Political donations

Approximately $15 million in donations was disclosed by donors, a small proportion of parties’ total funding.
The Liberal Party received $95 million in funding across its eight separate divisions, which includes donations and other receipts such as investment returns and rent.
The ALP received funding of $71 million, the Nationals $12 million and the Greens $16 million.
The political reporting scheme does not require multiple donations to different entities of the same party to be disclosed, meaning the source of millions in political funding remains unknown.

The truth about political donations: there is so much we don’t know

File 20180201 123862 b6n55t.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
AEC disclosures revealed Malcolm Turnbull to be the single biggest donor to a political party in 2016-17.
AAP/Dan Peled

Lindy Edwards, UNSW

The big story about the Australian Electoral Commission’s annual release of political donations disclosures is how little they really tell us. Over the last decade, the major parties have routinely only transparently disclosed 10-20% of their incomes as donations.

There is another 20-35% of party incomes that falls into a grey area, where accounting enables them to conceal the source of the money. Then there is another 50-70% of party incomes the public knows absolutely nothing about.

The precise splits for 2016-17 are:

This situation is able to happen because, federally, Australia has some of the most lax political donations laws in the developed world.




Read more:
Australia trails way behind other nations in regulating political donations


A system full of holes

Political parties in Australia at the federal level only have to disclose payments of more than A$13,200. They are requested – but not required – to distinguish between “donations” and “other receipts”.

There are no caps on how much people can give, or who can give. And the disclosures are only released annually, in February each year, with no more than a name and address attached.

This might not sound too bad. But it is actually a system full of holes that can be exploited to hide where parties’ incomes are really coming from.




Read more:
Explainer: how does our political donations system work – and is it any good?


The first problem is what parties declare to be “donations” and what they declare to be “other receipts”. In many cases, parties claim more than half of the payments they receive over the threshold are “other receipts”, even though the payments come as round numbers from those you would expect to be lobbying government.

One journalistic analysis found 80 cases where the donor had declared a payment as a donation, only to have the party claim it as an “other receipt”. An academic study concluded that most “other receipts” should be treated as donations for analytical purposes. However, there are some legitimate “other receipts”, such as union fees, share dividends, and proceeds from property sales.

There are also some crafty schemes parties use to make donations technically qualify as “other receipts”. They hold fundraising dinners, charging people large sums to attend, then report the payments as a fee for a service rather than a donation.

The second problem is parties using fundraising bodies to effectively “launder” the donations they receive. Donors give money to a fundraising body that then gives it to the party. This makes it difficult to work out where the money originally came from.

The very high disclosure thresholds also enable parties to engage in “donation splitting” – when a large payment is split into smaller amounts and paid to different party branches so each payment comes in under the reporting thresholds. Parties don’t even need to aggregate payments made on different days.

Donors are technically supposed to declare their payments if the combined value of their donations is over the threshold. However, they don’t have to disclose payments to fundraising bodies. And if a donor doesn’t disclose, there’s no way to know if anything is missing. The disclosure laws are notoriously weakly enforced.

Finally, a year’s worth of donations data is released in one huge data dump on one day. Thousands of lines of data are released. The data cannot be meaningfully sorted, or tallies that mean anything easily calculated.

Who is funding our political process?

In today’s resource-starved media environment, journalists are reduced to identifying the biggest payment that hasn’t been split or concealed, and attempting to make hay of those unsophisticated enough to have allowed themselves to stand out.

The story fades after a day or two, and the real secrets of who is funding our political process remains buried.

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the disclosure process is that the payments are only revealed months after they were made.

While small businesses have to pay tax quarterly, and the Australian Tax Office has apps that enable us to collect our receipts in real time, politicians only have to release their accounts annually. This means we only get to see the money that changed hands between stakeholders in the midst of major policy battles months after the issue has disappeared from the headlines.

The annual February festival of lampooning the largest visible donor lulls Australians into a false sense of security that there is a functioning political donations disclosure regime in place. Few realise how ineffective our political donations disclosure regime is, and how badly it is in need of reform.The Conversation

Lindy Edwards, Senior Lecturer in Politics, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

.

Infographic: Budget 2018 at a glance

0
Wes Mountain/The Conversation, CC BY-ND Jenni Henderson, The Conversation and Wes Mountain, The Conversation Jenni Henderson, Section Editor: Business + Economy, The Conversation and Wes Mountain,...

Could Labor’s tax changes make the system fairer or hurt investors?

0
Under dividend imputation rules, Australians are given franking credits on the dividends they receive for the shares they own in order to avoid...

MYEFO reveals billions more in revenue, $9 billion in fresh election...

0
They are the two rules that have defined the Coalition's economic management - budget repair and a "speed limit on taxes". On Monday, they...

Partially right: rejecting neoliberalism shouldn’t mean giving up on social liberalism

0
Partially right: rejecting neoliberalism shouldn't mean giving up on social liberalism shutterstock. Richard Holden, UNSW and Rosalind Dixon, UNSW Richard Denniss’s Quarterly Essay, “Dead Right: How Neoliberalism...

‘Staggering’: $90 billion lost in resources tax

0
'Staggering': $90 billion lost in resources tax By Eryk Bagshaw 12 March 2018 — 3:47pm An Oxford University expert says Australia would be $90 billion better off if...

A Parliamentary Democracy for Everybody

0
Forget what politicians say. What truly matters is what they do. And what they do is vote, to write our laws which affect us all. A Parliamentary...

Pigs at the trough – Revenues of $5billion or yearly cost...

0
Prime Minister Turnbull is pushing Tax Breaks for the Big End Of Town Why? The following corporations while generating revenues of almost $5billion dollars have decided...

Emotional video of starving polar bear shows climate change impact

0
​The world's tragedies often have images that end up defining them: A five-year old screaming in Iraq after her parents were killed by US soldiers....

No risk: The family who own Tasmania’s gambling industry

0
Every single gaming machine in the state is theirs. The Keno is theirs. They own one of the two casinos and a controlling stake...

Infographic: the National Energy Guarantee at a glance

0
Infographic: the National Energy Guarantee at a glance Madeleine De Gabriele, The Conversation; Michael Hopkin, The Conversation, and Wes Mountain, The Conversation The federal government today...

Liberal Party

LIBERAL PARTY
According to the AEC, the Liberal Party received $10.418 million in donations in the 2014-15 period. Here they are below:
All donations to the Liberal Party of Australia, unless noted otherwise
Brunswick Property Vic Pty Ltd: $600,000
Mr Paul Marks: $325,000
Pratt Holdings P/L: $210,000
Charles and Sylvia Bass: $200,000 — to the Liberal Party (W.A. Division) Inc.
Ever Bright Group: $200,000
National Australia Bank Limited: $177,775
Australian Hotels & Hospitality Association Inc: $157,100 — to the Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division)
Woodside Energy Limited: $127,000
Paul Ramsay Holdings Pty Limited: $125,000
Some more Liberal donors include the Commonwealth Bank ($47,700), KPMG ($60,000), Westpac Banking Corporation ($44,000), Allianz Australia ($35,000) and Blackmores ($25,000).

LABOR PARTY

LABOR PARTY
According to the AEC, the Australian Labor Party received $7.193 million in donations in the 2014-15 period. Here they are below:
All donations to the Australian Labor Party, unless noted otherwise
Mr Sean Tomlinson $253,300
Australian Hotels & Hospitality Association Inc: $171,000 — to the Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)
Electrical Trades Union of Australia – Victorian Branch: $131,000 — to the Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)
The Civic Group: $125,050 — Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)
Mr Eng Joo Ang: $110,000 — to ALP-NSW
Woodside Energy Limited: $110,000
Jianping Fu Min Zhang: $100,000 — Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)
ANZ Banking Group Limited: $80,000
Zaparas Lawyers: $78,800 — to Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)
Macquarie Group Limited: $72,400
Some more Labor donors include the CFMEU ($55,000), Cabcharge Australia ($50,000), Origin Energy ($47,550), the Commonwealth Bank ($46,925), Crown Resorts Limited ($42,990) and Santos Limited ($40,688).