smell a rat ?, page-10

Yes, jamesdenis, I think that you have hit the nail on the head, but your might not agree with my reason for saying so.

You posted
Will BHP pay more super tax in 5 years than it say lost on its MAGMA project in South America???? $3.2 billion dollars was a lot of money to lose and we as AUSTRALIANS didnt see a cent of it.


I would like to draw your attention to BHP news release dated 2nd May:

"The imposition of this new tax would result in an increase in the total effective tax rate on the Groups profits earned from its Australian operations from around 43 per cent currently to around 57 per cent from 2013."

Why do I think that its important to link this news release with your post. Your post points out pretty clearly in my opinion that mining is a high risk business - this is the bit I got from your post. Success cannot be assured.

As a shareholder looking for an investment to secure my future, the prospect of paying more than half the profits in tax when success comes hardly fills me with confidence. I'm sure that companies investing in Australian resources feel the same way.

I won't go into the negative impacts on super funds, employment prospects etc that could come from this tax as these have been covered very well.

I see a 43% tax that BHP currently pays in a risky business with volatile prices as super tax. I see the tax proposal as weapons grade tax with the potential to be very destructive.

I appreciate that we won't always agree. Life would be pretty boring if we all occupied the same planet in terms of opinion.