KhunHeineken

It's a news article, not a transcript of the whole meeting. I'm sure he spoke about the proposed changes more in depth than what was reported in the article. That said, many working expats want to be deemed a non resident because they are working for big dollars in a low tax jurisdiction. They don't want to come under Australia's non resident tax laws, so the 45 day law is more applicable to them than the 183 day law. Then you have expats with small incomes from Australia, including pensions, that want to be deemed a resident for tax purposes, so they do not come under the Australian non resident tax brackets, so the 183 day law is more applicable to them than the 45 day law. Can you see how the proposed changes scoop up everyone? I'll ask you the same question I asked another member recently. Given the proposed changes, how would an expat argue that they are a resident for tax purposes when they have spent maybe 2 months in Australia out of the last 5 years, or haven't even been back to Australia at all in the last 5 years? How could one possible argue they are an Australian resident for tax purposes? For most expats, the 183 days is irrelevant because they have no intention of returning to Australia for 6 months every year for the purposes of qualifying for tax resident status. Once again, confirmed by the Bob and Blake link, that pensioners should already be paying non resident tax. If one maintains a domicile, maybe a vehicle, a utility bill, bank account, community ties and has family,, basically all the things that kept them in the gray area for so long, the 183 day law does away with all of it. If one is a resident because they have been in Australia for more than 183 days, wouldn't that mean one is a non resident because they have been outside of Australia for more than 183 days? It can't work both ways.

Yes, and soon you'll have to use a wheel barrow to cart the money into a bakery, just to buy a loaf of bread.

A little bit of Aseannow has died with him. He was the encyclopedia of Thailand's visa laws, and everything in between the lines of those visa laws, and helped so many people over the years. He will be missed. RIP.

I actually thought the Labor government would extend this, as it was for covid, but now due to the high cost of living, but it appears not. https://www.9news.com.au/national/federal-budget-2023-low-middle-income-tax-offset-stage-three-tax-cuts-explained/b0735bc5-ce62-4c29-a923-354710093ed3 "So for many Australians (according to the ATO, more than 10 million people claimed the LMITO in 2019-20), their tax bill will increase by up to $1500 next year." Fundamentally unlike Labor.

From the Australian Debt Clock link. Total all debt. "Total Australian Credit outstanding includes all debt and equity outstanding of the domestic non-financial sectors. Total Australian Credit has grown from AU$787.7 billion in December 1989 to AU$6.3 trillion in December 2016; an increase of a little over 800% over a 27 year period." Total government debt. "Total Government Debt is the gross sum of liabilities across federal, state and local Government in Australia. Total Australian Government Debt increased by a mere 13.5% from December 1989 to December 2007, from AU$81.2 billion to AU$92.1 billion. However, from December 2008 to December 2017 Total Australian Government debt increased by over 520% from AU$115.4 billion to AU$716.3 billion. The primary reason behind this increase has been to provide depth in the market for government bonds so that the Reserve Bank of Australia can easily increase liquidity through open market operations by printing more Australian Dollars and buying the government bonds back." Some scary statistics.

No. The way it reads to me is this part of the proposed changes has nothing to do with retired expats who are living overseas full time. Many working expats wish to be deemed a non resident for tax purposes, but were concerned if they came home for a 4 week or 6 week holiday, and then had to come home again within the same year for something unexpected like a funeral or illness or injury to a family member, then that would put them over the 45 days, but still under the 183 days, so they would be deemed a resident for taxation purposes, and hit with a tax bill from the ATO. Here's a quote from the article about it. "Vanessa is a school teacher, and like many of her colleagues would return to Australia for the annual six-week break. However, based on a 45-day allowance, this would not provide for any buffer if she needs to fly home for emergencies such as a family member being unwell or even a teacher conference. As the draft rules stand, the 45-day test does not distinguish between work or personal travel. If Martyn was required to attend Australia for work-related purposes, this would also reduce potential visits for the balance of the year." In my opinion, there's no doubt that if you are outside of Australia for 183 days you will be deemed a non resident for tax purposes. This is obvious. As seen by a link posted by another member, involving Bob asking a question on an ATO Forum, and Blake, an ATO staff member answering, and something we have addressed time and time again on this thread, with many disagreeing, expat pensioners should already be paying non resident tax, but it's the grey area of 90 year old laws that allow so many, including myself, to slip through. The 183 days, linked to immigration records, will do away with that grey area and see every expat "deemed" a resident or non resident for taxation by the ATO simply based on the amount of days inside and outside of Australia. It's a simple and as cut and dry as that, no gray area, at all. Nothing to ask for a review, nothing to appeal. Black and white law. This is the real issue for consideration with these proposed changes. Not whether a pension is an income, or if you still have a Medicare Card, because these were already known at law well before these proposed changes, but the ease in which the government will be able to deem you in the future, simply through immigration records, and not through a 90 year old law's gray area. This is why they were designed the way they were. Simply to scoop everyone up, and have no way to appeal the tax bill, as it's all about the amount of days inside and outside Australia, nothing more. The member's link involving Bob and Blake settles a lot of debate. The 183 days in the proposed changes does away with any existing gray area and will be based on immigration records. I think this is pretty clear. When you simply look at these two things, the issue facing expat retirees, including pensioners, becomes very clear. Pensioners are already having their pension reduced when outside of Australia for 6 weeks. Consider how easy that is for the government to do, then consider the 183 day law with no exemptions or threshold, and one can see the financial impact, and the seriousness, of these proposed changes on expat retirees.

It's easy to get around, but if you can't, here's the quotes. "Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones told an Australian Chamber of Commerce event in Singapore this week the new rules for deciding Australian tax residency were in “the government’s in-tray” ahead of the October budget, and the day limit was “being looked at”." "Under changes put forward in last year’s federal budget, expats who spend more than 45 days in Australia and who also satisfy two of the four proposed “factors test” – being an Australian citizen or permanent resident, having access to an Australian property, having direct family members in Australia or Australian economic interests – would be classed as residents for tax purposes." The day limit he is referring to is the 45 days, not the 183 days.

What's even more sad is you continue to post off topic and personal attacks, yet, I have never reported anyone, ever. Does the issue upset you that much you need to constantly shoot the messenger? Just put me on your ignore list and move on.

I admit the increase to Jobseeker caught my eye. As for Labor fundamentals, well, as a party, they haven't looked after "the worker" like they used to for decades now. In any case, what has non resident taxation got to do with Labor fundamentals? There's 1 million Australians living / working overseas at any given time. (link already provided) I would think quite a high percentage of them are on very good money. I personally know a few that are. One member says about 80,000 of them are pensioners, I put it at about 200,000 are pensioners. Only the government knows the exact number. Why wouldn't the government, even a Labor government, go after the 800,000 / 920,000 non residents for taxation purposes with a law that scoops up them all up, with pensioners simply being collateral damage, as there are currently no exemptions in the proposed changes? Or, do you think there will be exemptions or a threshold introduced? I admit, I give the article, and the Assistant Treasurer's statements, some weight, particularly as the statement was made to expats at a meeting in Singapore, so it clearly was an issue they wanted him to speak on. As for "no chance" do you think this is fake news? Labor's Assistant Treasurer says it's in the government's "in-tray." A little hard to ignore that statement from him, isn't it? https://www.afr.com/policy/tax-and-super/assistant-treasurer-flags-new-tax-residency-rules-20220826-p5bd1v It's one thing to say "no chance" because of a possible increase to some welfare, but it's a completely different thing to address changes to a 90 year old law for non resident taxation.

How so? What makes you think the implementation of the changes are so far away in the future? No, just wondering why you are so confident the changes will either not be passed at all, or if passed, they will be passed so many years from now that you would have died, hence they will have no impact on you. What would your comment be if they are in the May budget, which is less than a week away?

Australia's debt clock. https://australiandebtclock.com.au

With electricity set to rise between 20% and 31% on the 1st July, that's going to see a surge in inflation that will not be easy to tame. https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/power-bills-to-rise-by-20-per-cent-from-july-1-20230314-p5crzg

Sadly, I think you are correct. Everyone voting for individual financial benefit, not the benefit of the country.

Australia was well on its way to over $1 Trillion dollars in debt before the pandemic.

$2.5 million an hour in interest. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/trillion-dollar-debt-delayed-but-interest-bill-accelerates-to-2-5m-an-hour-20230504-p5d5kj.html

That's the power of the Great British Pound in Thailand.

Why are you so confident the Labor government will not implement the changes? I've posted a link showing the Assistant Treasurer of the Labor Party informing expats at a meeting in Singapore that the proposed changes are in the government's "in-tray" and that they were looking at the 45 days part of the legislation. This says to me that the changes are not dead in the water under Labor.

That's the only accurate post you've made lately.

I've heard that when the Brit got his gear off, the old Aussie guy thought he was in Boyz Town and went to place a 100 baht note in between the Brit's a** cheeks, which he took offence to, so hit him with his beer bottle. Don't know how true it is.

There's always winners and losers on budget night, however, with the Australian economy the way it is, I think there will be more losers than winners for the foreseeable future. The government needs to collect more money. Simple as that. We may all dodge a bullet on the 9th May, but in my opinion, it's only a matter of time before those tax residency laws are passed.

That's a bit rich coming from you with all your hate speech, personal attacks, abuse and trolling. How has discussion about this serious tax facing every expat turned this thread into a dogs breakfast? It's you, and many others, that caused the thread to descend into the gutter. Talk about the pot and kettle. I posted the proposed changes and everyone went off like a bomb, as if it was my fault for drafting them. Some of the replies as to why they will either not come in, or come in with little effect on expats, were ridiculous. The simple fact is, a high percentage of expat retirees have never paid non resident tax, and that includes myself. We have fallen through the gray area net in the 90 year old law. The proposed changes, with the 183 day law was designed to turn the net into a scoop, so no holes for any expat to fall through. This should have been the focus of most discussion, but it became clear a lot of expats had no real idea of their tax residency status and their current tax liability. Once told of the harsh reality in these changes, well, it wasn't difficult to see the psychology behind the personal attacks, abuse and trolling. Take it up with Bob and Blake from the ATO in YOUR link. One can only wonder what may have come of this discussion if you posted that link 20 pages ago.

Price, Waterhouse, Coopers keeping an eye on the May budget for the government's intentions in relation to the proposed changes. https://www.pwc.com.au/publications/federal-budget-2023/analysis-and-insights/multinational-tax-updates.html "We also hope to see the Government indicate its intentions with respect to the former Government's announced but unenacted measures, for which a decision was not made in the October 2022 Budget, including the patent box regime, corporate and individual residency changes and whether we will see any reforms to the deemed dividend rules affecting private companies." Of course, it could just be the opinion of their staff, and they are scaremongering.

I didn't forget about self managed funds, but I would hardly call them mainstream for PAYG workers. That's not to say PAYG workers can't do it, just that it's not widely adopted by them, probably because of all the establishing and annual reporting necessary. I don't know every detail about the British system, but I believe you pay into it, and it's government guaranteed to you upon retirement. At least this way you know it can't be lost to you, and you know exactly what you will be getting in your retirement. There's something wrong with a system that people pay into for all their working lives, and when they are just about to hit retirement age, something like the GFC or Covid hits, and they have to keep working for years after. Fraud is also another concern, and there has been a lot of it. False signatures on forms requesting the fund move the money from a low risk portfolio to an aggressive portfolio so the manager gets a bigger commission saw retirees losing the lot is just one example.

Like I said, beaches forum rules, but I will not be reporting you, despite your admissions. If we took a poll in Nazi Germany back in the day about whether Hitler was a good guy or not, would it be a true indication of his character? I just addressed this in another post. Members jump into this sub topic of the thread on the current page. They doing scroll back and see previous links and read previous discussion. I've just posted the non resident tax brackets for a member for about the fifth or sixth time on this thread. Should I tell him to just scroll back, as they have been posted before? You got me. This post is six sentences. I know it's difficult for readers to maintain attention for two extra sentences.

They are 15 years behind in Sakon Nakon.