Under the rebate scheme, Australian taxpayers “refunded” New Zealand wine makers to the tune of $25 million in the last financial year, up around 10 per cent on the $23 million paid in 2012-13.

 

The rebate, which is extended to New Zealand in accordance with the Australia and New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement of 1983, has been labelled “perverse” and “absurd”.

 

Winemakers’ Federation of Australia chief executive Paul Evans has been meeting with government MPs this week to put the case for ending the rebate on the basis that it hurts Australian wine producers, with Australian taxpayers effectively “paying the competition to come in and flood the market”.


Thirty per cent of the top 20 wines in Australia are New Zealand brands.

 

“The original intention of the rebate was to support small- and medium-sized wineries. We believe the creation of the New Zealand scheme as part of our bilateral trading arrangements was perverse,” he said.

 

“Because they have a separate rebate scheme they enjoy a distinct commercial advantage over local producers, which is an absurd outcome in a market of oversupply.”

 

South Australian Liberal backbencher Tony Pasin, who represents more wine makers and grape growers than any other MP, has been lobbying the government to end the Kiwi subsidy.

 

While the New Zealand wine producers get the rebate, they don’t pay the tax in the first instance, and as such, it’s not a rebate but a subsidy, he argues.

 

Mr Pasin said he had raised the issue with Prime Minister Tony Abbott directly, who acknowledged the “inherent unfairness” of the scheme.

 

“This just doesn’t pass the pub test,” he said. “It’s certainly unfair, and the response I’ve had from our friends in New Zealand is, ‘Well, it might be unfair but you can’t stop us doing this because to amend the WET would be a breach of your trading obligations.’”

 

However, the government has been provided with legal advice on how the New Zealand rebate scheme can be unwound. Mr Pasin met with Assistant Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on Thursday following meetings with the WFA earlier in the week.

 

Entire Article Here

 

What a stupid arrangement. What was Howard thinking? Give the NZ wine growers subsidies so they can flood our market with their wines and knock our local producers out of business!?

 

So many mistakes from previous governments coming home to roost on the shoulders of the current government. And then they try to cut welfare and medical benefits spending to make up the shortfall! 

 

So many taxhole loopholes, people sucking money off The Great MIlch Cow Australia.

 

 

Message 1 of 22
Latest reply
21 REPLIES 21

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

Abbott is always spouting on, only to make himself look good usually. What has he done about it? Nothing at all.
Message 11 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers


@am*3 wrote:

No, it's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of awards won (many international ones as well). Cat LOL

 

the issue is not about the quality of the wine.

 

The rest of your replies to my comments aren't based on facts either.

 

Prove it.

 

That is an OLD article the opening post is based on. Feb 2015. I am sure you started a thread about it then. 

 

The issue is not about how old the article is or if there was a previous thread, either.

 

The issue is about the unfair advantage the Aus government is giving NZ wine growers by subsidising them, allowing them to compete against the Aus wine industry, and sending the Aus wine industry broke.

That's just sheer madness.

Remove the subsidy to even the playing field is the only thing that makes sense.

 

Message 12 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

No need for me to prove your comments aren't based on facts. They distort the situation also.

Why start two threads on the same topic 3 months apart? Nothing has changed at all re the WET rebate since Feb (date of the article).

Icy wrote: "Remove the subsidy to even the playing field is the only thing that makes sense."

Another ill informed comment

Small Australian winemakers are also eligible for the WET rebate. Scrap it and it could ruin them.

Free trade agreement - WET rebate applies to both NZ & Aust wine growers ( who meet eligibilty criteria)

"Riesling maker Ken Helm, from the Canberra region, says there's a campaign against the rebate, which scares him.

"Without the WET rebate, small regional wineries like ourselves would be facing bankruptcy."
2014
Message 13 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

Sorry ladies but the only wines that can beat a good WA wine are some from the Coonawarra region in South Australia.

NZ wines just don't cut it. 

Joono
Message 14 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers


@j*oono wrote:

Sorry ladies but the only wines that can beat a good WA wine are some from the Coonawarra region in South Australia.

NZ wines just don't cut it. 


 That's your opinion and others have different ones, which is the way it should be. Woman Very Happy

 

The smaller winemakers in SA & WA and other parts of Aust will be receiving the benefits of  the WET rebate as well (if they met eligibility).

The rebate icy wants scrapped.

 

ABC

The rebate was designed to encourage regional employment and business growth at cellar doors and wineries.

 

 

 

 

 

Message 15 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

ABC

Jan 2015

 

New Zealand winemakers say scrapping tax rebate won't solve Australia's profitability problem

 

Under the rules of the Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement, known as Closer Economic Relations (CER), New Zealand winemakers can also claim the rebate, and the chief executive officer of New Zealand Wine Growers, Philip Gregan, rejected the accusation his industry was taking advantage of loopholes in the law.


 "We operate under the same conditions in Australia as Australian winemakers do, and the same applies when Australian winemakers operate in New Zealand," he said
 

"The CER is about having the same regulatory regime operating for both countries in each market."

 

Mr Gregan said that even if the rebate was scrapped, it would not drastically change the sales of New Zealand wine in Australia.

 

"I'm not sure it would make too much difference to sales of New Zealand wine in the Australian market, which is I think the thing some winemakers seem to be worrying about."

Message 16 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers


@am*3 wrote:

@j*oono wrote:

Sorry ladies but the only wines that can beat a good WA wine are some from the Coonawarra region in South Australia.

NZ wines just don't cut it. 


 That's your opinion and others have different ones, which is the way it should be. Woman Very Happy

 

The smaller winemakers in SA & WA and other parts of Aust will be receiving the benefits of  the WET rebate as well (if they met eligibility).

The rebate icy wants scrapped.

 

ABC

The rebate was designed to encourage regional employment and business growth at cellar doors and wineries.

 

 

 

 

 


In fact I said I wanted the subsidy for NZ scrapped.

 

I have no problem with NZ marketing their wine in Australia, and If ppl prefer to buy NZ wine, so be it.

I don't see why our government should be forking out $25mil a year  in subsidies to support NZ's wine industry so they can have an advantage over Aussie winemakers.

Message 17 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

Agree with the WET Rebate - smaller AU wineries would be the unfortunate victims of any wholesale removal of the rebate.

 

As for AU vs NZ wines, well that's an argument that could go on for ever.  NZ makes some great wines, and so does AU.  Both countries make bad wine.  Look no further than the cheap cat's-pee Sauvignon Blanc from NZ crowding the shelves of the chain liquor stores.   I'd hate to think this rubbish is propping up Kiwi wineries.

 

Aussie cooler-climate SBs and Pinot Noir can be as good as premium Kiwi ones.  Our riesling is better.  Our riper red styles are better (Shiraz, Grenache etc.). 

 

Both countries have had significant success in international wine shows.

 

Of course, all this is in my humble opinion.

prostate cancer ribbon Pictures, Images and Photos
Message 18 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers


icyfroth wrote: 

 

 In fact I said I wanted the subsidy for NZ scrapped.

I have no problem with NZ marketing their wine in Australia, and If ppl prefer to buy NZ wine, so be it.

I don't see why our government should be forking out $25mil a year  in subsidies to support NZ's wine industry so they can have an advantage over Aussie winemakers.


Then you don't understand free trade agreements. 

 

WET rebates for small Aust wine growers are fine then, even though they have an advantage over other wine growers in Aust, who aren't eligible for the rebate?

 

WET rebates for Aust winegrowers in NZ are also OK.

 

Message 19 of 22
Latest reply

Aus Taxpayers Fund NZ Wine Growers

Look no further than the cheap cat's-pee Sauvignon Blanc from NZ crowding the shelves of the chain liquor stores.   I'd hate to think this rubbish is propping up Kiwi wineries.

 

Plenty of Aust equivalents doing the same or worse Cat LOL

Hidden Gem Semillon Savignong Blacn $4

Bankrock station Savignon Blanc  $5.50

 

NZ

Wahu Sav Blanc $7.00 - classy

 

 

Message 20 of 22
Latest reply