KhunHeineken

Other way around. No one likes The Tax Man, but as we can see in this thread, no one like the poster that tells you about The Tax Man.

No, he's not, but amazing how his one post is believed, and my over 300 posts saying the same thing were not, despite me posting many links showing exactly what Blake has stated in his advice to Bob. Like I said, it was bound to be an unpopular message, thus making the messenger unpopular as well, but unlike some others on this forum, I don't care about Likes, Thumbs Ups, Scores, Ratings etc. I've discussed the psychology behind many posts with another member. Basically, attack the messenger in the hope that the message will change, and join the "herd" in the attack for safety in numbers. This is why many consistently said it was just my opinion, or I was making stuff up, or it was only my interpretation, or I was only scaremongering. This was followed by personal attacks and trolling, much of which was quite humorous, yet, nothing has changed, with the proposed changes still in the current government's "in-tray." I found being called a scaremonger interesting, because I didn't put forward a rumor, or make up the proposed changes myself, they were there in black and white, on many website, for all to see. I suggested it was the legislation scaring people, and not me scaring people, but no, apparently it was me, because I made them aware of the legislation. Once again, the psychology behind the posts. I look back and some posts were just hilarious. The "That's just for guys like Paul Hogan" and the "I still have a Medicare Card so I am still a resident" posts just instilled in me that people needed the proposed changes explained to them. A recent post by a member basically asking if he didn't pull out his money from an ATM in Thailand would the government know he is not in Australia shows people still need to be informed of what's coming their way. This was followed by a member criticizing me, and then posting completely false information by way of telling people non residents can still benefit from a tax free threshold. I posted the non resident tax brackets for about the fifth time for his benefit, and people want to have a go at me for my post count. Members needed to be informed about the impact these proposed changes will have on them. A lot of false information and myths needed to be discussed, but as I have said, any information that involves telling people they may lose some money, even if they are a pensioner, was bound to be met with anger. I thank LosLobo for posting the link. If Blake's advice to Bob in the link doesn't show the seriousness of these proposed changes, I don't know what will. Perhaps now the discussion can move forward to more constructive things like some expat pension maximization strategies for pensioners, and some expat self funded tax minimization strategies for those who are self funded. Unfortunately, other than doing 6 months in Australia every year, self funded retirees would need to completely restructure their finances to minimize this tax, something that is not easy, quick, nor cheap. I've already had a brief discussion about this with my accountant. As for pensioners, sadly, I don't see many options, because as I have said in the past, their fortnightly "payer" may also become their fortnightly "taxer" so the way I view it is the only options available to pensioners is a reduction in either lifestyle or savings, or doing 6 months in Australia. Perhaps moving to a nearby cheaper country may also be an option. They could maintain the same lifestyle, despite a 32.5% reduction in pension. In my opinion, and I'll say that again, in my opinion, I don't think the proposed changes will be in the May budget, but they could be, and even if they are, I can't see them starting on 1st July 23, so that would most likely mean 1st July 24 at the earliest. So there will be some time to plan how to deal with it. As I have said many times before, Good Luck to all of us with these proposed changes.

I think Blake in your link, who is from the ATO, has summed up Bob's situation pretty well. If Bob wants to retire full time abroad, he'll have to do so on 32.5% less pension. Or, this could be just Blake's opinion, and he's just scaremongering.

Firstly, the proposed changes have not come in yet, so whatever Centrelink and the ATO have told you may very well be irrelevant if / when they come in. Here is the resident tax brackets. This is what you are wrongly referring to for pensioners living in Thailand. Residents These rates apply to individuals who are Australian residents for tax purposes. Resident tax rates 2022–23 Resident tax rates 2022–23 Taxable income Tax on this income 0 – $18,200 Nil $18,201 – $45,000 19 cents for each $1 over $18,200 $45,001 – $120,000 $5,092 plus 32.5 cents for each $1 over $45,000 $120,001 – $180,000 $29,467 plus 37 cents for each $1 over $120,000 $180,001 and over $51,667 plus 45 cents for each $1 over $180,000 The above rates do not include the Medicare levy of 2%. Here are the non resident tax brackets. This is what applies to people who are non residents for taxation purposes. Foreign residents These rates apply to individuals who are foreign residents for tax purposes. Foreign resident tax rates 2022–23 Foreign resident tax rates 2022–23 Taxable income Tax on this income 0 – $120,000 32.5 cents for each $1 $120,001 – $180,000 $39,000 plus 37 cents for each $1 over $120,000 $180,001 and over $61,200 plus 45 cents for each $1 over $180,000 Many expats, including pensioners, have been taking advantage of the gray area that the 90 year old non resident tax laws have. The above comes from the ATO website it is not my opinion and I didn't make up the chart. You can view it on the below link. https://www.ato.gov.au/rates/individual-income-tax-rates/ Can you indicate to me where a non resident has a tax free threshold? You fail to realize that an Australian pension is deemed to be an income by the ATO. Income and assets tests These tests measure your income (how much money you get) and the value of your assets (what you own, for example, any investment properties). If your income or assets are above certain limits, your pension payment will be reduced, or you may not be eligible at all. Your income includes money from: employment pensions annuities investments earnings outside Australia salary packaging See income test for pensions on the Services Australia website. Your assets include things like: investment properties caravans, cars and boats business assets The above is not my opinion. I didn't make them up. You can view the above on the link below. https://moneysmart.gov.au/retirement-income/age-pension-and-government-benefits You state how easy it is from them to reduce your pension when outside of Australia for 6 weeks. They will have the same ease declaring you a non resident for tax purposes and reducing pensions by 32.5%, and the magic number for resident / non resident is 183 days a year, proven by immigration records. You can view the proposed changes to non resident tax in many links. Here's just one of them. https://hlb.com.au/tax-residency-changes-for-individuals/ This is the main part. "Therefore, the Government in the 2020-2021 Federal Budget announced that it will replace the current individual tax residency rules with new primary and secondary tests to determine one’s tax residency. The primarily test is the 183-day test, that is, if a person who is physically present in Australia for a period of 183 days or more in any income year, this person will be considered as a resident for Australian tax purposes." You will notice there is no mention of exemptions or a change to non resident tax free thresholds in the proposed changes. In relation to the above information, can you tell me how you propose to remain a resident of Australia for tax purposes when you are living in Thailand full time, and definitely outside of Australia for 183 days? Can you tell me how you propose to argue with the ATO that your pension is not an income? Can you tell me how you propose to argue with the ATO that resident tax brackets and not non resident tax brackets, which have no tax free threshold, should be applied to your circumstances, despite the fact you are living in Thailand? Given all of the the above, can you tell me what part of it is my "opinion" and where is the "scaremongering?"

The RBA moved too slow, and raised too little, from the outset. 11 months later and inflation is still around 7%. More than double where it should be. Here's an interest clip. https://9now.nine.com.au/60-minutes/what-is-sticky-inflation-and-why-is-it-pushing-more-interest-rate-rises/e9b010f4-6e46-4863-8eb1-8b394524afd0 Australia's housing market bubble may very well need to burst so it can be rebuilt again in a way that does not skew the market in favor of investors, but considering Bill Shorten was voted down on winding back negative gearing, it shows too many are now reliant on the property gravy train. What government will be brave enough to do what needs to be done in relation to Australia's the housing market?

I have always said, from the moment I had to start paying it, if the government forces you to pay superannuation, then the government should guarantee the amount paid in, with at least a small percent of earnings, similar to that of a savings account. Forcing people to put their life savings in the hands of companies that punt it on the stock market does not instill people's confidence in the system.

Have you even put forward your own opinion on the issue? Which scenario do you think will happen? 1) The changes will never come in. 2) The changes will come in and every expat will be taxed. 3) The changes will come in but with some exemptions / thresholds. The proposed changes will effect every Australian expat, even pensioners, because as they stand, there are no exemptions or thresholds. These proposed changes are very much on topic in the thread. Are all the links, particularly those to the proposed changes, that I have posted, my "opinion" also? Do you have any comment on them, or just wish to shoot the messenger because you don't like the message? Do those links "count for much" or are they just the "opinion" of economists, accountants, financial advisors, journalists etc? Here's an example. Many members thought that once Labor was voted in these proposed changes would be dead in the water. The last link I posted, just a few posts ago. https://www.afr.com/policy/tax-and-super/assistant-treasurer-flags-new-tax-residency-rules-20220826-p5bd1v See the headline: "Assistant treasurer hints at new tax residency rules." That's the Assistant Treasurer of the current Labor government and is dated August 2022, yet yourself, and others, still only think it's my "opinion." It was in Labor's "in-tray" for the October budget, and it was "being looked at." He made these comments to expats in Singapore, yet those who thought Labor would never bring in the changes still say it's only my "opinion." "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." To those who think Labor will never bring in the proposed changes, does the article carry any weight, at all? Is the Financial Review a credible news source, or is the article only the "opinion" of the journalists? Are all of these accountants, financial advisors, economists, journalists etc, who have been linked on this forum, wasting their time informing their clients and publishing the proposed changes? Have they all got it wrong? Is it all fake news? Is it a scam? What is the purpose of all the information in the links? It's easy to criticize the opinion of others when you don't have one of your own.

Once again, no "credible" rebuttal link / quote to back up what is constantly your only your opinion. Below are the forum rules. 21. You will use a valid email address to register with ASEAN NOW. You will not use temporary or disposable email addresses to register with ASEAN NOW. You will keep the email address that you register with ASEAN NOW current so that you can receive ASEAN NOW notices. 36. Multiple accounts by the same person are not allowed. Creating a duplicate account whilst under a posting suspension could lead to further suspensions being applied. If you have access issues email support (at) aseannow.com It's not about how easy it is to break forum rules, it's about the forum rules themselves. Someone with over 19.000 posts trolling someone with only 1,800 posts for posting too much is funny.

Yet the madness continues. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-04-30/corelogic-house-prices-rebound-interest-rates-housing-market/102284450

Superannuation was designed to stop this. The next generation coming through will most likely be ineligible for any pension, even a part pension, due to having a large super balance. In the future, it will be only outgoing for workers, and never any dollars coming back to them the government.

A lot more "gradual" than past operating systems. in business terms, that tends to show it has failed to impress, or a "flop." Back flips tend to follow flops, and MS have already back flipped on the TPM installation. So Window 11 has "flopped" with you, and you are not alone. It has flopped with hundreds of millions of others, worldwide. I guess their big scare tactic of the TPM and devices not meeting minimum requirements just didn't work out.

Ahhh, the old, "I have an Australian bank account so I am still an Australian resident" argument. Australian immigration know you are outside of Australia, and for how long, thus, Centrelink know as well. There have been many posts and examples given about this. It has nothing to do with using an ATM overseas.

I've never been in denial about that. I don't care that they don't care about my posts on this issue, and with respect, I don't care about your personal attacks and trolling me. On many occasions I have requested them to put me on their ignore list. You should feel free to do the same. I couldn't care less. It's a serious issue that will effect all expats, including pensioners. The May budget is approaching, and whilst I think the proposed changes will not be put forward in the May budget, there's a chance they could be. I don't care if other people don't care about the issue.

That would be against forum rules, but unlike many on this thread who have reported me, i will not be reporting you. Still waiting for some credible links from you to rebut the links, yes links, not opinions, I have posted. No link from you in your last 26 posts. I gave up counting after that. I welcome any rebuttal links. Please post some. Does the word "living" mean "alive" and also refer to their geographic location, being in Australia? Your argument goes to lifestyle, which is irrelevant. How can a hypothesis be fact. A hypothesis is formed prior to fact. After all this time you still do not get it. I have posted links showing Jim Chalmers' hands are tied. The Australian economy is not in good shape, and he can't please everyone on the 9th May, and following budgets. He taxes wealthy expats, and expat pensioners will just be collateral damage. As another member put it, "a blanket tax." He's not targeting pensioners, but they may well be caught up in the net. The current laws are 90 years old, and have a big gray area, one that myself, and yourself, being on a part pension, have used to our advantage. They will put an end to the gray area, for everyone, and without any exemption or thresholds, that means pensioners are caught up as well. Your whole hope, opinion, or hypothesis is based on the notion of bad publicity for government, or lost votes from expat pensioners if these laws are passed, but the other 2.5 million pensioners in Australia will not give a rat's, and neither will any media outlets, for the, estimated 80,000 expat pensioners by your numbers, and the estimated 200,000 expat pensioners by my numbers. It will not be put to the public about the small cohort of expat pensioners as it will be insignificant to the public. No one will care, least of all the government, and there's next to no votes lost because expat pensions do not go to an Australian Embassy at election time. Look at all the information on the websites of financial advisors, investment houses, accounting firms etc. Many links to them have been posted. They are all aware something is in the wind, with some of them already offering some basic interpretations of the proposed changes. Are they forming a wrong hypothesis? Are they wasting their time? In my opinion, the laws will be passed at some stage in the future, regardless of which party is in government. The best we can hope for are exemptions or thresholds, but neither of these are mentioned in the proposed changes, so strap yourself in and get ready for the ride.

What about all that lost pension money to the Australian economy, and all that lost non resident tax revenue, for which I have admitted that I have escaped for some years. Don't you think that would outweigh some longer wait times for medical, and why would the government care what the returning expats do for accommodation. You are still stuck in denial that the Australia government actually cares about its citizens, it doesn't. I have posted links to the serious situation the Australian economy is in. They need the money, and will be chasing every dollar. They will not be held to ransom over some longer wait times for free medical, and returning pensioners living with friends and relatives.

Sure, but failing to plan means you are planning to fail. No gray area in this one, and at this stage, no free passes. This one's not going to go away.

I addressed this myth several pages ago. Briefly, every cent of pension money going to expats overseas is a total loss to the Australian government, and the Australian economy. In fact, it benefits another country's economy. Directly, or indirectly, force pensioners back to Australia and just about all that fortnightly pension circulates in the Australian economy, which creates jobs, and jobs create income tax, not to mention GST, taxes, excise, levies, council rates, fees, licenses, insurances etc that are all government revenue. Basically, the government gets a lot of that pension money back through various different sources. I agree there is currently a housing shortage at the moment, but this, and the myth that it will strain the medical system, is not enough for the government to care one bit about updating 90 year old non resident taxation laws. All it means is the waiting list gets a bit longer, so if pensioners have to wait 12 months instead of 9 months for medical treatment, why would they care? I don't think it will be in the 9th May budget, but in my opinion it will happen, possibly in Labor's current term. Labor are aware of the proposed changes and are reviewing the 45 day part of the law, but no mention of pensioners, pensions, exemptions, or thresholds. The assistance treasurer said the changes were in "the government's in-tray." https://www.afr.com/policy/tax-and-super/assistant-treasurer-flags-new-tax-residency-rules-20220826-p5bd1v As it's a Liberal initiative, I doubt they will oppose it, so it will have the numbers to pass. Best to start planning a strategy for your own circumstances for when these laws come in.

Not as dumb as it sounds. There's not that many air conditioned live music venues around.

The Jungle Bar on Soi Yamoto, or Soi 31/1, has air conditioning and live music. They have a Filipino band, and drink prices are reasonable.

I have just done a quick scroll back of 3 pages. You have only posted one link in your last 25 poss, and that was a news link. You are the one always asking for a "credible link." How can you rebutt my posts with opinion, alone? In a previous post you said, "You are totally wrong on the 2.5 million OAP recipients." I posted a link showing there are 2.6 million people on the aged pension in Australia. The link was from a government website. I have no problem with you rebutting my posts and links, if you can supply a "credible link" of your own with more accurate or more recent figures. If you can, I will gladly retract and work off the new information, but you don't put forward any rebuttal links, just more derogatory remarks. I don't post, on any forum or platform, for likes, thumbs ups, points, or a positive rating. I'm too old for that. Is that the motivation behind your posts? In any case, we have discussed the psychology behind people shooting the messenger, especially those who are elderly, happy with their lifestyle and routine in Thailand, and who are being informed they might be facing a 32.5% reducing in their pension in the future. It was never going to be a popular message, and it was always going to make the messenger unpopular. Obviously, I then started rebutting replies like, "That's only for Paul Hogan" and "I still have a Medicare Card so I am still a resident" with the harsh reality. This resulted in many personal attacks and trolling me. After a while, I started to fire back, even got sent on some short holidays, but alas, the proposed non resident tax changes didn't go away. As mentioned above, this sub-topic of a possible tax coming the way of expat pensioners, within the aged pension thread, has gone through several stages. Some of them psychological, such as denial and anger. I have posted link after link to back up some of my comments, but sometimes they need some foresight of the reader. An example of this is below. This link is hot off the press. It's only a short read, but paints the picture well of the difficult decisions the government facing in the May budget. I'll list some key points. Federal budget: Jim Chalmers’ choice – more deficit or higher taxes (smh.com.au) First, there's the headline: "more deficit or higher taxes." This is what the government is faced with on the 9th May. Now, an expat pensioner might view this as, "we'll, I don't pay any tax now, so how can I pay more tax." Whereas I view this as, "Anymore than $0 is more tax." Is that a pessimistic view, or a view the government may or may not adopt? I said way back there was going to have to be either higher taxes, or new taxes, or a combination of both. "But they would also cause havoc to a budget that, in case anyone has forgotten, has been in deficit since 2008 and is carrying record levels of debt." I have said before, the Australian economy is not in good shape. I have posted a link showing there will be 25 years of deficits, and debit is approaching $1 Trillion. I have consistently said "The money has to come from somewhere." "The biggest proposal, from the inclusion committee, is to increase JobSeeker to 90 per cent of the age pension. At present, it’s around 71 per cent." I have mentioned welfare is the Australian government's biggest expenditure and posted a link showing it, and is only going to get bigger. Who's going to pay for it? "That would also mean increasing tax on every person who earns more than $45,000 a year. And without those tax cuts, middle-income earners will pay a record share of their income to the taxman." Like I have said, someone has to pay for it, and the money has to come from somewhere. Now, when you read the article, do you consider it improper to form a hypothesis that the government clearly needs to collect more money so it doesn't have to keep borrowing? Couple that with the government sitting on draft legislation to changes to 90 year old non resident tax laws, which a previous government paid for, and loses next to no votes, and do you think it's "opinion" or probability that at some stage in the future, by either party, they will be eventually passed? Is that too long a bow to draw? If so, why? This is where some foresight is needed. Connect all the dots and one can see they lead to higher tax and / or new taxes in the near future. I disagree hypothesis only have power when they come to fruition. Many business decisions and investment decisions are made on hypothesis. For something as simple as reading a forum such as this, what's wrong with forming a hypothesis on the issue? Haven't people all around the world just gone through 3 years of forming hypothesis in relation to covid, and government policy? Of course you missed an important part of the math formula, that is "time." How long we have been members for. Yes, I have posted a lot on this topic. Anyone who has replied to me, I have given the courtesy of replying back. When I have been asked for a "credible link" (sound familiar) I have replied and posted one. After a while, anyone personally attacking me or trolling me, I fired back. In my opinion, yes, only my opinion on this one, the proposed changes to non resident tax is going to have big impact on EVERY Aussie expat, unless exemptions or thresholds are added, so I see it worthy of discussion, not trolling.

There's some truth to your comment, however, is this publication lying? https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/05/08/microsoft-windows-10-last-windows/?sh=e49f6da3328c "First some context. The statement came from Microsoft employee Jerry Nixon, a self proclaimed ‘developer evangelist’ who stated: "Right now we’re releasing Windows 10, and because Windows 10 is the last version of Windows, we’re all still working on Windows 10. If this sounds strange, Microsoft didn't help. The company today stepped forward to defend Nixon’s comment to The Verge saying it was “reflective” of the company’s opinion." "The company stepped forward to defend Nixon's comment." Fast forward to Windows 11, and it's either a back flip / U-Turn, or the publication is lying and MS never defended Nixon's comment about Windows 10 being the last OS. The millions of notifications on Windows machines, all around the world, telling the owner their computer did not meet minimum requirements for Windows 11 is now great publicity for MS, is it? How many people were concerned about this notification? How many people with a reasonably new machine at the time felt ripped off after receiving this notification? How many negative posts of forums about Windows 11 and TPM and compatibility and minimum hardware requirements were there after the Windows 11 announcement? I would say Windows 11 created a lot of negative publicity. Surely MS would have known that ruling out hundreds of millions of machines, all around the world, for Windows 11 was going to create negative publicity for MS. My reasons for this are given above. It turns out MS have now made it easier for older machines to install Windows 11. From not meeting minimum requirements to making it easier to install seems to me to be a back flip. What would you call it?

Yes. Your constant personal attacks and trolling me show a lack of subjectivity and pessimism. Perhaps you should look upon this forum as an information source and self education tool. Knowledge is power. You have 19,000 posts and I have over 1,800 posts. What was that about kettles? https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/age-pension "As at 26 March 2021, around 2.6 million people received Age Pension, equating to over 3 in 5 (62%) of the population aged 65 and over." Are you going to say that's not a credible link? Once again, you think the 183 day law is "victimizing pensioners" as in, ALL pensioners. No, it's not. It would just be withholding non resident tax from those aged pensioners living overseas. Most of the 2.6 million aged pensioners living in Australia would not care less about non resident tax on pensioners living overseas. Why would they? Why do you think they would be vocal about the issue when there's nothing in it for them? You said in a previous post you believe there was only about 80,000 aged pensioners living overseas. Why would the other 2, 520, 000 care about what happens to the 80,000 overseas? Why would the government care about the 80,000, from whom it loses next to zero votes from, when compared to the other 2, 520, 000 pensioners in Australia. Do you really think 80,000 aged pensioners, scattered all around the world, most of whom do not vote in elections, are going to have an influence on non resident tax policy? Why will it not be easy for the government to pass these changes? Are you going to protest outside the Australian Embassy n Bangkok in opposition to them? Expat aged pensioners are the minority, not the majority. How do you propose small numbers will sway government? In my opinion, the laws will eventually be passed, and the best we can hope for is an exemption for pensions, or a dollar value threshold added to the non resident tax bracket table.

There was no deflection. I called you out on wealthy Australians being able to "easily conform" to the 183 day law. When asked how, your reply was move back to Australia for 6 months of the year. If they wanted to do this, they would already be doing it. In fact, many Aussie expat retirees are capable of this anyway, as seen by how they move back for their 2 year qualifying period. Aussie expats, wealthy or pensioners, simply don't want to spend 6 months of the year, every year, for tax minimization or pension maximization purposes. Simply concept, really. Winning the lottery was an example. It could be the sale of an asset/s, an inheritance, a compensation payout or whatever. My point being, we are all in Thailand because we don't want to be in Australia. If we wanted to be in Australia, we can be, because we have a birth right to reside in Australia via citizenship. The argument of "I can't afford to live in Australia on a pension" is not true because there are about 2.5 million people on the aged pension doing it. The debate is in the quality of lifestyle, not the capability. It is true, I am not on the aged pension, but that's not to say that if /when the 183 day law is passed I will not restructure my finances and go onto the aged pension in the future. You still don't get it, do you? If / when the 183 day law comes in, we are all looking at paying 32.5% tax. In the case of pensioners, I would suggest the government simply withholds 32.5% of their pension. It's not me versus you versus pensioners. It's expats versus government, because the 183 day law, as it currently reads, doesn't discriminate. There are no exemptions, means / assets tests, or thresholds in the proposed changes. Interesting you mention psychology. Remember this list of reasons why people chose to ignore the proposed changes? Some were quite humorous. The psychology behind it is, if I tell myself enough reasons why it will not happen, then it won't happen, and if I tell myself enough reasons why it should not not apply to me, then it will not apply to me. If I shoot the messenger then I didn't receive the message and ignorance is bliss. "the Government would never do that. " "that will never happen." "Centerlink told me 6 years ago..................." "there would be too much bad publicity for the Government." "there would be a big backlash by pensioners." "I use a VPN when accessing the MyGov website." "that's only for people like Paul Hogan." "they can't tax a pension." "I'm still a resident because I am using an address in Australia." "I didn't tick the box leaving permanently on the departure card." "I told my Australian bank I am still a resident of Australia." "I'm on a veteran's pension. It's different." "I'm still a resident because I go back to Australia for a couple of weeks every year." "it would cost too many votes." "I still have a Medicare card so I am still a resident." "My mate told me................................" How does any of the above get around the fact that an Australian individual, pensioner or not, is outside of Australia for 183 days? The UK do not pass on CPI increases to British pensioners living overseas. This has been the case for years. I am not surprised the Australian government would be looking at making some savings in this area as well. You call it sharing misery around, probably because of your pessimistic view on things, but I call it spreading information, so people can prepare. Te current law is 90 years old and viewed as no longer fit for purpose. Times are changing. The ground is shifting beneath Aussie expats. The Australian economy is not in good shape and looking at 25 years of deficits. (already posted the link) The government has to get the money from somewhere, and whilst pensioners in Australia may get a free pass, like UK pensioners, I am not so sure Aussie expat pensions will be left untouched. Certainly self funded expats will be impacted. The previous Liberal government commissioned the draft legislation. It's already been paid for. The current Labor government is aware of it and reviewing it. This tells me it's not dead in the water or been thrown in the bin. It hasn't gone away with the election result as some on this forum had hoped. The Labor government can smell a dollar in it just like Liberal did. You're on a part pension. Have you at all considered, even for a moment, the 183 day law? if so, would you have even known about the proposed changes it if it wasn't posted on this forum? Ignore the propose changes at your peril.

I had a Google around and any slight advantage seem not relevant to the majority of users. No wonder you are staying with Windows 10.

Microsoft told the world Windows 10 was to be the last operating system. There should be no Windows 11 to market. Negative publicity is still publicity. Not true. Plenty on the net about it. https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2015/05/08/microsoft-windows-10-last-windows/?sh=261fe35b3328 "The Internet woke up to a shock this morning. Microsoft has used its Ignite 2015 conference to declare Windows 10 will be "the last version of Windows" I posted a quick Youtube clip on how Microsoft have made it a lot easier to install Windows 11 than previously. There is even a choice at install now. I would say that somewhat of a back flip on their "flop" or publicity stunt.