Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Nick Coatsworth, strongly criticised the recent two-state payroll tax decision concerning General Practitioners (GPs), deeming it akin to imposing a 'tax on sick people'.

During an interview on Sydney's 2GB radio with Ben Fordham, Coatsworth explained that the decision made by the state revenue offices of Victoria and New South Wales to subject independent GPs to payroll tax would inevitably lead to a shift away from bulk billing practices.

'There's no other way to describe this than a tax on sick people, and it's gross, it really is,' he said.

'We've got three first ministers—Chris Minns in NSW, Dan Andrews [in Victoria], and Andrew Barr here in the ACT—leveraging a 5.5 per cent payroll tax when none was leveraged for several decades.'

'They've seen this court ruling, and they're putting their hands in the pockets of sick Australians.'

The proposed payroll tax on independent general practitioners in New South Wales and Victoria could lead to patients paying an extra $20 per appointment. Credit: Shutterstock.

Doctors are concerned about recent actions by the Victorian and NSW state revenue offices, which they view as an attempt to increase tax revenue.

These offices have released rulings establishing a new stance: many independent General Practitioners (GPs) working within medical centres will now be liable for payroll tax.

Typically, medical practices pay payroll tax for their employees, such as reception staff, nurses, and doctors, under employment contracts.

However, the industry agreed that independent GPs comprised around 90 per cent of the GP workforce were exempt from this tax. This was because most GPs are not considered employees; they rent rooms from practice owners and operate based on independent agreements.

Now, three major medical associations—the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), the Australian Medical Association, and the Australian GP Alliance—are appealing to the NSW Premier Chris Minns and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews to reconsider these changes.

They argue that implementing these tax regulations could lead to the closure of medical practices and an increase in the cost of medical services, making healthcare less affordable.

Although the Victorian and NSW governments assert that these rulings merely clarify existing policies, there is disagreement from GPs, medical associations, and accountants who believe that a major change is taking place.

'State governments are ripping funding from general practice to boost their own tax revenues,' said RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins.

'It is the patients who will be hurt most when they lose their local GPs and access to essential care.'

On the radio show, Coatsworth advised NSW Premier Chris Minns to reconsider his decision about imposing a payroll tax on GPs. He emphasised that this tax would worsen the burden on already overwhelmed emergency departments.

'You can elect not to, maybe spend the money you've got in a better way and stop taxing sick Australians,' he said.

This news arrives at a crucial time, with GPs raising concerns about patients deferring or skipping appointments due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

According to data from the online healthcare directory Cleanbill, patients in Victoria face an average out-of-pocket fee of $40.10, while those in NSW encounter a slightly higher fee of $41.06.

Key Takeaways

• Nick Coatsworth, Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, condemned the ruling by Victorian and NSW state revenue offices to subject independent GPs to the payroll tax, labelling it a tax on sick people.
• Coatsworth suggests this move will decrease bulk billing and accuses the states of taking advantage of a recent court ruling to leverage a 5.5 per cent payroll tax.
• Three doctor groups call on the NSW and Victorian premiers to reverse the changes, warning that they will lead to the closure of practices and increase healthcare costs.
• Despite the backlash, the Victorian and NSW governments maintain that the ruling does not represent a change, a perspective disputed by GPs, doctors groups and accountants.

Members, what are your thoughts on these recent developments? Share them with us in the comments section below!

 

[Suzanne rose]

It's sad because I can see alot of people not going to the doctors all because they can't afford it .

My daughter had to take my granddaughter to her paediatrician yesterday to check on her allergies and it cost her $400. With rent and mortgage cost how can anyone attend doctors at these ridiculous cost

 

[Rob44]

The Royal Colleges themselves restrict access to medicine by their ridiculous closed shop practices regarding specialisation by young doctors. 6 referees required for admittance to the training course to be considered for the Royal College of Ophthalmology and each referee has to score the wannabe ophthalmologist 100% and you will need to be of hospital Registrar level of experience (3-4 years) to be any where near successful in your application (and a two-year Masters Degree might help) after which the course to become an ophthalmologist is 6 years , examined each year and don't you dare fail.

Work it out. 5 years basic Medical Degree, or 4 years for 1st Class Honours Degree and then 4 years for Medical Degree, no income+HECs debt, a minimum of 3 years in a public hospital with low pay and horrendous hours, after which.........That is 14 to 17 years, minimum, of study on low and HECs- indebted income because , as Fred Hollow's ads say, an eye is an eye. A $25 donation will buy the operation to clear cataracts if done by the Fred Hollows Foundation in an overseas developing country but $3000 minimum in Australia.

We need to completely revise the requirements placed on school-leavers who want to enter a university to undertake medicine as a career; we need to scrap the UMAT "intelligence" test and the GAMSAT "intelligence test" mandatory for entry to medical schools; we need to reduce the entry level for medical school to that required by universities for our mere mathematicians and physicists who can go on to complete extremely difficult and demanding PhD Degrees; and government should enable students to study at university, at least in the sciences and medicine, by paying their fees whilst studying with no subsequent HECs-type debt.

This will never be acceptable to the medical profession, unfortunately, as there are excellent medical doctors out there who have made major time sacrifices and serious financial commitments to becoming specialists, whether they be GPs or whatever. But is what the Royal Colleges desire in the best medical interest of all Australians? Were I to give career advice to my children; forget medicine even though you can and have scored that 99.5% to 99.9% at school to be able to apply for medical school; try Real Estate or take on a trade apprenticeship or go into banking. At least you will be able to afford a family whilst doing those.

 

[Shane/#]

Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Nick Coatsworth, strongly criticised the recent two-state payroll tax decision concerning General Practitioners (GPs), deeming it akin to imposing a 'tax on sick people'.

During an interview on Sydney's 2GB radio with Ben Fordham, Coatsworth explained that the decision made by the state revenue offices of Victoria and New South Wales to subject independent GPs to payroll tax would inevitably lead to a shift away from bulk billing practices.

'There's no other way to describe this than a tax on sick people, and it's gross, it really is,' he said.

'We've got three first ministers—Chris Minns in NSW, Dan Andrews [in Victoria], and Andrew Barr here in the ACT—leveraging a 5.5 per cent payroll tax when none was leveraged for several decades.'

'They've seen this court ruling, and they're putting their hands in the pockets of sick Australians.'

View attachment 28050

The proposed payroll tax on independent general practitioners in New South Wales and Victoria could lead to patients paying an extra $20 per appointment. Credit: Shutterstock.

Doctors are concerned about recent actions by the Victorian and NSW state revenue offices, which they view as an attempt to increase tax revenue.

These offices have released rulings establishing a new stance: many independent General Practitioners (GPs) working within medical centres will now be liable for payroll tax.

Typically, medical practices pay payroll tax for their employees, such as reception staff, nurses, and doctors, under employment contracts.

However, the industry agreed that independent GPs comprised around 90 per cent of the GP workforce were exempt from this tax. This was because most GPs are not considered employees; they rent rooms from practice owners and operate based on independent agreements.

Now, three major medical associations—the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), the Australian Medical Association, and the Australian GP Alliance—are appealing to the NSW Premier Chris Minns and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews to reconsider these changes.

They argue that implementing these tax regulations could lead to the closure of medical practices and an increase in the cost of medical services, making healthcare less affordable.

Although the Victorian and NSW governments assert that these rulings merely clarify existing policies, there is disagreement from GPs, medical associations, and accountants who believe that a major change is taking place.

'State governments are ripping funding from general practice to boost their own tax revenues,' said RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins.

'It is the patients who will be hurt most when they lose their local GPs and access to essential care.'

On the radio show, Coatsworth advised NSW Premier Chris Minns to reconsider his decision about imposing a payroll tax on GPs. He emphasised that this tax would worsen the burden on already overwhelmed emergency departments.

'You can elect not to, maybe spend the money you've got in a better way and stop taxing sick Australians,' he said.

This news arrives at a crucial time, with GPs raising concerns about patients deferring or skipping appointments due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

According to data from the online healthcare directory Cleanbill, patients in Victoria face an average out-of-pocket fee of $40.10, while those in NSW encounter a slightly higher fee of $41.06.

Key Takeaways

• Nick Coatsworth, Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, condemned the ruling by Victorian and NSW state revenue offices to subject independent GPs to the payroll tax, labelling it a tax on sick people.
• Coatsworth suggests this move will decrease bulk billing and accuses the states of taking advantage of a recent court ruling to leverage a 5.5 per cent payroll tax.
• Three doctor groups call on the NSW and Victorian premiers to reverse the changes, warning that they will lead to the closure of practices and increase healthcare costs.
• Despite the backlash, the Victorian and NSW governments maintain that the ruling does not represent a change, a perspective disputed by GPs, doctors groups and accountants.

Members, what are your thoughts on these recent developments? Share them with us in the comments section below!

The doctor I see charges $80 a visit for a script under 15 minutes a visit no bulk-billing for scripts before covid now you pay multiply that by 4 then 8 hour's a day not a bad hourly rate and yes doctors don't do 8 hour days may as well throw in time and a half and double time while you go about it and when there are 4 or more doctors per clinic it's a nice little honey hole 🕳

 

[Mikeyboy2012]

Payroll Tax is a state tax on wages paid. There are thresholds that must be reached before the tax is charged. If any business pays wages over that threshold, then Payoll Tax is paid on the amount over the threshold. Why should doctors be exempt? It's a business after all.

Many businesses get around the tax by paying "contractors" who are really employees. Others pay a separate entity, which they also own, to employ the staff and charge a "service fee" to the employer.

Payroll Tax has been around for many, many decades, hence, medical practitioners have avoided paying the tax for many, many decades and it's caught up with them.

There are calls to abolish the tax. This would solve the doctors' issue.

 

[Luckyus]

Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Nick Coatsworth, strongly criticised the recent two-state payroll tax decision concerning General Practitioners (GPs), deeming it akin to imposing a 'tax on sick people'.

During an interview on Sydney's 2GB radio with Ben Fordham, Coatsworth explained that the decision made by the state revenue offices of Victoria and New South Wales to subject independent GPs to payroll tax would inevitably lead to a shift away from bulk billing practices.

'There's no other way to describe this than a tax on sick people, and it's gross, it really is,' he said.

'We've got three first ministers—Chris Minns in NSW, Dan Andrews [in Victoria], and Andrew Barr here in the ACT—leveraging a 5.5 per cent payroll tax when none was leveraged for several decades.'

'They've seen this court ruling, and they're putting their hands in the pockets of sick Australians.'

View attachment 28050

The proposed payroll tax on independent general practitioners in New South Wales and Victoria could lead to patients paying an extra $20 per appointment. Credit: Shutterstock.

Doctors are concerned about recent actions by the Victorian and NSW state revenue offices, which they view as an attempt to increase tax revenue.

These offices have released rulings establishing a new stance: many independent General Practitioners (GPs) working within medical centres will now be liable for payroll tax.

Typically, medical practices pay payroll tax for their employees, such as reception staff, nurses, and doctors, under employment contracts.

However, the industry agreed that independent GPs comprised around 90 per cent of the GP workforce were exempt from this tax. This was because most GPs are not considered employees; they rent rooms from practice owners and operate based on independent agreements.

Now, three major medical associations—the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), the Australian Medical Association, and the Australian GP Alliance—are appealing to the NSW Premier Chris Minns and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews to reconsider these changes.

They argue that implementing these tax regulations could lead to the closure of medical practices and an increase in the cost of medical services, making healthcare less affordable.

Although the Victorian and NSW governments assert that these rulings merely clarify existing policies, there is disagreement from GPs, medical associations, and accountants who believe that a major change is taking place.

'State governments are ripping funding from general practice to boost their own tax revenues,' said RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins.

'It is the patients who will be hurt most when they lose their local GPs and access to essential care.'

On the radio show, Coatsworth advised NSW Premier Chris Minns to reconsider his decision about imposing a payroll tax on GPs. He emphasised that this tax would worsen the burden on already overwhelmed emergency departments.

'You can elect not to, maybe spend the money you've got in a better way and stop taxing sick Australians,' he said.

This news arrives at a crucial time, with GPs raising concerns about patients deferring or skipping appointments due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

According to data from the online healthcare directory Cleanbill, patients in Victoria face an average out-of-pocket fee of $40.10, while those in NSW encounter a slightly higher fee of $41.06.

Key Takeaways

• Nick Coatsworth, Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, condemned the ruling by Victorian and NSW state revenue offices to subject independent GPs to the payroll tax, labelling it a tax on sick people.
• Coatsworth suggests this move will decrease bulk billing and accuses the states of taking advantage of a recent court ruling to leverage a 5.5 per cent payroll tax.
• Three doctor groups call on the NSW and Victorian premiers to reverse the changes, warning that they will lead to the closure of practices and increase healthcare costs.
• Despite the backlash, the Victorian and NSW governments maintain that the ruling does not represent a change, a perspective disputed by GPs, doctors groups and accountants.

Members, what are your thoughts on these recent developments? Share them with us in the comments section below!

Maybe politicians should be reminded that the sick and elderly population still vote

 

[Janice McKay]

Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Nick Coatsworth, strongly criticised the recent two-state payroll tax decision concerning General Practitioners (GPs), deeming it akin to imposing a 'tax on sick people'.

During an interview on Sydney's 2GB radio with Ben Fordham, Coatsworth explained that the decision made by the state revenue offices of Victoria and New South Wales to subject independent GPs to payroll tax would inevitably lead to a shift away from bulk billing practices.

'There's no other way to describe this than a tax on sick people, and it's gross, it really is,' he said.

'We've got three first ministers—Chris Minns in NSW, Dan Andrews [in Victoria], and Andrew Barr here in the ACT—leveraging a 5.5 per cent payroll tax when none was leveraged for several decades.'

'They've seen this court ruling, and they're putting their hands in the pockets of sick Australians.'

View attachment 28050

The proposed payroll tax on independent general practitioners in New South Wales and Victoria could lead to patients paying an extra $20 per appointment. Credit: Shutterstock.

Doctors are concerned about recent actions by the Victorian and NSW state revenue offices, which they view as an attempt to increase tax revenue.

These offices have released rulings establishing a new stance: many independent General Practitioners (GPs) working within medical centres will now be liable for payroll tax.

Typically, medical practices pay payroll tax for their employees, such as reception staff, nurses, and doctors, under employment contracts.

However, the industry agreed that independent GPs comprised around 90 per cent of the GP workforce were exempt from this tax. This was because most GPs are not considered employees; they rent rooms from practice owners and operate based on independent agreements.

Now, three major medical associations—the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), the Australian Medical Association, and the Australian GP Alliance—are appealing to the NSW Premier Chris Minns and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews to reconsider these changes.

They argue that implementing these tax regulations could lead to the closure of medical practices and an increase in the cost of medical services, making healthcare less affordable.

Although the Victorian and NSW governments assert that these rulings merely clarify existing policies, there is disagreement from GPs, medical associations, and accountants who believe that a major change is taking place.

'State governments are ripping funding from general practice to boost their own tax revenues,' said RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins.

'It is the patients who will be hurt most when they lose their local GPs and access to essential care.'

On the radio show, Coatsworth advised NSW Premier Chris Minns to reconsider his decision about imposing a payroll tax on GPs. He emphasised that this tax would worsen the burden on already overwhelmed emergency departments.

'You can elect not to, maybe spend the money you've got in a better way and stop taxing sick Australians,' he said.

This news arrives at a crucial time, with GPs raising concerns about patients deferring or skipping appointments due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

According to data from the online healthcare directory Cleanbill, patients in Victoria face an average out-of-pocket fee of $40.10, while those in NSW encounter a slightly higher fee of $41.06.

Key Takeaways

• Nick Coatsworth, Australia's former Deputy Chief Medical Officer, condemned the ruling by Victorian and NSW state revenue offices to subject independent GPs to the payroll tax, labelling it a tax on sick people.
• Coatsworth suggests this move will decrease bulk billing and accuses the states of taking advantage of a recent court ruling to leverage a 5.5 per cent payroll tax.
• Three doctor groups call on the NSW and Victorian premiers to reverse the changes, warning that they will lead to the closure of practices and increase healthcare costs.
• Despite the backlash, the Victorian and NSW governments maintain that the ruling does not represent a change, a perspective disputed by GPs, doctors groups and accountants.

Members, what are your thoughts on these recent developments? Share them with us in the comments section below!

OMG. Since Labor has been in power they are systematically costing us more and more in relation to our health. First with the Chemists in regards to prescriptions, and now with Doctors. I now have to pay for some of my medications because they have taken away how much I can have per month, even on the Safety Net. Don't be sucked into thinking 60 day scripts are going to save you money. This is going to cost you more than you realise. No Chemists, no Doctors.

 

[Ashmenou]

The Royal Colleges themselves restrict access to medicine by their ridiculous closed shop practices regarding specialisation by young doctors. 6 referees required for admittance to the training course to be considered for the Royal College of Ophthalmology and each referee has to score the wannabe ophthalmologist 100% and you will need to be of hospital Registrar level of experience (3-4 years) to be any where near successful in your application (and a two-year Masters Degree might help) after which the course to become an ophthalmologist is 6 years , examined each year and don't you dare fail.

Work it out. 5 years basic Medical Degree, or 4 years for 1st Class Honours Degree and then 4 years for Medical Degree, no income+HECs debt, a minimum of 3 years in a public hospital with low pay and horrendous hours, after which.........That is 14 to 17 years, minimum, of study on low and HECs- indebted income because , as Fred Hollow's ads say, an eye is an eye. A $25 donation will buy the operation to clear cataracts if done by the Fred Hollows Foundation in an overseas developing country but $3000 minimum in Australia.

We need to completely revise the requirements placed on school-leavers who want to enter a university to undertake medicine as a career; we need to scrap the UMAT "intelligence" test and the GAMSAT "intelligence test" mandatory for entry to medical schools; we need to reduce the entry level for medical school to that required by universities for our mere mathematicians and physicists who can go on to complete extremely difficult and demanding PhD Degrees; and government should enable students to study at university, at least in the sciences and medicine, by paying their fees whilst studying with no subsequent HECs-type debt.

This will never be acceptable to the medical profession, unfortunately, as there are excellent medical doctors out there who have made major time sacrifices and serious financial commitments to becoming specialists, whether they be GPs or whatever. But is what the Royal Colleges desire in the best medical interest of all Australians? Were I to give career advice to my children; forget medicine even though you can and have scored that 99.5% to 99.9% at school to be able to apply for medical school; try Real Estate or take on a trade apprenticeship or go into banking. At least you will be able to afford a family whilst doing those.

Total agree with you

 

[Loubeauxarts]

I received a message from my GP last month stating that from 10 August there would be an out of pocket fee of $40 for standard consultations, pension card holders and over 65s will get a concession at $30. I have to see my GP every 4 weeks to get a prescription for my pain relief, an opioid, as they can't do repeats on controlled drugs. 13 X $30 = $390 per annum extra that I'll have to squeeze out of my pension. Where does it end? At least this article sheds some light on why the extra charge.