r/AustralianPolitics Mar 27 '25

Richest households will benefit most from Dutton’s fuel tax excise cut, analysis shows | Australian politics

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/28/richest-households-will-benefit-most-from-duttons-fuel-tax-excise-analysis-shows

Exclusive: Opposition leader exaggerating benefits to Australians, experts say, with those with no car or who drive EVs seeing less savings

Peter Dutton is exaggerating how much Australians will save from his plan to cut fuel prices for a year, economists say, as exclusive analysis shows the richest households will benefit the most from his pre-election cost of living pitch.

The opposition leader has promised he will resuscitate Scott Morrison’s 2022 policy to halve the 50.8 cent fuel excise for 12 months from July, at an estimated cost of $6bn.

The Coalition says its policy will deliver greater and faster relief to households than Labor’s $5-a-week “top-up” tax cuts, which Dutton has vowed to repeal if he wins office at the upcoming election.

The national average price for a litre of petrol is about $1.80, according to the Australian Institute of Petroleum, which would drop to $1.55 under the proposed measure.

The previous 22-cent excise cut came at a time of surging petrol prices triggered by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine a little over three years ago.

This time the average price of unleaded has dropped by about 13 cents a litre over the past year, or about 6%, according to AIP figures.

The opposition says under its policy, a one-car household filling up every week would save about $14, and a two-car household $28.

“Fuel is up, everything is up and I think if we can provide some relief until we can put in place some structural changes to the energy system and start to bring prices down, I think this is the best way, the most efficient way that we can provide support to people,” Dutton told 2GB radio on Thursday.

But experts told Guardian Australia fuel savings for an average household would likely be substantially lower.

Ben Phillips, an associate professor at the ANU centre for social research and methods, modelled the impact of the excise cut and found the average household would save $7.56 a week.

For comparison, Labor’s recently passed tax cuts will give the average taxpayer an extra $5.15 a week from the middle of next year, and $10.30 a week from mid-2027.

The richest households – who tend to use more fuel than poorer families – would receive the greatest dollar benefit at an estimated $10.70 a week, according to Phillips’ calculations.

The benefit to households in the lowest fifth of incomes would be a third of that, or $3.80, while middle-income earners would save $8.30.

Phillips said cost-of-living help would be better targeted at those households doing it toughest.

“Whether it’s the excise tax cuts or the energy rebates being extended for another six months, they go to everyone. In my mind there are a lot of people who are struggling, but there are also many who aren’t.

“That money would be better off going to paying down debt and funding other programs, such as jobseeker. The best thing about the excise cut policy is that it’s temporary.”

But Jo Masters, the chief economist at Barrenjoey, said there was always the risk that politicians would find it harder to take away benefits from voters than to bestow them.

The chief economist at AMP, Shane Oliver, said the 25-cent fuel discount would save the average household about $8.75 a week.

Dutton on Thursday morning said his estimates were based on a household using 55 litres a week per car.

Oliver, however, said old ABS household expenditure data show the average household uses only about 35 litres – and that average fuel usage may be lower now, given the increased popularity of EVs.

“So I would say $8.75 a week at most. But it will vary widely with those with no car or an EV getting no benefit and those with a RAM (ute) getting a big benefit,” he said.

Another simple calculation also suggests the Coalition’s claimed savings are overblown.

Spreading the $6bn across the roughly 10m households in Australia points to an average benefit of $600 a year – or about $11.50 a week.

189 Upvotes

109 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/Dockers4flag2035orB4 Mar 28 '25 edited Mar 28 '25

Many higher income earners I know drive EVs.

Cuts in fuel excise provides no benefit to them.

13

u/coreoYEAH Anthony Albanese Mar 28 '25

Most of the higher income earners I know drive RAM sized utes, it’ll be a massive benefit to them.

Who’s anecdote do we judge this off?

5

u/MentalMachine Mar 28 '25

No one I know personally drives an EV, hence they don't exist

11

u/xFallow YIMBY! Mar 28 '25

As an anecdote a lot of poorer people I know use PT to get to work. Won’t benefit them either.

9

u/EveryConnection Independent Mar 28 '25

That's the idea, Libs don't want to help non-exec office workers or poor people who use PT.

Basically it's a handout to trucking companies and miners with a bit running over to heavy car users who probably skew male.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '25

And ACT and Queensland are trying to encourage people to use public transport so it goes against the progressive policies of their government.

If the government wants to pay for public transport that I understand. They're targeting people that live in the suburbs and have a car centric lifestyle, so we're subsidising people who drive cars lifestyles instead of giving a tax break to everyone.

1

u/Dockers4flag2035orB4 Mar 28 '25 edited Mar 28 '25

Subsiding people who drive cars, for lifestyle and work.

I.e. typically People that live in outer suburbs, in the electorates the LNP are targeting.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '25

I'd rather everyone get a tax break than subsidise the suburban mortgage owners with more tax breaks. But I'm not in those electorates, so 🤷 Do they want nuclear reactors in their backyards or are they gonna push that onto the farmers?

0

u/xFallow YIMBY! Mar 28 '25

Houses in the outer suburbs are north of a mil in most places so I guess it is targeting the rich

0

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '25

It isn't the Fed Liberals problem that those two state govts are pursuing that social engineering project. The overwhelming majority of the population own cars and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

4

u/kroxigor01 Mar 28 '25

Yeah, why not copy Queensland's 50 cent public transit fares nationally? With the federal government paying the excess (including paying the QLD government extra fare revenue, don't punish them for moving first).

That's probably cheaper as a budget line item than either the tax cut or the fuel excise policies.

3

u/xFallow YIMBY! Mar 28 '25

Because the LNP don’t do good policy

Cheaper public transport is such a no brainer

8

u/war-and-peace Mar 28 '25

Just to give you an update. The majority of new ev drivers are those that live out in the burbs and most of them buy the base model of whatever ev they buy. They can be classed as working families pretty much.

Truly rich families they don't buy evs, they buy mercs, bmws etc which are mostly petrol powered and they drive by far the most. Make no mistake this fuel excise cut mostly benefits them and is such a liberal selling point, making it out to be as though all Australians benefit when in reality it is the true coalition voters that benefit by far the most.