Section 90 of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

Section 90 of the Constitution of Australia prohibits the States from imposing customs duties and excise duties. The section bars the States from imposing any tax that would be considered to be of a customs or excise nature. While customs duties are easy to determine, the status of excise, as summarised in Ha v New South Wales , is that it consists of "taxes on the production, manufacture, sale or distribution of goods, whether of foreign or domestic origin." [1] This effectively means that States are unable to impose sales taxes.

Contents

Whether a State tax is of an excise nature or not has been the subject of numerous cases in the High Court of Australia, and it has had difficulty in reaching a clear majority opinion as to how "excise" should be interpreted in specific circumstances. [2] It has been described as "one of the significant failures of the High Court." [3]

Text

On the imposition of uniform duties of customs the power of the Parliament to impose duties of customs and of excise, and to grant bounties on the production or export of goods, shall become exclusive. On the imposition of uniform duties of customs all laws of the several States imposing duties of customs or of excise, or offering bounties on the production or export of goods, shall cease to have effect, but any grant of or agreement for any such bounty lawfully made by or under the authority of the Government of any State shall be taken to be good if made before the thirtieth day of June, One thousand eight hundred and ninety eight, and not otherwise. [4]

Scope

Starting with Peterswald v Bartley (1904), it was initially held that "excise" is an indirect tax, and is accordingly based on the definition given by John Stuart Mill:

Taxes are either direct or indirect. A direct tax is one which is demanded from the very persons who it is intended or desired should pay it. Indirect taxes are those which are demanded from one person in the expectation and intention that he shall indemnify himself at the expense of another; such are the excise or customs. [5]

However, since Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria , it has been held that indirectness is neither a necessary nor sufficient quality for such a tax. [6]

Since the High Court's ruling in Parton v Milk Board , [7] subsequently endorsed unanimously in Bolton v Madsen , [8] excise duties in the Australian context are generally agreed to apply in several situations:

  • "What probably is essential is that it should be a tax upon goods before they reach the consumer." [9]
  • "A tax upon a commodity at any point in the course of distribution before it reaches the consumer produces the same effect as a tax upon its manufacture or production." [9]
  • "It is probably a safe inference ... that a tax on consumers or upon consumption cannot be an excise." [10]

In Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd v Victoria , it was further held:

...the tax must be directly related to the goods and the criterion of liability must be a step in the production, manufacture, sale or distribution of the goods. There is a direct relationship between the tax and the goods if the tax is calculated by reference to the quantity or value of goods produced or dealt with in the relevant period. Conversely, it was said that to establish no more than that the imposition of the tax increased the cost of putting goods on the market by a calculable amount, e.g., because the tax was imposed in a fixed amount as the fee for a licence, falls short of establishing the requisite relationship between the tax and the goods. [11]

In Gosford Meats Pty Ltd v New South Wales, Gibbs CJ summarised the position by stating that "an impost cannot be an excise unless it is a tax upon, or in respect of, a step in the production, manufacture, sale or distribution of goods." [12]

While the reasoning of these cases appears straightforward, the application has not. The High Court held in a series of cases that license and franchise fees did not constitute "excise", such as: [13] [14]

  1. a levy of six per cent of the wholesale value of liquor on liquor retailers (Dennis Hotels);
  2. a license fee scheme for the sale of petrol ( HC Sleigh ); [15]
  3. a licence fee calculated using a back-dating device (i.e., by reference to results of a preceding period) (Parton); and
  4. a tobacco licensing scheme (Dickenson's Arcade, Philip Morris).

However, other taxes have been held to be "excise": [13] [16]

  1. a levy which fell equally upon local and imported petrol (Petrol Case);
  2. a consumption tax on tobacco (Dickenson's Arcade);
  3. taxing receipts issued by vendors that acknowledged payment of the purchase price of commodities (Hamersley); [17]
  4. a tax on the processing of fish intended for human consumption (MG Kailis); [18]
  5. a tax on livestock used in the production of meat or wool (Logan Downs); [19]
  6. a pipeline charge held to be an excise on petrol (Hematite);
  7. a meat industry licence (Gosford Meats); and
  8. an X-rated video licensing scheme (Capital Duplicators).

But Ha v New South Wales has since cast doubt on State licensing schemes previously held to be valid for tobacco, alcohol and petrol, and which have accounted for a significant portion of State revenues. [13] Ha held that where such a scheme is not in reality of a regulatory nature, it is therefore invalid:

So long as a State tax, albeit calculated on the value or quantity of goods sold, was properly to be characterised as a mere licence fee this Court upheld the legislative power of the States to impose it. But once a State tax imposed on the seller of goods and calculated on the value or quantity of goods sold cannot be characterised as a mere licence fee, the application of s 90 must result in a declaration of its invalidity. [1]

This has created significant debate as to the validity of other State taxation schemes, such as in the recent trend for States to extend stamp duty to certain dealings in goods. [20]

In 2023, in the case of Vanderstock v Victoria the court ruled that a tax per kilometres driven for electric vehicles was an excise and therefore invalid. In a 4:3 decision, the court overturned Dickenson’s Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania and ruled that consumption charges are a form of duty excise. The minority justices were scathing in their dissent, with Steward J arguing the decision could "render the states and territories the constitutionally fiscal minions of the commonwealth". [21]

Significant cases

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Garfield Barwick</span> 7th Chief Justice of Australia and politician (1903-1997)

Sir Garfield Edward John Barwick was an Australian judge who was the seventh and longest serving Chief Justice of Australia, in office from 1964 to 1981. He had earlier been a Liberal Party politician, serving as a minister in the Menzies government from 1958 to 1964.

The system of tort law in Australia is broadly similar to that in other common law countries. However, some divergences in approach have occurred as its independent legal system has developed.

Australian constitutional law is the area of the law of Australia relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Australia. Legal cases regarding Australian constitutional law are often handled by the High Court of Australia, the highest court in the Australian judicial system. Several major doctrines of Australian constitutional law have developed.

The reserved powers doctrine was a principle used by the inaugural High Court of Australia in the interpretation of the Constitution of Australia, that emphasised the context of the Constitution, drawing on principles of federalism, what the Court saw as the compact between the newly formed Commonwealth and the former colonies, particularly the compromises that informed the text of the constitution. The doctrine involved a restrictive approach to the interpretation of the specific powers of the Federal Parliament to preserve the powers that were intended to be left to the States. The doctrine was challenged by the new appointments to the Court in 1906 and was ultimately abandoned by the High Court in 1920 in the Engineers' Case, replaced by an approach to interpretation that emphasised the text rather than the context of the Constitution.

The constitutional basis of taxation in Australia is predominantly found in sections 51(ii), 90, 53, 55, and 96, of the Constitution of Australia. Their interpretation by the High Court of Australia has been integral to the functioning and evolution of federalism in Australia.

<i>Swift Australian Co (Pty) Ltd v Boyd Parkinson</i>

Swift Australian Co (Pty) Ltd v Boyd Parkinson, was a case decided in the High Court of Australia regarding the scope of the trade and commerce power in section 51(i) of the Constitution.

<i>Bath v Alston Holdings Pty Ltd</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Bath v Alston Holdings Pty Ltd, is a High Court of Australia case that discusses the application of the freedom of interstate trade, as specified in Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia. This case followed the unanimous decision of Cole v Whitfield, regarding the interpretation of section 92 as about free trade as opposed to individual rights.

<i>Peterswald v Bartley</i>

Peterswald v Bartley is an early High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise.

<i>Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria, is a High Court of Australia case that deals with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying customs or excise duties. Although some of the judges used the now-discredited criterion of liability approach, this case remains authority for cases that are factually similar to it.

<i>Bolton v Madsen</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Bolton v Madsen, is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise duty.

<i>Andersons Pty Ltd v Victoria</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Anderson's Pty Ltd v Victoria, is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with Section 90 of the Constitution of Australia. In this case, following on from such cases as Dennis Hotels Pty Ltd v Victoria, Barwick CJ accepted the broad approach to the definition of an excise, but rejected the formalistic criterion of liability approach for determining if the excise falls at the relevant step. He adopted the substance over form approach, or the substantial effects doctrine, in that there are many factors to be considered, for example, the indirectness of the tax, its effect on the cost of goods and its proximity to the production or distribution of the goods.

<i>Dickensons Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Dickenson's Arcade Pty Ltd v Tasmania, also known as the Tobacco Tax case is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution.

<i>Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd v Victoria</i>

Hematite Petroleum Pty Ltd v Victoria, is a High Court of Australia case that deals with section 90 of the Australian Constitution.

<i>Ha v New South Wales</i> 1997 High Court of Australia case

Ha v New South Wales is a High Court of Australia case that dealt with section 90 of the Australian Constitution, which prohibits States from levying excise.

<i>R v Barger</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

R v Barger is a 1908 High Court of Australia case where the majority held that the taxation power could not be used by the Australian Parliament to indirectly regulate the working conditions of workers. In this case, an excise tariff was imposed on manufacturers, with an exemption being available for those who paid "fair and reasonable" wages to their employees.

Section 92 of the Constitution of Australia, as far as is still relevant today is:

... trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.

<i>Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd</i>

Roxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd is an Australian unjust enrichment law case, concerning to what extent enrichment of the defendant must be at the expense of the claimant.

In Australia, the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity defines the circumstances in which Commonwealth laws can bind the States, and where State laws can bind the Commonwealth. This is distinct from the doctrine of crown immunity, as well as the rule expressed in Section 109 of the Australian Constitution which governs conflicts between Commonwealth and State laws.

Section 99 of the Constitution of Australia, is one of several important non-discrimination provisions that govern actions of the Commonwealth and the various States.

Betfair Australia is an Australian web betting exchange. Established in 2004, Betfair Australia operates Australia's only betting exchange under a Tasmanian Gaming Licence. Since August 2014 Betfair Australia has been fully owned by Crown Resorts.

References

  1. 1 2 Ha, per Brennan CJ, McHugh, Gummow and Kirby JJ
  2. ↑ Gray 1997, p. 53.
  3. ↑ Caleo 1987, p. 296.
  4. ↑ Constitution Of Australia: Chapter IV – Finance And Trade
  5. ↑ cited by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in The Brewers and Maltsters Association of Ontario v The Attorney General for Ontario [1897] UKPC 2, [1897] AC 231(6 February 1897), PC (on appeal from Ontario) and The Bank of Toronto v Lambe [1887] UKPC 29, 12 AC 575(9 July 1887), PC (on appeal from Quebec)
  6. ↑ Caleo 1987, pp. 303–304.
  7. ↑ Caleo 1987, p. 300.
  8. ↑ Caleo 1987, p. 301.
  9. 1 2 Parton, at p. 260
  10. ↑ Parton, at p. 261, citing Atlantic Smoke Shops Limited v James H. Conlon and others [1943] UKPC 44 , [1943] AC 550(30 July 1943), PC (on appeal from Canada)
  11. ↑ Hematite, per Mason J (as he then was) at par. 16
  12. ↑ Gosford Meats, per Gibbs CJ at par. 8
  13. 1 2 3 Halliday 1998.
  14. ↑ Hanks 1986, p. 366.
  15. ↑ HC Sleigh Ltd v South Australia [1977] HCA 2 , (1977) 136 CLR 475(1 February 1977)
  16. ↑ Hanks 1986, p. 365.
  17. ↑ Western Australia v Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd (No 1) [1969] HCA 42 , (1969) 120 CLR 42(12 September 1969)
  18. ↑ MG Kailis Pty Ltd v Western Australia [1974] HCA 10 , (1974) 130 CLR 245(1 April 1974)
  19. ↑ Logan Downs Pty Ltd v Queensland [1977] HCA 3 , (1977) 137 CLR 59(1 February 1977)
  20. ↑ Sampathy 2002, pp. 154–155.
  21. ↑ Karp, Paul; Kolovos, Benita (18 October 2023). "High court strikes down Victoria's electric vehicle tax in ruling that could threaten other state levies". The Guardian. ISSN   0261-3077 . Retrieved 19 October 2023.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.