KhunHeineken

Getting the dole comes with some obligations. For some who have been in Thailand for quite a while, they may not like to abide by such obligations.

If anything, it will be raised to 68 or 69.

All that does is encourage people to steal cars for their thrills. The car owner picks up the tab.

I agree, but another member on this forum has stated that one is allowed to go overseas for a "prolonged period" of time and not be cut off, and not have the clock restarted on the 2 year prison sentence, because a nice girl at the call center told him so. When asked for a link on what is a "prolonged period" of time, and what is not, there was no reply. Grain of salt.

Doesn't matter what you declare. They know you are have not been living inside Australia, and for how long. That's all they need to know.

All that changes is the snouts in the trough for the next few years.

Yet another new thread where the non resident for taxation purposes issue is being discussed, yet it's denied by many on the pension thread, despite dividends and pensions both being deemed as income by the Australian government. If you don't want to be taxed as a non resident of Australia for taxation purposes, then don't have any assets in Australia for them to tax. Simple concept, really.

They don't tax interest on savings. Really? Link please? Investment properties are not as lucrative as they once were. Taxes, fees, levies, rates, maintenance etc. How does leaving money in Australia in a term deposit and / or buying a rental property, help someone remain a resident of Australia for tax purposes?

Some posts about driving a taxi. It's all Uber, or similar now. You'll need an appropriate car, and have to do long hours. As for finding employment in Australia, when over 60 years of age, good luck. Chances are next to zero.

That wooshing sound above your head is sarcasm flying over.

Yawn. Been debated and proven through many links, particularly one link where the question was asked on an online ATO forum, and answered by a staff member from the ATO. A pension is deemed to be an income, and if you are a non resident for tax purposes, you "should" be paying 32.5% tax on any, and all income, derived from Australia, which includes pensions. The proposed changes are not new laws. They just allow the ATO, Centrelink, and Immigration data bases to finally all communicate together in order to either collect the 32.5% non resident tax from those earning back in Australia, or withhold 32.5% tax on pensions. It's as simple as that.

So, it's only your opinion then. You forget, the legal public servants are permanently employed, on a salary, they are not outsourced and paid for a job. They get paid every fortnight regardless if they have 10 cases on the go, or 20 cases on the go, they still get paid the same. Sure, but you are yet to state, or link, an actual dollar figure as to what is not a "viable" tax debt to pursue. Is it $500, $5000, or more? You are the one claiming they will not chase a small debt, so what is "small?"

Are both agencies not part of the same government, therefore, their data bases communicate to each other, and if they are currently not, how long before they do? Then, you can add the immigration data base to that as well, which is already linked to both these data bases, as we all know. All that is left for the government to do is tighten up enforcement / compliance, and that's on its way, and not just for guys like Paul Hogan.

Well, you must be doing something right on this website if you get death threats.

That's the "I am back home in the village bar." It's in Issan. She's a keeper.

Pretty low threshold. https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Support-to-lodge-and-pay/In-detail/Release-from-your-tax-debt/ "In certain circumstances, we can permanently remove some or all of an individual's tax debt. We call this 'release'. We can only release you from payment of particular tax debts where paying those debts would leave you not able to provide for yourself, your family or others for whom you are responsible. This includes providing for items such as: food accommodation clothing medical treatment education" This means, anything more than the above, they will go after.

I am not repeating myself. You say the ATO will not take action over a debt that small. Do you have a link for that? What is their dollar amount between a small debt you say they will wipe, and a larger debt they will chase. It's your story, I'm just asking for a credible link. I have given figures of what a debt / reduction might look like IF expat retirees will be paying non resident tax in the future. I have asked you if you consider those figures to be small enough to be written off. No reply from you. It's not hypothetical. The 65,000 baht is a fact. Converting it to AUD is a fact. The 32.5% is a fact. Links have shown pensioners should already be paying it, but we are not going down that path again. I said if you don't believe so, that's up to you. We are now focusing on the dollar amounts and the ATO / Centrelink's debt collection methods. I've provided a link showing Centrelink have been chasing $786.06 for 6 years. Can you provide a link where either the ATO or Centrelink have written off small debts like this? If so, great, but I question whether they would keep writing it off, every year, forever. If that was the case, accountants would be structuring their client's financials to "earn" just the right amount of debt that the ATO writes off, but they don't.

For the record, this is a new subject. We are now discussing what the ATO / Centrelink determine to be a small debt / reduction, thus, will not bother with it. Your link relates to robodebt, and that's fine. I still can't believe with all that happened with robodebt, they are still chasing it. Of course not all debt is robodebt. I never suggested it was. Here's another article. This is about some debt accrued during covid. Look at the small amounts. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-16/welfare-pandemic-covid-centrelink-debts-jobkeeper/100379072 "It's really, really difficult to get Centrelink debts waived," she said. "Ms Singh said Centrelink was doing what was lawful under its recovery system but the federal government had the power to intervene. "I think that's unlikely," she said." Like I said, we are all just a number, with a dollar value.

43kg is a good weight for someone on yabo. You've got a keeper there. No. Aren't you the guy who trolls, baits, and personally attacks, and then reports to the mods when what you dish out comes back to you?

It's not a deflection. The link shows how ruthless Centrelink are when chasing even small amounts of money. I guess there's no difference between owing a small amount and a larger amount, a debt is a debt, and an over payment is an over payment, and both will proceed to the collections stage if not paid back. My comment about "non voters" was to show that if Centrelink are chasing small amounts of money from people inside Australia, who do vote, it's probable Centrelink will reduce pensions when the changes are passed, knowing the government of the day loses no votes. It must be noted that robodebt was under the former Liberal government, yet Centrelink is still chasing the money under the current Labor government, hence my comment, "Where's Albo?" Some members seemed to think Labor and Albo will look after pensioners and those on Centrelink, well, where is he on this issue? The new subject is about Centrelink being ruthless in their debt collection, with robodebt collection continuing to this very day, which is disgraceful. As another member says, Centrelink needs to reform, but when it comes to money, that can be difficult, and involves the letter of the law. As for your comment about "fairgame." I think the link shows everyone is fairgame for Centrelink, and the point I am making is, that also includes expat pensioners. Living in Thailand offers no protection from Centrelink. Do you have any comment on the link, or is it more same old personal attacks from you?

You have read that out of context, and that's because the words "tax purposes" should read "taxation purposes." Allow me to clarify. This is what I said: "Some on here seem to think their pension money is small enough that Centrelink will not chase them as a non resident for tax purposes, yet, they are chasing money from residents for tax purposes, so why wouldn't they chase non residents?" The point I am making is, some members believe Centrelink will not chase expat pensioners for non resident tax rates because they believe it's only small money for Centrelink / ATO. When I use the word "chase" I really mean simply reduce their pension by 32.5% after 183 days outside of Australia. Yet, here's Centrelink chasing "residents for taxation purposes" for very small amounts, and for years. If you look at the link, you will see the guy in the article has been fighting Centrelink for 6 years over $786.06. There is a photo of his bill in the article. My point is, if Centrelink are still fighting a robodebt bill of $786.06, I think the members who believe expat retiree non resident taxation is too small for Centrelink to be interested in may reconsider their stance. So, forgetting about whether expat pensioners will or will not be taxed at non resident rates once the proposed changes are passed, the new subject is, will the dollar amounts involved be significant enough for Centrelink to reduce pensions by 32.5%, and going by that link, and the two testimonies in it, the answer appears to be yes. When I watched and read the link, I actually thought these people were caught out cheating the system because they were working more than they declared and tens of thousands of dollars had to be paid back. When I saw it was only $786.06, and that was a robodebt amount, I was shocked.

Can you copy the sentence where I have said that? It doesn't appear in the post you have quoted. Are there any debts incurred when supplements are withheld after being outside of Australia for 6 weeks? It's not a debt, it's a reduction. After 183 day outside of Australia, there MAY be a further reduction of 32.5%. This MAY take place in the same way as the 6 week reduction. Once again, all you are focused on the ATO and a tax liability. I said ages ago the payer is also the taxer. To ensure the tax is paid, they will take it each fortnight, not give full payment and then a bill on the 1st July each year and chase a debt. Anyway, let's not go down the rabbit hole again. The new subject is the ruthlessness of Centrelink. The point I am making is they have no problem chasing robodebt, even now, which is a disgrace, so I am quiet sure they would have no problem reducing payments to non residents for tax purposes, yet some on here believe the money is too small for them to bother.

As I posted, I was just shocked to see Centrelink still chasing robodebt money. It's disgraceful. Some members have every confidence in Centrelink to overlook their tax residence status, yet here's Centrelink still chasing robodebt money. The new subject is how ruthless Centrelink can be, no matter how small the money involved, and where you live. It's a new rabbit hole.

Actually, the ATO may have not much to do with it for money people. Immigration inform Centrelink an individual has been outside Australia for 183 days and they reduce payments by 32.5%. Much the same way they do with supplements after 6 weeks. No, I am not. Centrelink already reduce payments after 6 weeks. After 183 days outside Australia, the reduction reason will be for non resident. It's possible the ATO will not be involved, other than the exchange of consolidated revenue behind the scenes. You seem to be confusing a tax debt with a simple reduction of Centrelink payments. Self funded and part pensioners will have an ATO debt. Those on a full pension will simply have a reduction in payment. This means, Centrelink don't chase anyone. It will not be a robotdebt scenario. It will just be a reduction in pension, much the same way it is after 6 weeks. There will be no debt to be repaid for those on a full pension. I agree with you that the proposed changes to the law are for the benefit of the ATO to be able to do away with 90 year old laws that have a huge gray area that many have been using to escape paying non resident tax rates, but it's entirely possible that the new laws are all about giving immigration the ability / power to inform both the ATO and Centrelink, via computer data bases, of who is outside Australia for 183 days, thus allowing the ATO and Centrelink to either start collecting, or reducing. Sure, let's not go down the rabbit hole again. I was just shocked when I read that news item that Centrelink was still chasing robodebt money, yet some on here seem to believe Centrelink are kind to pensioners, or their pension is so small that neither the ATO, immigration, or Centrelink with bother with them.

Put her on a diet, or trade her in.