Distributing GST revenue to the states: Where is the revenue raised and what is a ‘relativity’?

Parliament house flag post

Distributing GST revenue to the states: Where is the revenue raised and what is a ‘relativity’?

Posted 30/07/2014 by dalet

Discussions of the distribution of revenue from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) to the Australian States and Territories often refer to the GST that a particular state ‘collects’, or GST raised in a particular state. These are actually references to ‘relativities’, a term which describes the portion of GST a state gets relative to an equal per-capita distribution. This flagpost outlines how the location of GST collection differs from the per-capita approach and ‘relativities’ that underlie the actual distribution of GST revenue.

GST revenue is collected by the Commonwealth, and then distributed to the State and Territory governments (‘the states’). The current GST distribution framework is not based on where transactions physically take place, or in which state GST revenue is raised. In fact, it could prove complicated to try and allocate particular transactions to one location – sales that are liable to GST made across a state border would need to be allocated to one state or another. As the Commonwealth Grants Commission (CGC) notes in its 2014 annual update (p. 36):

Some people have misinterpreted a relativity to be the proportion of the GST revenue raised in a State which is returned to that State. This would only be true if the GST collected per person were the same in every State, which given differences among the States appears unlikely.

The starting point for the CGC (the body which provides advice on the distribution of GST) is the population distribution. Specifically, the CGC estimates the share of GST revenue that the states would receive if GST was distributed according to each state’s population (an equal, per-capita distribution).

The CGC also uses a complex assessment to calculate a ‘relativity’ for each state. As described in the Budget papers:

The relativities determine how much GST each State receives compared with an equal per capita share and are determined such that, if each State made the same effort to raise revenue from its own sources and operated at the same level of efficiency, each State would have the capacity to provide services and the associated infrastructure at the same standard.

The CGC has written extensively on how it calculates relativities (their frequently asked questions provide a high level summary, and their annual updates include extensive detail). A 2012 review of GST distribution also examined the process in detail.

Multiplying a state’s equal per-capita share of GST revenue by its relativity gives the actual share of GST it receives (there are some minor adjustments when the GST revenue is more or less than expected). A relativity greater than one means the state gets more than it would on an equal per-capita basis; a relativity less than one means it gets less revenue than on an equal per-capita basis. In the table below, a state’s actual share (C) is calculated by multiplying its equal per-capita share (A) and its relativity (B).  

 

State or Territory Share if GST were distributed on an equal per-capita basis (A) 2014–15 relativity (B) 2014–15 actual GST share after adjusting by the relativity (C)
NSW 32.00% 0.975 31.20%
VIC 24.92% 0.88282 22.00%
QLD 20.30% 1.07876 21.90%
WA 11.16% 0.37627 4.20%
SA 7.14% 1.28803 9.20%
TAS 2.20% 1.63485 3.60%
ACT 1.62% 1.23600 2.00%
NT 1.04% 5.66061 5.90%

Source: Parliamentary Lbrary estimates based on Australian Government, Federal financial relations: budget paper no. 3 2014–15, Table 3.7.

The chart below shows historical relativities, and the projected relativities in the 2014-15 Budget. For most states, relativities have generally been unchanged since the introduction of the GST. However, some states, particularly Western Australia and the Northern Territory have experienced significant changes in the relativities.

In its most recent update, the CGC stated (p. XX):

Western Australia’s above average revenue raising capacity drives its fiscal strength … The relatively low fiscal capacities of South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT stem mostly from below average capacities to raise revenue while Queensland and the Northern Territory face very high costs of providing services.

 Historical relativities for the States and Territories between 2000-01 and 2014-15, and projections from the 2014-15 Budget

Sources: Commonwealth Grants Commission, Report on 2014 Revenue Sharing Relativities, Table E-1, p. 135. Treasury projections for 2015–16 onwards are from the 2014–15 Budget, Budget Paper No. 3, Table 3.2.

Authored by Tarek Dale and Alicia Hall, with assistance from Daniel Weight.

Economics Section and Statistics and Mapping Section, Parliamentary Library


Thank you for your comment. If it does not require moderation, it will appear shortly.

Add your comment

[Click to expand]




Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print

FlagPost

Flagpost is a blog on current issues of interest to members of the Australian Parliament


Parliamentary Library Logo showing Information Analysis & Advice

Archive

Syndication

Tagcloud

Refugees asylum immigration Australian foreign policy Parliament climate change elections women social security Australian Bureau of Statistics Employment indigenous Australians Sport illicit drugs gambling people trafficking taxation Medicare welfare reform Australian Defence Force higher education welfare policy United Nations health financing Asia Middle East criminal law disability Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency World Anti-Doping Agency United States federal budget school education forced labour aid statistics Australian Electoral Commission WADA income management Industrial Relations emissions trading dental health Australia in the Asian Century steroids detention 43rd Parliament Private health insurance OECD ASADA labour force transport Law Enforcement Australian Federal Police people smuggling poker machines National Disability Insurance Scheme Australian Crime Commission slavery Papua New Guinea Australian Public Service constitution International Women's Day corruption Afghanistan Fair Work Act child protection Aviation debt federal election 2013 parliamentary procedure ALP New Zealand Newstart Parenting Payment Census politics High Court skilled migration election results voting mental health Federal Court terrorist groups Higher Education Loan Program HECS governance youth paid parental leave environment foreign debt gross debt net debt defence capability customs Senate doping health crime health risks multiculturalism aged care Gonski Review of Funding for Schooling sex slavery sea farers Special Rapporteur Electoral reform political parties banking firearms public policy Population violence against women domestic violence China ADRV terrorism science research and development social media pensions welfare ASIO intelligence community Australian Security Intelligence Organisation accountability public service reform Carbon Pricing Mechanism carbon tax mining military history employer employee fishing by-election European Union same sex relationships international relations coal seam gas family assistance planning Senators and Members United Nations Security Council Australian economy food vocational education and training Drugs health reform Indonesia children codes of conduct terrorist financing health system money laundering early childhood education Canada Financial sector UK Parliament national security fuel disability employment Tasmania integrity transparency Australian Secret Intelligence Service sexual abuse federal state relations World Trade Organization Australia housing affordability bulk billing water renewable energy children's health health policy Governor-General US economy export liquefied natural gas foreign bribery question time speaker superannuation expertise climate Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change leadership Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry food labelling Pacific Islands reserved seats new psychoactive substances synthetic drugs UNODC carbon markets Indigenous constitutional recognition of local government local government consumer laws PISA royal commission US politics language education baby bonus Leaders of the Opposition Parliamentary remuneration Australia Greens federal election 2010 servitude Trafficking Protocol energy forced marriage rural and regional Northern Territory Emergency Response ministries Hung Parliament social citizenship human rights emissions reduction fund; climate change child care funding refugees immigration asylum procurement Indigenous health e-voting internet voting nsw state elections 44th Parliament 2015 ABS Age Pension Death penalty capital punishment execution Bali nine Bali bombings Trade EU China soft power education Fiji India Disability Support Pension Antarctica Diplomacy by-elections state and territories workers Bills anti-corruption fraud bribery corporate ownership whistleblower G20 economic reform innovation standards NATO Members of Parliament Scottish referendum Middle East; national security; terrorism social services Criminal Code Amendment (Misrepresentation of Age to a Minor) Bill 2013 online grooming sexual assault of minors ACT Assembly public health smoking plain packaging tobacco cigarettes Asia; Japan; international relations Work Health and Safety Migration; asylum seekers; regional processing China; United States; international relations fiscal policy Racial Discrimination Act; social policy; human rights; indigenous Australians Foreign policy Southeast Asia Israel Palestine regional unemployment asylum refugees immigration political finance donations foreign aid Economics efficiency productivity human rights; Racial Discrimination Act employment law bullying asylum seekers Animal law; food copyright Australian Law Reform Commission industry peace keeping contracts workplace policies trade unions same-sex marriage disorderly conduct retirement Parliament House standing orders public housing prime ministers election timetable sitting days First speech defence budget submarines Somalia United Kingdom GDP forestry world heritage political engagement leave loading Trade; tariffs; safeguards; Anti-dumping public interest disclosure whistleblowing Productivity Commission regulation limitation period universities Ireland cancer gene patents genetic testing suspension of standing and sessional orders animal health live exports welfare systems infant mortality middle class welfare honorary citizen railways disciplinary tribunals standard of proof World Health Organisation arts international students skilled graduate visas temporary employment visas apologies roads Italy national heritage NHMRC nutrition anti-dumping Constitutional reform referendum Rent Assistance competition policy pharmaceutical benefits scheme obesity evidence law sacrament of confession US presidential election international days DFAT UN General Assembly deregulation Regulation Impact Statements administrative law small business Breaker Morant homelessness regional engagement social determinants of health abortion Youth Allowance Members suspension citizen engagement policymaking workplace health and safety Trafficking in Persons Report marine reserves hearing TAFE Victoria astronomy resources sector YMCA youth parliament alcohol Korea rebate Australian Greens presidential nomination Racial Discrimination Act entitlements political parties preselection solar hot water Financial Action Taskforce Horn of Africa peacekeeping piracy Great Barrier Reef Stronger futures political financing political education social inclusion Social Inclusion Board maritime early childhood National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care Murray-Darling Basin Iran sanctions Norway hospitals republic President Barack Obama Presidential visits ANZUS qantas counselling

Show all
Show less
Back to top