Bill Debate · In Committee

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026, Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026; In Committee

Senate · Thursday 25 June 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The Senate debated opposition amendments to remove schedules regarding capital gains tax and negative gearing from the tax reform bills, which the government and Greens defended as necessary to fund the Working Australians Tax Offset. Independent Senator David Pocock withdrew his amendments after receiving assurances that issues concerning death and divorce would be addressed in subsequent legislation. Further discussion focused on implementation details, including housing supply impacts and capital gains tax exemptions for classic cars, with Senator Hanson opposing the measures as a tax grab. The debate concluded when the allotted time expired and the questions were put before the chair.

Outcome

The amendments moved by Senator Chandler were not supported, Senator Pocock withdrew his amendments, and the questions were put before the chair after the allotted time expired.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Claire Chandler (TAS) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Chandler moved amendments to omit schedules 1 and 2, arguing the reforms constituted an unfair income tax increase that had not been put to voters. Chandler contended the legislation was rushed, complex, and lacked proper scrutiny, leaving key definitions unresolved and imposing significant compliance costs. Chandler asserted that the changes would harm investment, the housing market, and small businesses, and that the government lacked a mandate for such measures. Chandler maintained that the coalition supported lower, simpler taxes and that the current proposal failed to meet those criteria.

Government response

Katy Gallagher (Minister for Finance) ALP ACT

Gallagher opposed the amendments, stating the reforms were a coherent package designed to rebalance the tax system and fund tax cuts for working Australians. Gallagher defended the staged legislative approach as standard practice for complex tax reforms, noting that subsequent bills would address specific interactions and implementation details. Gallagher tabled a supplementary explanatory memorandum outlining government amendments to extend small business concessions and remove unnecessary ministerial powers. Gallagher provided revenue figures, indicating that negative gearing reforms generated the majority of the $3.6 billion revenue impact, which was offset by the Working Australians Tax Offset.

Opposition response

Andrew Bragg (Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) Liberal NSW

Bragg argued that the government had failed to define what constitutes a new build or explain the regulatory impact analysis used. Bragg questioned why the reforms distinguished between new and existing homes for tax purposes but not for superannuation fund investment restrictions. Bragg expressed concern that the reforms would reduce housing supply by 35,000 units and prevent investors from buying new homes, potentially increasing rents.

Nick McKim (TAS) (Australian Greens) Greens oppose

McKim opposed the amendments, arguing that capital gains tax and negative gearing reforms must be considered together due to their interaction. McKim criticised the government for lacking ambition in addressing the housing crisis, stating the reforms failed to adequately assist renters and first-home buyers. McKim highlighted the disparity in tax treatment between income from labour and income from capital, noting that current concessions disproportionately benefit wealthier individuals.
Slade Brockman (WA) (DPRES) DPRES

Brockman noted that the committee was considering the bills and the specific amendments moved by Senator Chandler. Brockman stated that the question before the committee was whether schedules 1 and 2 should stand as printed.
David Pocock (ACT) (Independent) Ind mixed

Pocock withdrew his amendments after receiving government assurances that grandfathering issues related to death and divorce would be addressed in future legislation. Pocock expressed disappointment that these matters were not resolved in the primary bill and criticised the rushed nature of the inquiry process. Pocock acknowledged the government's commitment but noted the ideal approach would have been to resolve these issues in the current legislation.
Andrew Bragg (NSW) (Liberal Party) Liberal oppose

Bragg withdrew his amendments and questioned the validity of the original regulatory impact analysis given the multiple changes announced since the budget. Bragg argued that the government had effectively announced the budget four times in different ways, undermining the certainty of the costings. Bragg maintained that the reforms were flawed and that the government's approach lacked consistency.
Katy Gallagher (Minister for Housing and Homelessness) ALP ACT

minister

Gallagher stated that definitions for new builds were outlined in budget papers and would be formalised in future legislation. Gallagher cited Treasury modelling predicting a rent increase of less than $2 per week for median households and noted that 75,000 Australians were expected to buy homes over the next decade. Gallagher explained that the capital gains tax concession would be adjusted to account for inflation rather than removed entirely. Gallagher also confirmed that classic cars remained exempt from capital gains tax.
Pauline Hanson (QLD) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation oppose

Hanson criticised the budget as a tax grab resulting from uncontrolled government spending and high immigration levels. Hanson argued that the reforms removed aspiration for younger generations by restricting investment opportunities for ordinary Australians, including nurses and police. Hanson questioned the capital gains tax treatment of personal assets like jewellery and raised concerns about government waste on international travel and foreign aid.
Ross Cadell (NSW) (National Party) Nationals

Cadell raised a specific concern regarding the valuation of historic cars for capital gains tax purposes before the upcoming deadline. Cadell asked how a car undergoing restoration that is not yet complete would be valued, noting that such projects often take longer than expected.

Opened by

Claire Chandler (TAS) (Liberal Party)

Liberal

Bills

Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026

Speeches

80 speeches, 7 other contributors

Topics

Housing Tax

Debate Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026; Consideration of Senate Message Bill Debate, 25 Jun 2026 · Same bill
Debate Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026, Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026; Limitation of Debate Bill Debate, 25 Jun 2026 · Same bill
Debate Housing General Debate, 14 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Housing, Tax
Debate A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Amendment (No Jab No Pay Repeal) Bill 2025; Second Reading Bill Debate, 16 Sep 2026 · Shared topic: Tax
Question Time House Question Time 19 Aug 2026 · Shared topics: Housing, Tax

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.