4MyEgo

I know one who has made a little over that on a topic that has nothing to do with what his future predictions are all about, (scaremongering), any ideas who I am talking about, hint: he still hasn't said he was WRONG 🤣

I feel for your wife, because she actually needs friends to entertain here, you must be a lot of fun.

Yawn, any real news about someone, somewhere doing something good in Thailand, like a honest taxi driver returning 3 million baht cash left in his taxi by a Falange, give me a break please, Big Joke is as clean as a cars motor internally, oils ain't oils.

I just read your post of 19 January 2008 and can only provide you with what I have found, first link basically says, that there is no room for negotiations when it comes to the 2 year rule, so to speak. Portability for former residents - Age, DSP Since 20 September 2000, a former resident who returns to Australia and is granted Age or DSP, or who transfers to Age under SS(Admin)Act section 12, cannot take that pension outside Australia if they leave within 2 years of having resumed residence in Australia. The purpose of this legislation is to discourage people from travelling to Australia just to get an Australian pension to take back overseas. The 2-year period includes, as separate full days, the day on which the recipient returns to Australia to resume Australian residence and the day on which they leave again. There is no discretionary power to allow portability of Age or DSP during the 2-year period (note, some exceptions to the 2-year rule apply - see below). Payment may be suspended for short overseas absences during the 2-year period and does not have to be reclaimed on return to Australia. A short absence from Australia (as long as the person is still classed as an Australian resident) will not impact on the end date of the 2-year period (i.e. the absence still counts towards the person's 2-year period). https://guides.dss.gov.au/social-security-guide/7/1/4 The 2nd, you could quite possibly be right, providing you fit the criteria and get your facts across as you did, i.e. dig in. Portability and residence The availability of short-term portability (excluding DSP, Widow B and Wife pensions) depends on whether the customer continues to satisfy the residence requirements. In deciding whether a person travelling overseas for a short time continues to reside in Australia, regard is given to the nature of the person's accommodation in Australia, family relationships, employment, business, financial ties, assets and the frequency of or duration of travel outside Australia. Recipients who return to Australia just to renew their portability period would not satisfy the 'residing in Australia' criterion and would not qualify for continued payment. Further information on the residence requirements can be found in the Social Security Guide at Chapter 3.1.1.10 Residence Requirements. https://www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/international/policy/portability-of-australian-income-support-payments Very interesting, thanks for that, not that it helps me, but it might help others who still claim to be Residents, e.g. lodge tax returns, have property, family in Australia etc etc. EDIT: Digging in even deeper, fascinating stuff that I have not come across before. A person does not need to be continuously present in a country in order to be residing there. A person holidaying or working temporarily overseas does not necessarily cease to reside in Australia while they are away. It is necessary to find the reason for being overseas and to look closely at the pattern and duration of time spent outside Australia in order to ascertain whether a person continues to reside in Australia. For Australian residence to be maintained during an absence, a person must demonstrate continued physical ties to Australia, the absence must be for a short duration, there must be a purpose for the absence and there must be a proposed end date for the absence. Taken in isolation, a 3-year continuous absence would be regarded as an upper limit to still being considered residing in Australia, unless there are special circumstances delaying a return. When looking at the pattern and duration of time spent outside Australia, if a person regularly spends more than 6 months a year outside Australia, then their residence in Australia is questionable. The purpose of an overseas absence may indicate whether a person continues to reside in Australia. The reason should be consistent with the intended length of the absence. For example, a person working on an 18-month overseas contract posting would still be considered to reside in Australia as long as they have demonstrated ongoing physical ties to Australia and a commitment to return to Australia at the end of the posting. It is not uncommon for a person to remain overseas for a lengthy period of time but state that they intend to return to Australia to live at some uncertain, future date. In general, when a person states that they are leaving Australia temporarily with the intention of returning to Australia, the person's 'intent' becomes less of a factor as the length of the absence increases. A person's physical ties with a country will normally take precedence over their intentions when lengthy periods of time are involved. A person who has spent the majority of their time overseas in the last few years and who returns to Australia to claim a benefit will not necessarily be eligible from the day they return to Australia. The person must demonstrate that their physical ties with Australia have been re-established, or are in the process of being established and that they intend to reside again in Australia. https://guides.dss.gov.au/social-security-guide/3/1/1/10

Thanks

Interesting, we would hope that, that's the case, because if you return and have established residency again, and they said you have to wait 2 years again, that would be a major deterrent to go back after portability was approved.

I will agree that Age Pensions are taxable income in Australia, if you are Resident of Australia and earn additional income which would be above the $32,000 threshold which would include SAPTO. Just because you may have to lodge a tax return, it doesn't necessarily mean that you will pay tax on your Age Pension from what I have read over time. How can that be ? Different area for me, i.e. two tax states. I only discuss one state that I know (Thailand) and under Article 18 of the DTA states that tax is payable on the Age Pension, in the state of Residency, so if you reside here for more than 180 days, Thailand is the state, as you are Resident to Thailand for tax purposes.

Ok, so you have parking on the premises, that's another plus for the $240 per week your paying, good for you. As you say at 77 it suites you to not have a spa or a pool and I agree, if you can get away with paying less than $500-$600 a week, why not, if the train station and shops are within walking distance good, I couldn't see that on Google maps, albeit I am not familiar with the state of WA, let alone the area. If your happy, that's all that counts, each to their own, but $10 for 4 litres of red has got to leave a bad taste in my mouth, may I suggest a bottle of Penfolds Bin 28 Shiraz 2021 at the very least, which will set me back about $40.00 or a Penfolds Bin 128 Shiraz 2021 which will set me back about $55.00. Red wine is like a woman, you can get them cheap, but take a look at what your getting, red wines all look the same, but the taste is different, so it's top shelf for my budget, and they have to look as good as it tastes.

Thank for that, however I read this at the bottom of page 7 in the link, your thoughts please. Former residents If a person who was previously an Australian resident returns to Australia after a period overseas, they may be transferred back to being assessed by Centrelink for an ‘autonomous pension’. These are Australian pensions granted under ordinary rules, which are not reliant upon an international social security agreement to be granted. If a person who has returned after an absence departs Australia within two years of becoming an Australian resident again, the autonomous pension is not payable outside of Australia (ie the general portability rules will not apply)17. If, however, they are again travelling to a country with which Australia has an agreement within this two year time frame, they may be eligible for benefits under the agreement (ie the agreement overrides the general portability conditions).

Interesting, thanks for that. Surely the 2 year period is a one off for former residents, I say that because the section below, copy and pasted and link provided, isn't really clear about having to repeat the process, e.g. if one was to return for short periods of time after qualifying and having their Age Pension portability approved. It only discuses former residents returning to qualify, and then go back overseas. If one had to repeat the process, that would be a real pain, e.g. lets say I went back, qualified, then returned to Thailand after portability was granted, and I wanted to return for a 2-3 month period say twice a year at most, maybe once a year, but lets say twice a year, for whatever reason, then had to start the process all over again, fark that. I mean lets assume I am staying with family, have no lease in my name, no utility bills in my name and am travelling around Australia for parts of those 2-3 month periods, I wouldn't have really re-established residency as far as I can see ? Interesting to get thoughts on this and ay members who do return, stay for a while then come back, and of course other members interpretations, as I wouldn't want any surprises if I did go back as I possibly plan my sneak attack, so to speak. Portability for former residents - Age, DSP Since 20 September 2000, a former resident who returns to Australia and is granted Age or DSP, or who transfers to Age under SS(Admin)Act section 12, cannot take that pension outside Australia if they leave within 2 years of having resumed residence in Australia. The purpose of this legislation is to discourage people from travelling to Australia just to get an Australian pension to take back overseas. The 2-year period includes, as separate full days, the day on which the recipient returns to Australia to resume Australian residence and the day on which they leave again. There is no discretionary power to allow portability of Age or DSP during the 2-year period (note, some exceptions to the 2-year rule apply - see below). Payment may be suspended for short overseas absences during the 2-year period and does not have to be reclaimed on return to Australia. A short absence from Australia (as long as the person is still classed as an Australian resident) will not impact on the end date of the 2-year period (i.e. the absence still counts towards the person's 2-year period). https://guides.dss.gov.au/social-security-guide/7/1/4

Here is a question to all who have been back to Oz to get the Age Pension, stayed the 2 years for portability and returned to Thailand to live. My questions is if one goes back, stays for 2 years, comes back and then goes back again, (short stints of say 2-3 months), then leaves again and does this year in, year out, can it impair ones Age Pension portability, i.e. Centrelink stop payments when you leave again, it's just that I heard something on those lines, but can't find anything to confirm it. I did also hear that if you were in Oz, 2 years prior to the Age Pension age, portability was instant once the Age Pension was approved and there was no issue coming and going as many times as you like.

Only he can answer those questions. His rent quoted sounded very cheap to most of us, myself being from the eastern states where a similar unit in a similar location would be between $350-$450 per week, and since he provided the receipt, I could see the address, and having the tools to check, i.e. units in the block, can confirm the $'s he is paying is pretty much on par to what an investor would receive on their outlay. Last sale in the block for a 2 bedder in 2023 was $290,000, so if they are renting it for say $300 a week, their return is 5.38% gross which isn't bad, that said, the higher the return on residential, the lower the sale price, meaning it's probably old, higher strata levies, away from infrastructure and it would take longer to sell, rent, that said, $240 a week in anyone's language is cheap, it just depends on where you prefer to live and with who and with what facilities you would like, meaning you will pay more, and the sale price would be higher based on the location, age, etc etc.

Having had a look at the block of (10) units, i.e. an early 70's, motel style 2 level walk up building with average sizes of units being about the size of a one bedroom unit, meaning 2 bedrooms is tight in todays standards, but good for a single bloke. From what other units have been renting and selling for in the building, e.g. condition, level, parking, size of the unit, location, it's about the money for the unit vs the return the owner is getting, and not wanting long vacancy and selling periods, the owner has probably suggested to himself and with the agents advice not to increase the rent in fear of losing the tenant and the unit being empty for a long time, i.e. the unit wouldn't be in high demand. I would suggest you don't have any parking as there appears to be limited parking available, albeit it only saw 2 spaces at the front. So there we have it in a nutshell everyone, Maylands WA for a cheap, small 2 bedroom unit in a suburban street, albeit it I would think that you will need a car to get around, as I can't see transport and shops being close by, the airport is about a 20 minute drive so might be hearing the big birds coming over every now and again. Personally for me, it doesn't fit the bill, but your $240 a week serves you well, it kind of reminds me of Lakemba in Sydney where I wouldn't live, but the rents are cheap, e.g. $350-$400 a week for a similar place. it all depends what one wants, could I live in it, sure, but being spoilt, I need modern, with pool, gym, spa, sauna, and of course shops within a couple hundred metres, which includes public transport.

Is that for the garage or workshop you rent ?

Unfortunately the Australia Government, be it the ATO or whoever, just love it when we in one way or another say we are leaving home, e.g. ATO, oh is that so, well have a great time, just remember to pay 32.5% on everything you earn from Australia, plus your 10% withholding tax on interest, don't worry, we will make sure you can't vote as well, and cancel your Medicare when you have been out of the country for 5 years continuously and don't bother trying to claim anything to reduce your tax liabilities, because we won't allow you. ATO continues, ah yes, you wanted to leave the lucky country and not accept things for the way they are, you know things like high interest rates, excessive rents, and then there is the cost of living, oh well, enjoy your new life while everyone else suffers 😍. Yes the 10% withholding tax deducted from interest earned, e.g. $100 interest, $10 deducted is miniscule.

I can tell you this much Georgie, you can read, but can't understand what others write. Try again, you might get it this time. The bus driver suggestion is so you, you can finally meet real people while driving them to their destinations, who knows, maybe even pick up a Sheila or 2, I mean if that is your preference, and of course it would probably pay better and beat the heck out of spending most of your days on forums while cleaning offices in that empty building at nights, or have it as a 2nd job to make more money to add to your million $ superannuation account for when you retire here in the LOS, the 2nd job part could even help you pay for your $3,000 a quarter strata levies and you taking the Sheila's to McDonalds for dinner, before taking them back to your studio in the bus. I know, I'm a genius oi, and your welcome. Apply straight away, and get that studio before someone else takes it, As for a studio, as mentioned, I have a family, bunks in a one bedder is a great idea, thanks, but a fold out in the loungeroom would be better for the kids and provide some privacy for me and mum, not a single bloke Georgie, I have a life. Wow, I'm on fire this morning, to think I just got out of bed, and not even a coffee. Your the man Georgie, and fire back with more thoughts when your ready as I am always up for your gas suggestions. Have a nice day now, Georgie the bus driver, now that's catchy, you know like, Bob the builder

Correct Correct Correct, and the reason for that I would suggest, is because non-residents cannot claim anything back come tax time, you are merely submitting a tax return on income earned as a non-resident, e.g. if you have an investment property, you cannot offset any losses under the normal negative gearing scenario, albeit it, you can, if I recall correctly claim back some items when you sell the property to reduce your capital gains tax liabilities. SAPTO would be a totally different situation when it comes to the ATO.

So you have money that shows the balance is over in your rental account which your agent has advised will be paid forward as rent balance from the period 26/02/2024 to 10/03/2024, however it doesn't show anywhere that you are paying what you claim, i.e. $240 per week, which without proof of rental receipt means SFA to all of us.

Yes, thanks, I am well aware that the Age Pension is based on eligibility criteria, i.e. (Asset & Income Tests). What I was banging on about was how long it would take me to recoup my outlay to go from here back to Oz to get it and stay there for the 2 years to have it made portable. For starters, I would require an airfare ticket (domestic) to get to BKK, then an airfare ticket (international) to get to Australia, and of course it would have to be a return ticket so that I can come back and see my family once a year for a short break, e.g. 2 weeks. Then I would require return tickets for the family (3) to visit me for the school break, e.g. March-April. So I would require 4 return tickets (Domestic & International) per year for starters. Then you have rent to pay, now for a decent one bedroom unit (not cockroach infested in Sydney with facilities such as a pool, gym, sauna, I would need to pay $600 a week as a minimum, that also being within a skip to train and bus transport & shops like Woolworths and or Coles. The Age Pension for a Single bloke is $548.00 per week ($1,096.70) per fortnight with supplements, so I am already out of pocket on a weekly basis, then I have electricity, groceries, car if not using the public transport system, and to be honest, I think the public transport system will have to do so as to keep the costs down on having a car. So 2 years in Australia on the Age Pension wouldn't cover my costs to live there, just looking at the rent I would be required to pay. I would suggest that I would be out of pocket at least another 2 years of Age Pension money before I recoup those costs to live there for those 2 years, that is why I said that I would be 71 before the Age Pension money would start flowing to me, i.e. money in my hand here in Thailand, and then I would have to consider whether it will be worth it with the New Tax Code and if they implement Article 18 of the Double Taxation Agreement between Australia and Thailand which has been in force since 1989, however not really enforcing the tax on Age Pensioners that I am aware of to date, but are within their rights to do so, will they, well that is up to them, something to keep an eye on that with the New Tax Code, and if they do, go down that path, you have the deductibles and the threshold to claim, so it could be a minimal tax one would hope, but something to consider when doing the calculations. I suppose if I went to a different state, or went bush and lived in cheap accommodation for 2 years and didn't have the family come over for 2 months a year, I could reduce my outlay and maybe save a year on the recouping of the outlay, but life is meant for living, and living for me means comfort, so I won't cut back on the things I like, especially having family time. I workout if things are feasible and if not, will give them a wide birth, which I think I will do when I am Age Pension age. The other thing I did mention was to buy a place to save forking out $600 a week on rent, then it would make it worth it, but I would have to make sure I could get my money back in 2 years, plus the stamp duty, legal fees, agents advertising costs and commission, then it would be probably be down to an almost break even point apart from the airfares, but could consider those as an annual expense anyway. That's the skewed way I do my feasibility on whether it's worth going back to get the Age Pension, did I mention that if I did buy a place, that I would lose out on the tax free returns that I make per year here which is about double what I would be getting on the Age Pension, as I would require those funds to buy a place, suffice to say, your damned if you do and your damned if you don't.

Keeping the thread going as I found this article interesting which again, supports what I was saying about the age pension in Australia not being taxed, "if it is your only source of income". https://www.firstsuper.com.au/retirement/planning-for-retirement/super-and-the-age-pension/#:~:text=Tax on the Age Pension,your only source of income. Please continue reading below the highlights in the link as it makes it more clearer as to when the tax free threshold applies, again, if you have any other sources of income, it will get added to your age pension amount and the threshold will come into play, as will you paying tax, that said, if you have no other income, then no tax is payable IMO. Naturally as an Australian Resident for tax purposes, you would have to lodge a tax return stating what you have earned in that tax year, and if it was only the Age Pension, then you won't be paying any tax. Be interesting to hear back from others if they believe it's any different to the way I am stating, all except one person please, as I am not interested in his views or opinions of any kind.

As expected, it didn't take long for the high jacker to high jack this topic. Oh well, I'm not going to respond to someone who has no idea what he is on about, sighting DTA's in other countries that have nothing to do with the current status here in Thailand, clearly no idea on what I was talking about.

We basically don't eat out, why, well when the chef states that the food is not prepared as fresh as hers, doesn't taste as good as hers and is cooked in the same cheap oils, not to mention hygiene. You won't dare argue with her on that as they are all relevant points. The above said, we mostly eat European at home, and we don't skimp on food costs, imported beef, lamb, olives, cheeses etc etc. When I feel like Thai, the chef will whip me up a couple of Thai dishes, it can be anything from stir fry chicken with vegetables and cashew nuts, tom yum kung, puk poung (morning glory) as a side dish with olive oil, garlic and chilies, pork spare ribs in a lime style soup with vegetables, (Bangkok spare ribs) as we refer to them, the ribs basically melting as they fall off the rib as they enter your mouth, sometimes eating the bone as well as they're as so soft as and enjoyable to boot, curried prawns with stir fried vegetables on a bed of Basmati rice, Penang chicken with homemade pita bread as a wrap with lettuce, avocado and tomatoes. Never met a woman who loved the kitchen as much as the bedroom.....sorry fellas, they broke the mold when they made this one. Only complaint is that she takes her time, so when she says she is going to cook, best drink a big glass of water because that hour wait can feel like forever until her blessed hands finish the finest food you have ever tasted, made with love, thank F when I order dessert it's instant 😍.

Your obviously taking these to help you get up, so to speak, which tells me that your blood circulation isn't at it's best, which could lead to the Number 1: killer, heart disease which breeds heart attacks. The above M&M's as I refer to them as, do the job of speeding up your blood flow, which in turn, helps you to get up, so to speak, now imagine if you have a few narrow arteries from say; not eating right, not exercising, etc, etc, and as the flow if flowing at a faster pace, then the blood clots in one of your arteries, well that could and more than likely, lead to a heart attack, which you may or may not survive, depending on how much of a blockage formed in your narrow arteries. I used to use those M&M's as I refer to them to help get me up, so to speak, they were the best thing ever for me at the time since my manhood would let me down most of the times, other times he would become a semi-conductor, that said, no one wants failure in that department when taking a nice piece of cake to task. All I will say is, don't make the same mistake I did when on those M&M's, i.e. perform more than 3 times in a day, otherwise you may not live to regret it, heart attack ensured, fortunately I survived it after a stent was inserted some almost 2 decades ago, now I hear or read guys talking about those blue pills and say, there is nothing better than a stent to get the blood flowing, my Cardiologist laughs when I tell him that I'm 21 again, and tells himself that he should have one inserted. Perhaps you should do a dye test or some other modern test that can be carried out these days to tell you how narrow your arteries are before you drop another pill, which might be your last ? If you do the test, it might cost you, but how much is your life worth, and at that stage you might decide how many years you've got left and if the cost to get a stent inserted (if required) is worth it for you rising to the occasion for many years to cum. Keep it up

I thought I'd start this topic off, and thank Will27 for starting it as a new topic, as the Age Pension topic which was run for over a decade was highjacked, making it virtually impossible for anyone to sift through it, as most of the comments, including mine were off topic of late, while arguing with a particular member about Age Pension tax and the Double Taxation Agreement, DTA, Australia has had with Thailand since 1989/90 and it's interpretations, in particular Articles 18 & 19 where it discusses taxes on Age Pensions (Article 18 & Government Pensions under Article 19). Hopefully the same won't happen here, and I will ask anyone who is contributing to it, if stating what they believe to be facts in their opinions, then to back them up with a link, so that we can agree or disagree with what the facts are and whether those links are credible or not, again, links provided sorts thing out very quickly for the majority of members. Now to get into it. From my understanding/interpretation, if you like, Age Pensions paid to Australia expats living in Thailand since 1989/90 under the DTA have been blanketed from paying any tax in Australia as the DTA states that Thailand (the state) where the expat/resident resides shall pay tax, pretty straight forward for the majority of members to understand, i.e. Article 18 which is what the Age Pensions falls under, end of story on that. Now with what's new. Issued on 15th September 2023, Revenue Order 161/2023 mandates that from 1st January 2024, any and all foreign income, from all sources (whether from employment, business, pension, or from overseas assets) will be taxable in Thailand when it's brought into Thailand regardless of when it was brought into Thailand. As you can see above, the word pension is clearly visible, however this new code, albeit it is new to most of us, the DTA has been around since 1989/90, so what's changed and are they after the Age Pensioner, well in my opinion, NO. Why do I say that, because they wouldn't require a new code for that as they have the DTA which allows them to tax Age Pensioners since when the agreement came into play, i.e. 1989/1990. I won't go into how would they even enforce this as it moves away from the topic, suffice to say these are my views, i.e. they aren't after the Age Pensioners who have been contributing to the Thai economy on what amounts they get, i.e. around 50,000 baht a month for a single Age Pensioner. I take it that they are after the bigger fish and to that, I will leave it there until I here some Age Pensioner here on AN or elsewhere complaining that he received a letter from the Thai Revenue Department to cough up on his Age Pension. Now with regard to tax on Age Pensions in Australia, from what I understand, residents of Australia have a tax free threshold of around $32k after having been approved for Seniors and Pensioners Tax Offset, SAPTO, expats can also apply for it, i.e. you don't have to be a resident of Australia to get the offset. So I can say Age Pensions are not assessible income in Australia for residents of Australia, unless they surpass the threshold, and one doesn't have to be Einstein to know that assessible income, isn't assessible until it becomes assessible, i.e. you must go over the threshold for it to be assessible income, and remember, thresholds are there to reduce your assessible income, to a lessor amount of tax that you would normally pay, or no tax in the case of an Age Pensioner, i.e. if he doesn't have any additional income which would push you over the threshold, so it's either assessible, or it's not, simple really. https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1989/36.html https://atotaxrates.info/tax-offset/senior-australians-tax-offset/

My dream would for annual extensions to be and the Thai Government to grow some balls and stop lying to everyone every year about the thick smoke that is being burnt here, stating that it is coming from neighbouring countries and apply heavy fines to sugarcane factories that keep accepting burnt sugarcane. While they are at it, they can also fine and put farmers in prison who start those fires so that I can walk to the front gate at 6am to unlock it, as I do every morning, but without coughing and splattering.