Received

Treasurer Jim Chalmers is playing down the prospect of a second consecutive budget surplus as he pitches his economic blueprint.

The government expects to book a $4.2 billion underlying cash surplus in this financial year - the first in 15 years.

This will be followed by a better-than-expected deficit of $13.9 billion in 2023/24.

Asked if a second surplus was on the cards instead, Dr Chalmers said he was taking a cautious approach.

"We've got this big improvement in revenues in the near term and we've taken the most responsible approach to that and that's why we're forecasting a surplus for this year," he told Seven's Sunrise program on Wednesday.

"But we've got some structural challenges in the budget. We made a heap of progress on those last night, but there will be more work to do."

Asked if he planned to push ahead with stage three income tax cuts slated for 2024/25, at a cost of $69 billion over four years, Dr Chalmers said the government's position hadn't changed.

"They don't come in for more than a year, they haven't been a focus of the deliberations for this budget at all," he said.

Dr Chalmers emphasised the 2023/24 budget was about helping people doing it tough and again rejected concerns a near $15 billion cost-of-living package could fuel inflation and lead to more interest rate rises by the Reserve Bank of Australia.

"It doesn't all hit the economy at once ... and broadly, across the economy, we don't expect to be adding to inflationary pressures," he said.

Independent economist Chris Richardson, of Rich Insights, said the budget lacked the hard decisions needed to allow the central bank to lean away from rate rises because it was pumping money into the economy.

He welcomed the lift to JobSeeker and other assistance but said that should have been accompanied with offsetting money-saving and revenue-raising measures.

"To be fair to this government, a lot of the spending they've done, they needed to do - they just also needed to make other decisions to save money to take pressure off," Mr Richardson told Sky News.

He said the government could have taken the opportunity to raise more revenue, noting that adjustments to the petroleum resource rent tax were "much too modest".

When he handed down the budget on Tuesday night, Dr Chalmers said it had been carefully calibrated in terms of spending.

"The restraint we've shown and the investments in the supply side of the economy, and the way we've targeted and staged our cost of living package is because inflation is the biggest challenge in our economy," he said.

Opposition finance spokeswoman Jane Hume said the budget should have done more heavy lifting to drive down inflation.

"Looking through the budget papers, every line says this isn't inflationary," she told Sky News on Wednesday.

"But that's not enough - is it actually reducing inflation, and if it is, well where, because we can't find a policy that has a sustained deflationary effect."

Treasury expects the annual rate of inflation to be back in the two to three per cent band in 2024/25 when it's forecast to fall to 2.75 per cent from six per cent this financial year.

© AAP 2023

The treasurer maintains his second budget will not nudge inflation higher and trigger another interest rate hike next month.

Jim Chalmers has spent much of the federal budget wash-up explaining how it will not drive up prices, in response to concerns over pumping more money into the economy.

In an address to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Dr Chalmers said more than one-quarter of the budget's total spending would go towards keeping existing programs running.

He also said the cost of living relief was carefully targeted and relatively calibrated - costing around 0.1 per cent of GDP in 2023/24 - and would be dribbled out throughout the year rather than in one big hit.

Plus, Treasury analysis in Tuesday's budget anticipates its cost of living measures - including the energy bill relief - will actually shave 0.75 per cent off inflation in 2023/24.

Official forecasts do show inflation coming down faster in this financial year compared to earlier forecasts, but only by 0.25 per cent.

But the inflationary impact of the government's budget policies remains a live question.

Some economists, such as Rich Insight's Chris Richardson, noted the cost of living spending was necessary but it would have been preferable to have offset it with money-saving and revenue-raising measures.

Major ratings agency S&P welcomed the government's decision to bank its revenue upgrades but warned the budget's handouts may add to inflationary pressures.

Director Anthony Walker also said inflation would likely remain above the Reserve Bank's target range until 2026, much later than the bank's and Treasury forecasts.

But several economists, including NAB's Alan Oster, considered the budget to have a relatively neutral impact on the inflationary environment.

"We see little implication for monetary policy in the near term, with the RBA likely to continue to focus on the ongoing pass-through of rates and the pace of moderation in inflation," Mr Oster and his colleagues wrote in an analysis.

The opposition has also accused the government of fuelling inflation and claims a family with children is around $25,000 worse off under the Labor government.

"After less than a year in government, there is $185 billion of extra spending, which makes inflation worse and does nothing to help you or your family get ahead," shadow treasurer Angus Taylor said.

"Instead, this budget makes the situation worse."

But the treasurer assured his budget would be contractionary when inflation was at its highest.

"The result of our efforts is to improve the fiscal position by around $125 billion over two years since coming to government," he said.

"All this means that our fiscal position is clearly not working against the RBA."

He said with the economy slowing, hitting the brakes too hard "would've done more harm than good".

© AAP 2023

A jury has found Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing advice columnist E Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $US5 million ($A7.4 million).

The verdict was announced in a federal courtroom in New York City on the first day of jury deliberations.

Jurors rejected Carroll's claims that she was raped but found Trump liable for sexually abusing her.

Hours earlier, US District Judge Lewis A Kaplan read instructions on the law to the nine-person jury before the panel began discussing Carroll's allegations of battery and defamation shortly before noon.

Trump, who did not attend the trial, has insisted he never sexually assaulted Carroll or even knew her.

Kaplan told jurors that the first question on the verdict form was to decide whether they think there is more than a 50 per cent chance that Trump raped Carroll inside a store dressing room.

If they answered yes, they would then decide whether compensatory and punitive damages should be awarded.

If they answered no on the rape question, they could then decide if Trump subjected her to lesser forms of assault involving sexual contact without her consent or forcible touching to degrade her or gratify his sexual desire.

If they answered yes on either of those questions, they will decide if damages are appropriate.

On defamation claims stemming from a statement Trump made on social media last October, Kaplan said jurors needed to be guided by a higher legal standard - clear and convincing evidence.

© AP 2023