
Despite $22bn promise, Adani has paid zero corporate tax in Australia and experts think it won't ever pay a cent
Adani pledged just over a decade ago to plough $22bn in taxes and royalties into the Australian economy. Industry groups supporting the coal company had also claimed Adani's controversial plans would fund schools, hospitals and other infrastructure for 'almost a century'.
Guardian Australia analysis also found that the Abbot Point port, operated by an Adani entity under a 99-year lease signed in 2011, rarely pays tax. Over a 10-year period, it paid company tax on port income on just one occasion, of less than $4m.
Adani's Carmichael mine, and rail and port operations, are among the most politically divisive projects in Australia. While critics usually raise environmental concerns, there's also a question over its economic benefits for Australia.
Despite recording strong revenue, Adani's Australian assets regularly report annual losses, in large part due to large annual payments to related parties for interest and lease expenses.
It also pays for services conducted by other Adani entities as the coal moves through the logistics chain from mine to export.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
Jason Ward, the principal analyst at the Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research, says the level of related-party transactions at Adani's Australian operations is 'pretty unprecedented'.
'My judgment on this is that this company is absolutely set up to never make taxable profit,' Ward says.
'The related-party transactions are so big and wild and all over the map that this company will never make a profit on paper and will never pay a cent of tax.'
Adani's most recent accounts for the Carmichael coal operations, for the year ended 31 March 2025, record $1.27bn in revenue. This gets dialled down to a $461.7m loss after various expenses, resulting in no tax payable.
Details of the 2024-25 accounts were first published by the Australian Financial Review.
Adani Mining's immediate parent company is in Singapore, which has a low corporate tax rate. Its ultimate parent is the India-based Adani Enterprises.
Ward says similar structures are used at other multinationals, and there is no suggestion Adani has acted illegally.
But he says governments rarely hold companies to account for promises of how their operations will benefit the public purse.
'In the future, approvals should be on the basis of fulfilling promises made, with clawback mechanisms that can be put into contracts,' Ward says.
Adani's Australian mining business is branded Bravus Mining and Resources.
A spokesperson for Bravus says the company complies with the corporate tax system, which he said was designed so corporations pay tax on profits made after deducting operating costs, interest expenses, previous years' tax losses and other allowable deductions such as depreciation on capital investment.
'Corporate income tax is just one part of Australia's complex taxation system, and it is misleading to focus solely on corporate tax paid and ignore the contribution to the Queensland and Australian economies of the millions of dollars in combined GST, payroll tax, superannuation, royalties and more we paid in FY25,' the spokesperson said.
'Our operations make a significant ongoing economic and social contribution to both the people who do the work and earn the money, and to the prosperity of their home towns in regional Queensland where they spend their wage.'
The accounts show Adani Mining paid a $78.6m royalty during the last 12-month reporting period. Royalties are payments made to governments to extract state-owned minerals.
It also paid a $36m royalty to a related party.
Guardian Australia analysis of company accounts and disclosures from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) found the mining project has not paid corporate tax since opening in 2021.
Adani's accounts show that even though revenue has been rising from the Carmichael operations, it has enough interest on related-party loans and other expenses to keep reporting losses.
ATO disclosures for the Abbot Point terminal business, now named North Queensland Export Terminal Holdings, between 2013 and 2023 showed just one record of the Adani entity paying tax, which was for $4m in 2017-18.
The port regularly generates annual income of between $300m and $550m.
Tim Buckley, a former investment banker and the director of Climate Energy Finance, says that given Adani has not paid tax during recent periods of surging coal prices, it probably never will.
'If not now, when?' Buckley says.
'Adani has an extremely complex, opaque corporate structure in Australia. I'm comfortable saying they never will pay tax, given the state of the balance sheet.'
In 2014, the then head of Adani Mining, Jeyakumar Janakaraj, said the Australian operations would deliver $22bn in taxes and royalties to be invested 'right back into frontline services'.
Adani's contested coal proposal was supported by various representative bodies, including the Australian Resources and Energy Employer Association which said in 2017 the project would 'provide taxation and royalties that will fund schools, hospitals and other community infrastructure for almost a century'.
The Minerals Council of Australia said in 2018 that 'through mining taxes and royalties, the Carmichael mine will generate billions of dollars for taxpayers over decades to fund nurses, teachers, police, hospitals, roads and other services and infrastructure for Queensland families and communities'.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
21 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Gary Neville's money
As a footballer Gary Neville was not known for his versatility. He was a one-club man who trundled up and down the right flank like a plough-horse. So it is heartening to see him switching things up politically. This week he became the latest Labour supporter to turn on them over tax. 'I honestly don't believe […] companies and small businesses should be deterred from employing people,' said Neville, who owns several businesses alongside his punditry gigs. 'So, I think the National Insurance rise was one that I feel probably could have been held back.' Leaving to one side the fact that Sky viewers might not mind living without his rabid commentary, there is a delicious schadenfreude in watching Neville, a noisy Labour fan, change tack. Last June, he even proved his commitment by taking Keir Starmer up the Langdale Pikes for a campaign interview, in what must have been the most tedious man-marking job of his life. Until recently Rachel Reeves has been blessed in her enemies. When she and Starmer broke a manifesto promise to whack farmers with inheritance tax, they couldn't have hoped for a better opponent than Jeremy Clarkson. Here was not some sympathetic turnip-tender on the breadline but a celeb who was on the record as saying dodging IHT was a reason he bought a farm. Number 10 must have rejoiced again in March when Alexander Armstrong, arguably the pre-eminent primetime posho, complained about VAT on private school fees. His quip that he was feeling 'extremely poor' did not land well with those who were actually feeling extremely poor. Now, even Labour's fans are rethinking. Neville was not the first. In February, the Iceland boss Richard Walker, who had supported Reeves' Budget, warned that, while it was right to look at 'levelling the playing field on tax', the Government had 'parked its tractor in the wrong place going after hard-working British farmers'. The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. Even Gary Neville's. Lower the voting age? Here's a better solution Full credit to Jeremy Corbyn for waiting until Labour had said they would lower the voting age before announcing his new party. The Government thought letting 16 and 17-year-olds have a go at the ballot box might give them the edge in a few marginals. Instead, they might hand a sizeable bloc to Corbo and his band of plucky dreamers, not to mention the Greens and even Reform. Luckily for Keir Starmer I have a solution. Rather than lowering the voting age, he should introduce a cut-off. Many problems in the UK are, we're told, down to our limitless brigades of pensioners. As they don't have day jobs or Xboxes to occupy them, voting provides a welcome distraction. With gilded pensions and houses they bought for a shilling and sixpence, they vote to preserve their interests. But you have to reapply for your driving licence at 70, so why not your voting licence? A short quiz could determine eligibility: should we keep the triple lock? Should the winter fuel allowance be extended to summer? Is the PM too young? Are the policemen too young? Is the Pope too young? I can foresee objections, so how about a compromise: you have 50 eligible voting years in your life and you can choose when to use them. If you wanted to torch them on idealism at 16, you would be free to, but you wouldn't be able to defend your pension later. Either way, surely this would be the kind of bold move Starmer had in mind when he promised 'action, not words'. At least, that's what he told Gary Neville, on a hillside in Cumbria.


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Starmer's former shadow chancellor urges Reeves to consider wealth tax at next budget
Former Labour minister Anneliese Dodds has urged the government to consider a wealth tax at the next budget in order to plug holes in the public finances. The former shadow chancellor – who quit Sir Keir Starmer's government in February over the PM's decision to cut the foreign aid budget to fund a boost in defence spending – warned that spending cuts will not 'deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary'. It comes amid mounting questions over how the government will raise the money to fill the black hole in the public finances left by a series of major U-turns and spending commitments. Ministers have already squeezed significant savings out of their departments in cuts that were unveiled at last month's spending review, meaning there is now a mounting expectation that the chancellor will be forced to raise taxes instead. But Labour's manifesto pledge not to raise taxes on 'working people' leaves the chancellor with a limited number of workable options. Speaking to Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Ms Dodds pointed to work undertaken by the Commission on Wealth Tax. 'They looked at the operation of lots of different wealth tax. They looked at all of that evidence and set out how it would be possible to deliver something like that in a UK context', she said. 'I would hope that the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence as well as other changes that have been put forward. 'We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions. I think it's important for all of those to be considered now." It comes after a memo leaked earlier this year showed Ms Rayner suggesting eight wealth taxes on the super-rich and corporations in a move supporters described as the 'progressive alternative'. Ms Dodds added: 'I don't think you can, particularly via cuts, actually deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary. But I know Rachel will be thinking deeply about this.' The Labour MP for Oxford East also urged the government to take a 'longer term approach' to the public finances, after the prime minister was bounced into a £5bn U-turn on welfare cuts by his own MPs. Speaking about the welfare cuts, Ms Dodds said: 'It can sometimes seem like the right thing to do for tactical reasons, in order to deal with a gap that had opened up because of the OBR's assessment, to try and plug that by cutting spending. 'It may make sense tactically, but strategically a longer-term approach is needed and that's the big issue that the government has to face up to.' The government has so far failed to rule out a wealth tax, but the prime minister has previously said 'we can't just tax our way to growth' when pressed on the subject at PMQs last month. Rachael Maskell, the leader of the rebel Labour MPs who forced Sir Keir to abandon his welfare reforms, called for a wealth tax to meet the cost of the U-turn, suggesting that as much as £24bn a year could be raised by increases in capital gains tax and other measures. pensioners following a U-turn on the issue earlier this year will cost the Treasury a further £1.25bn. The Treasury has been contacted for comment.


Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Former Labour minister Anneliese Dodds says she 'hopes' Rachel Reeves is considering wealth tax
A former Labour minister has said she wants Rachel Reeves to consider the "evidence" behind introducing a wealth tax in the UK. Anneliese Dodds, who quit as international development minister in February over Sir Keir Starmer's decision to slash the overseas aid budget, said she believed it was "important" that the government considers "who has the broadest shoulders". Speaking to Beth Rigby on the Sky News Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Ms Dodds, the MP for Oxford East, said there had been a "lot of discussion" about a wealth tax - a direct levy on all, or most of, an individual's, household's or business's total net wealth, rather than their income. Ms Dodds, who also served as shadow chancellor when Labour was in opposition, said she had been "a bit sceptical about some of those claims for a long time because, of course, wealth is taxed in the UK". However, she said work carried out by the Wealth Tax Commission in 2020 had looked at various types of international wealth taxes and how it would be possible to deliver one in a UK context. 1:57 She added: "I would hope the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence, as well as other changes that have been put forward." The former cabinet minister also said that tax proposals outlined by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner to Rachel Reeves should be "considered". In a memo that was leaked to the Daily Telegraph in May, Ms Rayner suggested to the chancellor that she increase taxes, including reinstating the pensions lifetime allowance and a higher corporation tax level for banks. "We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions as I understand it," Ms Dodds said. "I think it's important for all of those to be considered now." Ministers have signalled they will not bring in a wealth tax to balance the books, with Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds branding the suggestion "daft". Speaking to GB News last week, Mr Reynolds said: "This Labour government has increased taxes on wealth as opposed to income - the taxes on private jets, private schools, changes through inheritance tax, capital gains tax. "But the idea there's a magic wealth tax, some sort of doesn't exist anywhere in the world. "Switzerland has a levy, but they don't have capital gains or inheritance tax. There's no kind of magic. We're not going to do anything daft like that. "And I say to people: 'Be serious about this.' The idea you can just levy everyone. What if your wealth was not in your bank account, what if it was in fine wine or art? How would we tax that? This is why this doesn't exist. "There's a lot of populism out about this, and I'm frustrated. I see colleagues sometimes say this in parliament and I say: 'Come on, get serious.'" Ms Dodds said that while she had not spoken directly with Ms Reeves about a wealth tax, she believed the "trade-off we have to consider in a world of lots of difficult trade-offs is potentially making some big and significant changes early, or having to make many tactical changes through the parliament and potentially being forced into some of those difficult decisions anyway later on".