PRIME MWNISTER
For media 2 July, 1967
GAINERS AND LOSERS UND3R THE
LXDZRAL TAX/ FAIIILY PAYMENTS PACKAGES
The attached tables and graphs provide a comparison o2 the
position of various types of families under the Liberal
proposals cc compared with Labor's well targetted family
package. They show:
Labor's proposals benefit the needy, the Liberals the
well oHf allowing for the effects of extra health
costs, the loss of the 1.5 per cent second
tier wage increase and the potential impact
of the promised massive Liberal spending
cuts a single income family ( the Liberals'
" best" case) would need to be earning
$ 750 per week before they would be better off
under the Liberals.
after that the gains come rapidly
It is not true that the average family is $ 26 per week
better off under the Liberals.
single income families on $ 500 per week are
net losers by $ 10.77 per week;
but most wage earners earn $ 19,000 or less;
moreover less than 20 per cent of households
conform to the case quoted by the Liberals of
2 parents, single income with kids.
the table shows clearly that at $ 19,000,
every household with kids is substantially
worse off under the Liberals' proposals and
substantially better off under Labor's.
KAiE S L LEPEII FOF THE
tSII(' J1 F IIC X) MF FAJIlI. 3 (; HIID RFN, P C) O-) P
100 200 300 400 5G3 600 700 800 900
INJCOME (/ WELK) 1000
D. J -) OF'I (. EH FOP. THE POOR
IrS I F INC( AAF1 FJAil d, CHII [ I RF14
i\ I IREFAL
LIBERAL
1000 0 400 5: 6o0 0 700 800 900 1
it1 C .000
0 10
SINGLE INCONE FAMILY
PRESENT INCOMEAFTER TAX
VALUE OF
EXTRA
TIER 1 LIBERAL
HEALTH CARE IHPACT TAX CUT NET LXEr L
TAX CUT PAYNENT SINGLE INCOME FAMILY* OFFECT OF
LIBERAL
" OR SPENDING CUTS** NET BENEFIT
TO SINGLE
IMCOHI
FAMILY*
$ pa
15,000 17,000 19,000 21,000 23,000 25,000 $ pw
288 326 364 403 441 479 3.07 3.47 3.89 3.64 3.97 4.32 2.40 4.79 4.79 4.79 4.79 3.68 5.20 6.72 8.95 9.70
10.46 0.61
--01.. 9676
0.52 0.94 1.35 15.34
15.34 15.34
15.34 15.34 15.34 27.70
27.70 27 .70
27.70 27.70 27 .70
* NOTE: THIS IS THEIR BEST CASE
** SPENDING CUTS HAVE BEEN APPORTIONED EVENLY ACROSS HOUSEHOLDS, WHICH IS BROADLY CONSISTENT
OF AN ABS STUDY OF PUBLIC EXPENDITURE BASED ON THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE SURVEY. -11.75
-13.03
-14 .32
-11 .8ad
-11 .42
-11 .01
WITH THE FINDI
Comparison of Net Benefitc of Liberal and
Family Packagoes at $ 364 per week
( roughly modian cornings) Liberal p. w.
Single Incoue Family
S2 kids, both under 13
not renting
renting privately
3 kids, all under 13
not renting
-enting privately
S3 kido, 1 over 13
not renting
rentijc privately
4 kids, all under 13
not renting
renting privately
Sole Parent Family ( a)
S2 kidsi, all under 13
not renting
renting privately
Two Income Family ( b)
S2 kids, a. 11 under 13
not renting
renting privately ' 14.32
-14.32
" 14.32
-14.32
" 14.32
" 14.32
S9.52 S9.52 -24.87
-24.87
-22.75
-22.75 ATTAC 1
Labor Labor P. w.
18.00 33.00 46.00 61.00 52.00 67.00 59.50 74.50 18.00 33.00 18.00 33.00
Additional payments for extra children are identical,
under Labor's proposals, to tho case of a single income
earner, shown above.
Secondary earnings assumed to be half the primary
earnings. -w
4 N