David Alexander doorstop interview at Parliament House on CGT changes
Transcript: 18 June 2026
David Alexander:
Thanks. David Alexander. I'm the Chief of Policy and Advocacy at the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Here to comment on the government's proposed changes to the capital gains tax. So the government has proposed some changes that are intended to ameliorate the damage to the business community from its capital gains tax changes. We recognise that the changes will for some businesses ameliorate that damage. Our broader point though is why are we talking about damage at all? So we're very concerned that increased taxes on investment in business will reduce investment in business. So we don't think that the bill fundamentally addresses the broader concerns around the disincentives for investment in Australian business. Part of what we're seeing is a patch up job after the budget measure has been announced. There's been almost daily revelations of problems and issues that have been emerging. The government is trying to address this.
We're very concerned about the government trying to rush this through the parliament next week with minimal scrutiny. So we continue to say the government should go back to the drawing board and provide a supportive environment for investment in business, not disincentives. Happy to take questions.
Journalist:
For business that aren't captured within this new carve up, what problem is there with the indexation regime? Won't any startups that have a negligent cost base be covered by the startups?
David Alexander:
Yeah. So the government's trying to ameliorate the damage by lifting the threshold for small businesses, but there are a lot of businesses who won't meet those thresholds. You can see up the scale that the penalty is still going to apply. The government's also issued a paper on trying to deal with the tech sector, other areas of innovation. We'll take a proper look through that, but we're concerned that even by trying to create a distinction between innovative businesses who are eligible for more concessions and other businesses who presumably are not innovative, we think that's a false distinction. There's innovation across the economy, across business sectors in every kind of industry. So we think that there needs to be a recognition that there's innovation everywhere and we shouldn't be penalising. We should be supporting.
Journalist:
So what types of businesses do you think should be obviously innovating everyone, but can you narrow it down? Like what businesses should be deemed benefited and applied to this?
David Alexander:
Well, we think the starting point should be not penalising investment in business at all. So in fact, if we want to grow the economy in the future, grow jobs, grow wages, we need businesses thriving. And you're not going to do that by imposing higher penalties on investment in Australian business.
Journalist:
Accepting that the government wants to pose the new tax changes on some businesses. What would you recommend to get as wide as a coverage as you can of these carve outs?
David Alexander:
I think the starting point for your question is, given that the government wants to penalise Australian businesses with higher taxes, we don't accept that premise from the start. We think we're in a globally competitive situation that we need to win the race and imposing extra penalties is just going to put us further back in the pack.
Journalist:
David, I might have come in late on this. I can't get an answer from the government, but under the CGT exemption for businesses between two and 10 million can now apply for the extra 50 per cent deduction. Do you know if the 30 per cent floor still applies?
David Alexander:
I think it does. I mean, it's only just come out,
Journalist:
So
David Alexander:
We're still going through it ourselves. But yes, my understanding is it does apply still. Yeah.
Journalist:
Well, what level of detail were you consulted on with this stuff that.... were you just told before the announcement that it was coming?
David Alexander:
We have had discussions with the Treasurer's office and Treasury about our views on the whole package and particular parts and we've made suggestions. Our overall position is that the tax regime should be more supportive of investment in business. So the starting point is fundamentally different. There are ways that you can ameliorate the damage and we've in our submissions put in ideas about how that might be done, but let's not confuse that with the notion that imposing extra tax on investment in business is just a bad thing.
Journalist:
Your starting point is don't do any of this in the first place.
David Alexander:
That's right.
Journalist:
Just changing tax slightly. Pauline Hanson yesterday said she wants to see changes to the industrial relations system. She thinks it should be easier for bosses to be able to sack workers. Do you think Hanson's agenda in totality would be good for business in Australia?
David Alexander:
Look, there's a lot there to unpack and we've seen an extraordinary rise in the polls of One Nation, but as yet the policy context is pretty unformed. We've seen some comments yesterday. We haven't analysed them deeply. Some of the things that proposed the notion that small business finds it very hard to get a fair go, we think that that is a correct assessment of the situation. Small businesses suffer an enormous amount of penalties in red tape in regulation and even in industrial relations, the obligations are very onerous. So we ourselves have been pushing for reduction in the red tape and regulation in the industrial relations system. We've offered concrete proposals around that, lifting the threshold definition of small businesses in the act so that a number of the more onerous provisions don't apply.
Journalist:
Just as a head of an industry organisation, are you having to now treat Hanson and One Nation as a serious party, you engaging with them in the way that you would the opposition and other minor parties in terms of understanding their policy and so on?
David Alexander:
Yeah, we treat all parliamentarians with respect. They've all been elected to parliament representing Australians. And so we look at that and we offer advice. We love to hear from them. We communicate with our members. One Nation has a number of members in parliament, not that many. So clearly there's a polling effect that's going on, but in the parliament itself, that's not reflected at least at this stage.
Journalist:
You mentioned there was a lot raised yesterday. I just want to just run this one past you. Hanson said, why should business pay them if they're not at work in relation to parents on parental leave? What do you make of these comments and has paid parental leave schemes in Australia gone too far?
David Alexander:
Yeah. So there's a number of aspects that we haven't really analysed in any way with One Nation. In the broad, we make a number of positions regarding small business in particular and the onerous requirements that are put on small business year after year. We just saw in the last term a few rounds of major legislative changes with the closing loopholes bill. That's still weighing down on small businesses at the moment. So there's quite a few of these areas where we are concerned and we think the government should take up the issue and seek to address it.
Journalist:
So you think parental leave schemes have gone too far or are they...is business managing with that?
David Alexander:
Yeah, we haven't looked at the One Nation policy on that in any detail. So before we comment, we'd have to have a look at it. Anything else? Nope. Very good.