KhunHeineken

I think this guy puts to rest some of the debate on this thread, that is, the fact that pensions are an income and taxable, and that pensioners should already be paying non resident tax. All that is left to discuss is what is the government going to do, and when, to be able to start collecting. In my opinion, the proposed changes were designed to make it easier for the government to do so. Thanks for posting.

I am using some devices that covers both the internet and the power. The first is an IP Switch. This thing is awesome. It pings about five of the biggest sites, Google being one of them, but you can add your own sites. If it can't ping all five sites, it reboots one or both power outlets, and I have the modem / router plugged into one of them, so it's as good as an internet freeze and I'm there recycling the router, but this device does it for me. They are highly customizable and you can set them on a schedule. For example, I have it reboot my network once a day at 3am. They have an app where you can reset the power outlets from anywhere, or turn on or off an outlet from anywhere. Should the internet go down for hours, you can set the device to keep rebooting until internet is restored. The device also sends email notifications when the internet is restored , and it keeps logs also. https://5gstore.com/product/8897_5gstore_remote_power_switch_-_2_outlets_-_remote_automation_and_remote_rebooting_-_app_controlled.html To monitor electricity, I use one of these, but you have to pay for a text message every power outage. It sort of monitors the internet also because it's based on their server pinging it and if it can not contact it, the power must be down, but, possibly the internet as well. It's customizable as well, and I have set mine to the maximum to 10 minutes loss of contact because I am only monitoring for power outages and don't have anything plugged into it like a fish tank pump or freezer. https://www.pwron.net.au Both of the above have generic similar devices on the market, but the above are the ones I use. With the IP Switch, you can buy it with power plugs for different countries from the website. I chose the 2 pin plug for Thailand.

See my reply to another member. An expat who maintains a domicile in Australia may be in a better position than an expat who has not, but with thousands of expats who have not visited Australia in years, domicile or not, how can they possibly argue they are still a resident for tax purposes, in order to escape paying a tax that they should have been paying for years?

"application of the statutory rules remain uncertain" Any comment on this? The new laws haven't been passed yet. Once again, many expat retirees have been living in Thailand, perpetually, and have not visited Australia in years. How are they possibly going to argue they are residents for tax purposes? Whilst the domicile test may or may not over rule the 183 day "bright line test" in the proposed changes, and if it does, that's a positive for me and you, as we have maintained a domicile in Australia, what about the thousands of other expats in Thailand who have not? Remember, it's a tax they should already be paying.

So, it's all just disappeared, has it?

How so? What's the point of the proposed changes if they change nothing? In your opinion, what do the proposed changes actually change then? You are not a on a full pension though, are you? Do you think the returns on your investments will get a free pass from non resident tax, a tax that you should already be paying? They will be looking to fry all manner of fish for every dollar, not just the big fish.

Hardly. No. The link is dated 8/6/23 and provided TR 2023/1, which I then found on the ATO website.

It does appear that way, yet, the proposed changes have not been passed. I've maintained a residence in Australia, for the very purpose of placing myself in the gray area of the current legislation. How many expat retirees still have a property in Australia, community ties etc? When was the last time they visited Australia? In my opinion, under the old laws, and the new proposed laws, most expat retirees in Thailand would be non residents for tax purposes.

Dated 8/6/23. https://www.minterellison.com/articles/ato-finalises-tr-20231-on-residency-for-individuals Some interesting examples on the ATO website. https://www.ato.gov.au/law/view/document?docid=TXR/TR20231/NAT/ATO/00001

Out of courtesy, I replied to your post, but it was removed. (I am not questioning moderation) On that basis, I am reluctant to reply to your post again.

I would be interested in how you think, at law, long term Thai expats will be able to stand outside the law, other than your opinion of "fairness." As for "unworkable" computer data bases do the work, and I believe a system is already in place for pensioners who are outside of Australia for 6 weeks, but I am happy to be corrected on this. Are "long term Thai expats" not "longer terms non-residents?" This is the point of the proposed changes. To take away the "intention" of the expat, which is difficult to prove, and replace it with a time based criteria, which can not be disputed.

Correct. The proposed changes do away with pages and pages and pages of 90 year old laws that had so many loopholes and gray area that in 2023, they are no longer fit for purpose. Again, the 183 days is not a new tax. The 183 days just allows the collection of tax from expats. The best that can be hoped for is a new non resident tax bracket that includes a tax free threshold. Say $0 to $35,000 at 0% tax, or, pensions are exempt. To date, neither of these appear anywhere in the proposed changes.

Yawn. They are not "going after the little battlers" in relation to the proposed changes. It's a tax that Aussie expats who derive an "income" from Australia, and yes, a pension is deemed an income, should have been paying for decades. The proposed changes allow the ATO to finally collect this tax from many who have not been paying it, both wealthy, and battlers, and in the case of pensioners, simply reduce their pension the fortnight after they have been outside of Australia for 183 days. Basically, non resident tax does not discriminate. If / when the proposed changes are passed, there will be no chest beating by myself. The proposed changes are there for you to read, and the assistant treasurer of the current Labor government has said it is in the government's "in tray" so it didn't die with the ousting of the former Liberal government. The non resident tax brackets are there for you to read. The legislation that a pension is deemed "income" is there for you to read. Many links to the above have been posted, several times, by myself, and others. Connect the dots and you will see the picture.

Yourself, and many others, took the stance that expat OAP's have never been liable to pay non resident tax, and will never be liable for non resident tax, and anyone who suggested they should have been paying it, and may have to pay it in the future, was labeled a scaremonger. The Paul Hogan Syndrome. Are you now saying expat OAP's are in fact liable to pay non resident tax, but have been evading it for many for decades? Can you clarify your stance? At law, should expat OAP's be paying non resident tax? Yes, or no?

For how much longer do you think this will be possible? The government is aware of the loopholes, as we are. Would it be so surprising to you they make changes to close the loopholes? On the point of paying no tax, here's an interesting article. https://www.9news.com.au/finance/australia-millionaires-ato-data-rich-people-paying-no-tax/726563bf-9fd7-4da4-ae18-498308aac038 "Highly skilled accountants were able to get their clients out of over $400 million in tax." No matter how "highly skilled" accountants are, they will not be able to get around the immigration data base, and the 45 / 183 days.

The reason my posts are removed is because a small minority of "haters" constantly report them to admin and have them removed, despite their own baiting, off topic, and personal attacks on the same thread. I'm still waiting for some links from you showing my posts are incorrect. You are not hiding behind personal attacks now, are you?

If / when that does happen, what will your comment be on this forum? Once again, it's a tax they should already be paying. Do you understand that? It's not a new tax. The proposed changes are focused on enforcement. Do you know the difference? It's not about "starting" to tax them. It's about changing laws in order to be able to start collecting taxes that have been avoided for decades.

At least my posts contain links. No links from you in over 30 posts, yet YOU continually say you post links showing I am incorrect.

The front of The Warehouse was being knocked down today.

You do realize, you contradicted yourself several times in your previous post. Here's just one example. "Personally I can't see the ATO chasing OAP's for the non residents tax, that said, if they ever did, they would be within their rights," - you see, it's not about being in their rights, it's the law, therefore, it's not really about what you personally think, is it? What makes you think pensioners will be able to stand outside of the 183 day net, and non immigration tax brackets? Yeah, expat pensioners, and myself, have not been paying non resident tax rates for decades. Why would it be soooooooooooo surprizing to YOU that a goverment, of either party, would seek to stop that loophole, not just for pensioners, but for everyone, including Paul Hogan? Is it really rocket science?

You didn't even know who PWC was until I mentioned them.

Another baiting and off topic post from you, yet, not reported by myself.

The burden of proof between a civil case and a criminal case is very different.

So, you have Blake, from the ATO, replying to Bob, on an ATO forum, in which Blake clearly, in writing, informs Bob he will be a non resident for tax purposes, and will pay income tax at 32.5%. Yes, a pension is deemed an "income" by the ATO. See various links to this in previous posts. Here's the relevant line in your link. Blake from the ATO: "As a foreign resident for tax purposes, you will pay income tax according to foreign resident rates. This means for all income under $180k, you'll pay 32.5c per dollar. You would only report and pay tax on your Australian-sourced income to us." Now, your friend rings the ATO and is told by a staff member, "not interested in pensioners." Did he get that staff member's name? Did that staff member email your friend any links to relevant laws and regulations? What information do we rely on, Blake's, or the staff member over the phone? One is right, and one is wrong. Did the call center staff member tell your friend don't worry about the 183 days, and don't worry about your pension being an income, because it's not relevant to you because these laws are "not interested in pensioners." Perhaps it really is just "for guys like Paul Hogan." Did that call center staff member tell your friend "pensions will be exempt?" Did that call center staff member tell your friend, "we are making changes to the non resident tax brackets and the first $35,000 will have a tax free threshold? On what basis did the call center staff member suggest your friend will be able to stand outside the law? Again, you are using words like "I can't see the ATO going after non resident old age pensioners." They are not "going after" them. It's a tax they should have already been paying, as Blake informed Bob in your link, but outdated 90 year old non resident tax laws have seen them avoid paying it. Then, there's people like myself, and part pensioners, that haven't been paying, either. Then, I dare say, high net worth individuals have been avoiding paying it as well. It's not a new tax. What is new will be the 183 days automatic deeming of non resident status for taxation purposes, and with a pension being deemed an "income" at law, I would really like to know what information the call center staff member is basing their advice on. Do you think if he rang again, he may get different advice? Perhaps if he rang a third time, I would not be surprised if he got different advice from the first two calls. This is why I put more weight on what is in writing. "Non residents do have to pay 32.5c in the $ from income derived within Australia" - but the call center staff just told your friend he doesn't have to because they are "not interested in pensioners" and you said they are not "going after" pensioners, so why are you saying this? Do we rely on the written word of the law, or your mate's telephone call and your opinion? "that said there are also ways to get around that, e.g. non dividend paying shares. Dividend paying shares already have 30c taken out when they pay you so the ATO isn't going to chase you for the 2.5 cents in the $." - it's a pension, not a share portfolio. How does this help pensioners with the proposed changes? "Personally I can't see the ATO chasing OAP's for the non residents tax, that said, if they ever did, they would be within their rights, and it would be a downright low act IMO. - where's the "chasing?" Immigration inform Centrelink and the ATO that John Smith, the Aussie old age pensioner, has been outside Australia for 183 days, therefore, he's now deemed to be a non resident for tax purposes. If he's on a part pension, the ATO bill him for 32.5%, and if he's only on a pension, Centrelink reduce his pension by 32.5% the first fortnight after the 183 days. Simple. All this is taking place while they are still "going after" guys like Paul Hogan. These changes simply get everyone outside of Australia for 183 days. No gray area, nothing to review, nothing to appeal. It's a numbers game, and the magic number is 183. You, and others, make it sound like the ATO and Centrelink have to employ 200 extra staff, with office space, to implement this. They don't. Computer data bases will do all the heavy lifting. Tell me this, when John Smith goes to transfer his pension to a Thai bank account 6 months after these changes are passed, and sees his pension has reduced by 32.5%, what is he going to do? Is he going to fly home and take legal action in the High Court? Is he going to write a letter to his MP? Is he going to protest outside the Australian Embassy in Bangkok? No. He'll ring Centerlink to ask why, and he will simply be told "because you have been outside of Australia for more that 183 days" and that's where it will end.

For the mobile signal, have you considered something like this? https://www.lazada.co.th/products/electronicshopelectronicshop-110-220-v-tri-band-amplifier-900-1800-2100-gsm-dcs-wcdma-2g3g4g-lte-universal-booster-repeater-us-plug-i338956760.html?spm=a2o4m.searchlist.list.1.6f493c9fVmHCK2