KhunHeineken

Let me be very clear about it, and you can quote me on this. After the change of government, when the Assistant Treasurer met with expats in Singapore and said to then the proposed changes were in the government's "in tray" (link previously posted) I have always said it appears it's not IF, just WHEN. I have also gone on to say that even if Labor do not bring in the proposed changes, the next Liberal government will because they are the ones that proposed them, so once again, it's only a matter of time. We can speculate on "when" the current Labor government may or may not bring in the proposed changes, but you can quote me on saying that it is my opinion that they will eventually be passed, by either political party, at some stage in the future. As mentioned in a previous post, we saw how quick the changes to the Stage 3 tax cuts happened. The proposed changes to tax residency will have no where near the same media scrutiny and will be easily passed in by Labor because it's the opposition party that proposed them.

I would think the "discussion paper" was put forward back in 2021 by the Liberal government. This was the "consultation paper" in which stake holders could make final submissions. So, I am thinking it's closer than what you think. As for holding my breath about changes to tax legislation, what about those changes to the Stage 3 tax cuts? You wake up one morning, and suddenly the Stage 3 tax cuts have changed. That's how quick it can happen. Here's an article from today. "Everything on the table" in relation to changes to taxation. I'd say the proposed changes to tax residency legislation would be on the table as well. Stage 3 tax cuts: Allegra Spender, Bill Kelty call to overhaul system beyond income tax cuts (smh.com.au)

Why do you think the changes will not be passed? Who is going to object to the legislation? The previous Liberal government proposed them, and the current Labor government is running with them. I can't see it being an election issue, so who is going to stand in the way of them being passed?

I could do 45 days, and even cop 60 days, but 90 days a year is not good. Dated October 23. https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/business-travellers-tourists-could-be-caught-in-new-tax-rules-20231017-p5ecvy

Nope. Those on a full pension have posted. I am self funded and posted. I think you are the only member actively posting who is on a part pension. Are you considering some financial restructuring after the changes come in?

How can you lose land that you can never really own in Thailand? The purchase money just gets redistributed to Thai's, one way or another.

What about those that haven't lost their life savings in Thailand, are they "lucky" or something else????

1st Feb 21 is nearly 3 years ago. Do try to keep up with the latest news on the civil war in Myanmar to save embarrassing yourself anymore than you already have.

Hardly. Serious question.

Another useless troll post from you. That makes it 500 superfluous, redundant, and against forum rules posts you have made in reply to me. It may simply come down to who lives longer as to who will prevail.

Have you seen the price of houses and rents across the country lately?

Sure, so will I, as we will all have to. Nothing wrong with considering the options though.

Been posted many times before by me and others. Google it and you will see many pages from accounting firms, financial planning firms, also government websites about them. They are no secret.

Yet, you seem to think pensioners will get a free pass from the very same laws, despite no mention of an exemption.

All correct. Unfortunately, the unknown factor in the maths as to whether it's financially beneficial or not to return is the individual's life span. Return and pay all that money and die not long after serving the 2 years and it was wasted. Return and go on to live a very long life and it was financially beneficial to do so.

A friend of mine returned and bought a mobile home and cruised around Australia, sometimes with the Thai missus. It was his cost effective method for transport and accommodation in one, whilst filling his day and showing the missus his country. This may not be for everyone, but it is an option.

Myself, and some friends, and I am sure many others around the world who are self funded, lodge tax returns. We pay resident tax rates, due to the loopholes previously mentioned. That will change when the proposed changes are passed. We will be paying non resident tax rates at 32.5% from $0. Where this is relevant to pensioners and part pensioners is there are no exemptions for pensions in the proposed changes, nor any mention of a tax free threshold being added to non resident tax brackets, hence why I posted about it a long time ago, because a pension is deemed income, and is also taxable, and this caused some debate, which is still continuing.

Did you ever work out which pension you were on? One day it was a vet's pension, the next day it was the aged pension.

I agree with you 100%, however, I find it strange you do not accept that there could be another "checkmate" on the way, as we have been discussing. Australia is edging closer to $1 trillion debt. The money has to come from somewhere. They will be looking to implementing every "checkmate" they can.

Who are they "tracking down?" Those who lodge a tax return, they have them cold. They will get their non resident tax bill in the usual way. They will have pensioners cold as well. Immigration tells ATO and Centerlink an individual has been outside of Australia for 183 days and next fortnight the pension is reduced buy 32.5%. Where's the "tracking down" about this?

If you agree 100%, then you are contradicting yourself. Can you see how convenient the proposed changes make it for the government to either collect, or withhold pensions money, from people outside of Australia for 183 days? No tax returns needed. Just post out a bill to self funded and part pensioners for 32.5%, and withhold 32.5% of the pension from pensioners, all physical presence and time based, with the work done by computers. I see the words "my interpretation" and "it could also apply to non residents in my opinion." You have posted, "the age pension forms part of your taxable income." So, basically, as I have posted many times, and provided links, the pension is deemed to be an income, and is taxable. I have also posted the non resident tax brackets. So, can you post a link showing the pension is exempt from non resident tax? Can you post a link showing a tax free threshold for non residents? If you can't, all we have is your "interpretation and "opinion." The rest of your post is basically a personal attack. Why don't you put up or shut up? Post some links to back up your "interpretation" and "opinion."

The previous Liberal government had then drafted. The current Labor government has allowed the consultation phase which started in July 23 and ended September 23. (link already provided) Here's the Assistant Treasurer telling expats in Singapore the proposed changes are in the government's "in tray." https://www.afr.com/policy/tax-and-super/assistant-treasurer-flags-new-tax-residency-rules-20220826-p5bd1v So, out of these facts, can you tell me why you think neither political party will get them passed? How can Liberal try to block them in parliament when they were all for them and had them drafted? How can Labor try to block them when in opposition when they didn't bin them and were looking to tweak the 45 days? I can simply see the writing on the wall.

You have stated you are on a part pension. What about the supplement income you receive? How can that stand outside the proposed changes in the future? The rest of your post is just wishful thinking. As I have said, computers will do it all, and there can be no asking for a review or appeal because one has simply been outside of Australia for 183 days, proven by immigration records, and there's no getting around that.

I get it, but what you don't accept, or understand, is when the proposed changes are passed, computers will do all the heavy lifting. What part of this don't you understand? Guys like me, who appear to be tax residents on a long holiday, will end up getting a non resident tax bill. Part pensioners will be the same on their supplement income. Aged pensioner will have a 32.5% reduction in their pension. There's no way the government will pay the full pension every fortnight, then chase the 32.5% on the 1st July every year. Like the supplements,the 32.5% will be withheld after 183 days. The immigration data base already talks to the Centerlink data base, and they will be set to talk to the ATO. It's not like the ATO have to employ another 500 staff for this. Some of your post is incorrect. I think what you mean is, currently, pensioners, part pensioners, and even self funded guys like me, have always declared ourselves as residents for taxation purposes, not non residents, as you have posted. This may have been a typo on your behalf, because if we did declare ourselves as non residents, we would have to pay non resident tax. How can you class yourself as a non resident to avoid non resident tax. The way to avoid non resident tax is to be a resident. Once again, maybe a typo on your behalf. Interesting comment about self assessment. Do you think we will all be able to "self assess" ourselves out of the immigration department knowing we have been outside of Australia for 183 days? Yes, we continue on as we have been, but the proposed changes are there for all to see, and in my opinion, it's only a matter of time before either political party passes them into law.

If you ad together the stamp duty to buy, the agent's fees to sell, the taxes and fees and maintenance for 2 years, then the loss of the earnings on the capital invested elsewhere, then the high cost of living, it may not be worth buying a property for the 2 years, not to mention the risk that the property market goes down, creating further losses.