All Aussie Related Stuff (excluding the old age pension)

[stud858]

8 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Didn't you say earlier, that if you don't have residency of Thailand, that makes you a resident of Australia for taxation purposes?

If you are already a resident for taxes purposes in australia then yes. Living in Thailand doesn't automatically cancell that. 

[Will27]

4 minutes ago, stud858 said:

If you are already a resident for taxes purposes in australia then yes. Living in Thailand doesn't automatically cancell that. 

You didn't really answer the question I think.

 

Didn't you previously say that if an Aussie living in Thailand doesn't get Thai residency, that makes them a resident in Australia

for taxation.

[stud858]

8 minutes ago, Will27 said:

So if the ATO audits Joe Bloggs and says "you haven't been back to Australia for 7 years" or something similar, you

think that by saying you have a house there makes you a resident? How can you prove an intent to move back to Oz?

 

That's pretty much wrong.

 

The ATO could say, well when/if you return to Australia, then you can say you're a resident.

Residency for taxation doesn't work like that.  It's not about where you physically are or sleep The ATO rules are clear. Also There is no mention of previous time.  It is about intent.  I agree,  it's crazy, but that's the way it works. 

If Joe follows the rules he will still be a tax resident.  How can he do it?  My comments explain more in all my previous posts. He just follows the law to his favour 

[stud858]

6 minutes ago, Will27 said:

You didn't really answer the question I think.

 

Didn't you previously say that if an Aussie living in Thailand doesn't get Thai residency, that makes them a resident in Australia

for taxation.

Yes, I dud say that, but hope you can honour me the assumption that my statement is only in response to disprove your previous statement and is correct if there was already residency for tax in the first place. Which is a pretty good assumption for an Australian.

  but if you've read all my posts you will see my argument all along has been trying to disprove what people say,  maybe including yourself, that if you stay outside Australia for 184 days or 5 years you autumatically become a non resident. That's not true,  but only for a very specific few with extra circumstances.

 

To be honest, I think we are clear now on what the ATO rules are though. We've both read them.  

[Will27]

3 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Residency for taxation doesn't work like that.  It's not about where you physically are or sleep The ATO rules are clear. Also There is no mention of previous time.  It is about intent.  I agree,  it's crazy, but that's the way it works. 

If Joe follows the rules he will still be a tax resident.  How can he do it?  My comments explain more in all my previous posts. He just follows the law to his favour 

Of course it's about where you sleep/reside.

 

From the ATO:

 

The primary test of tax residency is called the 'resides test'. If you reside in Australia, you are considered an Australian resident for tax purposes and don't need to apply any of the other residency tests.

If you don't satisfy the resides test, you'll still be considered an Australian resident if you satisfy one of three statutory tests:

""The domicile test: You're an Australian resident if your domicile (broadly, the place that is your permanent home) is in Australia, unless we are satisfied that your permanent place of abode is outside Australia.

I haven't included the 183 and superannuation test.

It would be  a stretch to try to say your place in Australia is your permanent home when you spend 51 weeks a year in Thailand I'd imagine.

•  
•  

[Will27]

 

1 minute ago, stud858 said:

Yes, I dud say that, but hope you can honour me the assumption that my statement is only in response to disprove your previous statement and is correct if there was already residency for tax in the first place. Which is a pretty good assumption for an Australian.

  but if you've read all my posts you will see my argument all along has been trying to disprove what people say,  maybe including yourself, that if you stay outside Australia for 184 days or 5 years you autumatically become a non resident. That's not true,  but only for a very specific few with extra circumstances.

 

To be honest, I think we are clear now on what the ATO rules are though. We've both read them.  

 

I haven't said that.

 

But you're saying things like it doesn't matter how long you spend outside of Australia and if you don't get

residency in Thailand, that makes you a resident of Australia which is clearly incorrect IMO.

[stud858]

6 minutes ago, Will27 said:

 

 

I haven't said that.

 

But you're saying things like it doesn't matter how long you spend outside of Australia and if you don't get

residency in Thailand, that makes you a resident of Australia which is clearly incorrect IMO.

For you to lose residency for tax,  please show me where it says about being out of the country for whatever time you will lose your residency?

Last time someone showed the 183 day rule.  It's not for that.  

Someone showed an example. Was non resident because of setting up abode outside of country.not because of time outside purely.

I haven't been shown any rule yet? 

 

How can I think otherwise? 

I'm open to it.  But I can't see any rules about it. 

 

[stud858]

27 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Of course it's about where you sleep/reside.

 

From the ATO:

 

The primary test of tax residency is called the 'resides test'. If you reside in Australia, you are considered an Australian resident for tax purposes and don't need to apply any of the other residency tests.

If you don't satisfy the resides test, you'll still be considered an Australian resident if you satisfy one of three statutory tests:

""The domicile test: You're an Australian resident if your domicile (broadly, the place that is your permanent home) is in Australia, unless we are satisfied that your permanent place of abode is outside Australia.

I haven't included the 183 and superannuation test.

It would be  a stretch to try to say your place in Australia is your permanent home when you spend 51 weeks a year in Thailand I'd imagine.

•  
•  

Sleep and reside do not have the same definition and the ATO only uses reside.  

Your physical presence in a place doesn't define abode or permanent residemce. With the ATO anyway. 

I think it does with centre link. Not so much redefining those words but using your physical presence. 

[Will27]

2 hours ago, stud858 said:

Sleep and reside do not have the same definition and the ATO only uses reside.  

Your physical presence in a place doesn't define abode or permanent residemce. With the ATO anyway. 

I think it does with centre link. Not so much redefining those words but using your physical presence. 

Pretty much says it all I think.

If you're living in Thailand pretty much all year round, you're more than likely to be assessed as a resident.

 

ATO: In this test, we must be satisfied that your usual place of abode is outside Australia, whereas the first statutory test (domicile) requires us to be satisfied that your permanent place of abode is outside Australia.

 

ATO: Determining your usual place of abode

Whilst the question of a usual place of abode is a question of fact, generally the phrase is interpreted as the abode customarily or commonly used by you when physically present in a country.

Your place of abode need not be fixed but must exhibit the attributes of a place of residence or a place to live, as contrasted with an overnight, weekly or monthly accommodation of a traveller.

Some of the relevant factors are: 

• intended and actual length of stay overseas, including the continuity of that stay
• existence of an established home overseas

[stud858]

9 minutes ago, Will27 said:

 

***See my starred responses

 

ATO: In this test, we must be satisfied that your usual place of abode is outside Australia,

 

**Usual,  does not mean time wise. My usual address is still Australia even if I stay in Thailand the full year.

 

whereas the first statutory test (domicile) requires us to be satisfied that your permanent place of abode is outside Australia.

***Temporary visa cannot have a permanent place to live 

9 minutes ago, Will27 said:

 

ATO: Determining your usual place of abode

Whilst the question of a usual place of abode is a question of fact, generally the phrase is interpreted as the abode customarily or commonly used by you when physically present in a country.

 

*** Yes,  while in Australia, I commonly and customarily use my Australian address. Of course,  it's my abode. 

Your place of abode need not be fixed but must exhibit the attributes of a place of residence or a place to live, as contrasted with an overnight, weekly or monthly accommodation of a traveller.

*** Yes my address in Australia is not a hotel. 

9 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Some of the relevant factors are: 

• intended and actual length of stay overseas, including the continuity of that stay
• existence of an established home overseas

** I intend to return to Australia. I do have a holiday house I stay in whilst in Thailand but it's not my usual abode. 

 

 I am an Australian resident for tax,  even if I was out of country for the year. 

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, moojar said:

CGT discount when I do sell will be calculated with the year/s of non-residency taken into account.  Own for 20 years / non-res for 2 of those years, somewhere there will be a 10% penalty in the calculations. 

Not wishing to burst anyone's bubble, the guy at the ATO no doubt can only quote you on current legislation that is in, but what worries me is if tomorrow they pass the one that is currently waiting to be passed into legislation, please have a read of this link if you haven't already, because from my analysis, it say from 1 July 2019 (if passed) CGT will be from the date you purchased the property, but feel free to correct me.

 

If passed, this will be the uppercut knockout that most non/foreign residents (same meaning) will not see coming.

 

https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/people-organisation/publications/assets/pwc-australia-cgt-exemption-for-homes-of-foreign-residents-removed.pdf

 

Once you do get the ruling, you might want to get an update if this is passed. 

 

 

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, moojar said:

I'd prefer to be resident of course, given that I'll be retired and not earning any money outside of Oz.  I don't believe I get a choice in the matter though - ticking a 'resident' box on my tax return does not magically make me legally resident, unfortunately.  

 

I'll discuss with my accountant before applying for a private ruling though - don't tell the ATO more than they need to know, and that includes applying for a private ruling.  But no point pretending one thing if they are easily gonna catch me in a lie.   

 

IMO one reason these rules are there is to stop people avoiding tax by claiming to be resident when they are not.  Not necessarily aimed at long-time residents of Oz that have retired overseas, but we get caught up in the rules brought in because people who can claim residency, do.  Like the hoops we have to jump thru for a pension now - people have been gaming the system, the govt has to change the rules, we get caught up in that closing of loop-holes.  

I was in the same boat as you, the ruling said I would be a non resident, so I think you know it will be the same as you have said.

 

The reason I believe they want us to e non residents is because they want their cake and they want to eat it too, the reason I say that is that they don't want us to be claiming the threshold of $18,200 because the tax will be minimal and if you have a partner on title, that threshold doubles when you income split and it is more than likely that they will get nothing.

 

The above is one scenario, but get this, if you have a property back home and rent a property overseas and work, they will make sure you are a resident of Australia for tax purposes because they do not want to miss out on that income, remember its worldwide, therefore you can have the threshold because you are producing an income and the ATO will tax you on that income and the income on the property, but if you retire and are not producing an income/wage, only from your property, fark you, your a non resident and its 32.5c up the date.

 

If you could somehow show you are making a $ here, they would deem you a resident of Australia...lol

 

I haven't worked that one out yet.

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, stud858 said:

It can very much depend on what you say.  If you say your intention is to retire to Thailand and not intend to return then you're on your way to get a non resident ruling. 

If you say you will get a non immigrant visa based on retirement because you are over 50 and you intend to return to your home in Australia as it holds all your personal items,  receives your mail,  and you have every intention of returning to Australia as the Thai government will not give you permanent residency. This will set you on your way to a residency for tax ruling.

 

I believe you will find it will be the opposite, I say that because I did exactly that, the key word here could be construed in two words, retired (your a gonna), work, (your in as an Australian Resident, you see they want a slice of the pie of the worldwide income, they don't want you having the threshold if your not producing an income, which in turn will reduce the tax payable on income you receive from your property, and they will stick it to you forcing you to sell it because the 32.5c in the $ you pay in tax is really 45-50% once you add on all the outgoings and fees and maintenance. 

 

Now from 1 July 2019 if they introduce that bill into legislation it will be full capital gains tax on your property from the date you purchased it, which puts the screws right in, oi.

 

https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/people-organisation/publications/assets/pwc-australia-cgt-exemption-for-homes-of-foreign-residents-removed.pdf

[stud858]

For the Aussies working in Thailand,  some useful info from ATO. The tax treaty list and documents. I'll read it later as I'm not working a.T.m.

I'm interested to know if any one finds anything juicy.

https://treasury.gov.au/tax-treaties/income-tax-treaties/

[stud858]

3 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

I believe you will find it will be the opposite, I say that because I did exactly that, the key word here could be construed in two words, retired (your a gonna), work, (your in as an Australian Resident, you see they want a slice of the pie of the worldwide income, they don't want you having the threshold if your not producing an income, which in turn will reduce the tax payable on income you receive from your property, and they will stick it to you forcing you to sell it because the 32.5c in the $ you pay in tax is really 45-50% once you add on all the outgoings and fees and maintenance. 

 

Now from 1 July 2019 if they introduce that bill into legislation it will be full capital gains tax on your property from the date you purchased it, which puts the screws right in, oi.

 

https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/people-organisation/publications/assets/pwc-australia-cgt-exemption-for-homes-of-foreign-residents-removed.pdf

Saying you are retiring to Thailand and getting a visa based on retirement are not the same.  You must clearly state your intention to be back in Australia. Then, by the ATO rules all should be fine. 

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, moojar said:

See my reply to Stud858.  You don't have to have been granted Thailand residency (path to citizenship) to be a resident of Thailand.   Just living there on a retirement visa makes you a 'resident of Thailand' (living in Thailand).  No legal rights, but still a resident.   Like a foreign student studying in Australia.  Does not have PR or citizenship, he is on a visa of some sort - he is residing in Australia. 

I think if your working and producing an income you may retain your residency, being retired like yourself and myself is a little different as we are not contributing to the economy of Australia, that said they don't want us getting the tax threshold, its taken almost 3 years to work it out, but I think that recent ruling; Harding Vs The Commissioner of Taxation spelt it all out, i.e. he was working in Saudi Arabia making $175,000 USD and not paying tax in Saudi Arabia, he had a property in QLD and was claiming to be a non resident.

 

ATO said yes you have lived there and worked there for over 6 years, but you haven't cut Australia off, as you have a property here, which means you could return at any time so your an Australian Resident for taxation purposes, that said if he said he was retired and not producing an income, they would have granted him non residency IMO as he wouldn't be contributing to Australia.

[4MyEgo]

3 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Saying you are retiring to Thailand and getting a visa based on retirement are not the same.  You must clearly state your intention to be back in Australia. Then, by the ATO rules all should be fine. 

I don't believe it's that cut and dry, they would want to know a hell of a lot more than that, i.e. do you own property, do you have family there, drivers licence, club memberships, etc etc and then they would you look at you on an individual basis. 

[stud858]

1 minute ago, 4MyEgo said:

I don't believe it's that cut and dry, they would want to know a hell of a lot more than that, i.e. do you own property, do you have family there, drivers licence, club memberships, etc etc and then they would you look at you on an individual basis. 

Yes for sure. I Agree. Saying you are on a retirement 1 yr visa is not the end all and be all. This alone though will not deny you residency for tax. 

 

[4MyEgo]

4 hours ago, Will27 said:

If you're going to be living in Thailand pretty much fulltime, in all likelihood you will be a non-resident.

 

There are too many people on here that because they have a medicare card, a drivers licence and an Aussie postal

address seem to think they're still residents.

 

I know there are exceptions to every rule, but how anyone honestly think they're a resident living 51 weeks a year

in Thailand is a bit strange.

One would be that they are working, now that makes it about 0.001% of Aussie xpats, so if they are no producing $ where they are being taxed and contributing to Australia, then they are toast, non residence as far as the ATO is concerned IMO, I mean why else would they strip you of everything, and make you return for 2 years to get the pension made portable.

[4MyEgo]

2 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Yes for sure. I Agree. Saying you are on a retirement 1 yr visa is not the end all and be all. This alone though will not deny you residency for tax. 

 

I will agree with you to the point that if you say you are retired, they will turn their backs on you and more than likely say you have been or are a non resident, I say that because I could be her for 10-20 years renting out my property and they would get zero to very little $'s in tax, I would get Medicare, could vote and apply for the pension when I return and have it portable straight away because I am a resident of Australia, NOT GONNA HAPPEN ?

 

They want the $ to give out the passes.

[stud858]

2 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

I will agree with you to the point that if you say you are retired, they will turn their backs on you and more than likely say you have been or are a non resident, I say that because I could be her for 10-20 years renting out my property and they would get zero to very little $'s in tax, I would get Medicare, could vote and apply for the pension when I return and have it portable straight away because I am a resident of Australia, NOT GONNA HAPPEN ?

 

They want the $ to give out the passes.

Sure, although,  the pension from Centrelink and dealings with tax office do things a bit differently. Clink considers time out of the country specifically. I believe a few expats do their weaving and wriggling and still follow the law to get a fair result though 

[4MyEgo]

3 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Sure, although,  the pension from Centrelink and dealings with tax office do things a bit differently. Clink considers time out of the country specifically. I believe a few expats do their weaving and wriggling and still follow the law to get a fair result though 

Different department yes, and they see things their way, yes, but we are talking residency rulings here for tax purposes by the ATO, the AP is a totally different thing, and the same a$$holes put those bills through legislation, sort of intertwining really, but if they can make you a non resident for tax purposes because your not producing an income, they just made your life that much harder because portability for the AP will be a 2 year jail term.

[Will27]

1 hour ago, stud858 said:

d**Temporary visa cannot have a permanent place to live 

*** Yes my address in Australia is not a hotel. 

** I intend to return to Australia. I do have a holiday house I stay in whilst in Thailand but it's not my usual abode. 

 

 I am an Australian resident for tax,  even if I was out of country for the year. 

Based on what?

 

Having a house in Australia?

[Will27]

31 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

I don't believe it's that cut and dry, they would want to know a hell of a lot more than that, i.e. do you own property, do you have family there, drivers licence, club memberships, etc etc and then they would you look at you on an individual basis. 

stud858 seems to think as long as you have a residence in Australia and say you have an intent to go back to Oz,

you're a resident for tax purposes.

[stud858]

8 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Based on what?

 

Having a house in Australia?

Based on Having my usual abode in Australia that I've had forever,  that's got all my stuff.  I intend to go back to Australia.  my beloved dog is buried in the backyard there so I have physical  and emotional ties to it. It is my one and only true safe and permanent abode Also on top of that my renewal of my visa is not guaranteed in the country I am in at the moment. Please Mr Taxman. Accept me as a resident. 

 

Mr Taxman: Ok mate.  You've passed our online test aswell.  All seems in order.  

[4MyEgo]

14 minutes ago, Will27 said:

stud858 seems to think as long as you have a residence in Australia and say you have an intent to go back to Oz,

you're a resident for tax purposes.

That is also the way I interpret what he is saying it, however I think the only way you could do it, is to say, hey Mr Taxman, I have been on an extended overseas holiday, here is my passport, I haven't stayed at any places too long and you will see that by the stamps in my passport, I haven't worked, it was a holiday, so I haven't really had an abode of sorts apart from my place here in Australia, and the rent from the property helped me survive while I was on my extended holiday/trip.

[Will27]

4 minutes ago, stud858 said:

Based on Having my usual abode in Australia that I've had forever,  that's got all my stuff.  I intend to go back to Australia.  my beloved dog is buried in the backyard there so I have physical  and emotional ties to it. It is my one and only true safe and permanent abode Also on top of that my renewal of my visa is not guaranteed in the country I am in at the moment. Please Mr Taxman. Accept me as a resident. 

 

Mr Taxman: Ok mate.  You've passed our online test aswell.  All seems in order.  

So you think you're a resident because you haven't got Thai residency and you've got a house

with a pooch buried in the backyard?

 

Gee, I'm glad you cleared that up for the rest of us Aussies here.

 

Might've as well close the topic?

 

[Will27]

5 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

That is also the way I interpret they way he is saying it, however I think the only way you could do it, is to say, hey Mr Tax man, I have been on an extended overseas holiday, here is my passport, I haven't stayed at any places too long and you will see that by the stamps in my passport, so I haven't really had an abode of sorts and haven't rented out my property, so I haven't been a burden on the system, however if he rented it out, it could go either way IMO

Yep, but he's living in Thailand.

 

Also, not being able to get Thai residency means jack shit to the ATO.

[stud858]

8 minutes ago, Will27 said:

stud858 seems to think as long as you have a residence in Australia and say you have an intent to go back to Oz,

you're a resident for tax purposes.

Yes totally possible. Are you saying it's not possible? But that's not my argument anyway.

Some are saying that's not possible  AT ALL if you are out of Australia and in Thailand for the year.  . I've listed through the rules and concerns  in previous posts.  You may need to go back and re read to get my complete point of view. It's not correct or fair to say that is my stance from a single post. My stance involves,  types of visas, personal circumstances,  etc. 

 

When I'm shown the ATO advice on the matter I can agree with you about being out of the country for a year will void my tax residency status without other circumstance. 

 

 

[stud858]

8 minutes ago, Will27 said:

stud858 seems to think as long as you have a residence in Australia and say you have an intent to go back to Oz,

you're a resident for tax purposes.

Yes totally possible. Are you saying it's not possible? But that's not my argument anyway.

Some are saying that's not possible  AT ALL if you are out of Australia and in Thailand for the year.  . I've listed through the rules and concerns  in previous posts.  You may need to go back and re read to get my complete point of view. It's not correct or fair to say that is my stance from a single post. My stance involves,  types of visas, personal circumstances,  etc. 

 

When I'm shown the ATO advice on the matter I can agree with you about being out of the country for a year will void my tax residency status without other circumstance.