Division
The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2024-10-09.125.1) introduced by Wentworth MP [Allegra Spender](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/wentworth/allegra_spender) (Independent), which means they failed. ### What do these amendments do? Ms Spender [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2024-10-09.114.1): > *... the amendments that I have put forward are, firstly, around allowing a greater time period in which to pay, given that people are being taxed on unrealised gains. Because these gains are unrealised, they relate to assets that have not been sold, or realised, and people may not have the cash to pay this. We should not be forcing people, or pushing people, to be paying tax on income that they haven't earned in a time period that is unreasonable—currently at 84 days.* > > *My second amendment speaks to my concern about the impact on the venture sector and whether the government has adequately assessed that. I have put in my amendment that a review should be done on the impact of this sort of change on the venture and technology sector in particular.* > > *Finally, I'm also calling for this legislation to acknowledge, and to try and give some confidence to, the people the member for North Sydney identified, by saying that this is not going to set a precedent for taxing unrealised gains in other parts of the economy.* ### Amendment text > *(1) Page 3 (after line 8), after clause 3, insert:* > >> *4 Review of Schedule 1* >> >> *(1) The Minister must cause an independent review of Schedule 1 to be conducted as soon as practicable after this Act receives the Royal Assent.* >> >> *(2) The review must include a review of the impact, or potential impact, of Schedule 1 on the startup and high-growth sector.* >> >> *(3) The persons who conduct the review must:* >> >>> *(a) consult with the public in conducting the review; and* >>> >>> *(b) give the Minister a written report of the review
House of Representatives, 2024-10-09. negative: ayes 61, noes 74.
Question
The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2024-10-09.125.1) introduced by Wentworth MP [Allegra Spender](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/wentworth/allegra_spender) (Independent), which means they failed. ### What do these amendments do? Ms Spender [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2024-10-09.114.1): > *... the amendments that I have put forward are, firstly, around allowing a greater time period in which to pay, given that people are being taxed on unrealised gains. Because these gains are unrealised, they relate to assets that have not been sold, or realised, and people may not have the cash to pay this. We should not be forcing people, or pushing people, to be paying tax on income that they haven't earned in a time period that is unreasonable—currently at 84 days.* > > *My second amendment speaks to my concern about the impact on the venture sector and whether the government has adequately assessed that. I have put in my amendment that a review should be done on the impact of this sort of change on the venture and technology sector in particular.* > > *Finally, I'm also calling for this legislation to acknowledge, and to try and give some confidence to, the people the member for North Sydney identified, by saying that this is not going to set a precedent for taxing unrealised gains in other parts of the economy.* ### Amendment text > *(1) Page 3 (after line 8), after clause 3, insert:* > >> *4 Review of Schedule 1* >> >> *(1) The Minister must cause an independent review of Schedule 1 to be conducted as soon as practicable after this Act receives the Royal Assent.* >> >> *(2) The review must include a review of the impact, or potential impact, of Schedule 1 on the startup and high-growth sector.* >> >> *(3) The persons who conduct the review must:* >> >>> *(a) consult with the public in conducting the review; and* >>> >>> *(b) give the Minister a written report of the review
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.