Re: No speedrail, Badgerys creek or Kurnell

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:31:05 GMT, "Dave Proctor"
<daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:

>"Maurie Daly" <mauried@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
>3a37064b.25494969@can-news.tpg.com.au">news:3a37064b.25494969@can-news.tpg.com.au...
>
>> Why doesnt Speedrail simply go ahead without the tax concessions?
>
>(apologies for typos in previous post).
>
>Apparently, they needed the tax concessions to make the thing profitable,
>which I do not have a problem with, as long as that is all they are, tax
>concessions (and not payments from the government to Speedrail).
>
>Dave
>
>
I have a problem with this too.
If the tax concessions represent a no net cost to the Govt ,and have
to be paid back over time ,then effectively the consortium is asking
the Govt for nothing,so why ask in the first place.
I suspect that the real problem is the same one that killed the
original VFT proposal,which is that the Consortium wants to be able to
offset tax liabilities from its other operations against initial
losses from the VFT.
I dont have a problem with this , but I can see why the Feds do as it
will cause then to suffer a reduction in company tax from the
companies which make up the consortium.
On a differant issue, is the Consortium building / potentially
building / maybe building at some future date / investigating the
feasability of building / the AP to darwin line asking for similar tax
concessions.?

MD