Gerard Hines

I've just read the proposed startup carve outs here (consult.treasury.gov.au/c202…) and it raises more questions than it answers. If the Government's own solution to the damage caused by these tax changes is to exempt certain companies, that's already a sign the policy has serious problems. Putting aside the enormous damage that will still be caused by the 30% minimum tax and indexation changes for every other investor, this carve out consultation is full of unanswered questions: - What happens if a startup is acquired after four years rather than five? It seems the Government only wants to support success if it happens after an arbitrary holding period which is now longer than the current 3 year employee share scheme concession. - What happens to employee shares issued while a company was under 10 years old, but the company is over 10 years old on 30 June 2027? The consultation paper suggests they wont be eligible. Why not? - Why should a software company receive relief from a near 47% tax because it qualifies for the R&D Tax Incentive, while a healthcare, agricultural or professional services business doesn't? Apparently some entrepreneurs are more equal than others. - Once a shareholding exceeds $10 million, the concession disappears and they're back to facing tax rates approaching 47%. That's effectively telling entrepreneurs: build a successful business, but just not too successful. It's a strange message for a country that says it wants more innovation, investment and ambition. The consultation paper points to international precedents, yet the proposal falls well short of global benchmarks. In the U.S. the QSBS regime can reduce the effective tax rate on qualifying startup gains to around half of what an Australian founder could face under these rules! If you're an ambitious founder trying to build the next Canva, Atlassian or a business worth $100 million or $1 billion, the message remains that Australia doesn't want to back you all the way through the journey. These carve outs tell Australians to dream small... During the Senate inquiry we heard several non-founders claim that founders don't think about tax settings. Of course they do! Founders have to leave stable jobs, often invest their own savings, sell or mortgage their homes, take enormous risks and spend years with no guarantee of success. Tax settings are part of that opportunity cost calculation. The most ambitious founders create most of the jobs, build globally competitive businesses and ultimately generate substantial tax revenue for Australia. If the incentives aren't right, many simply won't build those businesses here. The more carve outs, exemptions and special rules that get added, the clearer it becomes that this policy is being designed on the run.