Woodhouse MichaelHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Madam Chair. I've got a couple of comments and questions too along the same lines as my colleague Mr Bayly particularly firstly the quantum of the information being required and from whom then the retrospectivity issue and then I'll speak to my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP).Now the Minister of Revenue's commentary on the bill talks about the proposed amendment as the commissioner being able to request information from certain trustees in relation to the prior seven years but the clause itself—clause 35 inserting new section 59BAB—doesn't appear to say what those certain trustees are. Now I'd like to be clear what we're talking about here because it may be necessary—well I don't think it's necessary but if it's appropriate to go back for complex trust structures who have the mechanisms and the information but the ma and pa trust for the disabled child that the Minister refers to earlier will have very little ability even to comply with new section 59BA much less 59BAB. So I'd like to know what the definition of certain trustees" is because it doesn't seem to be reflected in the specific clause that we are considering.Now this is an amendment actually. It deletes current section—I think it's—59(3). And all section 59(3) of the Act says is file a profit and loss statement I think—something pretty straightforward. It's a fairly rudimentary section. And then we've got this replacement which frankly looks like overkill to me. Mr Bayly pointed out the fact that actually the commissioner just says "the other information required" which for a section of this nature is highly irregular. Usually the collection of tax information is very carefully prescribed because that's why we have such a big Income Tax Act and a fairly sizable Tax Administration Act. So I'd just like to have those two questions answered.Now I want to just talk about my SOP. My SOP is going to delete new section 59BAB. The Minister as a lawyer and the Attorney-General knows how retrospectivity is usually used. It's usually used to fix an error. And as Minister I don't think I had to do it but Ministers have had to come to the House and go "We got a piece of legislation wrong technically and we've been charging a levy when we didn't have the legal power to do so and we have to retrospectively fix that." Well the Kaipara Harbour issues from some years ago required retrospective legislation. And certainly legal members of this House hold their noses and vote in favour of retrospective legislation. But the idea that we can dive back seven years from the point where a new requirement to report has been imposed on taxpayers some of whom would not have collected the information in the way that they are now going to be required to going forward provides a really really onerous burden that I believe is unnecessary and should be deleted from this bill.Now in the Minister's commentary again on page 19 he talks about this by saying "The bill would allow the commissioner to collect information as part of the increased disclosures for prior years where such information exists." Now assuming my SOP is defeated and this clause remains what I'd like to know from the Minister is what the definition is of where such information exists because it's not clear in the clause whether or not the commissioner can accept or is able to accept or the taxpayer has the defence of not providing information retrospectively where a trustee may say "Well look it's just too hard for me to get that information. The information does not exist so I cannot comply retrospectively." Where in the bill does the commissioner have the power to go "Oh that's all right."? Or more importantly where do they have the power to prevent the commissioner from saying "I don't care. You have to find the information. It doesn't matter what it costs. It doesn't matter who you have to engage in terms of lawyers or accountants."? Where the information does not exist how does the Minister's own commentary get reflected into new section 59BAB of the bill?"