However,the question has not gone to a full meeting of federal cabinet and there is no decision on whether to amend the package when ministers are concerned at the political danger of breaking the Labor election pledge to deliver the tax package.

The revised costing of the stage three cuts,which are not due to start until July 2024,could shape the debate in the week before the federal budget on October 25.

“The government hasn’t changed our position,” Albanese said of the stage three tax cuts when asked at an event in western Sydney on Friday.

“We’ll continue to get on with making sure that we deliver a budget that is responsible,that acknowledges the pressures that are on it.”

Asked if he was guaranteeing there would be no changes to the tax cuts,Albanese replied by saying,“that is exactly”,before restarting his sentence to say:“What I have said is that the government has not changed our position.”

The tax cuts reduce the 32.5 per cent tax rate to 30 per cent for people earning between $45,000 and $200,000,ensuring all workers earning more than $45,000 gain some benefit.

The more generous element of the package abolishes the 37 per cent marginal tax rate for those earning more than $120,000,so the greatest gains go to those on higher incomes.Every dollar earned over $200,000 will continue to be taxed at the 45 per cent tax rate.

A study by the Australia Institute concluded that half the benefits by dollar value would go to those earning more than $180,000 a year.

The $243 billion cost estimate is from the Parliamentary Budget Office and covers the nine years to June 2033. The estimate was finalised on July 7 in response to a request from Greens leader Adam Bandt,who wants the cuts repealed in full.

Grattan Institute chief Danielle Wood said an updated forecast would show a higher cost because of the increase in employment and higher nominal wages.

“We would expect the package to cost more but at the same time,we would expect income tax revenue to be rising faster than forecast,” she said. “So it would be a bigger cost on a bigger tax base.”

Wood said there were strong economic grounds to scale back the income tax cuts for workers on higher incomes while leaving the benefits for those on low and middle incomes.

Chris Richardson,an independent economist and former director at Deloitte Access Economics,said this week he did not oppose the stage three package on the grounds of fairness but that good economics and good politics meant they should be trimmed rather than scrapped.

Richardson suggested keeping the marginal tax rate for those earning above $120,000 at 37¢ in the dollar – rather than reducing it to 30¢ – in order to cut the annual $21 billion cost of the stage three plan down to about $12 billion.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news,views and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley.Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter here.