The government has set the "Super Profit" to be anything over the long term bond rate which is just under 6%. Do you think anyone would go forward with a projected return of less than 6%, the answer is no.

BTW This tax will be retrospective.

The finance companies will look long and hard at whether to finance these ventures, and it takes a lot to get one of these projects up and running, especially when the government is taking its additional 40% on anything over 6% profit.

The takers are trying to screw the makers.

>Well that's another issue, the idiots now want to put an additional 40% tax on mining to pay for it, they are going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
>
>It's not actually additional, it's a profit tax lifting miners' effective tax rate from around the 45% mark to maybe 57% which is less than some US corporates are facing and they don't get to suck massive wealth out of the ground. The tax is also proposed only for "super profits" over a level deemed reasonable. IOW the miners can expect to keep making huge profits, the difference is that now they'll be sharing the cream with the resource owner instead of taking it all themselves.
>
>Miners may act as if they need giant profits to function and may threaten to go elsewhere but the Aussie desert contains huge percentages of available resources and where else will they go since minerals don't grow on trees and most mining rights elsewhere are already sewn up. Even with these taxes there's squillions to be made.
>
>The big question is whether Australia wants to continue acting as a mining site for China or whether Australia wants to claim some of the benefit and invest it in things the nation cares about. If you look at how Norway did it and the wealth effect of their petroleum fund, Aussie's decision to assert its ownership rights may be overdue.
>
>FWIW it's being suggested that other mining nations may establish their own taxes to reflect the fact that these resources are finite and actually belong to the country.