Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janine Dixon, Director, Centre of Policy Studies, Victoria University

Australia has a problem. Across the economy, business investment has been sluggish for the past decade, leaving policymakers reaching for solutions.

Weak business investment can leave the economy stuck in low gear, operating without enough equipment or technology and failing to meet its potential. It’s tempting to think that if investment could be revived, higher living standards would follow. But it is not that simple.

In a recent report on creating a more dynamic and resilient economy, Australia’s Productivity Commission proposed some big changes to the way businesses are taxed in Australia, including lowering the corporate tax rate for most businesses and introducing a unique new cash flow tax.

So, what exactly is the Productivity Commission proposing – and would it help boost business investment? And crucially, would it improve living standards for Australian people?

Lower tax rates – with a catch

Right now, there are two rates of company tax. Businesses with turnover of less than A$50 million a year are taxed at 25%. Larger businesses, with turnover of more than $50 million, face a 30% tax rate.

The proposed reform of the corporate tax system has two key elements. First, almost all businesses would be taxed at 20%. Very large corporations, with turnover above $1 billion, would face a rate of 28%.

Second, all businesses would pay a new 5% tax on their “net cash flow”. The government would collect less revenue through company tax, but it would get some of it back through the net cash flow tax. More on this later.

The profitability problem

The Productivity Commission is concerned about potentially profitable business ideas that become unprofitable when company taxes are taken into account.

For example, $1 million invested in building a restaurant might generate profits of $1.3 million over its lifetime, making it a profitable activity. But after paying 25% in corporate tax, or $325,000, the restaurant only generates $975,000 for the investor.

Knowing she will make a loss, the investor will decide not to make the investment.

Now, suppose the corporate tax rate was cut to 20%. Corporate tax paid by the restaurant would be $260,000, leaving $1.04 million for the investor. The investor sees she will make a positive return and decides to finance the restaurant. This argument is at the heart of the Productivity Commission’s recommendation to cut the rate of company tax.

In reality, the picture isn’t quite this simple. The investor must also account for the time value of money, various risks and opportunity cost, and the returns she could be making if she invested the money in other ways.

When calculating profits, the tax office includes depreciation as a cost. This deduction reduces the corporate tax bill significantly compared to our hypothetical example. Depreciation deductions are spread over many years so they are worth less than if the deduction on the whole investment was allowed up front. This is important when we talk about a cash flow tax later.

Foreign and domestic investors

Another complication is Australia’s unique dividend imputation system. If the investor lives in Australia, the tax the company has already paid on its profits is treated as if she paid it herself.

When she does her tax return, that company tax counts as a franking credit towards the income tax she owes on all her income. This means the investor is indifferent to the company tax rate because it works like an advance payment towards the personal tax she has to pay anyway.

If dividend imputation was available to everybody, the corporate tax system would be a very leaky bucket indeed – all the revenue it collected would be lost again when credited to the personal income tax paid by investors.

But a lot of the money invested in Australia comes from foreign investors. They don’t pay personal income taxes to the Australian government, so the company tax we collect from them stays in the bucket.

This is the key to making corporate income tax cuts have an impact. But it is also the reason we need to be careful about how we assess the success of the proposed policy.

With lower corporate taxes, foreign investors will likely invest more in Australia, leading to a larger economy. Our economic modelling at the Centre of Policy Studies, published in the Productivity Commission’s interim report, finds the economy (or GDP) will be larger by 0.2% in the long run. This sounds good – but there’s a catch.

When the Australian government collects less tax from foreign investors, Australia’s income falls. Our modelling finds gross national income will be smaller by 0.3% in the long run. The economy will be larger, but less of it will belong to us.

A new tax on cash flow

Alongside recommendations to cut the corporate tax rate, the Productivity Commission has proposed introducing a cash flow tax.

This is a relatively rare form of taxation used in only a few countries. Like corporate tax, a cash flow tax is levied on profits.

But the big difference is that a cash flow tax treats investment costs as an immediate tax deduction, rather than gradually depreciating the investment.

This is attractive because it does not change the incentive to invest. By treating the investment as one big tax deduction at the beginning of its life, an investment that is profitable in a tax-free world will also be profitable under a cash flow tax.

This means the government can collect tax revenue from companies without having a negative impact on investment.

Under a cash flow tax, highly profitable businesses will pay a relatively large amount of tax, while businesses that are just breaking even will pay very little. Unsurprisingly, lobbyists for big business have urged Treasurer Jim Chalmers to ignore the recommendation.

A company tax cut results in lower income for Australians, but adding a cash flow tax reverses these losses by collecting more revenue from foreign investors and multinational corporations. Our modelling finds this package would lead to gains in Australia’s gross national income of 0.4% in the long run. The Productivity Commission’s report now rests with the treasurer for consideration.

The Centre of Policy Studies at Victoria University was commissioned to conduct some of the economic modelling which is quoted in the Productivity Commission’s interim and final reports mentioned in this article.

– ref. A new company tax mix has been proposed. We need to be careful how we assess it – https://theconversation.com/a-new-company-tax-mix-has-been-proposed-we-need-to-be-careful-how-we-assess-it-273892

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/28/a-new-company-tax-mix-has-been-proposed-we-need-to-be-careful-how-we-assess-it-273892/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Neha Lalchandani, Research Fellow, Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Deakin University, Deakin University

If you pack school lunchboxes for your children, you’ll know it can sometimes feel like a real slog.

It needs to be easy to prepare, nutritious and something children will actually eat. On top of this, there is increasing awareness it should be friendly for the environment and not generate food and plastic waste.

As a 2021 OzHarvest report noted, Australian students throw away an estimated 5 million uneaten sandwiches, 3 million pieces of whole fruit and 3 million items of packaged foods each year.

As students return to school, here’s what schools and families can do to pack lower-waste lunches.

Our research

My colleagues and I have been researching what South Australian families put in lunchboxes and why.

In our 2025 study of 673 preschool and primary school lunchboxes, we found 53% of all packaged items in lunchboxes were single-use plastics, mostly from snacks. The most common packaged snack types were chips and muesli bars.

We found families tend to let children’s preferences drive what they pack – because if food comes home untouched, kids can go hungry or food may end up in the bin.

Parents also told us they tend to rely on packaged foods because they are busy and have little time to prepare school lunches.

It’s not that they don’t care about sustainability, but choosing familiar packaged items they know their children will definitely eat take priority.

How schools can make eating easier

Our research also found primary school eating times can be short – only around ten minutes at lunch – as children are keen to get out and play.

So schools should consider extending eating time to allow children to be more settled and eat more of what’s packed. This can mean less waste and fewer hungry moments later in the day. Other research shows longer seated time for eating means children are more likely to eat fruits and vegetables.

Schools could also consider scheduling eating times after play. While teachers and parents may worry children will get too hungry, research suggests scheduling play before lunch can help children eat more of their meal, and more nutritious items too. This is because they arrive at lunch with a healthy appetite and less urgency to rush through eating.

Schools can also incorporate food and sustainability literacy into the curriculum, to help kids embrace healthier and less-packaged foods. Schools can also encourage more “nude food” (packaging-free) days, provide families with healthy, low-waste lunchbox suggestions and have recycling and compost bins handy in the playground.

How can you pack a low-waste lunchbox?

1. Talk to your child about what they like to eat at school and how much

This allows them to tell you what works for them at school – which may be different from at home. Invite them to pack the lunchboxes with you the night before school when there is more time.

This can build independence and encourages children to take more responsibility for what they eat at school. Perhaps if they have packed it and understand the work involved, they are more likely to eat it.

2. Substitute packaged snacks for alternatives

Try packing fruits that need no preparation. Also consider vegetable sticks and boiled eggs (you can prep them in a batch and store in the fridge).

You can make a batch of savoury muffins, home-made popcorn (chuck kernels in a brown paper bag and microwave) or your own portions of low-sugar yoghurt in reusable containers.

3. Stock up on reusable containers

There are lots of options to consider, including:

• bento-style, compartmentalised lunchboxes are great for packing a variety of items and they can keep foods separate, preventing soggy snacks

• small stackable tubs can be used for yoghurt, fruit chunks, boiled eggs and veggie sticks. Look for clear containers (so kids know what’s inside) with leak-resistant lids

• reusable and washable fabric or silicone snack bags for sandwiches, crackers and other dry snacks like popcorn and mini muffins.

4. Avoid these items

Avoid cling film, plastic bags and foil. Also avoid supermarket snacks in individual plastic wrappers – such as popcorn or bars.

5. Make it manageable

We know preparing school lunchboxes can be demanding for families. So if you are going to make some changes, it’s OK to start small. You don’t need to prepare everything from scratch everyday. A starting point could be using more reusable containers and portioning bulk-bought foods.

Neha Lalchandani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Swap muesli bars for homemade popcorn: 5 ways to pack a lower-waste lunch box – https://theconversation.com/swap-muesli-bars-for-homemade-popcorn-5-ways-to-pack-a-lower-waste-lunch-box-273808

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/28/swap-muesli-bars-for-homemade-popcorn-5-ways-to-pack-a-lower-waste-lunch-box-273808/

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary Bushell, Clinical Associate Professor in Pharmacy, University of Canberra

Fish oil, also known as omega-3, is one of the most popular dietary supplements. It’s often promoted to protect the heart, boost mood, reduce inflammation and support overall health.

But how much of this is backed by science, and when might fish oil supplements actually be worth taking?

A long history

People have been taking oils from fish for centuries.

Modern interest surged in the 1970s when scientists studying Inuit diets discovered omega-3 fatty acids and their heart-protective effects.

By the 1980s, fish oil capsules were being marketed as an easy way to get these healthy fats.

What’s in fish oil?

Fish oil comes from oily fish such as salmon, sardines, tuna, herring and mackerel. It’s rich in a special type of fat called omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), mainly EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid).

These omega-3s play an important role in how our cells function. Every cell in the body is surrounded by a thin, flexible layer called a cell membrane. This membrane works like a protective skin: it keeps the cell’s contents safe, controls what moves in and out, and helps cells communicate with one another.

Omega-3s don’t build the membrane itself, but they slot into it, becoming part of its structure. This helps the membrane stay fluid and flexible, allowing it to work more efficiently, especially in tissue that relies on fast, precise signalling, such as in the brain and eyes.

Because we can’t make enough omega-3s on our own, we need to get them from food or, sometimes, supplements.

How are fish oil supplements made?

After fish are caught, their tissues are cooked and pressed to release oil. This crude oil is purified and refined to remove impurities including heavy metals such as copper, iron and mercury.

During processing, the oil may be concentrated to boost its EPA and DHA content.

The purified oil is then encapsulated in soft gels or bottled as liquid oil.

Some supplements are further treated to reduce odour or the familiar “fishy” aftertaste.

Fish oil and heart health

Omega-3 fatty acids are best known for their role in heart health, particularly for lowering triglycerides, a type of fat in the blood that, when elevated, can increase the risk of heart disease.

A 2023 paper pooled 90 clinical trials with more than 72,000 participants and found a near linear relationship between dose and effect. That doesn’t mean “more is always better”, but higher doses tended to produce bigger improvements in heart-related risk factors.

It found you need more than 2 grams per day of EPA and DHA combined to meaningfully lower triglycerides (by 15 to 30%). This is most relevant for people with existing heart disease, high triglycerides, or obesity.

But it’s important to read the label. A “1,000 mg” fish oil capsule usually refers to the total oil weight of the oil, not the active omega-3 content. Most standard capsules contain only about 300 mg of combined EPA and DHA the rest is other fats.

At lower doses, changes in blood fats were modest. The same analysis suggested low-dose fish oil may even nudge LDL or “bad” cholesterol up slightly, while having only a small effect on triglycerides.

A 2018 trial tested a high-strength purified EPA product (4 grams per day) in people already taking statins to lower their cholesterol. Over five years, it prevented one major heart event (heart attack, stroke or urgent procedure) for every 21 people treated. However this was a prescription-only pharmaceutical-grade EPA, not a standard fish-oil capsule.

In Australia, fish oils are sold in pharmacies, health food stores and supermarkets. Some concentrated products are available as “practitioner-only” supplements via health professionals.

The same purified EPA used in the 2018 trial is now available in Australia as Vazkepa, a prescription-only medicine. It was added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) in October 2024, making it more accessible for high-risk patients.

For otherwise healthy people, the evidence that standard fish oil supplements prevent heart attacks or strokes is much less convincing.

What about arthritis and joint pain?

Fish oil has mild anti-inflammatory effects.

In people with inflammatory arthritis (such as rheumatoid arthritis), omega-3s can reduce joint tenderness and morning stiffness.

These benefits, however, require higher consistent doses, usually around 2.7g of EPA and DHA per day. This is the equivalent of around nine standard 1,000mg fish oil capsules (containing 300 mg of EPA and DHA) daily for at least eight to 12 weeks.

Can fish oil improve mood?

Some studies suggest omega-3s, particularly those higher in EPA, can modestly reduce symptoms of clinical depression when taken alongside antidepressants.

A 2019 review of 26 trials (involving more than 2,000 people) found a small overall benefit, mainly for EPA-rich formulations at doses up to about 1 gram per day. DHA-only products didn’t show clear effects.

That doesn’t mean fish oil is a mood booster for everyone. For people without diagnosed depression, omega-3 supplements haven’t been shown to reliably lift mood or prevent depression.

How much can you take?

For most people, fish oil is safe.

Common side effects include a fishy aftertaste, mild nausea and diarrhoea. Taking capsules with food or choosing odourless or “de-fishified” products can help.

Prescription strength products such as Vazkepa (high-dose EPA) are also well tolerated, but they can slightly increase the risk of irregular heartbeat (atrial fibrillation) and bleeding.

Up to 3 grams per day of combined EPA and DHA from supplements is generally considered safe for most adults.

Higher doses for specific medical conditions should be taken under medical supervision.

So, should you take it?

The Heart Foundation recommends Australians eat two to three serves of oily fish a week. This would provide 250–500 mg of EPA and DHA per day.

If you don’t eat fish, a fish oil supplement (or algal oil if you’re vegetarian or vegan) can help you meet your omega-3 needs.

If you have heart disease (with high triglycerides) or inflammatory arthritis, fish oil may offer extra benefits. But dose and product type matter, so speak with a health professional.

For most people, though, two or three serves of oily fish each week remain the simplest, safest and most nutritious way to get omega-3s.

Read more:
Should I take a magnesium supplement? Will it help me sleep or prevent muscle cramps?

Mary Bushell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Should I take a fish oil supplement for my heart, joints or mood? – https://theconversation.com/should-i-take-a-fish-oil-supplement-for-my-heart-joints-or-mood-267976

Evening Report: https://eveningreport.nz/2026/01/28/should-i-take-a-fish-oil-supplement-for-my-heart-joints-or-mood-267976/