KhunHeineken

No fleas on me.

It costs millions of dollars to draft legislation. It's not something they give to a bunch of kids straight out of uni. No doubt the government of the day spent this money on the drafting because they could see a long term financial benefit to do so, and it was obviously drafted with making money in mind, not losing money. I admit, such legislation was more aimed at the top end of town who individually escape from paying millions of dollars in tax, but the law can't discriminate, unless means testing or exemptions are written into the law, and I saw none of that in the proposed changes. The end result is, John Smith is treated the same as Paul Hogan, whether John Smith is a pensioner, or not. The second half of this part of your post is just your opinion, which of course you are entitled to, and I don't mind reading. Of course, covid turned a lot of non residents into residents for 3 years, and the government had its hands full with that crisis. Now things are back to normal, but with an even bigger debt to service, I am sure the government, whether that be the current Labor government, or a future Liberal government, will be looking to get their hands on John and Paul's money again. As you say, it's just your opinion. There's nothing in the proposed changes that says pensions will be exempt from non resident tax rates. What has someone in Australia sending money to someone overseas got to do with the proposed changes? Is that person in Australia who is sending money overseas and who wishes to retire overseas an Australian citizen? If so, after 183 day overseas, any income earned in Australia would be taxed at non resident rates. Why would they be treated any differently. If they are not an Australian citizen, no vote lost there, either. Since when have you expected a government to be fair, especially when it comes to tax? I see your point. Do you think the benefit of either saving in Centrelink payments to non resident pensioners, and indirectly forcing some of the expats home, and having their full pension circulating in the Australian economy, outweighs their use of infrastructure here? I did say, having them return creates jobs, even in hospitals, and what do people with a job pay, income tax. An example of the extras you talk about, say some free car registration. They now drive a car in Australia and pay for fuel. Do you think all the tax and excise, including GST on petrol for the year, amounts to more than the free rego? I say it would. What about that beer they have at the RSL? All the tax and excise on it going back into government revenue, not to mention the extra bar staff employed to serve that beer, and the income tax they pay. Now picture just these two examples across hundreds of thousands across Australia that were indirectly forced to return, and you will see the government has more than made enough to cover some medical. I see it as a financial win - win for government, and on that basis, I put the chances at higher than remote.

What negative have I invented, Scorecard? I didn't know there was any positive to paying tax. You have seen the proposed changes. They are very clear, with the 183 day in / out rule. I didn't invent them. They are simple to understand. Aussie citizen outside of Australia for 183 days is deemed a non resident for taxation purposes. Does that Aussie citizen derive an income from Australia, if yes, taxed at non resident tax rates. Is a pension an income derived in Australia, yes. Will pensions be exempt, maybe, maybe not. What part of the below do you dispute? Are you an Aussie citizen? Yes. Do you live in Thailand? Yes. Do you derive an income (pension) from Australia? Yes. Are pensions exempt? Unknown. Some suggest the government wouldn't tax pensioners at not resident rates because of a backlash. I have suggested such a backlash would cost close to zero votes. I have never made my way to the Australian Embassy to cast a vote, have you? If we took a poll of members on this thread and asked them the same question, how many would say they have ever voted at an Australian Embassy? No doubt they will upset pensioners if pensions are not exempt, but it will cost them no votes, so why would they care? It's a no brainer for government. Save billions of dollars in Centrelink funds, for costing zero votes. What government wouldn't take that deal?

It's taxable because it is deemed to be an income. Why do you think it will not be taxable at non resident rates, if outside of Australian for 183 days?

It's not about cuts to the pension. It's about you deriving an income, yes, the pension is an income, from Australia, and your geographic location. You say there is a 1 in a million chance the government will cut pensions, but if / when these changes come in, there is a 100% chance you will be deemed a non resident for taxation purposes if outside of Australia for 183 days. Do you see the issue? Pension = income. Outside Australia 183 days = non resident for taxation purposes. Exemption = maybe, maybe not.

How many of these people make their way to an Australian Embassy to vote at election time? I have never voted at the Australian Embassy in Bangkok. So, whilst not being a popular policy with expats, how many votes do they lose? Close to zero. This is another incentive for them to no exempt pensions from non resident taxation. Think of the billions of dollars returning back into the Australian economy, and the jobs it creates. You see it as a negative, but it's actually a financial plus for the government to indirectly force pensioners home. They want to see the Australian tax payer's money circulating in the Australian economy, not circulating around another country's economy. They give you a pension, and they get some of it back in GST, excise, council rates etc etc, and also income tax from the jobs created. They give you that pension and you are overseas, they get back zero. Yes, they are unclear, but will become very clear if the new changes come in. 183 days inside Australia, you are a resident. 183 days outside of Australia, you are a non resident for taxation purposes. It doesn't get any clearer than that. Once again, you are using words like "pension cut." I have said, these changes do not target pensioners. They target everyone outside of Australia for 183 days who derive an income from Australia. They may exempt pensions, they may not, but people living outside of Australia will be deemed non residents for taxation purposes and there will be no way to get around that. The question simply is, will pensions be exempt? There is nothing in the proposed changes saying they will be, so I would put it a little higher than "remote."

Understood.

Maybe I misunderstood. I was under the impression you either did not qualify for a pension, or would receive a reduced pension, due to having significant savings in a bank. You then moved all of that money to Thailand and cried poor to Centrelink and was granted a pension, or a larger pension. If I am wrong, what was the purpose of moving all your money to Thailand? If I am right, what consequences do you think there will be if / when they catch up with you?

Minix boxes (android) come with a remote control, but they are not cheap. I own a couple of them, and never used the remote, not once. I own one of the keyboard / mouse combos in the photo in your post, but ended up just sitting one of these on the coffee table, as easier to use, especially when typing in movie titles for search. https://www.logitech.com/en-au/products/combos/mk240-minimalist-keyboard-mouse.920-008202.html

It can't effect money transfers, but Centrelink will know you are overseas, so there maybe less money (non resident taxed pension) deposited into your Australian bank account for you to then transfer to Thailand. Let's hope pensions are exempt, but it seems they are deemed as "income" at law.

So therefore it's "income" and at risk of being taxed at non resident rates under the proposed changes. Do you agree or disagree with this? Not non resident tax though, right? The whole game changes when outside of Australia for 183 day, if these changes come in. Isn't that what we are all doing on this forum, discussing the proposed changes, and how they MAY or MAY NOT be implemented, and how they MAY or MAY NOT effect individuals? Of course I am presenting my thoughts and opinions on the matter, aren't you? One thing that is not an opinion are the proposed changes. They are fact. If / when they come in, we will see how they will be implemented, but the "183 day bright line test" is of some concern for me, and no doubt some others, and possibly pensioners as well. Perhaps Centrelink pensions will be exempt, but superannuation payment will not be exempt. Or, there will be no exemptions for anyone. Who knows? Nothing wrong with discussing the proposed changes and their possible effects on expats.

Ok. Any advice for the expats coming through?

What do you think would happen if / when Centrelink discover you have assets / income in Thailand? You do know Australia has a tax treaty with Thailand.

I've never filled the form out, but surely it asks what you own. Eg. house, Ferrari, diamonds, shares, CASH etc.

I own several android boxes. The OP wanted to control a media player with a remote control. For me, there's little different between a remote control and a mini keyboard / mouse combo.

That's one option, but doesn't a pension application take into account overseas assets and income? Did you make a false declaration?

So it appears this may have changed. One must present themselves at an office, instead of documents (cards) automatically being sent out.

I, and a few other members, posted links to the proposed changes on how the government may be deeming who is a resident, and who is a non resident for taxation purposes in the future. The main part of the proposed changes was being inside, or outside of Australia for 183 days a year. Indeed, they called this the "bright line test" meaning to me it will hold significant weight upon how an individual will be classified. The effect of these changes, if they come in, will not differentiate between a billionaire, millionaire, and a pensioner. All three have a name, date of birth, and a passport number, and have been outside of Australia for more than 183 days, as shown in immigration records. Everything will be handled by a computer data base. Will they make an exemption for pensioners, maybe, maybe not? Let's hope they do. The proposed changes were put forward by the Liberals, does it really matter if the changes come in when they are next in power? Relying on Labor for the next few years is only a buying some time to come up with a plan. As I have said in previous posts, don't expect pensioners back in Australia to care, because it doesn't effect them one bit, and don't expect the government to be worried about losing votes, because how many expats make their way to an Australian Embassy at election time, so no votes lost on this policy. Non resident taxation, and their high rates, have been around for years. Nothing new about this taxation policy. What is new, if these changes come in, is the grey area that many, including myself, have been able to skirt around and still claim to be a resident for taxation purposes will be replaced by the 183 day law, and there's no getting around that, because you are either in, or out of the country for 183 day, and this is recorded by immigration. Once again, these proposed changes do not target pensioners, they are clearly designed to scoop up everyone. Expat pensioners may just be collateral damage. Yes, but as I said in another post, who really cares whether the government administers the new changes, or a private company. If it becomes law, there will be no difference between the two. It's not like the government will show any mercy. The law is the law. This goes to the heart of the matter. Say you retire and take your super as a monthly payment. You leave Australia and live in Thailand. Is that monthly payment an "income" under the law? If so, and you are outside of Australia for 183 days, how to you propose to argue that your monthly payment should not be taxed at non resident rates? It's money "earned" in Australia, and you live overseas.

What about a SSD? They don't use much power.

What has Centerlink being privatized or not have to do with this issue? The government doesn't care, nor does a big company. The government was the one that gave us Robodebt.

Why do you say that? Do you have a link to any legal precedent, or test case? You may wish to read these links. Just two of many articles about it. https://www.thesenior.com.au/story/5573886/centrelink-privatisation-warning-as-private-firms-win-more-call-centre-jobs/ https://thesocialist.org.au/centrelink-being-privatised-by-stealth/ Everything has gone up by a considerable percentage, but wages and pensions etc have not gone up by the same percentage, thus, people are falling behind. In order to survive, people take a cut in their lifestyle.

Why do you say Services Australia / Centerlink were not aware of your arrival back in Australia? Did you ask a staff member? Were you expecting them to post you a new concession card the day you landed? Where would they post it to? I think it's more a case of letting new arrives comes to us, rather than chasing them.

That's a question for Lacessit, because he's the one who posted it, but here's the website. https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/about-us?context=1 This would be correct. I am not on an OAP, but a friend is. He called them one day and did not mention his location. As soon as they verified his ID, the staff member told him he was overseas. They knew within seconds of the phone conversation start he was not in Australia. Couple that with the 183 day law, if it comes in, and it's looking like a good pay day for the government. The sub issue being discussed in not about portability. No one is saying "if you leave Australia you will not get your pension." The issue is the proposed changes to non resident taxation. The government is making it very easy for them to tax people as non residents. Inside Australia for more than 183 days, resident. Outside of Australia for more than 183 days, non resident for taxation purposes. Inside Australia, traditionally, pensions have not been viewed as an income, but have been viewed as a benefit. If they view a pension as an income if you are outside of Australia, then you can expect non resident tax rates to be withheld every fortnight you are outside of Australia over 183 day. No one is saying the pension will be cut off at 183 days. It may be reduced by the non resident tax rate, because, after 183 days, you become a non resident. I Googled is a pension and income in Australia and this came up. Your income includes money from: employment pensions annuities investments earnings outside Australia salary packaging https://moneysmart.gov.au/retirement-income/age-pension-and-government-benefits#:~:text=Income and assets tests&text=Your income includes money from,annuities

If the proposed changes come in, and they deem pensions, that's all pensions, to be "income" just like any other income, immigration will notify the Australia Tax Office and Centerlink that you have been out of the country for 183 days, so next fortnight's pension will be less 30%, or possibly even 48%. It will be "taxed" at the non resident for taxation purposes rate, which is very high, and has no tax free threshold. I can't seem them giving people living overseas the full pension every fortnight, just to send them a bill for 30% or 48% at the end of the financial year, because how are they going to enforce collection when the debtor doesn't reside within Australia? If you are working online remotely, or work for 5 months of the year in Australia and spend the other 7 months overseas, or have a passive income generated in Australia, such as renting out a property, interest, or dividends, but you are living in Thailand, for example, you can expect a letter from the ATO, after you submit your tax return, informing you that as you were outside of Australia for more than 183 days you have been deemed a non resident for taxation purposes, and as your tax return showed an income of X amount of dollars, you now have a tax liability of 30% or 48% of your X amount of dollars and here's your bill? Please pay within 28 days. For pensioners, the issue will be if they deem the pension to be an "income" just like any other income. Hopefully, pensions will be exempt, but who knows. For the others who work remotely, or actually work in Australian for less than 6 months, or for those who receive a passive income, such as rent, dividends, interest etc, as the other member said, you are screwed. You will be paying non resident tax rates.

You, and many others. The days of having a decent lifestyle in your retirement years in Australia are coming to an end, unless you are quite wealthy. As I alluded to in another thread, it's possible, in the future, retirees will be leaving Australian shores in big numbers. That's a lot of Aussie dollars leaving the Aussie economy, benefiting a foreign country, whether it be superannuation, savings, rent, dividends, pensions, or a combination of these. I can't see the Australian government sitting back doing nothing as billions of dollars flow out of the Australian economy to places like Thailand, Bali, Vietnam, Philippines etc. With the direction Australia is heading in, people will not be able to retire until in their 70's, which means they will basically die working. Many may just decide to cash in, and check out of Australia, and enjoy their twilight years abroad, and who can blame them? It will be interesting to see what moves the Australian government do to stem the exodus of people and their money.