KhunHeineken

It's currently not enforced because the current laws are 90 years old, and based on being "domiciled" in Australia, and one's "intention" to return. This is why I, and many others, including pensioners, have NEVER paid a cent of non resident tax, when we are clearly non residents, and deriving an income from Australia, and yes, the pension is deemed an income. It's a huge loop hole. The proposed changes will close this loop hole for the government, in a way that can not be reviewed, or appealed. Immigration records showing 183 days in or out, it's will be as simple as that. Well, there really is no argument. It's there for all to see. I posted a list of all the reasons people did argue, the "Paul Hogan, Medicare Card and Albo" posts come to mind. They have all be debunked though many links, quotes, youtube videos etc, by myself, and other members. There were even members that were under the belief they still get the tax free threshold as a non resident. They were also informed that's incorrect. Can you clarify your stance? Do you think the proposed changes will be eventually passed? If passed, do you think Centerlink will automatically withhold 30% of one's pension after 183 days, in the same way they cut off the supplements? Or, if passed, do you think nothing will happen to pensions? You use the words "consider the ramifications" and that's what this topic is all about, but many put forward humorous reasons for why they think there will be no ramifications at all.

Times are changing, and so are countries. Expats need to be adaptable, or, accept they may have to pay more, in the way of tax, to continue to reside in their chosen retirement destination county.

It's well known that the Thai diaspora is quite large. 2016 stats, but even then, 1.1 million Thai's working / living abroad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseas_Thai Plenty on the net about it. This was at the top of the page of a quick Google search. 1.1 million people out of around 70 million people may not sound like a lot, but picture a lot of that 1.1 million people sending money back to Thailand every week / month from working in the west and it's considerable remittances.

Should the issue return, an idea is to buy another router and connect it to the ISP's router using an ethernet cable. You then have full access to all settings, configurations, passwords etc etc because you own it. You connect your devices to your own router. No need for anything expensive. It's just to give you full and complete access to the settings of that router. Basically, just use the supplied ISP router as a gateway.

I'll give his repo another try then.

OP, you have posted about the "pros." Do you have any idea what MAY be happening in the background that could be a "con." (no pun intended)

One minor thing to consider is your passport really isn't a 10 year passport. It's actually a 9.5 year passport. You will not be allowed to board a flight with a passport with less than 6 months validity. Probably ok for a flight back to Australia, but for any other international travel, you need 6 months validity. So, best to get a new passport prior to 9.5 years. I have no idea why this rule is in place. Someone looking to have a 2 week holiday in Thailand, and they still have 5 months left on their passport, what's the problem?

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think age has something to do with renewing online. Once over a certain age, I don't think you can renew online, because you have to read the eye sight chart.

No, just your total number of days in / out within a financial year. Thai immigration know it, that's why it's called "overstay" if you go over, yet, YOU seem to think Australia is incapable of having a computer data base that can do the same.

Yes, but what is the relevancy of this comment? You will still be able to have it transferred, but it MAY be 30% less money. That's because many people are using the "domiciled" and "intention" loop hole. That loop hole will close when the new laws are passed. The proposed changes are exactly that, 183 days in or out. Once again, you are talking about the current situation, not the proposed changes. Losing 30% of your Aussie pension, the Thai tax is the least of your problems. Once again, 30% is a lot of tax. Thai tax is nothing compared to what Australia MAY be finally able to tax you as a non tax resident in the future. Times, and laws, are changing.

That's why the laws are changing. Like I have said in the past, Centerlink is the payer, and can also be the taxer / withholder. Computers will do it all. It already happens when a pensioner is outside of Australia for 6 weeks. Supplements are cut off. No giant leap forward to withhold 30% non resident tax, in the same way the supplements are cut off.

Why would there be any issues? All it means is you pay a higher rate of tax.

As just mentioned in a previous post, the day is coming where there will be no point being able to supply an address, when the government data bases know you are not living at that address, and are living overseas.

I maintain private health insurance in Australia, so I am covered. This is a similar issue to the non resident taxation issue. The data bases are all starting to communicate with each other, and when Australia moves to a physical presence and time based model for tax residency, for sure it will have some form of impact on the availability of Medicare for expats. Basically, the days of living overseas for years, and paying no Medicare levy, and flying back to Australia for free medical treatment, will be over, and the 5 years enforced. It will not matter if you have an "address" in Australia because they will know you are not living at that address, and in fact are living overseas. As I have said, one should not rely upon Medicare for treatment of serious injuries or illnesses.

Really? I'm shocked.

More poor advice from you. JP's can only perform their duty in their State of jurisdiction. They can not perform JP duties whilst interstate, or overseas. Here's the NSW JP Handbook. https://dcj.nsw.gov.au/documents/legal-and-justice/justice-of-the-peace/the-role-of-jps/jp-handbook-full.pdf "You must be physically present in NSW to exercise your functions as a JP except in certain circumstances when you are delivering JP functions via audio-visual link (see page 14). " The JP should have know this and declined to witness the document. Also, it invalidates your document. If they looked into that document, you would have been asked to resubmit, and the JP may have been stripped of their certification. They don't really have to, in order to have the Vet pension cut off, do they? The Embassy informs Births, Deaths and Marriages, and from there, other government agencies are informed, and payments stopped. However, I have been told there is usually two, or possibly three, more pension payments after death. Most likely due to the bureaucracy, with cross referencing etc.

Can you quote me where I have said any other that???? Banks accounts and automatic transfers. Huh???? Go on the record. What pension are you on????

No, I don't like to be critical of posters, just calling it as I see it. Last time I went to load Sly Guy's repo it wouldn't take. I gathered he may have been shut down, which is what can happen. He went from Matt Hausman to Sly Guy, so just like Matt Hausman didn't work, maybe Sly Guy doesn't anymore. I don't know. Just thought I would mention it. I went another route and gave up on it.

Another member started a thread recently that Microsoft has now blocked the work arounds that many were using to install Windows 11 on incompatible hardware. Check it out.

I have no problem with that. Feel free to put me on your ignore list. It makes it easier for those who want to seriously discuss the issue. Funny thing is though, YOU are not on the aged pension either.

I might not even be able to exchange AUD there, the way it's going.

Firstly, the question was not put to you. The question was put to the member Scorecard, who, at various stages has posted he is on a Vet's pension, and then at other stages, has posted he's on the old aged pension, and how kind the Centerlink call center staff are when he makes inquiries about it. He's also posted a lot about portability, something Vet's don't have a problem with. In fact, I know a few Vet's in Thailand and had some brief discussions with them about it. I specifically remember him posting his 2 year stay in Australia for portability was in a Vet's village, and how easy the 2 years was for him because it. So, he's either a Vet, on a Vet's pension, or he's not. I called him out on it a while ago, and his reply was, "You are on my ignore list." Funny that. So, I, and others, smelt BS. Yet, he has never gone on the record as to, exactly, just what pension he's on, because they are VERY different pensions, with VERY different entitlements. I have posted before I am not on an aged pension. Posted it months ago. No secret. I have also posted before I will not receive an aged pension, without shifting assets, and my accountant working some magic. All legal, of course. I have no problem admitting after working and paying a lot of tax, I do feel somewhat "entitled" when that day comes. My post count on this thread is high because a long time ago I got wind of the proposed changes to Australia's 90 year old tax residency laws. I'm sure you have seen them. Basically, just like Thailand, Australia is looking to change to a physical presence and time based model, from a "domiciled" model. I posted those changes and got an avalanche of crazy reasons why it will never happen. Everything from Paul Hogan, to having a Medicare Card, even Albo has been voted in, so it's never going to happen. I replied to every serious post, and also every personal attack, baiting, flame, troll, abusive, hate, ridicule etc post, thus, a high post count. Also got sent on a posting holiday. As I have said, the proposed changes are the single biggest issue facing members reading this thread, and I stand by that. What's there to talk about in relation to portability? Do tell? It's been done to death. There was a lot of debate, but at the end of the day, what was established was: 1) The pension is deemed an income. 2) The pension is taxable. 3) Someone who is living in Thailand WILL BE deemed a non resident when the proposed changes are passed. Many already are anyway, including myself. 4) The proposed changes have no means testing, thresholds, or exemptions in them. 5) Non resident tax is 30% from $0 to $135,000. Members still believe there's nothing to worry about, and that's fine. I'm just interested in why, with some more substance to their post other than Hoges, Medicare Cards, and Albo. Indeed, the psychology behind not wanting to consider the possibility these changes will have any impact, whatsoever, was also discussed. You see, pensioners may get an increase, but the pensioners back home are going backwards. Eg. electricity, gas, water, rates, food, petrol etc etc. Nothing that we care about here, because it's cheap living, but the government, who is in record debt, may just want a piece of the non resident tax pie, and that could include pensioners, possibly as collateral damage. Yet, no one wants to put the jigsaw puzzle with the five things above together to even think it's possible. We already know Immigration inform Centerlink after 6 weeks out, so supplements are cut off. Is putting the ATO in that loop such a giant step forward that is too far for a computer to do???? The Brit expats get their pension frozen when they leave. Maybe Australia wants to tax pensions. Same Same, but different. Who knows? What I do know is times are changing, Australia is in record debt, and chasing every dollar they can get. Members posted, "they will not target pensioners." I never said expat pensioners will be "targeted." All I have ever said is they very well may be collateral damage. Members posted, "pensioners will be up in arms." I asked, who went to the Embassy in Bangkok last election and voted. No reply. So why would pensioners in Australia give a sh*t about pensioners living it up in Thailand and Bali etc? So, to summarize, there's been a lot of funny posts put forward why it will not / can not happen, but little in the way of substance as to why, hence, one more post to my count on this thread. Now, if you can post a reason why all the above five things WILL NOT line up to cause pensioners ANY grief at all, I'm all eyes.

Not sure what country you are from, but in my home country, she could open an account, and a term deposit. The term deposit accounts are currently paying around 5%. She could let it roll, all have the interest put into a current account annually, that can be pulled out with an ATM card in Thailand. Or, through internet banking. Eg. Wise, also. You could probably get an account that pays a bit less interest, but interest transferred to the current account monthly, so available for use on a monthly basis, with the capital still sitting there. Of course, I would inquire about how she could close the account from overseas, when that day come for you, thus, no visa for her. Simple. Solid. Easy. Guaranteed. Just check on the closing of the account from abroad, and of course, the interest rate may not be always 5%, but better than Thailand rates, and no speculation in stock markets. Just something to consider.

I think you missed the point that most are concerned about. That is, their meagre pension is contracting in value. The purchasing power of their transferred funds is shrinking. Basically, their lifestyle may have to change.

I agree. An argument lost on many members in the Australian Forum - Old Aged Pension thread, also. Article 18 of the Thai / Australia DTA relies on the "provisions" of Article 19, and Article 19 is about "government service." pensions, not "government pensions" as in, welfare, or benefits as it's known in some European countries. There is a difference. One member posted in the Australia Forum, and I quote, "Forget about Article 19" yet in this Forum, advised another Australian member he would have to pay tax under Article 19 of the DTA. Go figure. Every DTA is different, yet, have a lot of similarities, particularly when it comes to pensions.