Medicare card Australia. Can I still get it?

[4MyEgo]

10 minutes ago, oxo1947 said:

Sorry 4MyEgo.... I did not make myself clear (my fault)... I have not lived there but I do visit sometimes every 2nd year---sometimes sooner if weddings etc come up. Yes I used the card 10 months ago, for inoculations & stocking up on medications etc.

The card did laps 5 years ago --a new one wasn't sent until once again I done some "Consulting" work over the phone  for as friends company, paid $310 tax. Card arrived 2 months latter, without me applying for it. My accountant tells me that any person paying tax must have a Health care card as that is what part of the tax is for. I do still have a permanent address there (friends house.

 

Maybe he has this wrong.

 

I am 70 but do not receive an age pension, so maybe I am not tracked as much as pensioners, I have looked at paying also for a Medicare private...its about $1,000 a year. & does allow you more (quicker) access if you did need to return there for non emergency treatment.

Wow sounds like your onto something, hmm so pay some tax as a non resident and they keep you on Medicare.

 

From what I have read is non residents do not pay the Medicare levy, so how they have kept you on has got me, but hey, we all deserve to be on because we have all paid our taxes and are Australian Citizens, well that's my beef.

 

The problem you would have with any insurer in Australia is; that unless you are an Australian resident, the policy is null and void, i.e. its cancelled, sure as you make a claim, they will shut you down and say, oy, you are not a resident, that is unless you are retaining your residency, and I am confused ?

[StevieAus]

9 hours ago, gusincebu said:

Hahaha.. Just shows maybe I felt just a little guilty :)

Sent from my vivo 1713 using Tapatalk
 

Totally agree with your comments, I too paid personal tax, company tax and collected GST for the government and the the spongers who received the benefits.

Never had much from the medical system ( which in a way is fortunate) and do not receive a pension,

It seems that if you choose to live overseas you are treated like a pariah despite the fact that you must be saving the system money.

I will hang on to my Medicare card whether it’s legal or not and the next time we visit Aus will get one for my baby daughter who is now an Australian citizen

Probably will never use it but why not?

9 hours ago, gusincebu said:

Hahaha.. Just shows maybe I felt just a little guilty :)

Sent from my vivo 1713 using Tapatalk
 

 

[oxo1947]

Sorry MyEgo...there seems to be a slight gap in the understanding....probably due to me not being to clear, I haven't declared myself as non resident...no one has asked me that question..maybe that's where the discrepancy comes from.

I just took it that when  I return & the form asks Visiting or returning I tick visiting and the probable length of time.  So I expect them to place me in that category

On the tax front, I am not required to pay any. I set my own Super fund up, when you were allowed to in the early 90s.

 

Sorry if I have muddied the waters-- my situation probably isn't relevant to most..... I should have been clearer......

[lordblackader]

9 hours ago, InMyShadow said:

10 hours ago, gusincebu said:

Hahaha.. Just shows maybe I felt just a little guilty :)

Sent from my vivo 1713 using Tapatalk
 

You did well. Screw the government they are alway going after the tax payer. Arrive by boat and your treated to a full medical.

Let's not forget free housing and welfare as well. Australian Government should support retirees living offshore and reducing the tax burden, instead they punish them and give preference to every Mohammed, Hamza and Abdul who arrives illegally by boat. 

[4MyEgo]

1 hour ago, oxo1947 said:

Sorry MyEgo...there seems to be a slight gap in the understanding....probably due to me not being to clear, I haven't declared myself as non resident...no one has asked me that question..maybe that's where the discrepancy comes from.

I just took it that when  I return & the form asks Visiting or returning I tick visiting and the probable length of time.  So I expect them to place me in that category

On the tax front, I am not required to pay any. I set my own Super fund up, when you were allowed to in the early 90s.

 

Sorry if I have muddied the waters-- my situation probably isn't relevant to most..... I should have been clearer......

Tis all good mate.

 

Waters are clear as can be now, explains the lot 555

[4MyEgo]

1 hour ago, lordblackader said:

Let's not forget free housing and welfare as well. Australian Government should support retirees living offshore and reducing the tax burden, instead they punish them and give preference to every Mohammed, Hamza and Abdul who arrives illegally by boat. 

Last I heard they stopped the boats, and to be honest, Australia's intake compared to the rest of the world is miniscule What I would like to see is these government plicks make some adjustments to the system, like carers allowance to be wiped, because we can all look after our parents, I know a block who's parents are on the old pension, and he lives with them, has a Thai wife, and 2 kids, he claims family A & B, newstart and also gets the parents pension with carers allowance, and also drives a cab on the weekend, so he milking it big time.

 

Anyone else on the dole, should be automatically wiped after a year, single mums as soon as the kid is school age, back to work or off you come.

 

No point in sticking it to us who have paid our taxes, just saying 555

 

Do I have any answers as to what might happen to those milking the system, or been on the system for so long, personally don;t give a rats as our taxes paid have been going to them instead of us.

[MadMuhammad]

12 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

As I had a company prior to leaving for Thailand on a permanent basis, I ran the question by my accountant, i.e. do you think its worth while keeping the company going to try and retain my residency status, with his reply being, its very complicated mate, with a director having to be in country they, etc etc, and have closed all loops but one as far as he was concerned.

 

He went on to say, just tell the banks to withhold 10% on your bank term deposit accounts, flick the property and invest in the stock market because that's the only loop that they haven't closed yet, so its been tax free $'s for the past two years for me and remain until such a time until they close that one down.

 

Also for any Aussie's who owns a property back home, watch out after 30 June 2018 if your a non resident, because they are about to remove that finger and replace it with a hand.

 

You can see what I am talking about under the Home Country Forum sub heading Australian Property-Capital Gains Tax with the links, in other words, if you don't keep up with these C..ts, they will pull the rug from beneath your feet.

Great advice as always mate and yes, c..ts they are lol.

Most definitely bailing out of my property on my exit because, as you kindly pointed out, it just won’t be worth it when it comes to CGT at sale time. 

My old girl plans on working another 5 years so I’m considering bringing her in as a director to keep my share portfolio and trust Australian owned and avoid the extra tax implications. 

You’re correct though, it’s grttinh harder and harder to ride that fine line between getting raped further and staying legal.

[StevieAus]

8 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

Last I heard they stopped the boats, and to be honest, Australia's intake compared to the rest of the world is miniscule What I would like to see is these government plicks make some adjustments to the system, like carers allowance to be wiped, because we can all look after our parents, I know a block who's parents are on the old pension, and he lives with them, has a Thai wife, and 2 kids, he claims family A & B, newstart and also gets the parents pension with carers allowance, and also drives a cab on the weekend, so he milking it big time.

 

Anyone else on the dole, should be automatically wiped after a year, single mums as soon as the kid is school age, back to work or off you come.

 

No point in sticking it to us who have paid our taxes, just saying 555

 

Do I have any answers as to what might happen to those milking the system, or been on the system for so long, personally don;t give a rats as our taxes paid have been going to them instead of us.

I think you may be wrong on the intake issue, sure they have stopped the boats but that is only one group, I am sure I read that per head of population Australia has one of the highest intakes of refugees in the world.

They were talking about admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees who were not even literate in their own language, that sounded like a great idea another burden on the taxpayer.

It seems to have gone quiet as they were having difficulty proving they didn’t have any terrorist links and wouldn’t be a risk.

[Peterw42]

53 minutes ago, MadMuhammad said:

Most definitely bailing out of my property on my exit because, as you kindly pointed out, it just won’t be worth it when it comes to CGT at sale time. 

 

CGT isnt the end of the world. Keep it and live off the rent. If one day you sell it, its tax on the profit not the whole value of the sale. If you sell in a year with no other income its minimal tax.

A good accountant can get you lots of deductions while you have a rental property and greatly reduce the CGT when you sell.

CGT is tax on the difference between what you payed (its value on 30 June 2018) for the property and what you sell it for, "LESS" what it has cost you to hold, maintain, repair, improve and depreciation on the property. Anything from council rates through to a new kitchen, all comes off the gain. Lots of building construction/depreciation that will further reduce the capital gain.

 

10 years rental income and deductions will probably offset any future CGT, and at the end of the day if you pay a large amount of CGT, it means you made a large amount of money.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by Peterw42

[Peterw42]

10 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

I haven't declared myself as non resident...no one has asked me that question..maybe that's where the discrepancy comes from.

You have hit the nail on the head, it all comes down to what you declare etc. Stop doing tax returns and tick the "no longer a resident box" and you are pinged at ATO, Centerlink, medicare etc. Write on your departure card that you are "never coming back" and you are a non resident. 

 

[MadMuhammad]

4 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

 

CGT isnt the end of the world. Keep it and live off the rent. If one day you sell it, its tax on the profit not the whole value of the sale. If you sell in a year with no other income its minimal tax.

A good accountant can get you lots of deductions while you have a rental property and greatly reduce the CGT when you sell.

CGT is tax on the difference between what you payed (its value on 30 June 2018) for the property and what you sell it for, "LESS" what it has cost you to hold, maintain, repair, improve and depreciation on the property. Anything from council rates through to a new kitchen, all comes off the gain. Lots of building construction/depreciation that will further reduce the capital gain.

 

10 years rental income and deductions will probably offset any future CGT, and at the end of the day if you pay a large amount of CGT, it means you made a large amount of money.

 

 

I understand where you are coming from regarding the tax deductions available. My home is almost brand new, 9 months old at this stage, so maintenance and improvement costs are negligible to non existent and at today’s valuation spending $60k on CGT for little to no reason just doesn’t make sense to me.

I signed my contract in 2015 but due to building issues and the builder going into liquidation I only took possession this year. The capital gains I have realised as of today from my initial purchase price compared to the rental income which I have been advised, it would take me 12-15 years to be in front of that figure compared to selling now (if that makes sense.) Also, the property market is tipped to slow to single digit growth over the next 18 months and beyond so any more gains will be minute based on the last 2-3 years. The figures I have done are before I include property management fees, repairs, damage by tenants etc.

My property has a very high end fit out and for that reason is not an easily rentable property (the black hardwood timber floors alone give me nightmares when considering letting the property) plus it has been pointed out in another thread, thanks 4MYEGO, the Australian government is constantly moving the goal posts ragarding foreign residents etc.

Financially I have the means to live out my life in SEA with the funds I have now so I’m not looking for a sustainable income (other than the passive income form my share portfolio) or single digit growth year on year. The money will be far better off being invested in shares with a decent amount set aside for a ‘rainy day’.

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by MadMuhammad

[tigermoth]

As long as you are either a citizen of Australia or have permanent resident status you are entitled to medicare regardless whether you reside overseas or not. Australia is a signatory to the UN charter declaring that an individual can be a resident of two countries. The problem is the morons in the government system in Australia, i.e., Centrelink, don't know their own rules. I have had many run ins with them and have been given false information, lied to and in one instance told I should lie to them as they knew many did. I ended up studying the social security laws until I became very knowlagable of them and forced the staff many times to check what they told me as they were wrong.

[Peterw42]

1 hour ago, MadMuhammad said:

I understand where you are coming from regarding the tax deductions available. My home is almost brand new, 9 months old at this stage, so maintenance and improvement costs are negligible to non existent and at today’s valuation spending $60k on CGT for little to no reason just doesn’t make sense to me.

I signed my contract in 2015 but due to building issues and the builder going into liquidation I only took possession this year. The capital gains I have realised as of today from my initial purchase price compared to the rental income which I have been advised, it would take me 12-15 years to be in front of that figure compared to selling now (if that makes sense.) Also, the property market is tipped to slow to single digit growth over the next 18 months and beyond so any more gains will be minute based on the last 2-3 years. The figures I have done are before I include property management fees, repairs, damage by tenants etc.

My property has a very high end fit out and for that reason is not an easily rentable property (the black hardwood timber floors alone give me nightmares when considering letting the property) plus it has been pointed out in another thread, thanks 4MYEGO, the Australian government is constantly moving the goal posts ragarding foreign residents etc.

Financially I have the means to live out my life in SEA with the funds I have now so I’m not looking for a sustainable income (other than the passive income form my share portfolio) or single digit growth year on year. The money will be far better off being invested in shares with a decent amount set aside for a ‘rainy day’.

 

Yes, everyones circumstances are different, i can appreciate not wanting to rent out etc.  But you have just pointed out some good reasons to hold the property. You have already made a capital gain prior to the laws changing, that gain is not subject to CGT, only any gain made after the laws change on 30/06/18. and if you think the market is slowing, then a futher "no gain".

[4MyEgo]

9 hours ago, MadMuhammad said:

Great advice as always mate and yes, c..ts they are lol.

Most definitely bailing out of my property on my exit because, as you kindly pointed out, it just won’t be worth it when it comes to CGT at sale time. 

My old girl plans on working another 5 years so I’m considering bringing her in as a director to keep my share portfolio and trust Australian owned and avoid the extra tax implications. 

You’re correct though, it’s grttinh harder and harder to ride that fine line between getting raped further and staying legal.

Your always welcome mate.

 

I am glad to hear your flicking the property as opposed to the ATO taxing you 1/3 of the rent and capital gains tax, look at it this way, the property market usually goes up in cycles of 7 years, the last lift was in 2012 and is just now easing off, and I believe prices will drop over the next 2-3 years as wages haven't grown in over a decade and when interest rates start to lift, there will be a lot of people feeling the heat, because a lot of them have lied about their incomes via brokers and the brokers passing that onto the banks, and so on and so forth, so after a rising market, there is usually a long flat line, with the line usually going slightly south, and opportunities will be available.

 

My plan is return in 10 years, re-establish my residency and buy a place that I can live in for a minimum of 2 years, then apply for the OAP, once approved and I know its portable, I will flick the property, hopefully for a good gain, because the timing should be right, and continue to live the life only those back in the slave trade can only imagine.

 

As far as putting the old girl down as director to keep your share portfolio and trust going, to sort taxes out, if your accountant gives you the big tick, all and good, but just remember, as a foreign resident, you don't pay tax on fully franked shares, and no capital gains tax, but I am sure your plan has been turned over and over to work best for you, and I wish you the very best with it.

 

Enjoy life, because us Xpats who worked our rears off from young, have now only realised, that there is life outside Australia, and a very very affordable one at that 555

[InMyShadow]

Your always welcome mate.
 
I am glad to hear your flicking the property as opposed to the ATO taxing you 1/3 of the rent and capital gains tax, look at it this way, the property market usually goes up in cycles of 7 years, the last lift was in 2012 and is just now easing off, and I believe prices will drop over the next 2-3 years as wages haven't grown in over a decade and when interest rates start to lift, there will be a lot of people feeling the heat, because a lot of them have lied about their incomes via brokers and the brokers passing that onto the banks, and so on and so forth, so after a rising market, there is usually a long flat line, with the line usually going slightly south, and opportunities will be available.
 
My plan is return in 10 years, re-establish my residency and buy a place that I can live in for a minimum of 2 years, then apply for the OAP, once approved and I know its portable, I will flick the property, hopefully for a good gain, because the timing should be right, and continue to live the life only those back in the slave trade can only imagine.
 
As far as putting the old girl down as director to keep your share portfolio and trust going, to sort taxes out, if your accountant gives you the big tick, all and good, but just remember, as a foreign resident, you don't pay tax on fully franked shares, and no capital gains tax, but I am sure your plan has been turned over and over to work best for you, and I wish you the very best with it.
 
Enjoy life, because us Xpats who worked our rears off from young, have now only realised, that there is life outside Australia, and a very very affordable one at that 555

Not so easy to lie to the banks. Proof of income MUST be supplied and not photocopies.

Your suggesting a sub prime type scenario and that ain't gonna happen. Maybe 20 years ago but not in today's market.

Trust me I have a long history in finance

[4MyEgo]

9 hours ago, StevieAus said:

I think you may be wrong on the intake issue, sure they have stopped the boats but that is only one group, I am sure I read that per head of population Australia has one of the highest intakes of refugees in the world.

They were talking about admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees who were not even literate in their own language, that sounded like a great idea another burden on the taxpayer.

It seems to have gone quiet as they were having difficulty proving they didn’t have any terrorist links and wouldn’t be a risk.

I thinks me is right, if you look at the attached link, up to mid 2015:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_refugee_population

[MadMuhammad]

37 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

Not so easy to lie to the banks. Proof of income MUST be supplied and not photocopies.

Your suggesting a sub prime type scenario and that ain't gonna happen. Maybe 20 years ago but not in today's market.

Trust me I have a long history in finance
 

While I’m not arguing your point I have recent experience with a broker ‘bending’ the truth for a mortgage approval. 

I was going to finance the property I am living in through a trust structure. I am currently unemployed so as to provide some proof of income we were bringing in family members as beneficiaries to service the loan, along with using the rental income but with no intention of renting the property after settlement. 

I was planning on using existing cash reserves to service the loan until the sale in 12-18 months time. The trust beneficiaries had no tangible disposal able income to service the loan should I have as drastic change in circumstances. 

This was to be done under instruction from my broker. I’m sure this is not the only time he has suggested this or gone down this path. 

Ultimately I paid cash for my home to avoid fees, tax implications and to receive Stamp Duty concessions and the FHOG.

 

[InMyShadow]

While I’m not arguing your point I have recent experience with a broker ‘bending’ the truth for a mortgage approval. 
I was going to finance the property I am living in through a trust structure. I am currently unemployed so as to provide some proof of income we were bringing in family members as beneficiaries to service the loan, along with using the rental income but with no intention of renting the property after settlement. 
I was planning on using existing cash reserves to service the loan until the sale in 12-18 months time. The trust beneficiaries had no tangible disposal able income to service the loan should I have as drastic change in circumstances. 
This was to be done under instruction from my broker. I’m sure this is not the only time he has suggested this or gone down this path. 
Ultimately I paid cash for my home to avoid fees, tax implications and to receive Stamp Duty concessions and the FHOG.
 

I believe you 100% there will always be crooked brokers and car sales men.
However they don't represent the majority.
The sub prime crisis that crashed the USA and some global markets was almost 100% and not just brokers but the banks own finance department.

That's never going to happen again for a very very long time if ever. Getting finance these days is a bit of a battle

[StevieAus]

On 10/24/2017 at 5:05 PM, 4MyEgo said:

I thinks me is right, if you look at the attached link, up to mid 2015:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_refugee_population

I am very happy to stand corrected on this issue and do not mind admitting that I was wrong, as it happens so infrequently

Ha Ha !!

[4MyEgo]

On 24/10/2017 at 11:59 AM, Peterw42 said:

 

CGT isnt the end of the world. Keep it and live off the rent. If one day you sell it, its tax on the profit not the whole value of the sale. If you sell in a year with no other income its minimal tax.

A good accountant can get you lots of deductions while you have a rental property and greatly reduce the CGT when you sell.

CGT is tax on the difference between what you payed (its value on 30 June 2018) for the property and what you sell it for, "LESS" what it has cost you to hold, maintain, repair, improve and depreciation on the property. Anything from council rates through to a new kitchen, all comes off the gain. Lots of building construction/depreciation that will further reduce the capital gain.

 

10 years rental income and deductions will probably offset any future CGT, and at the end of the day if you pay a large amount of CGT, it means you made a large amount of money.

 

 

So give the bastards 1/3 of the rent with no threshold, add all of your outgoings and vacancy factor, with a market that will remain flat for the next 10 years, as opposed to investing it into the stock market (blue chip fully franked stocks) paying you anywhere between 5-6 tax free with no capital gains tax, hmmm, I like my idea better....SELL !!!

[4MyEgo]

On 24/10/2017 at 4:00 PM, tigermoth said:

As long as you are either a citizen of Australia or have permanent resident status you are entitled to medicare regardless whether you reside overseas or not. Australia is a signatory to the UN charter declaring that an individual can be a resident of two countries. The problem is the morons in the government system in Australia, i.e., Centrelink, don't know their own rules. I have had many run ins with them and have been given false information, lied to and in one instance told I should lie to them as they knew many did. I ended up studying the social security laws until I became very knowlagable of them and forced the staff many times to check what they told me as they were wrong.

Medicare is as you say, there for Australian Citizens, and or Permanent Residence, i.e. Aussie Citizens living in Australia or abroad, claiming they are still Aussie residents, but for us Xpats, its all over after 5 years, some say after 2, and I will be testing that when I go back after next months as I will have been abroad for 2 years. No doubt I will update this post when I do return and try and make a claim. Hopefully it will good for the 5 years as opposed to the 2 years.

[4MyEgo]

On 24/10/2017 at 9:04 PM, InMyShadow said:

Not so easy to lie to the banks. Proof of income MUST be supplied and not photocopies.

Your suggesting a sub prime type scenario and that ain't gonna happen. Maybe 20 years ago but not in today's market.

Trust me I have a long history in finance
 

Not suggesting a sub-prime market at all, but a drop in the market of up to 20% as its over inflated in my opinion.

 

"Up to a third of Australian mortgages could be "liar loans" based on factually inaccurate information, investment bank UBS has warned".

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-11/500b-dollars-of-liar-loans-in-australia-ubs/8892030

 

When I used to value properties for lenders, it wasn't unusual for me to provide the lenders with 3, sometimes 4 valuations for the same property (different lenders) meaning that mortgage stress was always lurking in the background, and each valuation instruction varied from each instruction. i.e. "owners estimate" 1.5 mil, 1.750 mil, 2 mil and each time I would go back out to value the property, i.e. take the 5 photos copy and paste the report and send it off, the owner would ask, what's the point you coming back out again, with my reply being the inspection has to be internal, on the day the report is dated, backed up with date and time stamped photos on the photos. 

 

Banks don't want people to know how many "mortgagee in possession valuations" are carried out when they take possession of the properties, and they will hold the properties for as long as it takes for the market to rise in some cases for them to make a profit after already buying out whatever balance the buyer had in the property so as to keep their record clean. If the banks showed how many properties they had on their books, purchased through mortgagee in possession practices, it would show a clearer picture, just saying.

 

Banks need the business, and know the brokers turn it up, especially when it comes to low doc loan, higher interest rates charged, less documents, banks take the risk vs profit scenario, APRA turning up the heat is the best thing they could do to cool the market, otherwise they could see what was coming, not saying a sub-prime event, but a hell of a lot of shit for the Australian economy, hence the reason we have this watchdog. 

[Peterw42]

10 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

So give the bastards 1/3 of the rent with no threshold, add all of your outgoings and vacancy factor, with a market that will remain flat for the next 10 years, as opposed to investing it into the stock market (blue chip fully franked stocks) paying you anywhere between 5-6 tax free with no capital gains tax, hmmm, I like my idea better....SELL !!!

"No threshold" only applies if you are no longer "a resident for taxation purposes".

Buying and selling shares is subject to capital Gains tax, it always has been. Fully franked shares are not tax free, the company sends off the tax before they pay you the dividend (dividend less 30% company tax =dividend to shareholder) A 6% dividend means a 9% gross dividend. You are still liable for any difference between 30% tax, and your nominal tax rate.

[4MyEgo]

1 hour ago, Peterw42 said:

"No threshold" only applies if you are no longer "a resident for taxation purposes".

Buying and selling shares is subject to capital Gains tax, it always has been. Fully franked shares are not tax free, the company sends off the tax before they pay you the dividend (dividend less 30% company tax =dividend to shareholder) A 6% dividend means a 9% gross dividend. You are still liable for any difference between 30% tax, and your nominal tax rate.

We are getting slightly off the topic, however, as a Non-Resident you DO NOT pay capital gains tax, and yes fully franked shares are taxed before you get the money, so you could really say, they are tax free, i.e. 5% - 6% return on your investment (tax already taken out) vs 2% - 3% less 1/3 tax for a Non-Resident, plus capital gains tax.

 

Hopefully I haven't confused all with the above, but it makes more sense to me, someone who has been in real estate for 25 years to say, as a Non-Resident, you are far better off having your money in blue chip shares for the returns and not having to pay capital gains tax on your shares.

 

Stay as a Resident, get you $18,200 threshold, pay tax under the normal tax rules, plus pay capital gains tax, having done the math countless times, and also running it by my accountant, he is also of the opinion that I was better off as a Non-Resident for tax purposes, although the only detriment to me would be:

 

Loss of Medicare after 5 years

 

Not able to vote

 

Having to return to Australia two years prior to the OAP and remaining in Australia until approved that it is portable, usually after the 2 year period, and the OAP naturally being approved subject to meeting the assets test.

 

Now if you going to have a flat market for 10 years, sure you might have zero capital gains tax to pay, but you have "no gain" and you are paying tax on an investment that you would be lucky enough to be getting between 2% - 3% less other outgoings, as opposed to watching your money grow in the share market (fully franked shares), with you having control on what you buy and what you sell and every time you make a capital gain, its yours, no capital gains tax.

 

Really a no brainer to me, based on the above, and don;t forget, my plan is to return in 10 years, reclaim my status as a resident and buy a property 2 years prior to me applying for the OAP, with the hope that it increase in value in those 2 years, so I can then flick it when my OAP is approved and portable, so that I can repeat my tax free lfestyle, although you can call it taxed lifestyle if you like, as its nor here or there for me, but I know one thing for sure, I am making double plus what I was making having a property in Sydney with regard to returns as a Non- Resident, and zero capital gains, even if I retained my residency, I would still be worse off on the return.

 

Up to everyone to do their own math, mine works for me.

 

 

[pdoneleg]

It really shits me that we loss entitlement ... I just come back to Thailand from Europe ...and I know a few of them that live in Thailand and they just go home for operations etc and get really comfortable pensions , OK not all Europeans... not sure about north Americans... but Australian government waste so much money yet are so tight with older Australians ... the ones which has made the country what it is today ...ok ..there are some who have not done their share and use the system but not many  ... I go back regularly  and am a self funded retiree... so am not affected ... but it shits me ....     

[bazza73]

21 minutes ago, pdoneleg said:

It really shits me that we loss entitlement ... I just come back to Thailand from Europe ...and I know a few of them that live in Thailand and they just go home for operations etc and get really comfortable pensions , OK not all Europeans... not sure about north Americans... but Australian government waste so much money yet are so tight with older Australians ... the ones which has made the country what it is today ...ok ..there are some who have not done their share and use the system but not many  ... I go back regularly  and am a self funded retiree... so am not affected ... but it shits me ....     

When you fall below the threshold asset level, you can get a part pension. While you are self-funded, and if you have your pension paid out of any super fund, the earnings of the fund and your pension are tax free.

If you really want to bitch about something, take a look at this link:

 

http://www.yourpension.com.au/APCalc/#CalcForm

 

and see what happens to the part pension if you own a home, or have a wife who is not an Australian citizen. Then you'll see what tight really means.

[4MyEgo]

On 26/10/2017 at 3:25 PM, pdoneleg said:

It really shits me that we loss entitlement ... I just come back to Thailand from Europe ...and I know a few of them that live in Thailand and they just go home for operations etc and get really comfortable pensions , OK not all Europeans... not sure about north Americans... but Australian government waste so much money yet are so tight with older Australians ... the ones which has made the country what it is today ...ok ..there are some who have not done their share and use the system but not many  ... I go back regularly  and am a self funded retiree... so am not affected ... but it shits me ....     

Anyone is entitle to a full pension if they have been in Australia for 35 years, they don't even need to work, just to have live in Australia for 35 years, nothing to do with anything.

 

I understand your frustrations, but it ain't gonna change anything, you have to plan to beat the system, I have mine, others have theirs, hope you can work one out for yourself, because some of our plans will work, others will fail.

 

Good luck

[ELVIS123456]

On 10/26/2017 at 3:56 PM, bazza73 said:

When you fall below the threshold asset level, you can get a part pension. While you are self-funded, and if you have your pension paid out of any super fund, the earnings of the fund and your pension are tax free.

If you really want to bitch about something, take a look at this link:

 

http://www.yourpension.com.au/APCalc/#CalcForm

 

and see what happens to the part pension if you own a home, or have a wife who is not an Australian citizen. Then you'll see what tight really means.

Thanks for that link Bazza - really useful.  As I plan ahead this means I can change things and see what would happen to the pension payments.  I was always going to have a lot of things 'disappearing' a few years before I apply for the OAP and now I can easily calculate the impact of any potential change in financial arrangements.

 

But getting back to the point - it is an effin joke how the Pollies in Aust have been able to reduce both the OAP benefits and tighten up the eligibility with so little protest from the public/media.  Every budget they get their public servants to give them estimated savings for any and all potential changes to the OAP eligibility, and then they decide which ones to propose based on political realities - expats on the OAP are an 'easy target'.  The option of reducing the number of refugees or economic immigrants (as opposed to those with money), so that the OAP can be maintained for those who have contributed for 35+ years and who have chosen to live overseas because of the costs to live in Australia when older and not working, just doesn't get a mention. 

 

Like I have said before, the Libs are the ones making these changes, and Labor is the one blocking some of them. If the Libs keep going this way, then Labor will get my vote next time - which given the current crisis about dual-citizenship might be sooner rather than later.  They say it only takes 2% of the net votes for any Party to change, for the result to change, as most Aussies always vote for the same Party.  I wonder how many Expats are there living overseas who are either on the OAP or plan to be in the next 5-10 years?  Anyone know the numbers?

 

 

[4MyEgo]

17 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Thanks for that link Bazza - really useful.  As I plan ahead this means I can change things and see what would happen to the pension payments.  I was always going to have a lot of things 'disappearing' a few years before I apply for the OAP and now I can easily calculate the impact of any potential change in financial arrangements.

 

But getting back to the point - it is an effin joke how the Pollies in Aust have been able to reduce both the OAP benefits and tighten up the eligibility with so little protest from the public/media.  Every budget they get their public servants to give them estimated savings for any and all potential changes to the OAP eligibility, and then they decide which ones to propose based on political realities - expats on the OAP are an 'easy target'.  The option of reducing the number of refugees or economic immigrants (as opposed to those with money), so that the OAP can be maintained for those who have contributed for 35+ years and who have chosen to live overseas because of the costs to live in Australia when older and not working, just doesn't get a mention. 

 

Like I have said before, the Libs are the ones making these changes, and Labor is the one blocking some of them. If the Libs keep going this way, then Labor will get my vote next time - which given the current crisis about dual-citizenship might be sooner rather than later.  They say it only takes 2% of the net votes for any Party to change, for the result to change, as most Aussies always vote for the same Party.  I wonder how many Expats are there living overseas who are either on the OAP or plan to be in the next 5-10 years?  Anyone know the numbers?

 

 

I don't know the answer to that mate, but have you asked yourself how many Expats are living overseas that are not entitled to vote, i.e. non residents.

 

These pollies are to smart for their own bloody good, why else would they take our rights away to vote, we remain Australian Citizens by birth right, well most of us, yet we cannot have a saying on what goes on in OUR country, yes we are here as you mentioned, because of the cost of living in Australia is too high, and we have a better quality of life over here, due to it being affordable.

[ELVIS123456]

On 10/26/2017 at 1:17 PM, 4MyEgo said:

my plan is to return in 10 years, reclaim my status as a resident and buy a property 2 years prior to me applying for the OAP, with the hope that it increase in value in those 2 years, so I can then flick it when my OAP is approved and portable, so that I can repeat my tax free lfestyle,

Just re-read things and meant to say something before - old timers disease catching up 

 

I did the numbers on buying a house versus renting, and unless you get a decent annual increase in the house's sales value, it is financially better to rent (over about 5-7 years).  Over only 2-3 years, it would be much better to rent financially in most circumstances.

 

Obviously it all depends on what you are going to get for your money from investments rather than using it to buy a house.  But with Super returns at well over 5% (averaging about 7% last 10 years) it makes no sense to buy for me.  When buying you pay stamp duty and legals etc.,  you then have rates and insurance and maintenance etc, and when you sell you pay agent's fees and legals etc.  The money you get from keeping the money invested is more than the net proceeds for a buy/sell outcome. The interest received will more than pay the rent for the equivalent residence, when it is calculated on that basis.

 

Something to think about.  Unless I have missed something?