Before the High Court: Vanderstock v Victoria: Are "True" Consumption Taxes Forbidden to the States by Section 90 of the Australian Constitution?

Anthony Gray*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The High Court of Australia will soon consider a constitutional challenge to recent Victorian legislation that imposes a fee on the use of a zero or lowemission vehicle. The challenge argues that such a fee is an excise tax, prohibited to the States by s 90 of the Australian Constitution. The Court will need to consider the current orthodoxy that a consumption tax is not an excise, and its longstanding interpretation of s 90. This column submits the High Court should extend the existing definition of excise to include true taxes on consumption. This would be most consistent with the view of the purpose of s 90 accepted by the High Court since 1949, and would remove an anomaly from existing law.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)591-603
Number of pages13
JournalSydney Law Review
Volume44
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2022
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Before the High Court: Vanderstock v Victoria: Are "True" Consumption Taxes Forbidden to the States by Section 90 of the Australian Constitution?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this