July 1, 2025
Dear Parliamentarian
As per the correspondence above & below, the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) has informed us they are ‘likely to be able to cost’ ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’, which consists of substituting The Universal Subsistence Income (USI) for both:
- Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW)
- Income-Welfare.
Accordingly, we are seeking a parliamentarian to submit such a request to the PBO.
Such a request won’t necessarily mean you support ‘The Reform’ just that you are open-minded in seeking more information and, in general, are supportive of democracy’s:
- ‘Battle of Ideas’
- Objective expert analysis (in this case, as per the highly-credentialed PBO)
- Grassroots organisations including respecting their requirement for information.
Thus, even if you suspect ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’ may not be a good idea, there is still commendable good-faith reason to request the information especially given our society’s increasing Disempowerment, the current focus on productivity (with the upcoming ‘Productivity Roundtable’) and, the bipartisan, runaway government-budget-deficit.
In this context, the referenced PBO modelling is important because, whereas every other income-Welfare-related suggestion is, inevitably, costly and, therefore, further pressurises the already pressurised government-budget, ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’ appears to, via its efficiencies, depressurise it (and this would be a key factor for the PBO to assess).
Imagine, every non-jailed in-country adult citizen receiving a starting floor of $24,000 a year [i.e. ‘The Cost-of-Living Crisis’ vanquished] yet unemployment eradicated, inflation easily controlled and the government-budget in better shape, which means lower tax. Isn’t that worth investigating? Isn’t it of interest to your constituency?
Moreover, such an analysis would not only be, to our knowledge, a global first, its benefits are also likely to be both global and everlasting [initially, that may sound exaggerated, but is it?] – which means it’s an opportunity to contribute to all humanity forevermore.
Putting it another way, your constituents and their children & grandchildren may benefit from you requesting the PBO analyse ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’.
Thank you.
Best regards
Paul Ross
Founder & CEO
The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO)
…
Subject: In Principle Capacity to Model ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’
To: Ms. Sam Reinhardt, The Parliamentary Budget Officer, Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO), Australian Parliament
CC: Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO) Confidants
[A 90% Australian multi-domain multi-partisan 11,000-strong group spanning academia, the arts, business, education, emergency services, the environment, health, law, media, the military, philanthropy, other public-services, religion, social-services, sport, think-tanks, trade-unions and, regarding politicians (Left-to-Right/conservative-to-progressive), over 80% of Australia’s Federal, State & Council representatives.]
June 26, 2025
Dear Ms Reinhardt
I hope you are well.
This letter’s purpose is to ascertain whether the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) could, in principle, model ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’ as explained below.
That is, while we understand the PBO is restricted to assisting ‘parliamentarians by providing policy costing and budget analysis services’ such that only a parliamentarian may request a report, if the PBO can, in principle, perform the mentioned task then The CDO will petition Federal parliamentarians (most of whom are CDO-Confidants and are, therefore, receiving this letter) to request it.
Alternatively, should the task fall outside the PBO’s abilities such that it would be unwilling to attempt it, it would be helpful to know the precise details as to why.
First, regarding the PBO’s ‘Build Your Own Budget’ analysis program, while a tremendous initiative, it isn’t sufficiently malleable for our purpose.
Noting the request for feedback, namely:
‘We want to hear your thoughts and your experience using Build Your Own Budget, including … ways you think the tool could be improved. Please share with us your thoughts on any additional or enhanced functionality that you would like to see’,
The CDO will welcome the further variables of:
- The Universal Subsistence Income (USI) (including the 3 differentiations for below 18, 18-to-66 and 67+)
- The Universal Minimum Hourly Wage (UMHoW) rate
- While noting some income-Welfare components are included, the addition of childcare subsidies, superannuation tax benefits etc.
- The Land Tax.
Regarding modelling ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform’, its specifics are …
The USI (per year) to all non-incarcerated in-country citizens aged:
- 18 – 66: $24,000
- <18: $6,000 (in most cases, received by the guardian/s)
- 66<: $30,000.
[Regarding the Disability pension, it becomes a Health Budget add-on (assume $3,300 per year) – i.e. the disabled receive The USI + the, therefore, vastly reduced disability benefit.]
No Universal Minimum Hourly Wage (UMHoW) – i.e. it’s eradicated – which means:
- Unemployment is perpetually zero (modelled as such)
- Inflation, which is now easily managed, is assumed to be constant at 2.5%.
No income-Welfare – i.e. all targeted income-subsidies/benefits/tax-breaks are eradicated (including childcare subsidies, superannuation tax benefits etc.)
Noting, collectively, this will create a virtuous cycle of lower tax, greater prosperity & crystalised societal-unity, which, specifically, will positively impact business (including improving productivity), decrease non-USI government expenditures, depressurise the government-budget and, politically, allow transformative tax-reform, we wish to conservatively assume expenditure decreases of:
- NDIS 20%
- Mental-illness 25%
- Crime [including police, courts & prisons] 25%.
Productivity is ultra-conservatively assumed to be 5% per annum for the foreseeable future (at least 25 years).
Regarding tax, there are 3 scenarios.
Tax Scenario 1
- 20% flat-rate income and profit tax (no tax-free threshold as all receive The USI)
- 20% GST (full-breadth no exclusions except health & education)
- 2% Land tax.
Tax Scenario 2
- No income/profit tax
- 20% GST (full-breadth no exclusions except health & education)
- 2.5% Land tax.
Tax Scenario 3
- No income/profit tax
- 20% GST (full-breadth no exclusions except health & education)
- 3% Land tax.
[While this streamlined efficiency will assist state and council budgets, for the sake of simplicity, it may be assumed there is no change to their tax/expenditure regimes.]
…
We look forward to your reply.
Thank you.
Best regards
Paul Ross
Founder & CEO
The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO)