KhunHeineken

How will this stop the new laws being passed, and their impact on expats?

Is it not a fact that my posts, therefore myself, have borne the brunt of ridicule, abuse, snide remarks, and personal attacks on this thread? I don't seek out, or need, any sympathy. Simply stating a fact. Once again, I don't see anything positive in the new laws for expats. Do you? If so, please post of them. Yes, the new laws are not in yet. Did I say they were? Do you think they will be passed, eventually? f not, why not? I said my figure of 200,000 expats, all around the world, is debatable, did I not? I asked you to put a figure forward and no reply. Coming from a member who has 18,921 posts to my 1.613. in any case, try to convert me then. If you, and everyone else is right, and I am wrong, point out where I am wrong with something of more substance than, "Those laws are only for Paul Hogan" and "I still have a Medicare Card so I am still a resident." Can YOU tell me where either the proposed laws in various links are in error, or my interpretation of those laws are in error. By this I mean, the written words, not "there would be a backlash from pensioners" and "pensioners would be up in arms." It's about the laws and my interpretation of them. Of course it will effect me. I've never suggested otherwise. How many times have I said, "I am one of the ones that will be screwed?" In my opinion, I'll say that again for clarity purposes, in my opinion, the proposed changes have the ability to impact all expats. I've been clear about this. There are no means / asset testing, thresholds, or exemptions mentioned in them, nor any change to the non resident tax brackets, on any websites I have read. Just because my thought process revolves about what I actually read, rather than emotion, I am labeled as being "negative." What I read is, if you are outside of Australia for 183 days, you will be deemed a non resident for tax purposes, no more gray area. Therefore, any income derived from Australia starts at being taxed at 32.5%, from $0. Does it read differently to you? There's a difference between tax minimization and tax avoidance. Your use of the word "circumvent" suggests some illegality will be involved. This is certainly not the case. One strategy discussed is the positive effect that I no longer have to maintain a "domicile" in Australia. This it what happily kept me in the gray area for so long. No point keeping it if / when these laws are passed. So sell that property, and invest the proceeds elsewhere. Sure, the government still gets 32.5% on the earnings of that sold property a year, but I get the earnings of the other 67.5%, and do not have to pay any fees such as council rates, insurance, maintenance etc. This 67.5% covers some loss to the 32.5% tax other investments attract, but should keep me pretty much in the lifestyle I currently enjoy in Thailand. None of this is "circumventing" the law. It is just minimizing the impact of the new tax on lifestyle. The ATO can jam a letter into me at any time and my books will pass inspection. Why do you think I mentioned some time ago the new laws may free up some housing stock? The only reason I had that property was to qualify for the gray area for non resident for tax purposes. I have friends that will do the same if / when these laws come in. I have one friend who built a house in Issan for the missus, but lives in Phuket. His strategy if / when he loses 32.5% of his income out of Australia is they move to Issan and live in the house, but going back to Australia for 184 days a year is not an option for them. That's a big lifestyle change, but better than other alternatives. The new laws will force a lot of people to make some tough decisions, these are decisions most don't want to face, so better to throw rocks at me on this forum and hope it all goes away, but I really don't think having a Medicare Card is going to get anyone a free pass on these changes. The current wave of hope is, the laws are not in yet, and might not be in for years. This is of course correct. The longer the better as far as I am concerned, and then there will probably be the usual start date of "next 1st July" as well. There's a reason why many accounting firms, lawyers, and wealth manager websites have posted about the new laws, way before they are in, because expats need to consider them, and their own circumstances, and plan for it, and this includes pensioners. It's all expats, from the wealthy to the not so wealthy. As far as being envious of thresholds and / or exemptions that I may not qualify for, no. I have wished everyone luck with these new laws, several times. If at a later stage details emerge of thresholds and exemptions, of course I would hope I am in that pool, but if not, I'll assess my situation and see if it is financially advantageous for me to move some assets to try to join the pool. Once again, tax minimization, not tax avoidance. You have said you are a part pensioner. If pensions are exempt, but other income is not, have you considered a tax minimizing strategy for your other source of income, or will you just pay the 32.5%? Once again, you, and others, are playing the poster, not the post/s. Challenge me all you like on what I post, rather than post things like "you are being negative" or "it will never happen because of a backlash from pensioners" because not only is it irrelevant, it means nothing to me. It's about the written words in the law, not emotion.

No everyone in the room will get all of the jokes, all of the time. Once again, you are incorrect. It's taxing everyone outside of Australia for 183 days who derive an income from Australia. Do you have a comment on this, or will you continue with your pitiful personal attacks? So do I. 1) To tax or not to tax - that is the question. 2) Know your tax liabilities - be prepared for change. 3) The Three Wise Monkeys - if I don't see it, hear it, speak it, then it will not happen to me. 4) If I shoot the messenger enough, the tax will go away. 5) The Cat is out of the Expat Taxation Hat - will it be skinned. 6) 250 - can these lost votes change taxation policy. 7) My war against the ATO - tips for expats, by Paul Hogan. 8) Have Medicare Card will travel.

And it still continues. The "facts" are in the proposed changes. Have you read them? I posted a link for you. I did not write them. That is not my website. If you read the proposed changes, you will see if you are inside Australia for 183 days, you will be deemed a resident of Australia for tax purposes. Therefore, if you are outside of Australia for 183 days you also CAN NOT be a resident of Australia for tax purposes. Is this being a "scaremonger" or does this make sense to you? It has not been put through parliament yet, but it hasn't gone away. The current Labor government is away of it, and I posted a link for that also. Yes, it stops the big gray area loophole many have been using, including myself. Have you considered, the reverse, of the reverse, is what's going to catch out many expats who are not "very wealthy?" How do you propose to still be a resident of Australia, when immigration knows you have been outside of Australia for 183 days? I would be interested in your answer.

Sure, but does that mean one should totally disregard it?

Yes, self funded, so even if pensions are exempt, I am still screwed when these laws are passed. This has been discussed at an appointment with my accountant on this visit back to Australia, and some strategies discussed. Until the laws are passed, and the devil in the detail is known, it's continue on as normal. I'm Australian. If I wasn't, why would I be posting in this thread? Location is Thailand, but currently back in Oz. Heading back shortly. No. Are you being sarcastic? In a previous post you disagreed. Of course the figure of 200,000 is not exact, but I explained how I arrived at that figure. It's only 2 out of 10 Aussie expats. There's around 10,000 Australians living in Bali, and you said 20,000 are living in Thailand. It's interesting that 15% of the 200,000 only live in two countries. As for why am I so interested in the pension I don't get, that is a good question. I originally posted to give a "heads up" to expats on this thread about the proposed changes and was shocked by many of the replies. There were gems such as, "Those laws are only for guys like Paul Hogan" and "I still have a Medicare Card so I am still a resident" that had me shaking my head. These were just two of many reasons put forward by members as to why they thought the new laws would not apply to them, and despite being outside of Australia for 183 days, they would still remain a resident of Australia for tax purposes. Using these two examples, being outside of Australia for 183 days would not apply to you, because you are not Paul Hogan, and / or you still have a Medicare Card cause me to post that I disagreed, and you will be deemed a non resident for tax purposes. So, after posting how I don't think holding a Medicare Card will exempt you from these laws, and how the laws may be for everyone, and not just guys like Paul Hogan, I was ridiculed, personally attacked, and even called a "scaremonger" despite posting links to accounting firms, lawyers, and wealth manager websites that explained the proposed changes. It then became clear to me that many members were posting based on emotion. As I said in another post, it's normal to resist change, even fear it, especially change that can effect lifestyle, and especially in those that are older. Not to mention, anything that takes some money out of our hands raises some anger. I replied to every post that addressed me, saying why I either agreed, or disagreed. So, while I have no financial interests in pensions, as in, I don't receive one, the thought process, emotion, denial, abuse and intimidation, much of which was directed at me, personally, much of which still continues to this day, kept me posting on the matter. Despite all of the posts, as I did back then, and still do, I wish all expats, pensioner or not, the best of luck in dealing with these new laws if / when they come in.

There are none so blind, than those who refuse to see.

Like I said, I'm not on a pension. I looked it up, it said $1026.50 per fortnight, I posted the link, and ran the numbers. At $963 per fortnight, the annual savings to Centrelink, based on 200,000 Aussie expats, all around the world, would be $1, 627, 470, 000. Still over $1 billion, which an other member denied it would be, which I also addressed in another post, after he claimed many pensioners were on a part pension.

Ok, which makes it easy for them to reduce pensions after 183 days, right? Thanks for the info, but how does this help people when the new laws come in? Once again, does the government really care if it makes $1 or $1 billion out of pension savings with this new law? Without asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions, they are putting every expat in the 183 day basket, which will save / make them billions of dollars.

Here's one of many links already posted. https://hlb.com.au/tax-residency-changes-for-individuals/ That is not the circumstances of most retired expats living in Thailand, and elsewhere. Most are pensioners, or self funded, or a combination of both, and are living in Thailand, or elsewhere, full time. It can't be any other way. If you are inside Australia for 183 days, you are a resident for tax purposes. If you are outside of Australia for 183 days, you can not also be a resident for tax purposes. You will be a non resident for tax purposes. Don't confuse citizenship or permanent residency with being a resident for tax purposes. They are different things.

I did say it was debatable. I never put these figures forward as exact numbers. Only immigration and Centrelink know the exact numbers. I do see one problem with your post. If someone is on a part pension, that means they have some other form income. That other source of income is also up for 32.5% non resident taxation. That puts them in the 200,000 pensioners category, and also puts them in the 200,000 self funded category, as per my example figures. Either way, they are taxed, and if anything, part pensioners are more at risk, because if pensions are exempt, you can bet the other source of income will not be. As for returning to Australia, we are discussing "expats." Those who have left Australia, and who may only return for emergency medical. or possibly a family event, but have made a life overseas. Such people often post on here, "I have been in Thailand for 10 years" etc etc. If an expat, pensioner or not, returns to Australia for 184 days every year, they will have absolutely nothing to worry about, but who wants to spend 6 months of the year in Australia? It not a deficiency in logic, they were debatable figures. The logic and math is sound, the figures are for example purposes, but may or may not be close to actual. Like I said, the figures are debatable. Seriously how relevant do you think is that figure from 7 years ago? Do you have a link to that quote? Even using your figures, which rely on people being part pensioners, which actually is flawed logic, because their other source of income will be taxed at non resident rates anyway, is $760,000,000 still not a nice, and ongoing savings for government? Why wouldn't the government scoop that up as well and / or bring it back into the Australian economy, by indirectly forcing some expats back to Australia? We can can debate the figures, but with so many Aussie pensioners living abroad, the savings will still be substantial. Once again, you have a thing for the changes to tax concessions on super. I have asked why, but you have not explained. I gather you seem to think that the government will be happy that it can raise X amount of billions from super tax concessions, thus, they will leave the 90 year old non resident tax legislation sitting on the shelf. Why would they do that? They can still bring it in and collect more money. It looks even better come the next election when they can throw the extra cash around to buy votes. It's not about being in a "posting" hole. When the proposed changes come in, and they eventually will, without asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions, we will all be in the same taxation "hole." As you said, a "one size fits all" tax. As I said, full pension, part pension, self funded, or even working, the proposed changes were designed to do away with the 90 year old big gray area, and scoop everyone up who is outside of Australia for 183 days and who derives an income from Australia. You seem to contradict yourself because you argue that $760,000,000, which is your figure, not mine, is too small for the government to worry about, yet, you said it could be a "one size fits all" tax. Say there are no asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions, does it really matter if it saves Centrelink $1, or $1 billion? The law will apply to all expats, equally. The only difference will be the non resident tax brackets, but most expats will be in the first bracket, which is $0 to $120,000 at 32.5%.

Egg-actly.

I'm not on a pension. I'm self funded. I got that figure from the Services Australia website. Normal rates, single, total, per fortnight, is $1026.50. Is this figure wrong? If so, post the correct figure and I'll run the numbers. I'm sure it will still be over $1 billion, which Lacessit disagreed with. The example is a pensioner, using an address in Australia, and not informing Centrelink they have left Australia. Sure, I believe it's a little less if you do tell them you have left Australia. How much less is it? What's the amount. It's just a quick bit of math. It will not change the fact that the proposed changes, as they are, will apply to every expat, and make a nice savings for Centrelink, for the loss of next to zero votes. https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/how-much-age-pension-you-can-get?context=22526 Normal rates Per fortnight Single Couple each Couple combined Couple apart due to ill health Maximum basic rate $936.80 $706.20 $1412.40 $936.80 Maximum Pension Supplement $75.60 $57.00 $114.00 $75.60 Energy Supplement $14.10 $10.60 $21.20 $14.10 Total $1026.50 $773.80 $1547.60 $1026.50

Yes, but the new law is only for guys like Paul Hogan, not for everyone, right? The Liberal Party commissioned the drafting, and the current Labor government is aware of it, so it hasn't gone away with a change of government. I posted a link to an article where the current assistant treasurer made comments that the government was looking into possibly adjusting the amount of days, but no mention of asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions. It's these that will be so important to most retired expats. Myself, and many of my Aussie friends in Thailand, and I dare say many Aussie expats all around the world, have been using that gray area to skirt around paying non resident tax. All to do with maintaining a "domicile" in Australia. Basically, appearing you are just on a long holiday, with every intention of returning to Australia, and not leaving Australia for good. All of this gray area will disappear with the 183 days "bright line test." What remains to be seen when this law is passed, and I am sure it will be, because the current law with the, shall I say, abused gray area, is 90 years old, is if there will be any asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions. We would all like to think so, because most are not as wealthy as Paul Hogan, but non resident tax brackets currently start at $0 to $120,000 at 32.5%, and I see nothing in the proposed changes to these non resident tax brackets, either. Given there's some good savings to Centrelink to be made, and some good tax collection to be made from everyone else, all with next to no votes lost, in my opinion, it's only a matter of time before they are passed by either party in government, and once they are passed, without some relief to pensioners, and some not so wealthy self funded retirees, many expats are going to have to make some tough decisions and / or take a big hit to their lifestyle. Members can personally attack me on this forum all they want, but at the end of the day, when the proposed changes are passed, and they will be passed, if they remain as they currently are, with no asset / means testing, thresholds, or exemptions, then they will have an impact on every single Australian who is outside of Australia for 183 days who derives an income from Australia, which also includes a pension. because that's what these proposed changes were EXACTLY design to do.

Is there room inside for a second battery? Rather then risk possible dame by replacing the existing battery and breaking the spot welds, can you solder a couple of short leads onto a new battery, and then solder those leads onto the existing battery or the spot welds, being careful with the polarity (+/-) and using some insulation tape so nothing shorts out inside. If no room, maybe rig something up where the second battery can be outside the housing. You can have a go at this as a DIY. Nothing to lose if you can't actual replace the existing batteries.

Was it misinformation, or things have changed since then? Retirement age went for 65 to 67. As we are all living longer, I expect the retirement age to be raised again in the future. With the current economic conditions, many can't afford to retire at 67 anyway.

If you read more closely, you will see the humor egg-ists.

PM sent.

Did you not see the humor in my reply?

Just letting you know that the ATO is going to "rip" you a new one "stanley." No need to take it personally.

Ok, so I posted some links from government websites a while ago that said at any one time there are more than 1,000,000 Australians living abroad. (scroll back, you'll find the links) Obviously, Australian immigration and Centrelink know whether a welfare recipient is inside Australia, or outside Australia. We don't know the exact figures, but say we said 40% of the 1 million Aussies overseas were retired. Obviously, this figure is debatable. So that's 400,000 Aussies retired overseas. A member posted earlier that Thailand has 20,000 Australian expats alone. I suggested Bali would have a lot also. Out of those 400,000 retired Aussie expats, say half are receiving a Centrelink pension. Once again, this is debatable. So, say there's 200,000 Aussies living overseas, anywhere in the world, on a Centrelink pension. The fortnightly aged pension is $1026.50AUD. 200,000 x $1026.50 = $205,300,000 in aged pension a fortnight to Aussie expats. Effectively, this money leaves Australian shores, and is gone from the Australia economy. $205,300,000 x 26 fortnights = $5,337,800,000 a year in aged pensions going to Aussie expats. The tax rate for non residents is 32.5% from $0 to $120,000. (scroll back for link to this also) $5,337,800,000 x 32.5% = $1,734,785,000 is non resident tax (pension reduction) to Aussie expats, per year. Are we not in the billions of dollars? This is only 2 out of 10 Aussie expats, that are on a Centrelink pension. Now, let's move onto the other 200,000 self funded retirees through their super, rental property, shares, business ownership etc. Then, let's move on to the other 600,000 Aussie expats that are working, some of whom are on big dollars, like Paul Hogan. How many of the other 800,000 Aussie expats have been maneuvering around the big gray area of a law passed in 1936 to call themselves Australian residents for taxation purposes when they are actually not? The 183 days will scoop all of them up easily. Put it all together and it's a nice earner for government and costs next to zero votes. What government wouldn't want a piece of the above action? Are the above figures "utter drivel" Lacessit? If you think so, why? We can work backwards to find out just how many Aussie expats on a pension it takes, at non resident tax rates, to hit the $1 billion mark, so if you disagree with the 200,000 figure, given that Thailand has 20,000 of them alone, throw a figure out there and let's run the numbers. Yes, I was the one that posted a link to that. What's your point? That it makes a lot of money? So does taxing / reducing pensions at non resident tax rates, as shown above. I just did. It's over $1 billion AUD in savings a year. As far as the cost of implementing, next to nothing, as Centrelink staff are already are being paid, and immigration and Centrelink data bases do all the work. Some wait times may take longer. As if the government cares about that. Pretty simple for Centrelink and immigration data bases. Once a pensioner is overseas for 183 days, their pension is reduced by 32.5%. A computer handles this. Where's the administrating cost in that? The pensioner comes home, they have to go to a Centrelink office and wait in a queue. So what? Where's the administration cost in that? Even if there was some administration costs, it's more than covered by the over $1 billion raised in pension savings to Centrelink. Here's another interesting article. This could be good news for the proposed non resident tax changes. There could be a threshold put in place on the super tax concessions to only target the top end of town. Hopefully, they might do the same to the non resident tax when it comes in. Maybe something like you can have an income derived from Australia up to X amount of dollars before non resident tax rates apply to your income. A little like the tax free threshold. We can only hope. Jim Chalmers signals $3m superannuation fund threshold for cut to tax breaks (smh.com.au) Once gain, I only posted the links to the super tax concessions to show how easily and quickly a new tax can come in, or be changed to tax more people. I didn't post them because they are relevant to non resident taxation, but you seem to have a thing for super tax concessions. Why is that? It doesn't really effect expats already living in Thailand and elsewhere, but non resident taxation very well might.

Happy to hear why you think you are correct, and I am wrong, rather than a meaningless personal attack. A bit like the Australian Tax Office will be on this one, when it's passed. ` But, apparently, these proposed changes are only for guys like Paul Hogan.

So? Glad I could help. Are you a moderator? Some wish to discuss the proposed changes. You don't have to join the discussion. Feel free to put me on your ignore list. That's what it's there for. You didn't make a comment in your other post. It was just a personal attack. I asked if you have any comment on proposed changes in the link, and your next post is another personal attack. What's your opinion on the proposed changes?

I suppose for those that have put everything they have in a Thai girls name, this tax would be the least of their concerns.

Does it really matter when it's passed? If you say 10 years from now, great. Most of us will have passed. or too old to care anyway. If you say 10 months from now, that's going to effect most members of this forum, and new Aussie retirees to Thailand, and other countries. Another interesting article. Albanese can break reform gridlock, but will he dare? (smh.com.au) "Albanese has given Chalmers another chance to test the public’s appetite for tax reform after last year’s discussion on the stage-three income tax cuts ended in retreat, with the PM sticking to his election promise to leave the former Morrison government’s fiscal time bomb untouched." I doubt the Australian public would care about any tax reform for non residents. It will sail through.