KhunHeineken

Pay the extra for unlimited kilometers. You will need them.

So, we have the government call it a "short absence" but they do not say how long that actually is. We have you saying, just your opinion of course, that's it's 5 days. Then we have another member frequently saying on this forum a "prolonged period of time" is fine. Where's the amount of days, and / or frequency, throughout the 2 year period? Is this not the information, from the government, via a posted link, that we all want to see?

Not being naive at all. As I have said, it's not about what the government knows, it's about what the government can prove, but that doesn't mean the actions of some, or many, does not come with any criminal intent. If you are genuinely separated, ok. If you are not actually separated, but claim you are for financial gain, to the point you even holiday together to Thailand, possibly on the same air tickets, well, I would say you are rolling the dice. Links already provided about how the government are investing such cases.

The guy in your link is the same guy in a link I provided. Interesting story. Yes, you have to pay even if overseas. Say someone doesn't pay, and returns home to see their family for a short time. Do you think there is no enforcement? They just get a free pass. Nothing happens. Enlighten me as to what may happen to them.

And how many different usernames?

I couldn't care less if you claim you are separated when you are actually not. Get back every dollar of tax you have paid in your life in the form of a pension, I say. However, don't urinate on the Australian tax payer and tell them it's raining. It's fraud, and you could be caught out. I have posted some links to show the measures the government are taking to stop this type of fraud. Roll the dice at your own risk.

I didn't move the goal posts. You just don't see the pitch in between the goal posts. What is the dollar figure for write off? You claim to know. What is it? Tell us all.

I have some friends with similar experiences. In your case, the cost of printing and postage is more than the debt. The point I am making is, $2, $200, $2000, $20,000 etc - it's all the same process, and whilst we may not care while sitting here in Thailand, should we want to or need to return to Australia, where we would then be under Australian jurisdiction, things may get nasty over any amount of debt, no matter how small. Of course, there's no individual responsible or accountable for it, it's just the system.

This is an interesting read. Dated April 2023. https://www.itnews.com.au/news/password-crackers-and-metadata-used-to-check-centrelink-users-relationship-status-592649 "Services Australia is using telecommunications metadata and password-bypassing software to investigate welfare recipients suspected of claiming single payments while in relationships." I wonder if holidaying together in Thailand would raise suspicion.

I am well aware it's not about what they know, it's about what they can prove. I am simply saying there are many people, and I am not accusing the members on this forum, because only they know the facts, that are abusing the system for financial gain. We have all seen in the news, on many occasions, the guy on sickness benefits, claiming a bad back from a car accident that he has a compensation claim running on, caught out working on a construction site by insurance investigators. I am simply saying, claiming you are separated when you actually are not, is fraud, and therefore, a crime. Just because it's difficult to prove, or the government lacks the resources to be able to do so, doesn't mean it's not a crime.

Coming from someone with over 20,000 posts.

You beat me to it, and that's his second AN username.

Wrong, as usual. https://retirementessentials.com.au/news/centrelink-age-pension/centrelink-welfare-crackdown/#:~:text=Reports last week reveal that,cameras and audio bugging devices. "Reports last week reveal that Services Australia (the department responsible for Centrelink) is in the process of hiring private investigators to gather evidence on claimants who are suspected of wrongdoing. The planned surveillance is believed to include both cameras and audio bugging devices." https://www.news.com.au/national/federal-government-to-continue-to-use-private-investigators-in-crackdown-on-welfare-cheats/news-story/eea5f19cb6565e90f29c53d06640bbb0 Many articles about it.

Don't quote me on this, but I think that's if you are over 60 years of age. The OP is in his 50's.

People can be prevented from leaving Australia, and I have provided two creditable links setting out the government's policy. Are you saying it's fake news? Are you saying the government is bluffing? Bottom line is, I am saying they can be stopped from leaving Australia unless they pay, or make arrangements to pay. Read the links again. Still waiting on a link from you about a dollar value the ATO will not chase. Requested said link many time, yet nothing. It's just your opinion. We have one member's account of a $600 debt from 8 years ago. Things change over 8 years. Say the member flew back to Australia 7 years ago, perhaps that ATO may have caused him some issues. Still waiting on that link.

Claiming one is separated when they actually are not is fraud, thus, criminal.

I think you will find graduates are well aware of the policy and know their passport is tracked, so there are no news links of someone being detained at the airport. You keep telling me and I keep asking you, what dollar amount of debt will the ATO not bother chasing? This is your claim. Do you have any links? You say they will not chase small debts. What dollar amount is "small?"

As I said, the subject has been mentioned in several new threads, not started by myself. I have referred the OP's, and other members, to the thread where it was discussed at length, and with many links posted. A lot of the plans the OP's have, and the information requested by them, relies a lot on their tax residency status, so they should check out the discussion in the other thread.

I agree. I have asked members who have said they have lived in Thailand for years, but are still a resident for tax purposes, what argument would they put forward to the ATO when their letter arrives? How can one argue they are a resident for tax purposes when they have been living in Thailand for years? The days of being able to say I am just on a 3 year holiday and have the "intention" of returning to live in Australia are coming to an end.

I agree, but some time ago we had a lot of funny comments from those not willing to face the prospect that they may need to consider a Plan B for the future. The "That's just for guys like Paul Hogan" was one of the funniest, and more memorable. As discussed, expats who are non residents for tax purposes should already be paying the tax. These are not new taxes being proposed, just new laws that make enforcement a lot easier for the ATO.

Here's a couple of links. https://www.smh.com.au/money/tax/what-you-need-to-know-about-your-student-debt-before-heading-overseas-20180430-p4zcf7.html This guy has an interesting story. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-03/qld-hecs-help-ex-pats-indexation-university-debt/102427526 See this line: "Now, the ATO uses passport matching to track who leaves the country with a HECS debt." Do you really think the ATO tracks passports ONLY for HECS debt? Do you have any links showing the amount the ATO will not chase? Is it $1000, $5000, $10,000? As you said, the ATO can do pretty much anything to recover debt, so why wouldn't they?

Perhaps you can explain how an expat who has been living in Thailand for the last 3 years, or longer, can argue with the ATO in the future that they are still a resident for tax purposes. Things are changing. It's been discussed at length in the other thread. Having a house, bank account etc will not be the criteria the ATO will be using to classify you in the future. You will be deemed either resident or non resident based on time and physical presence, not domicile and "intention." Currently, anyone can say they have the "intention" of returning to Australia, and for those who still have a property, can show they have a "domicile" in Australia. The reality is, most have no intention of living in Australia again, whether they own a property there or not. The proposed changes will address this loophole for everyone, not just the wealthy.

Have you noticed quite a few recent threads, not started by myself, mention resident / non resident for taxation purposes? Some members, and I am one of them, state they haven't been back to Australia for years, yet are still claiming to be a resident for taxation purposes. The proposed changes that have been discussed will close this loophole not only for the wealthy, but for everyone, because as it stands, there are no exemptions, or non resident tax free threshold mentioned in the proposed changes.

The good think about root canal therapy is you have a nice smile afterwards.

Do you holiday to Thailand together also? We are discussing a level of criminality now.