Kuriger Barbara; McAnulty Kieran; Watts SimonCHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): I will take a call from the Hon Kieran McAnulty but I'm looking for new things now because the Minister seems to be getting in a space where he is repeating some of the answers. Thank you.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): OK no problem. Well the good news is I haven't repeated myself and no one else is focusing on what I'm focusing on so that'll come as a great relief the Chamber. CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): That's why I'm taking your call. I'm trusting you.Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Thank you very much. There is an outstanding question with the Minister in regards to the rate proposed and its correlation with potential loss of revenue for class 4 providers and the flow-on impact to local communities but perhaps he's asked advice from officials on that. But I do have additional points on a similar area. We haven't actually heard from the Minister around why we landed on 12 percent as the proposed rate for the duty. It was referred to the Minister that earlier to another question related but different that we wanted to level the playing field and keep things consistent. The concern that I have around that is that this area is anything but consistent. If you look at the duty that is applied to profit on casinos it's 4 percent—that's onshore of course. If you look at the duty that's applied to onshore pokey machines or gaming machines that's 20 percent. And so the proposed rate of 12 percent is inconsistent with either of the two online gambling areas that this proposed duty would cover. There's also the question around the consumption charge which I accept is a different area because that covers sports and racing although given that that consumption charge is at 10 percent we have another rate across four areas split between onshore and offshore and I'm keen to understand why they landed on 12. The other area of course is that the Minister has said himself that the issue around regulation particularly around harm minimisation but there is a need in general for regulating of online gambling in particular whether 12 percent in itself if it was at a higher rate could actually perform the role of reducing harm and channelling turnover back onshore if it was set at the right rate. And so that is an area in particular that I'd like to get into hopefully with the back and forth of the Minister. But I've asked a few questions here before we get into that it'd be good to hear a response.Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): The setting of the 12 percent rate was taken on the basis that the 12 percent in addition to the 15 percent GST takes us into the region of 25 percent and that 25 percent is assessed as the midpoint of what other like-minded countries in the OECD do in this similar area. And so the specific examples of that as I highlighted in my response to the prior question in sections 45 and 47 of the regulatory impact statement outlines some of that. Section 44 actually provides a list of all of the countries and all of the rates. And as the member would have seen when he reviewed the regulatory impact statement for this bill that 25 percent in New Zealand is higher than Italy at 20 percent Belgium at 11 UK of 21 Sweden of 22 and I could go on. That is the basis of why we've landed on there. I think that is a pragmatic position in terms of the rate that has been set and we will monitor that in conjunction with other overseas jurisdictions.