How Tony Crook voted compared to someone who believes that the federal govenment should increase transparency in big business (that is, companies with an income equal or more than $100 million/year or, alternatively, $200 million/year) by making certain information public, including their total income and how much tax they paid

Division Tony Crook Supporters vote Division outcome

6th Jun 2013, 11:46 AM – Representatives Tax Laws Amendment (2013 Measures No. 2) Bill 2013 - Consideration in Detail - Reject transparency provisions

Show detail

The majority voted against an amendment that would have deleted the transparency provisions from the bill. This means that the amendment failed.

People who supported the transparency provisions voted "no" and people who wanted to get rid of the provisions voted "yes".

What are the transparency provisions?

The bill requires the Commissioner of Taxation to publish certain tax information of corporations that have a total annual income of $100 million or more. That tax information includes the corporation's:

  • name and ABN;
  • total income;
  • taxable income; and
  • tax payable.

The bill also gives the Commissioner a separate duty to publish the final amount of the corporation's annual payable Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) or Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (PRRT) (if any).

See Chapter 3 of the explanatory memorandum for more information.

absent No Not passed by a small majority

How "never voted" is worked out

Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Tony Crook was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.