David Walden

2 hours ago, Johnnyy said:

 

InsureandGo. Destination may vary of course.

 

You probably had top cover, usually there are 3 levels available and no known pre-existing ailments.  Often there is an increase in premiums for each year over 65y/o if you can find a company who will cover you.  Most will not come near you if you are over 65y/o or they require a hefty penalty.  Most will not even talk to you if over 70 y/o.  If ever there was a reason to read the fine print in any contract of any sort you ever signed, Travel Insurance is at the top of the list.  Yes all 70 pages and more sometimes.

2 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Go fund me.      x

 

Loan.   

 

All those friends and family and nobody is prepared to loan this woman £10,000 instead they go to the local paper to assist in begging money from strangers. I understand that many Brits, used to the welfare state, travel abroad without insurance and expect others to pick up the tab but I don't have to like it. My mother is 86, regularly travels abroad and arranges insurance every time, which she has never used.  

One of the reasons older people do not have travel insurance is that often they have a heart condition or other ailments and take preventative medicines to reduce the risk of those problems.  The insurers will often use this information to refuse a claim if it happens  This indicates that the problem may be a pre-existing condition, not always.  Most travel insurance issued in Australia and perhaps the same in the UK is that if possible the insured just has to be repatriated you back to their home country so they can receive any corrective surgery under your home countries free health care system.  Read the fine print you will find it among the 60/70 pages.  The insurers, they will take the cheapest option.  If you are to sick to travel then they will have to do enough to get you home.  Like you break a hip and with a bit of treatment, you can travel home with an escort in a week or 2.  That's what they will do.  Their obligation stops the moment you arrive back in your home country. 

On 11/15/2018 at 6:38 AM, tideout said:

 

Charming looking place.

Spent most of my last 4 years on/off from Australia in Cha-am. Not too big not too small. 30 km's north from Hue Hin  Presently the town is suffering much as the 100 metre wide beach, its greatest asset has mostly disappeared.  High tide with easterly winds has taken nearly all of the beach sand away and the sea keeps crashing onto the rocks placed there by the local Govt to try and stop this erosion without much success, also some of the concrete seawalls have collapsed recently.  Not good for tots and children as the beach was magnificent for children.  They need to climb over granite rocks to get to the water, boat ramps nearly all rendered useless.  Used to have mainly thousands of Thai families many with small children and teens playing scratch games of soccer or just having fun games at weekends on the wide sandy beach but not now, also the clogging up the roads around the beach on Sat/Sun which was was OK is now mostly free-flowing.  With the beach almost up to the beach road very little sand is now available, very few small children can be seen running around...still a very nice place but I do feel for the Thai Trader with their 20,000or so deck chairs for hire and about 10% rented and their efforts to make a Bht or two with their food stalls etc.  The banana boats for hire have just about stopped   The Bus Stop Soi lady bar owners many of them say they are going broke...Cha-am I think is still just right to retire in still.    

10 hours ago, LosLobo said:

I can understand why people might abuse you, though I would never condone it.

 

You often give inaccurate, misleading and confusing advice that has nothing to do with the subject in question.

You forgot to also add that I often give correct advise which is totally unwelcome...please don't shoot the messenger.  I'll tell anything you want to hear from now on.

4 hours ago, LosLobo said:

I can understand why people might abuse you, though I would never condone it.

 

You often give inaccurate, misleading and confusing advice that has nothing to do with the subject in question.

Just because you are ignorant of Centrelink matters does not mean I'm wrong.

12 hours ago, LosLobo said:

I am confused!

 

How can you advise on deeming when your own superannuation (pension phase) was implemented before 1 Jan 2015.

 

Only pension schemes implemented after 1 Jan 2015 were subject to deeming, yours having been grandfathered.

 

Clearly deeming is something which you have never had any experience with!

Any deeming issues you mention has nothing whatsoever to do with the "Stealth tax" on super applied after 01/01/2015.  The grandfathering you mention in your comments is for the people who had their retirement fund in super in place before 01/01/2015, that fund is grandfathered and no "(stealth) tax on the profits before distribution occurs, provided that fund is not altered it is tax-free.  Not so for Superfund accounts after that date, they are subject to the new tax on profits paid by the super funds before dividends are distributed.  I was involved as I changed my super from my previous bus employers fund to a different bank-managed fund be just before the cutoff date.  Having given up driving the school bus I realised my old boss (nice bloke) was getting 1.25% of my fund as a commission and the fund was taking 1.25% of the total of my fund to manage it =2.5% of the total. He was doing this with 50 other employees as well, yes 2.5% % commission of the capital, not the dividend and all quite legal for him.  My new bank super fund still only charges me 0.5% to manage the fund.  If I had made the change after 01/01/2015 my super would have been subject to this new tax arrangement, it would have been treated as a new account.  It was the same for about a million other fund owners who wanted to make changes to their investments before 01/01/2015 to retain the grandfathering effect.  As a result, the system got clogged up with un-processed applicant's changes and new accounts.  The ATO agreed to allow the grandfathering for changes as long as the application was submitted before the cut off date 01/01/2015 because the super funds were getting clogged up with paperwork.  By making these changes from 2.5% commission for the old fund to 0.5% commission for my new fund saved me about $3,000 a year. So after 4 years that is near $12,000.  Some commissions paid by super funds were higher and some commissions have been kept secret from the clients (lots I expect) as is about to be revealed in the about to be released Royal Commission Into the Banking and Finance Industry in Australia.

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

Please explain to me how deeming exists for the under retirement age non pensioners!

Don't know I only writing about the AAP available to some single people with assets less than $770,000 or a full AAP if your assets are less than $465,000 and you don't own a house.

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

The statement "none of you know that" is correct because the work bonus is actually $250 p/f. ????

 

 

 

There is the income threshold and then on top of that is the "work bonus" presently those 2 payments for a single person add up to about $460. (yes if you say a work bonus is $250 OK)

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

Please explain to me how deeming exists for the under retirement age non pensioners!

  After 01/07/2019 the threshold plus the work bonus will allow you to earn about $500 per fortnight before you lose any AAP.  But you have to have a job.

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Lol

 

Amen to that, forums are the starting point for me, then I research, then confirm with my accountant of 30 plus years, if he can't answer my question, then I will sort it one way or another from the horse's mouth so to speak, in this instance Centrelink.

The only thing I have given advice for is issues which have applied personally with me.  The name of the site is "Australian Pension" it is implied from the comments made here are to do with the Australian Aged Pension (AAP) that is for people who are receiving the AAP or hoping to.  Deeming exist with many aspects of Centrelink payment for under and over retirement age.  If above retirement age and you have no assets but a job like I did 10 years over a 14 year period driving a school bus then the "work bonus" comes into play where you have near $500 p/f threshold before losing any of your pension.  You can earn near $500 p/f after that deeming comes into play (none of you know that).  The threshold all changes if you are married, and the deeming issues change.  If married then the SAPTO that is the tax offset benefit become very handsome benefits,  you can use your wife's unused tax threshold so your combined tax threshold will peter out at about $56,000 before as a couple you start paying tax etc.  If your affairs are simple as most AAP recipients are about 95% and as a single person and don't own a house you live in forget about the deeming issues.  Centrelink will simply accept your assets as stated.  If below the $456.500 as stated then the deeming will be irrelevant.  You will receive the full pension.  All income for Centrelink purposes is gross income that is including tax.  One of the problems of giving advise about the AAP is that often people ask for advice and if you don't give them the answer they want to hear they abuse you.  They think that might change things.  Yes, well pigs might fly also.

On 1/27/2019 at 9:41 AM, Will27 said:

About as conflicting as this:

 

on 1/22/2019/at 5:544PM, David Waldren said: 

I will not now be making any further contributions on this site on this subject.

And this

on 1/22/2019 at 6:32PM, David Waldren said:

My very very last post...

 

 

Hows the weather out where you are.  Is that a Centrelink entitlements matter?  Hello, hello.  I'm not the least bit upset by the monotonous regularity of the same questions with the answers not believed and asked all over again at least 500 times.  I do enjoy assisting people where I can...This reply is not a Centrelink entitlement matter...it's a personal one about the weather?   Whether she will or whether she won't.  That is the question?

7 hours ago, totally thaied up said:

I am honest, sleep very well at night. Better than having to worry about paying back 10,000's of dollars and the fact I can take my wife home to Australia at any time is priceless.  

I am honest also it is just that I have had the opportunity to peruse the Centrelink web site extensively as do all the contributors to this discussion.  I appear to have a better understanding of Centrelink requirements than most of the posters on this site.  Many of them are painting themselves into a corner.

   My actions actually saves Centrelink money.  By living "separated under the one roof" means that Centrelink does not have to pay me "Rent Assistance of about $135 p/f.  If you are separated and cannot live in the house you jointly own with your estranged "still wife" and need to live elsewhere then Centrelink is required to pay you this rent assistance.  I also live much of my time in Thailand so they save $58P/F by not paying most of the pension supplements.  Thankfully for my age, I am in quite good health.  I walk 6km each day and have done so almost every day for the for the last 43 years and 3 or 4 times a week I do a 30 min workout with 2 x  2kg weights.  Being resident in Thailand on longish holidays instead of parting long term does give me access to the almost free medical services when back in Aus (I do usually see my doctor) and taking steps to maintain my health I make use of the Aus Govt free medical services with just a few exceptions.  I really do not want to make my estranged wife sell the house and buy a real crappy one with her half of the money.  Anyway it's a good place to keep my campervan and the $10,000 of modest quality tool I have acquired from Bunnings just up the road over the last 25 years.

   So Mr Goody too-shoes, I really don't think you know the difference between that brown stuff and clay?   That's putting it nicely.  I sleep very well at night, your comments are just water off a duck's back.  I simply make use of the benefits that are available to all who want to take the time to study the current Centrelink rules.

8 hours ago, totally thaied up said:

I was told in no uncertain terms via Centrelink, they will review your living arrangements in Thailand (or in fact, anywhere in the world you live). I get every two years review forms sent to my home address asking me to update the status of my marriage and asking about changes to my assets. I know plenty of guys here living or cohabitating with a Thai woman and it is clearly a defacto relationship ( http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/2/2/5/30 ) but claim being single. I do not agree with this at all because the honest ones like myself get reviewed almost every second year due to being married and doing it honestly while the rest get away scot-free. If I divorced and still lived with my wife (had a sexual relationship), would this be honest or correct? Some will say the Government needs to know nothing but it is clearly 'getting around' the system. 

 

It is not ethical at all but I sleep well at night understanding if Centrelink ever came after me, I got nothing to hide and believe me, the Overseas Services section look. If you ever have been under a review (I got reviewed twice in the last five years both at the same time by the ATO and Centrelink - I had to pay back $73 but I still had to pay it back!) They may not get you now but if they decide to go after you, you will have a lot of explaining to do. I lose a lot of money every year from being honest but at least I get to call my wife my wife and don't cheat the system that is so good to me.

I believe you are your own worst enemy?

1 hour ago, Nemises said:

Noted.....again.

1 hour ago, Nemises said:

Noted.....again.

You will note I said Centrelink entitlements matters...I'll just sit back and watch you all self destruct.  Should be interesting.

 

 

4 hours ago, Nielsk said:

Exactly the same in the western civilized countries.  Don't You read an and see the world press ?!?

Yes, I think we have some corruption in Australia, Europe, USA, and Canada, you would be nieve to believe otherwise but nothing like it is in some other Asian and Central/South America plus Africa countries.  Perhaps that is why in the more developed countries even our ages pensioners are in the top 90% of income earners in the World.  In Australia, we may complain and bitch about our government but we do have stable government, that really is where the difference is?

On 1/23/2019 at 5:02 PM, DrDave said:

If the army, with all of their might, couldn't (or wouldn't) tackle the corruption problem while in power, then I hold very little hope that any elected government will solve this problem.

Corruption is usually what keeps totalitarian governments in power? 

On 12/17/2018 at 6:12 PM, Pedrogaz said:

 

Immigration don't make the laws.....that's the government's job....but your point is well taken. A lot of people do abuse the income requirements and I know that the US embassy did little or rather no checking/verifying when I first came here in 2008. 

I get the feeling that the government don't want Thailand to be a home for the less-well funded farang. This is why they seem to be making laws that make extending one's visa more difficult and/or more expensive. They don't really care if it inconveniences ex-pats, or if the ex-pats go home. They don't really like us here anyway.

Like Thaksin years back with his 'elite visa' the government is after people with pots of money.

Being an Australian I know that in Aus as it is much the same in other western countries the governments often spend millions of dollars telling people how much they will enjoy having a holiday in Australia or in their country.  Millions of people remember Paul Hogan or "Crocodile Dundee".  He was paid millions to stand up and tell people all over the world how good the place is.  Even today as I potter around Cha-am with my "Crocodile Dundee' look-a-like hat people still remember those adds.  I'm yet to see Thailand provide any advertising to help their tourist industry expand or to survive.  Certainly not to Phuket or any of the other locations mentioned in these discussions.  Yes, you have to spend a penny to make a few more pennies. But TIT. 

3 minutes ago, PerkinsCuthbert said:

When you have a cultural system whereby payment has to be made for a lucrative government job, and the outlay is recouped and profit then made through the perpetration of similar corruption, it becomes very difficult to remove the cancer, short of wholesale, major surgery that may well kill the body politic in the process.

Much the same is happening in Australia and many Western Countries only bigger.  There is no such thing as a free lunch.  Australia has sold much of its government-owned utilities and received hansom upfront payments to be able to show what a great job they have they have done in balancing the budget and then get re-elected for another 1 or 2 more terms. Then it catches up with them, Yes selling off the family silver to balance the budget is great.  Of course afterward, these so-called loverly buyers have had to double the price of the commodities to get their investment back to pay a bigger dividend in the future.  Yes, and people think it was all just magic.  

It was claimed in Thai TV recently from one of the USA TV on a program about the distribution of wealth in Thailand where it was claimed that of the 70,000,000 Thai people 1% of the population owned 2/3rd of all the wealth in the country.  The other 69,300,000 owned 1/3rd of the wealth.  Nobody has yet said "That's not true" How can that be in any civilized country.

2 hours ago, LosLobo said:

I would be cautious about taking DW's advice about divorcing and living together separately and apart.

 

I cannot see how it would be ethical.

 

Attached is DSS's spin on the subject:

 

http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/2/2/5/20

 

I don't see why you keep specifying this "$465,500" when you mainly have only financial assets and will be income tested.

 

The "$465,500" is an unnecessary DW artifact when calculating your entitlement.

 

The range from full pension to no pension for single man would be $161,200 to $768,300.

 

The (SAPTO) Seniors and Pensioners Tax Offset just increases your assessable income threshold from $18k to $32k.

 

1

The situation about "separated and living under the one roof applies to me" and Centrelink knows all about it.  I have no fears about that.

I will no longer respond to any questions about Centrelink entitlements on this site.  Let's go and talk about going and living in Portugal on the AAP.  It's looking more attractive every day.

15 hours ago, LosLobo said:

 

 

To the average person, the above posts would seem to be offering conflicting advice. ????

If you took into account the average single AAP recipient with the average personal assets of only about $120,000 you could expect to buy blue-chip investments returning 6/7%  (ASX 200) with perhaps 3% capital appreciation, thus, if you were 65 y/o you should be able to take 10% or about $10/12.000 each year and not pay any tax as the Seniors tax threshold is $32,000 income free each year and not even put a tax return in.  This investment should last forever maybe and increase in relation to the CPI. 

On 1/23/2019 at 6:51 AM, 4MyEgo said:

Good to know.

 

Another question if you don't mind, the 1.75% tax, is that on what you make, i.e. up to the figure they stipulate, eg around the $51,000 mark from memory, I mean if you earn $552 per fortnight i.e. $14,352 per annum and they have reduced your pension to around $726.30 per fortnight, are you also taxed on the $14,352 earned by deeming ?

 

As far as I recall the taxation scale allows you the to pay no tax up to $18,200, however not sure how Centrelink see this ?

 

I mean if they did tax you on $14,352 at 1.75% it would be peanuts, but good to know.

If you would like a correct answer you need to ask you question bearing in mind if your questions are about  AAP matters or self-funded and over retirement age because different answers will apply for over or under 65y/o. i.e...tax thresholds, single or married, the work bonus which significantly increases your income threshold.  Income, deeming amounts and asset thresholds and other issues.  The "work bonus" will have a big effect on your deeming threshold, seniors tax offsets for couples and a host of other things.  It's mostly on the Centrelink web site and seniors tax information offset infomation.  Can be daunting navigation to what you want to know......PS Centrelink has no interest in your taxation liabilities.  Most pensioners (about 83%) pay no tax whatsoever. 

Watch out for tax accountant giving advice about Centrelink matters they probably know less than you do.

14 hours ago, LosLobo said:

 

 

To the average person, the above posts would seem to be offering conflicting advice. ????

Before commenting further why don't you go onto the ATO website and navigate to "Seniors taxation offsets for couples"  or is ignorance bliss. 

So on $465,500 you won't pay any tax, as the threshold of $18,200 is under what they would assess at using deeming, as mentioned earlier, i.e. $14,352 derived from 1.75% up to the $51,200, the 3.25% thereafter.

   The taxation single threshold for all Australian over the age of 65y/o is near $32,000.  You don't pay tax on income under that amount ( yes true not the same for under 65y/o).  You should take that into consideration when planning how to invest any retirement money.  Also, one of the benefits when on the married rate for the AAP is you can use your wife/husbands taxfree threshold to be offset against your income, your income is assessed as joint income.  This means a married couple can earn about $56.000 (maybe more now) and pay no tax at all and you don't even have to put a return in if you are certain you are under that combined asset threshold.

  If as a couple and each has the AAP of about $18,000 each that $36,000 per year one of you can earn $20,000 more and pay no tax whatsoever.  You apply to the Tax office the "Seniors offset tax application" and if you are earning only $20,000 per year on top of your combined AAP income the Taxation department will advise your employer not to deduct tax from your pay.  If they do as it takes about 6 weeks for the application to be granted you will need to put in a return to get back what you have already paid. 

    You need to make a new application each year to start in July.  if you are already receiving the seniors offset benefits from the tax dept they will send you an application form in mid May.  You can do it online when it works as I used to do when I drove the school bus (still miss it).  If you don't apply for the seniors offset tax reduction your employers will take the tax out and later you will have to put in a tax return to get it back.  a bird in the hand is worth two or ten in the bush.

I admit I do get a bit cranky on this site, this is due to the monotonous regularity of false and misleading information that appears on this site about The Australian Ages Pension often.  AAP some still call it Old Aged Pension (OAP).  That name was changed to AAP 35 years ago.   Lots and lots of post with never-ending incorrect information.  As I say almost everything I write about on this site is a result of my own personal experience.  Take it or leave.  "It's up to you"...a famous phrase used by bar girls with monotonous regularity in Thailand.  I forgive them.

On 1/22/2019 at 8:06 PM, 4MyEgo said:

Thanks for the links LosLobo, very informative and have to give credit to that cranky TVF member David Walden who is obviously very passionate about knowing his stuff, he is correct in stating that: The numbers for non-homeowners are $465,500.

 

I put that amount in one of the links (deeming) and it said I would make $8 a year so no skin off my nose there and if all was in order, i.e. I got divorced from the Mrs and only had $465,500 as a non homeowner, I would receive the full single pension with supplements about $900 plus bucks per f/n, sounds fair to me, just got to go and sit it out 2 years beforehand, apply and then catch the next flight out after all is approved.

 

Will have to get a divorce kit and complete it, lodge it and then get the Mrs to enter the country about 4 weeks after I have flown in, that or she stays low in Thailand for a little longer, but can't see that happening as we dig each others company and have kids.

 

Anyways got to start planning, thanks for everyone's input, including Cranky Dave's ????

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi this TVF David Walden.  Just to steer you in the right direction. 

    1...You don't have to be divorced to be separated.  A person can stand up and make a public statement that they are single and live with there now previous partner.  In writing is better.  There are great benefits to separating amicably.

    2...You need to divide all other assets (settle) apart from the jointly owned home you both live in, can do it if you want to.  Don't worry about knives forks and spoons.

    3...You can live in your still jointly owned house separated.  Download or get from Centrelink a form      "Separated living under the one roof" and submit it.  Haven't tried in Thailand but theoretically speaking it should work there also. Hmmmm.

    4...You don't have to sell your nice jointly owned house and buy 2 crappy ones.  Be sure you have separate bedrooms and provide your own food and do your own housework. Hmmm again. 

    5...You will need to have a joint Credit card or debit card to pay all your bills.  A credit card is better, put all your bill on it and pay it 50/50 when required one payment each the same each month. 

    6...You will both receive a single AAP payment each fortnight instead of the married rate  (an extra  $200+ p/F each).

     7...Plenty of blokes living in Thailand Separated but still married but separated (you do not have to be divorced to each get a single pension each.  Centrelink may ask why.  Just tell them it is none of their business.)  There are lots of personal even intimate reasons why you are separated but not divorced???  My old girlfriend was an investigator for Centrelink,  that issue is a no no for investigators. "You can get murdered for asking those questions"  she used to say.  As it was she used to get threatened with murder nearly every day...lots of stories there.

Like I have always said nearly all my posts on this site is as a result of my own personal experience.  Once granted "Separated living under the one roof".  is forever unless you remarry or live as a couple under the one roof again.   Warning  do not have holidays to the same location at the same time as your estranged wife, husband or partner.

1 hour ago, Pattaya46 said:

Please...

When will you stop to bring your story of O-A visa in threads that are about Retirement Extension only !!!

You probably get this request from others more than 10 times already ! But you continue !!! 

I'll be happy to stop when people stop asking the same question.  I really don't mind.  It will probably take another 100 times to get the full story across to those people with needs to know.  My experience is that even if there are 100 pages of 20 post in each the average poster only reads the last 3 or 4 pages.  They don't go back far, with human nature I don't think that's gunna change soon.