• In 33 days

$300 Electricity Rebate For Every Household (Paid as 4 $75 Quarterly Deposits into Electricity Account) @ Budget.gov.au

47276
$300 Electricity Rebate For Every Household (Paid as 4 $75 Quarterly Deposits into Electricity Account) @ Budget.gov.au
Go to Deal
save50 on 14/05/2024 - 21:25 budget.gov.au (9462 clicks)
Last edited 15/05/2024 - 12:24 by 1 other user

New power bill relief
$300 energy rebates for every household

The Government is providing $3.5 billion in energy bill relief for all Australian households and around one million small businesses.

From 1 July 2024, more than 10 million households will receive a total rebate of $300 and eligible small businesses will receive $325 on their electricity bills throughout the year.

This is estimated to directly reduce headline inflation by around 1/2 of a percentage point in 2024–25 and is not expected to add to broader inflationary pressures.

(BTW: comparing to QLD's $1000 energy bill relief from https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/843908, what is the difference between this one and that post as this post has so many negative votes? If it is an 'announcement', it will be the similar announcement to QLD's rebate. In other words, both posts should be treated fairly and equally.)

Financial Electricity Rebate

Related Stores

Budget.gov.au
Budget.gov.au

Comments

  • Irishness on 14/05/2024 - 21:29
    +34

    so Fed rebate $300 + $1000 for Qld'ers from the State?

    • Korban Dallas on 14/05/2024 - 21:32
      +36

      That's about 2 years of free electricity for me

      • ph81 on 14/05/2024 - 21:43
        +5

        Yep, factoring in about 2 & half here. Possibly can stretch it to 3.

        • Korban Dallas on 14/05/2024 - 22:38
          +2

          Perhaps a lot more If I can switch to time of use.

          Single taraff is killing me.

      • toasty on 14/05/2024 - 21:44

        Same, but I’m finally installing solar so I’ll cash it out and put it towards my mortgage.

        • sky42856 on 14/05/2024 - 21:47
          +5

          you can't cash out government incentives - tried with Origin and was refused.

          • toasty on 14/05/2024 - 22:04
            +2

            @sky42856: Both my mother and sister have done it with the previous ones. I’m fairly certain my sister was with Origin too, so I have no idea why they didn’t let you.

          • INFIDEL on 14/05/2024 - 22:24
            +4

            @sky42856: Have been paid remaining rebate to bank account when switching electricity retailers - over last few years of Qld rebate. Including with Origin.

            It's your money, not the electricity retailer's!

            Switch electricity retailers for the incentives every few months.

          • Korban Dallas on 14/05/2024 - 22:39
            -1

            @sky42856: Not straight away (was knocked back once) but after a few months I have had done.

            Also got the Qld one twice by accident 😊

          • Poor Ass on 15/05/2024 - 00:10

            @sky42856: You can but there's a trick to it… I went through the same thing

          • yadq on 15/05/2024 - 02:53
            +1

            @sky42856: AGL refused to do so for me years ago, obdunsman was very effective however in explaining them it's not their money - and ever since they always send any credited amounts straight to my bank account.

          • jrvb42 on 15/05/2024 - 08:07

            @sky42856: You certainly can if your account is in credit.

          • Garrettau on 15/05/2024 - 17:21

            @sky42856: Change providers then they have to refund. Tried Ampol energy and they agreed

        • Iwantthatbargain on 14/05/2024 - 21:48

          I doubt if they allow cashing it out

          • frugalferret on 14/05/2024 - 22:08
            +6

            @Iwantthatbargain: They absolutely do allow you to cash out. It's credit on your power bill. It's your money, not the power companies. You request your credit, and they send it to you, just like people with solar credit have been doing for the past 10 years.

            • purple1 on 14/05/2024 - 22:15
              -7

              @frugalferret: Your statement is incorrect. Energy rebate and solar feed-in credits are not treated the same way.

              • frugalferret on 14/05/2024 - 22:30
                +4

                @purple1: https://imgur.com/a/kz3xZ4b

                Credits from Solar + Government rebates can be refunded at any time. If your power bill is always in credit, then there is nothing stopping you requesting your own money from your electricity provider.

                Source: have been doing that

                • peterlong1952 on 15/05/2024 - 10:09

                  @frugalferret: I tried that and they wouldn't refund any credits from sign up bonus or government rebates.

            • 0jay on 14/05/2024 - 22:22
              +3

              @frugalferret: I've never had an issue cashing out gvt credits (beyond having to hassle the retailer)

      • nokidsandthreemoney on 14/05/2024 - 21:44
        +56

        That’s about 4 months worth of electricity for me, and 6 other families I know. It doesn’t help most people in the medium-long term, and certainly isn’t life changing in the slightest for the short term either. A genuine waste of almost all of the budget surplus.

        • Rebu on 14/05/2024 - 21:53
          +1

          Why

          • nokidsandthreemoney on 14/05/2024 - 22:00
            +127

            @Rebu: Why? Because it’s a flashy way to try and win votes but doesn’t address the real problem, that privatised energy suppliers are running rampant with price gouging the same as the supermarket monopolies. The government needs to actually step in with their authority to invoke real, effective change, but they won’t because they are weak, scared little people who only care about saving their own necks in the upcoming elections, and shaking hands with their financial supporters. If people can’t see past the smoke they’re blowing, they should drop in to their local neurologist to get a head scan.

            • VVilf on 14/05/2024 - 22:25
              +46

              @nokidsandthreemoney: Agreed, privatised and multinational energy and resource/mining companies have pulled off the greatest heist of the Australian people.

              I love the way this guy explains it.

              • nokidsandthreemoney on 14/05/2024 - 22:37
                +25

                @VVilf: Lol that is great, I hadn’t seen that. If we don’t laugh, we’d cry right. I bet that dude has big energy absolutely seething with videos like that!

                The problem I always find is Australia is such a culturally relaxed country, which is one of our biggest attributes yet also an Achilles for us politically, economically, socially…
                Now they’ve been exposed and we are cottoning on to the fact that energy providers and supermarkets are bending us over, what will we do? Will we revolt like the French farmers recently? Lobby the government to enact change on our behalf? Nope, well all sit back, crack a tinny, and say ‘She’ll be roight, moite’. I’m guilty of it, I think we pretty much all are. We are for the most part an exceptionally well behaved and polite population that has allowed the nanny state to grow and the government (all government parties) along with their good buddies in private enterprise who ensure them cushy board member roles in retirement, laugh all the way to the bank.

                • Nuclearvodka on 15/05/2024 - 05:34
                  +12

                  @nokidsandthreemoney: Aussies are not well behaved and polite.
                  They're completely apathetic.
                  Too busy watching the footy or MAFS to bother going on a strike.
                  The media in Aus is also Dogsheet and reporting on useless sheet like identity politics instead of actual issues like cost of living, price gouging, etc.

                  • nokidsandthreemoney on 15/05/2024 - 06:28
                    +4

                    @Nuclearvodka: I do agree that a proportion of our community is apathetic, you're right, but i wouldn't go so far to say that we all don't care or are disinterested in our government or what happens from a decision making standpoint. This thread alone is evident of our cohesive passion of many voters, look how it has popped off regarding just one single aspect of an annual budget expenditure. I think perhaps a mixture of the two, whereby either we are naturally apathetic of decisions that don't affect us individually or we don't have on our individual radars, and then often too polite to cause a row when something doesn't go our way that we wish did.

                    You're spot on with our media though, a cowardly group of dull 'reporters', whom are essentially shift workers clocking in for their paycheck and drip feeding us either extreme of a horror story of crime to grow division, or an irrelevant good news story of how a puppy helped a kitten cross a road. Gone are the days of hard hitting, useful investigative jourlnalistic endeavour which we need now more than ever. That's why Angus Grigg's interview on four corners with the Woolies CEO was so well renowned, because it's whats craved and required of the public but so seldom delivered; media independence keeping institutions accountable to the people. That's why its integral for a well functioning country to have independent and secular media, policing (and defence force), and governemnnt, if any one of those groups controls or works too closely with the other, that is when corruption runs rife and tears the fabric of a society apart.

                  • elektron on 15/05/2024 - 09:40
                    +3

                    @Nuclearvodka: A strike against the Government? The place to strike is at a voting booth.

                    • Nuclearvodka on 15/05/2024 - 10:18
                      +2

                      @elektron: And yet, most Aussies have no idea who or why they vote for (don't worry, the French don't know either)

                      • elektron on 15/05/2024 - 13:36

                        @Nuclearvodka: Yes, sadly modern democracies are failing and we don't yet have a viable alternative.

              • JownehFixIT on 15/05/2024 - 07:50
                +1

                @VVilf: I was going to say, check out @punterspolitics! Beat me to it.

              • dealsucker on 15/05/2024 - 08:53
                +1

                @VVilf: I genuinely want to understand how we earn so little from our gas export compared to even qatar let alone Norway which has the largest sovereign fund compared to any other country

            • Austrian Oak on 14/05/2024 - 22:46
              +24

              @nokidsandthreemoney: When i pointed this out in the Energy Australia post, where Energy Australia is not an Australian Company but a Chinese company pretending to be an australian company and not to support them, i got downvoted and got branded a racist. lol

              https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/845659

              Compare Gas prices in WA where it's still government run and their supply charges are 1/5th of what we pay in the Eastern states.

                • Austrian Oak on 14/05/2024 - 22:56
                  +16

                  @INFIDEL: And where do their profits go? To their shareholders overseas.

                  • INFIDEL on 14/05/2024 - 22:57
                    -6

                    @Austrian Oak: Of course shareholders receive dividends from profits, same as any other Australian registered company.

                    Not the only energy (or other) company here structured like that!

                  • Austrian Oak on 14/05/2024 - 22:58
                    +7

                    @Austrian Oak: So we should sell all our critical infrastructure to the highest bidder?

                  • INFIDEL on 14/05/2024 - 23:12
                    +5

                    @Austrian Oak: You seem surprised😲
                    Australia is a major investment country for overseas money.

                    As its been for over 200 years!! Mainly from UK, then US. More recently from Asia.

                    Chinese power play: The astonishing number of Australian energy assets totally owned by China
                    Like Energy Australia & Alinta.

                    So why are you only complaining about 1 Hong Kong / China owned company operating here, amongst the huge number of others??

                    eg Optus is a wholly owned subsidiary of Singapore based Singtel.

                    ShopBack is a Singapore company.

                    Even Origin Energy is only partly Australian-owned - there are shareholders around the world.
                    It's how stock markets work.

                    Foreign Investment Review Board looks into overseas investment in Australia.

                    Not hard to find ownership - do a search!

                • INFIDEL on 22/05/2024 - 18:37

                  @INFIDEL: Lol! Nothing much more futile than negging reality🤣
                  It changes nothing.

                  Yes! Overseas people & companies invest here (subject to Foreign Investment Review Board), to receive a dividend on their investment… in Australian registered companies like Energy Australia, Optus, etc.
                  Same as Australian investors.

              • nokidsandthreemoney on 14/05/2024 - 23:03
                -2

                @Austrian Oak: Yeah some people will just scream the racist card because they don't know how to actually substantiate an argument, but your comments there are purely factual about an energy supplier? I don't understand how that is remotely racist. But anyway, yeah agreed, government consolidation is the way or at the very least, heavy monitoring and controls if it really has to be a privitised affair.

                Side note, it doesnt matter that the company was incorporated in 1901 when Hong Kong was technically an independent principality liberated by the English, there was an agreement struck on essentially a leasehold so HK was once a part of China and was always going to be reabsorbed by China, albeit it happened sooner than expected with a little too much Tiananmen Square vibes. Tragically the business case of HK as an incredible democraticly based free market economy which China quite rightly envied and idolised, became rapidly defunct once absorbed due to the communist based beast that China is. Most companies that could 'escape' fled to South Korea and Japan. China are licking their lips the same with Taiwan currently, but the irony would be the same, they intrinsically cannot inherit an economy based on political principles in direct conflict with their own. It's like trying to mix water and oil, as adults we know it won't work. But by gosh when we were kids, didn’t we try.

                • bchliu on 15/05/2024 - 02:12
                  +4

                  @nokidsandthreemoney: "Hong Kong was technically an independent principality liberated by the English".. LOLOLOL..

                  (Mod: Personal Attack Removed) to white wash this history. As someone born in HK before 1994, you'd hold a passport called "BDTC - British Dependent Territories Citizen" before it was changed to a "BNO - British National Overseas". It was NEVER some independent, free or democratic BS under British rule. Almost every part of the HK "government" before 1997 was assigned or appointed by the UK government. Most of the HK tax collected ended back into the UK treasury office with very little given back to HK's own people or infrastructure.

                  It was not until it got closer to 1997 when their lease ended that they agreed with China to give them any levels of self election and that was only valid once they handed the rights of the territory back to China.

                  Most companies didn't "escape" to South Korea or Japan - they stayed on and kept running their business as usual after the hand over. Again total BS historic revisionism here.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nationality_law_and_Ho…

                  • nokidsandthreemoney on 15/05/2024 - 08:10

                    @bchliu: Whoops, looks like Xi Jinping himself is gracing our thread with his presence..
                    White wash history? Pull ya head in champ. They wanted to disconnect from China and the English helped them achieve that. They helped them build a thriving economy, and all was at peace in HK until China decided to forcefully reclaim the country.

                    Now I know you've cited an excellent resource there in Wikipedia , but perhaps go and actually visit the place, and chat with some locals, and you'll find that yes plenty of people and businesses did escape to other Asian countries, and no, they aren't happier or better off under Chinese rule than what the British helped them achieve.

                    Nice try though CCP.

              • nokidsandthreemoney on 15/05/2024 - 07:45
                -1

                @Grok: Hahaha did you even read what I wrote?! Communism doesn't work, it never has and never will. It's idyllic but not realistic. Try re-reading my comments, graduate 5th grade, and then come back and we can have another chat.

            • GnarlyKnuckles on 15/05/2024 - 02:36

              @nokidsandthreemoney: Yes this, 100%. It reminds me of when 'Kevin 07' gave away 'stimulus' payments of $1000 of tax-payers' money to everyone for … well, no logical reason really; except that perhaps he thought it would help him get re-elected.

              Scoff.

              • allewell on 15/05/2024 - 06:54

                @GnarlyKnuckles: You do remember the GFC right. Oh wait, you didn't because Australia escaped it, in part due to those payments.

            • elektron on 15/05/2024 - 09:48
              +4

              @nokidsandthreemoney: It has a lot more to do with government energy policies than the privatised energy market. With our abundance of both coal and uranium we should have the cheapest energy in the world instead of one of the most expensive.

              Most people don't realise that the most powerful lobby in Australia today is the renewables lobby. Besides paying very high energy bills, you are also paying tens of billions in subsidies as tax payers.

              So yeah, thanks for the $300 rebate, Jimbo.

              • nokidsandthreemoney on 15/05/2024 - 09:54
                +3

                @elektron: Yes definitely agree, which realistically should make it even easier for the government to manage soaring prices, but as I noted in an earlier comment, they’re weak, selfish people trying to line their own pockets. They wouldn’t even need to spend 7 billion on this handout, they could just implement policy changes to ensure we save that much, or more. But they won’t, because they’re spineless.

            • autolux on 15/05/2024 - 10:34
              +2

              @nokidsandthreemoney: this. but those with authority/mandates to try and change this aren't scared or weak — they are corrupt, paid off and in on the take with their energy co. mates they're raiding the tax base with.

              • elektron on 15/05/2024 - 14:01

                @autolux: It's definitely this. Plus, structural reform is hard, and always risks alienating people, whether it's some voters, powerful lobbies or both.

            • frewer on 15/05/2024 - 12:52

              @nokidsandthreemoney: TLDR; Taxpayer money > household > private companies

            • Ryxxi on 15/05/2024 - 14:31
              -1

              @nokidsandthreemoney: sure but the liberals would have done even worse.. so I dont know if its really for the votes.. No gov currently is going to mess with big companies.

        • Korban Dallas on 14/05/2024 - 22:42
          +1

          Probably should of had 1k off solar system rebates with interest free loans…..

          Better long term.

          But I am not the gov 😭

          • nokidsandthreemoney on 14/05/2024 - 22:48
            +3

            @Korban Dallas: Firstly, absolutely love your username.

            Secondly, agreed. Solar rebates would've been a much smarter way to invest it.

            • INFIDEL on 14/05/2024 - 23:21
              +3

              @nokidsandthreemoney: If you haven't noticed, State Govts control & offer Solar Rebates. Not a Commonwealth matter.

              These 1 off (4 x quarterly $75) payments are for immediate "cost of living" relief to pay electricity bills.

              Not to be eaten up shonky solar installers like in the "pink bat" home insulation fiasco😜

              • nokidsandthreemoney on 15/05/2024 - 07:19
                +3

                @INFIDEL: I know it's a state government affair, but the federal government often allocates budget handouts to states individually anyway, so they could've in this case too.

                @massafiri
                I know what you're saying and I did think about this, but handing out the same amount of money semi-indirectly through energy rebates still has the same inflationary effect it would have if disbursed otherwise, except that this way is a quick, easy, and flashy way to burn through the billions, that intends to make the government look good, whereas schemes such as solar rebates wouldn't be so obvious in a 'philanthropic' sense (I laugh because its not chairty, its just some of our own tax dollars coming back to us) and could have a longer lasting effect as instead of having a month off paying my power, I'd get half price power for the next decade or two? I know which I'd prefer. Not to mention it would create jobs in the process.

                Better yet, if they'd funnelled the money toward a different sector such as building, that could've adressed the bigger problem at hand altogether. If they're battling inflation, AND house prices running rampant even still with rising interest rates which is effecting only the home owners with mortgages (often lower income earners than those without mortgages due to natural chronological events, you have the biggest amount of debt earlier in life when you earn less), as well as being passed on to renters, if the government targeted the issue of housing supply, they'd be working to fix the inflation issue at it's core. To simply put it, if they helped increase housing supply, which as a side benefit makes housing more affordable for Aussies, it may assist in lowering house prices, and in turn, as per the recent study run by VISA and mentioned in last months AFR article, decreasing the total value of retirees money and the wealth effect, is directly correlated with their consumer spending. We have such an aged population and the wealth divide is growing. Younger people or those under 50 with decent sized mortgages are the ones doing the heavy lifting economicly, whilst as they say, the 'rich get richer' with interest rates helping their liquid cash grow and house prices still rising. Their wealth continues to soar and the effect thay has psychologically is 'we have plenty of money, lets keep spending!' or to reference the article 'rich in assets, high on income, and short on time'.
                Unfortunately, the new generation of retirees coming through now are one of the first generations of 'pure consumers', whereas their parents whom lived through the depression and world wars and had very little, this new group has lived through globalisation and the most economically prosperous period in Australian history. They bought homes for (what feels like) cents on the dollar, got paid handsomely, and got to sit back and watch their wealth sky-rocket without so much as a truly turbulent period. They'll agrue the 90's interest rates were high, and the dot com bubble burst hurt, and the GFC was scary, but they didnt deal with war or constant recession, and we can all agree it'd be nice to be able to buy a 600sqm block with a liveable house 5kms from the CBD for 3-4x our annual salary. This group is now what the government are actively in battle against to try and stifle their spending habits, the rest of Aus is doing their part with tightening their buckles and feeling the heat.

                Tldr: Fix supply of houses, decrease housing values slightly, deter retiree consumer spending due to lowered total wealth, bing bang boom, inflation slows quicker.

                • dtc on 15/05/2024 - 12:10

                  @nokidsandthreemoney: I think you and all the 'its inflationary' people are missing the long term picture. If the rebate reduces inflation then it will also reduce pay rises, as they are often either directly linked to CPI or regard CPI heavily. Reducing wages creates a long term downward pressure on inflation (since the cost of services is one of the biggest contributors to inflation)

                  What additional measures do you think should be take to increase the supply of houses (which is not the same as reducing the cost of housing…there is now a high base cost of a new house due to, well, wages.)? There is a lot of funding for social housing, funding to states if they reduce regulatory and planning burden, special category to increase immigration of qualified tradies.

                  Most of your solutions eg deter consumer spending by retirees, is just transferring the cost of reducing inflation to one group vs another group. Forgetting, for example, that in the 70s and 80s and much of the 90s this group faced much higher inflation for decades in a row; we have had a decade of virtually nil consumer inflation and now its all the retirees fault that we have 4% CPI?

                  You seem to be mixing up consumer inflation and asset inflation, which are not the same thing and rarely have the same cause. The energy rebate isnt going to affect housing prices. Increased housing supply isnt going to reduce the cost of a haircut.

              • A-mak on 16/05/2024 - 06:09

                @INFIDEL: Just FYI: Federal gov also provides solar rebates but theirs is given directly to the solar company in the form of small-scale technology certificates (STCs).

                For example: If you receive a quote in Victoria from an accredited solar installer you should see all listed rebates & amounts (STC, SolarVic, SolarVic-Loan) as individual line items.

                • INFIDEL on 16/05/2024 - 11:46

                  @A-mak: Yes - run through State solar schemes.

            • entropysbane on 15/05/2024 - 08:58
              +1

              @nokidsandthreemoney: Ahh but doing a bigger solar rebate instead would not buy the votes of renters or most apartment dwellers.

          • GnarlyKnuckles on 15/05/2024 - 03:00
            -6

            @Korban Dallas: 'Doddering Albo' should have offered a large federal government rebate on solar system batteries, so that with a bit of clever appliance-usage management even peeps with relatively few panels could stop paying the electricity companies thousand$ every year; and stop getting ripped off by those same companies' pathetically low 'feed in' payment rates.

            That would 'marry perfectly' with Australia actually starting to build lithium batteries here in Australia, instead of mining the lithium here, selling it to China for a song, then buying that very same lithium we mined here in Australia back from China at a huge mark-up, wrapped in a battery. I don't think Alb-idon' is capable of even understanding any of this, let alone actually making it happen. Even when he gives publicly televised speeches he can't speak properly, and sounds like an idiot. He is a union puppet, devoid of any wisdom, let alone common sense. He is not even the least bit charismatic. 'Uncle Arthur' springs to my mind immediately, the second I hear his voice.

            I would quite honestly prefer that any other political party was in charge of the country, rather than one with 'Uncle Alb-idon' at the helm.

            God help us.

        • massafiri on 15/05/2024 - 01:23
          +1

          The issue is investing long term in infrastructure would likely put upward demand on services. In an inflationary time, the government does not want to do this.

          $300 into energy is basically free money to those who manage a home - but it won’t stimulate the economy in the same way that the Rudd government handout did.
          There’s no other way to cause deflation while also giving out money at the same time.

        • DingoBilly on 15/05/2024 - 08:36

          Yep. This was my criticism of the QLD rebate. Although that one is more targeted and more generous, I'd still prefer them to actually invest it in fixing climate change/doing something more than just giving a free handout to people for political reasons.

        • N30NF15H on 15/05/2024 - 10:46
          +1

          About 4 months here too. Stuck on embedded provider who charges "market rate". I now pay monthly what I paid quarterly only 2 years ago at my last place.

        • ameno on 15/05/2024 - 16:11
          +3

          Labor trying to buy votes on both a state and Federal level.. No way!

        • HeWhoKnows on 16/05/2024 - 20:54

          This is simply a band aid solution so Labor can say they met thier promise to reduce energy bills by $275
          So the $300 amount is no coincidence.
          Certainly more like an upcoming election stunt

          Firstly your energy bill continues to go UP and UP
          Secondly its a once-off (pre-election) rebate
          Thirdly In most cases the governemnt is simply giving you back $300 of YOUR MONEY!
          Fourthly Its not even means tested so even multi-millionaires get it.
          Definitely NOT traditional Labor policy nor even Liberal policy.
          Its an act from a desperate and increasingly unpopular Prime Minister and Government trying to save themselves from sinking into oblivion!

      • altitudinous on 14/05/2024 - 22:46
        +6

        free = you paid for it with your taxes, but i get the drift

        • HeWhoKnows on 16/05/2024 - 20:59

          Thats right
          The Governemnt is giving you back $300 of your money and telling you they are helping you out…Seriously????

      • cloudy on 15/05/2024 - 05:50
        +4

        hat's about 2 years of free electricity for me

        Well now the power companies know we’re all getting these rebates be prepared for them to jack up prices knowing we won’t feel as much hip pocket pain. This absorbing this tax payer cash.

        • entropysbane on 15/05/2024 - 09:00

          Economic rent is an unknown concept to a political science PhD like Chalmer’s.

    • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 14/05/2024 - 21:51
      +30

      Adding money (injections) to the economy means more spending by consumers thus forcing the RBA’s hand for a rate rise.

      It seems good on the surface but when you look underneath the smoke screen you’ll see that you’ll be worse off from interest rate rises.

      • freefall101 on 14/05/2024 - 21:57
        +10

        I’m still entirely blown away by their attempt to argue it’s helping to fight inflation. Or why they’re vote buying so far out from an election.

        It won’t do much to inflation, likely it’ll mean for some putting less on the credit card as a crucial bill payment instead of giving straight cash to people, but it’s still inflationary.

        • Tyrx on 14/05/2024 - 22:06
          +14

          It will technically lower inflation as it reduces CPI. The reduced spending on utility bills will drive the CPI down as the weighting on that service is quite high in contrast to other goods and services where expenditure may increase due to this. But yes, in real terms it is inflationary in the end - this is basically fudging the numbers to make inflation look less serious on paper.

          • Blew on 14/05/2024 - 23:23
            +5

            @Tyrx: It won't reduce spending on utility bills, it will only rebate that expenditure. The spending may go up.

          • Brick Tamland on 15/05/2024 - 07:36
            +1

            @Tyrx: Interesting, I guess its hoping that in the meantime inflation is still trending downwards and this makes it look like it going down faster.

          • autolux on 15/05/2024 - 10:36

            @Tyrx: this is the problem with current CPI. nobody with a brain believes the figures reflect reality, and anybody who's looked into how its used now vs in the past, sees they've deliberately juked the stats to the max.

            • dtc on 15/05/2024 - 11:54

              @autolux: It would be useful if you could suggest a better way to determine the CPI other than basing it on millions of data points showing what Australians actually buy on average and then recording the change in prices of those items that are being bought.

      • Dunnomuch on 14/05/2024 - 22:00
        +3

        Yeah and no. My power habits won't change, and the chances are I'll save and not spend any money this frees up in my budget

      • nikoris on 14/05/2024 - 23:52

        I say next time they announce money deductions.

      • dealhunter52 on 15/05/2024 - 00:47
        +5

        Exactly, we will be paying back much more than $300 due to resulting higher and persistent inflation.

      • massafiri on 15/05/2024 - 01:28
        +1

        This will fudge the CPI number and will likely lead to a lower interest rate. The goal of the government is to get rates down in anyway they can within 1 year. Can’t do “long term planning” if they will be voted out in 12 months.
        It’s politically savvy policy - yes, it’s still inflationary but will likely affect us later.

        • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 15/05/2024 - 07:55
          -1

          Nope, it won’t lower interest rates as it’s a short term change to the CPI and therefore won’t be present when the RBA looks at underlying inflation (which excludes short term volatility). Therefore, it’s not going to encourage the RBA to lower interest rates.

          • massafiri on 17/05/2024 - 16:17

            @WoodYouLikeSomeCash: Yes It’ll drop CPI by a few percentage points. The RBA makes a decision monthly - if the inflation is lower than target, they will modify interest rates.
            The government is throwing everything at the wall - yes it’s short sighted but all politicians are. I welcome any relief effort, that’s all we can ask of the politicians. Don’t give me interest relief 20 years down the road.

            • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 17/05/2024 - 16:18

              @massafiri: It will only drop headline inflation, the RBA uses underlying inflation as well which won’t be affected as it’s a volatile change.

      • Flying Ace on 15/05/2024 - 06:55
        +1

        Not everyone has a home loan.

      • entropysbane on 15/05/2024 - 09:02

        Yes I immediately laughed at the claim it wasn’t inflationary.
        I suppose it isnt if the energy companies only jack up the price by the equivalent of the subsidy.

    • KenDiaMoi on 14/05/2024 - 22:00
      +6

      What a waste of money. Just pay for solar panels

      • massafiri on 15/05/2024 - 01:28
        +3

        Take the $300 you’d save and invest them in solar panels?

    • smurfy on 15/05/2024 - 07:51

      Its one qtr of electricity for me, sad.

    • Ryxxi on 15/05/2024 - 14:26

      wow really ? what is VIC getting ?

  • bloom on 14/05/2024 - 21:29
    +10

    What’s the promo code!?

    • vinni9284 on 14/05/2024 - 21:35
      +55

      PAYBACK300INFUELEXISETAX

    • dullbeard on 14/05/2024 - 21:46
      +5

      ALBO2025

        • try2bhelpful on 14/05/2024 - 21:49
          +5

          Women won’t vote for Dutton, he is a thug, forget that.

          • montorola on 14/05/2024 - 21:51
            +3

            @try2bhelpful: He'll seduce them with his sunglasses 😎

            • try2bhelpful on 14/05/2024 - 21:52
              -1

              @montorola: I know I shouldn’t go on appearances but with his glasses Dutton looks like a minion.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join