Australian pension

[LosLobo]

4 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

What's that old saying, "knowledge is power", suffice to say I was pi$$ed off knowing that I couldn't hold onto my property when I moved here, i.e. if I held it, after 183 days I would be deemed a non resident as I am not living in Australia, the property would be taxed at 32.5c in every $ earned, then on top of that I would have to pay water & council rates, insurances, agents fees, repairs etc etc etc and could not claim anything back, add to that capital gains tax when selling, it just wasn't worth holding onto, suffice to say I sold it before the 6 months was up and the market headed south, good timing for me.

 

I found out by researching that if you invest the money in the ASX as I mentioned before, as a non resident, you do not pay any tax if you buy fully franked shares as the dividends have the tax paid by the companies before you get your payment, add to that no capital gains tax is payable on any shares sold, so why the hell would I want to hold property back in Oz, I have shares in 4 banks that pay me between 5.5% & 6.5% twice a year with other shares also paying me about the same rate tax free.

 

Some will say the market is risky, sure it is, so is real estate, I mean the Sydney market where I came from is down 20% over the past 3 years when I sold out, but you do not see the decline everyday.

 

Like I said market go up and down and if you buy in at the right time (when is that), how long is a piece of string), you can make a good gain, short trading is also a good payer, i.e. have your long term shares paying you your dividends, don't worry about any drops in value as your earning an income, they will climb back in time and as you don't need the capital its a no brainer, then day trade buying and selling as you go, and if the market dips when you have bought, hold, wait, hold, wait, hold, wait, and then when you think it's down to the bottom, buy in again, selling at the price your happy with.

 

You should be able to make 10% at the least tax free.

How do you see the market at the moment?

I have been sitting on my hands with my super transferred to cash since the October crash.

I didn't follow FA advice that you need to have one or two years of losses every seven years.

So I am still positive for the year. But in 2019, frankly cash investments won't pay the bills.

[4MyEgo]

2 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

How do you see the market at the moment?

I have been sitting on my hands with my super transferred to cash since the October crash.

I didn't follow FA advice that you need to have one or two years of losses every seven years.

So I am still positive for the year. But in 2019, frankly cash investments won't pay the bills.

How good is anyone's crystal ball ????

 

I was 50% in with 50% reserves in the bank, that said, I watched the market drop more, so I decided to get in another 25% and am sitting now, when it rises, it should be a good one, that said, it could go the other way, but as the old saying goes, "you gotta be in it to win it", worse case scenario if the market goes no where for 6 years, I can still survive on what are in reserves.

 

I think now that we know Trump's hands are tied, the markets should relax a little, this US China trade war thing has really spooked the market, but it has cleaned out the cobwebs so to speak and things will improve IMO.

[totally thaied up]

5 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

I was 50% in with 50% reserves in the bank

I am 30% in, the rest in cash at this time. I never really go in more than 40% and that has held me via every crash to date. I like having at least three years in capital to live on in hand- that has always been one of my mottos. I can out ride most things in that time and make a profit.

 

I use to mainly (and will do in the future) have most of my capital gains on sold call options on stock I OWNED. I use to pull 25K plus a year doing this or just doing close to the money calls on the Miners trading heavily. I have done this since 1995 till I got seriously sick in 2012 and then I had to pull back on it all and slide into a Pension as I needed to get better. Within the next 5-10 years, I will have no choice what-so-ever to go back to trading as I will lose my Pension when my parents pass on. I would most likely not need to work trading as I will have enough money for my lifetime (under Family Trust) but I want my wife to be left with a nice portfolio that will bring her in a million baht plus every year in dividends and for her not to worry about anything after my death.

 

 

Edited January 1, 2019 by totally thaied up

[4MyEgo]

19 hours ago, totally thaied up said:

I am 30% in, the rest in cash at this time. I never really go in more than 40% and that has held me via every crash to date. I like having at least three years in capital to live on in hand- that has always been one of my mottos. I can out ride most things in that time and make a profit.

 

I use to mainly (and will do in the future) have most of my capital gains on sold call options on stock I OWNED. I use to pull 25K plus a year doing this or just doing close to the money calls on the Miners trading heavily. I have done this since 1995 till I got seriously sick in 2012 and then I had to pull back on it all and slide into a Pension as I needed to get better. Within the next 5-10 years, I will have no choice what-so-ever to go back to trading as I will lose my Pension when my parents pass on. I would most likely not need to work trading as I will have enough money for my lifetime (under Family Trust) but I want my wife to be left with a nice portfolio that will bring her in a million baht plus every year in dividends and for her not to worry about anything after my death.

 

 

I am waiting for the correction, should be no later than mid February, and when (I hope) it comes, I will be reducing my portfolio back to 50% in and 50% in the bank.

 

Like I said, reserves are fine for a good 6 years, but I prefer not being so heavily in, however the opportunity is there, and we all know the market has taken a good beating over the past 4-5 months, some cannot afford to go in more, others can, and if it all pans out, will make a good killing.

[totally thaied up]

6 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

I am waiting for the correction, should be no later than mid February, and when (I hope) it comes, I will be reducing my portfolio back to 50% in and 50% in the bank.

 

Like I said, reserves are fine for a good 6 years, but I prefer not being so heavily in, however the opportunity is there, and we all know the market has taken a good beating over the past 4-5 months, some cannot afford to go in more, others can, and if it all pans out, will make a good killing.

 The data coming out of China was not good. Smashed our dollar again. I think we are going to be in for a world of pain still with the AUD. Reading predictions over three years to 19 baht. I have done my costing now at 19 baht for my living expenses and will have to cut a few things back. I am going worst case 18-19 to best case 23-24 over the next so many years. The AUD is in the doghouse for the time being.

[madmen]

 The data coming out of China was not good. Smashed our dollar again. I think we are going to be in for a world of pain still with the AUD. Reading predictions over three years to 19 baht. I have done my costing now at 19 baht for my living expenses and will have to cut a few things back. I am going worst case 18-19 to best case 23-24 over the next so many years. The AUD is in the doghouse for the time being.

I'm waiting for the AUD to drop below USA 50 cents before I sell my condo lower Sukhumvit. Major currency killing..

[totally thaied up]

1 minute ago, madmen said:

I'm waiting for the AUD to drop below USA 50 cents before I sell my condo lower Sukhumvit. Major currency killing..

If that happened (below 50), my wife and I will relocate back to Australia. I could not afford to live here at that rate. I think not many Aussies could. 

[4MyEgo]

8 hours ago, totally thaied up said:

If that happened (below 50), my wife and I will relocate back to Australia. I could not afford to live here at that rate. I think not many Aussies could. 

It's all relative to what you can make, sure its not good, the AUD falling, but it's cheaper to live here by 50% compared to Australia or Sydney in particular where I came from 3 years ago. The rent alone would be a killer.

[stud858]

Better off telling them you now need a wheel chair and apply for more benefit. Go get them pollies mate, stick it to em. 

Don't marry. 

[totally thaied up]

12 hours ago, stud858 said:

Don't marry. 

Yes, if you do not plan to get them PR, do not marry. You lose too much money on the OAP/DSP. I lost $400 a month from marrying but I want my wife to have access to PR at the end of this year. Got to give something to get something back.

 

12 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

20 hours ago, totally thaied up said:

 

It's all relative to what you can make, sure its not good, the AUD falling, but it's cheaper to live here by 50% compared to Australia or Sydney in particular where I came from 3 years ago. The rent alone would be a killer.

The parents have got myself a Condo on the beach that I can move into at any time at the end of this year when it is finished being built. We have a house in Thailand and the Condo in Australia would be a haven for us if the dollar dropped too much. My living costs in Australia would be less than here in many ways and I would not have to worry about health insurance and the such. I am not that well at times. My wife could get decent work via my parent's Company contacts. I really do not want to go but I will have to weigh things up as time goes by to what benefits us both. I don't do bars, I don't have giks or a mai noi. I am just a normal guy with a normal wife that is Thai.

[4MyEgo]

8 minutes ago, totally thaied up said:

The parents have got myself a Condo on the beach that I can move into at any time at the end of this year when it is finished being built. We have a house in Thailand and the Condo in Australia would be a haven for us if the dollar dropped too much. My living costs in Australia would be less than here in many ways and I would not have to worry about health insurance and the such. I am not that well at times. My wife could get decent work via my parent's Company contacts. I really do not want to go but I will have to weigh things up as time goes by to what benefits us both. I don't do bars, I don't have giks or a mai noi. I am just a normal guy with a normal wife that is Thai.

It sounds like a well thought out back up plan, i.e. you live in the condo free, you get Medicare looking after you and the wife gets paid work.

 

If I didn't have to use the money from the sale of my property to survive, I would choose Australia over Thailand any day of the week, that said, it serves its purpose, I am happy, my wife is happy, the kids are happy, but if I had a place paid off in Australia and didn't have to work, I know where I would be, free healthcare Vs 120,000 baht emergency and selective private cover here could be saved.

 

If your health is not that great, being close to family does help.

 

Either way, wish you well on your plans.

[David Walden]

On 12/9/2018 at 6:51 PM, Lacessit said:

If Centrelink finds out you are married to someone who is not an Australian citizen, your pension will be cut in half at minimum. They will treat you as a couple, give you the couple's pension, then say your wife does not qualify. Isn't Australian bureaucracy wonderful?

My personal bitch with Centrelink is they won't pay rent support to pensioners living overseas. They would only have to pay one-quarter to one-third of what they would have to pay if I was renting in Australia, but no. Skinflints.

Not quite correct.  Your AAP will be reduced to half the married rate.  If you both qualify you each get half the rate of a partner about $720 P/F.  If living in Thailand that means you will get about $720 Aus P/F instead of 858.00 P/F single.  Probably your wife does not qualify so she gets nothing unless she has resided in Aus for more than 10 years, 2 of which must be in Aus prior to applying at about now 66y/o.

[David Walden]

On 12/31/2018 at 4:09 PM, 4MyEgo said:

So if I understand what you are saying is;

 

Centrelink don't care how much income you earn from shares as long as your assets stay under the threshold of $768k for Pension peters, and as long as his assets stay under $768k he will receive $696/Fn, in other words the pension won't get reduced ?

 

The link attached show some thresholds, but still, miles ahead as a couple: http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/4/4/1/90

If your assets reach Aus$768,000 your AAP will stop.  From about $470K it will reduce $3 for every $1000 P/F of assets.  If you are $330,000 over the threshold at $3 per $1000 P/F deducted, do your sums and it will come out Zero!!...sorry.

[David Walden]

On 12/11/2018 at 12:26 PM, Pete1980 said:

You asked if she would be a dependant. So I assume the income you will be wanting to give her, is from the Australian taxpayer. You get extra welfare if you have dependants.

Very generous of you. 

From the way you worded your OP it sounded like you were marrying her for the sole purpose as regards to your pension.

Which is illegal.

 

Anyway, I doubt you will be better off, there are rules in place to stop that sort of nonsense. And rightly so. 

 

I didnt say your girl was a bargirl. But lets face it, most of the farangs I know in Thailand have met their Teerak in a bar, and often marry them, which quite often results in them qualifying for Australian welfare. It doesnt sit well with me that my taxes are used in that way.

So where do you meet a Thai girl if not in a bar in Thailand, maybe at the local barn dance?  Not many choices. If you do meet a nice girl in Thailand who is not a bar girl she is usually a friend of a bar girl or a retired bar girl.  Now that's the way. 

Edited January 21, 2019 by David Walden

[David Walden]

On 12/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, 4MyEgo said:

Wow, you sound very angry, feel the government and family law court system have let you down reading your earlier post.

 

Let me straighten a very important thing up for you and perhaps others, the OAP has nothing to do with people paying taxes, it was originally and still is designed to catch the unfortunate ones when they reach retirement age and cannot support themselves, hence the reason they have the assets test, i.e. you do not need to pay tax to receive the pension, you just have to qualify and have lived in Australia for 35 years to receive the OAP, so hopefully you will accept that. The pension is not your superannuation whereby your employer contributes the 9.5% of your wages to superannuation, but you would know that.

 

The family law court might lean towards the mother moreso than the father as it is usually the mother that will raise the children and be burdened with what most x husbands don't want to do be doing because they work and are not capable of raising the kids while working full time, been there, done that when I raised my daughter under a shared care agreement, i.e. 50/50 split, she was 18 months old at the time and I remember up until that I met my Thai wife about 7 years later, it was literally hell, moreso for my daughter as work was also in my household unfortunately.

 

If you worked hard and had a family split up and she got 70% plus, you have to get back on the horse that threw you off and stand on your own as no one else gives a rats a$$, I managed to keep going after divorcing at 40 and worked my ringer off till I was 55, now living the dream, no government pension, will never qualify for it, no hand outs, no inheritance, no nothing and no anger, life is too short, before you know it we will all be in the turf or BBQ'd, so just live within your means and smile, because I can guarantee you there are others far worse off, just have a look at the Thai pensioner, 600 baht a month, a meal a day for a pensioner, free hospital care etc etc, others like a bloke I know has cancer at 66 and is not going to make it and has had a pretty good life with a great wife and two adult sons, everything will be left to the kids, unfortunately we all think we are going to survive to enjoy the fruits that we sow, there are no guarantees mate, so fark the government and the family law system, just focus on you, the blue sky, the fresh air, enjoy the simple things in life, a young sheila, because holding onto the past will just eat you and make life hell as opposed to what it is supposed to be, you make what you make of it, your choice.

 

As for negative gearing, well if people are prepared to work hard, take risks and sacrifice, property can be a good investment over the long term, working and wages are to survive, you don't go forward unless you play the game and sacrifice, property was a good tool for my early retirement, but nothing comes easy oi ????

 

I recently completed a survey as to how Australian Aged Pensioners recipients (AAP) rated into all incomes of the 7 billion people in the world.  The AAP pensioner recipients came out a having an income in the top 8% in the world.  92% of the world's population have an income lower than an Australian Aged Pensioner.  I'm happy.

[Lacessit]

On 12/31/2018 at 4:00 PM, 4MyEgo said:

This is crazy $hit, how far up to speed are you on this, I have just started reading this deeming thing which is new to me.

 

So is the threshold the same as a single/couple home owner if you don't own a property, i.e. you have your money in shares, or is there a different threshold ?

 

Is there an amount/threshold of income you earn from shares before they start reducing your pension ? 

 

Naturally I have a wife who is 21 years my junior, and I am sure we will be assessed on a couples pension but get paid the single pension ?

You will be paid your half of the couple's pension if Centrelink knows you are married. Your wife, not being Australian, will get nothing. You will NOT get the single pension.

[Lacessit]

On 12/19/2018 at 6:06 PM, 4MyEgo said:

Wow, you sound very angry, feel the government and family law court system have let you down reading your earlier post.

 

Let me straighten a very important thing up for you and perhaps others, the OAP has nothing to do with people paying taxes, it was originally and still is designed to catch the unfortunate ones when they reach retirement age and cannot support themselves, hence the reason they have the assets test, i.e. you do not need to pay tax to receive the pension, you just have to qualify and have lived in Australia for 35 years to receive the OAP, so hopefully you will accept that. The pension is not your superannuation whereby your employer contributes the 9.5% of your wages to superannuation, but you would know that.

 

The family law court might lean towards the mother moreso than the father as it is usually the mother that will raise the children and be burdened with what most x husbands don't want to do be doing because they work and are not capable of raising the kids while working full time, been there, done that when I raised my daughter under a shared care agreement, i.e. 50/50 split, she was 18 months old at the time and I remember up until that I met my Thai wife about 7 years later, it was literally hell, moreso for my daughter as work was also in my household unfortunately.

 

If you worked hard and had a family split up and she got 70% plus, you have to get back on the horse that threw you off and stand on your own as no one else gives a rats a$$, I managed to keep going after divorcing at 40 and worked my ringer off till I was 55, now living the dream, no government pension, will never qualify for it, no hand outs, no inheritance, no nothing and no anger, life is too short, before you know it we will all be in the turf or BBQ'd, so just live within your means and smile, because I can guarantee you there are others far worse off, just have a look at the Thai pensioner, 600 baht a month, a meal a day for a pensioner, free hospital care etc etc, others like a bloke I know has cancer at 66 and is not going to make it and has had a pretty good life with a great wife and two adult sons, everything will be left to the kids, unfortunately we all think we are going to survive to enjoy the fruits that we sow, there are no guarantees mate, so fark the government and the family law system, just focus on you, the blue sky, the fresh air, enjoy the simple things in life, a young sheila, because holding onto the past will just eat you and make life hell as opposed to what it is supposed to be, you make what you make of it, your choice.

 

As for negative gearing, well if people are prepared to work hard, take risks and sacrifice, property can be a good investment over the long term, working and wages are to survive, you don't go forward unless you play the game and sacrifice, property was a good tool for my early retirement, but nothing comes easy oi ????

 

Right in some aspects, wrong in others. I've moved on. That doesn't stop me from being pissed off at the useless drones that call themselves public servants in Australia. I don't include the ones at the coal face such as the police, paramedics and health professionals who do a thankless job with the ferals.

Negative gearing is a sacrifice? BS. It's a tax rort which benefits the top 5% of the Australian population.

Why do you think many Federal Liberal MP's own multiple properties?

I have a Thai GF, and we are happy together. I would like to marry her. However, sacrificing $200 a fortnight for a meaningless piece of paper offends my sense of logic.

[David Walden]

On 12/30/2018 at 10:15 AM, 4MyEgo said:

I have a question for all you trendsetters out there that know "first hand" about the OAP.

 

Having done some research, and read countless replies to posts etc etc, I know you have to be in Australia at least 2 years prior to the OAP age to be able to have the OAP made portable, i.e. have it paid to your account with you being allowed to transfer it over here, naturally you have to advise Centrelink that you are going overseas for a while or indefinitely, Mr/Mrs Centrelink, I am going away overseas, don't know when I will be back, kiss my left one, etc, etc.

 

What the question I have is, about assets, I did read that if you are single/married and own a house there is a threshold. Well I don't own a house but have money invested within Australia and the actual question is, how much in $'s can I have invested to be just under the threshold to receive the OAP.

 

I am married to a Thai girl naturally and will be applying for the OAP if I decide to return down the track, i.e. if they haven't moved the goal posts and know they will reduce the OAP married pension down to about the single age pension because she is younger, so if I get the single OAP of about $400 or just under, I'm ok with that, but really want to know about the assets test, i.e. does it only apply to homeowners or does it also apply to those who don't own a home and have funds invested.

 

I also know that I would have to shift some $'s at least 5 years before I apply to either get under the threshold which I don't know how much that threshold is, if there actually is one for non homeowners, and if I am correct in saying I would get a single rate pension, even though I am married to a Thai who is also an Australian Citizen. 

 

Just keeping options open and any input would be appreciated.

All this information is very clear on Centrelink web site under "Aged Pensioners" easy to follow.  A short answer without picking up the exact threshold is $470,000 of assets and that is anything car, furniture a horse you name it.  As I said in my previous post above for every $1000 of assets over the threshold of $470K you lose $3 P/F of your pensioner.  So if you do the sums when your assets get to about $770,000 you will get nothing.  Up to $470,000 you will receive the full pension about $920 p/f and if living in Aus about $135 P/F extra as rent assistance.  It drops down to $858 after 6 weeks if living in Thailand and you don't get the rent assistance. If renting a place you will receive close to $1040 cash in the hand P/F.  Yes, 92% of people in the world are worse off than the little old Aussie Pensioner.               

                                     Whoopee!!

PS... I've written about a 200 post on this site about the Australian Aged Pension AAP, not the Old Age Pension (OAP that name stopped 30 years ago)? and have often been told I'm an idiot. But usually always correct.  Many of the questions and answers are just a repeat, but I don't mind, the same questions often appear over and over again.  I have had a lot of experience in matters relating to the AAP.  You can look at all my post by navigating to them by the search tools.  Mostly it's fun with some exceptions. I use my real name.

Edited January 21, 2019 by David Walden

[4MyEgo]

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Right in some aspects, wrong in others. I've moved on. That doesn't stop me from being pissed off at the useless drones that call themselves public servants in Australia. I don't include the ones at the coal face such as the police, paramedics and health professionals who do a thankless job with the ferals.

Negative gearing is a sacrifice? BS. It's a tax rort which benefits the top 5% of the Australian population.

Why do you think many Federal Liberal MP's own multiple properties?

I have a Thai GF, and we are happy together. I would like to marry her. However, sacrificing $200 a fortnight for a meaningless piece of paper offends my sense of logic.

I have been where you are coming from and totally understand what your on about.

 

With regard to negative gearing, let me put it mildly to you, working and making a salary in the 6 figures doesn't do much for you if you live in Sydney and have a young family, one working the other a full time mum/wife, that said without a vehicle, not the one you drive, I am talking investing in property or the stock market, you only survive on what you make, suffice to say negative gearing is their to give you that lift later in life if you make the sacrifice, yes there are tax benefits, but don't forget, they get you by the short and curlys when you sell, i.e. you pay capital gains tax, but like I said, making a salary doesn't cut it, you need an investment vehicle, either property or stock market, don't forget, you have to be willing to sacrifice as well and put up with all the BS changes when your in it.

[4MyEgo]

11 minutes ago, David Walden said:

All this information is very clear on Centrelink web site under "Aged Pensioners" easy to follow.  A short answer without picking up the exact threshold is $470,000 of assets and that is anything car, furniture a horse you name it.  As I said in my previous post above for every $1000 of assets over the threshold of $470K you lose $3 P/F of your pensioner.  So if you do the sums when your assets get to about $770,000 you will get nothing.  Up to $470,000 you will receive the full pension about $920 p/f and if living in Aus about $135 P/F extra as rent assistance.  It drops down to $858 after 6 weeks if living in Thailand and you don't get the rent assistance. If renting a place you will receive close to $1040 cash in the hand P/F.  Yes, 92% of people in the world are worse off than the little old Aussie Pensioner.               

                                     Whoopee!!

So what your saying in essence is that if I have $470,000 in the bank or less and am married to a Thai who has Australian Citizenship and has been in the country for 10 years, I will get the full pension, but halved because she is 21 years my junior and can find a job to support me, regardless if we returned to live in Thailand ? 

[Lacessit]

9 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

I have been where you are coming from and totally understand what your on about.

 

With regard to negative gearing, let me put it mildly to you, working and making a salary in the 6 figures doesn't do much for you if you live in Sydney and have a young family, one working the other a full time mum/wife, that said without a vehicle, not the one you drive, I am talking investing in property or the stock market, you only survive on what you make, suffice to say negative gearing is their to give you that lift later in life if you make the sacrifice, yes there are tax benefits, but don't forget, they get you by the short and curlys when you sell, i.e. you pay capital gains tax, but like I said, making a salary doesn't cut it, you need an investment vehicle, either property or stock market, don't forget, you have to be willing to sacrifice as well and put up with all the BS changes when your in it.

Er - you also get the icing on the cake of the capital gains tax discount.

I'm not arguing against investment, heaven forbid. My take on negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount is it distorts the housing market in Australia, and puts affordable housing beyond the reach of the younger generations. The think tanks in Oz agree with me, or I agree with them. The Liberals don't, surprise surprise.

The pollies like to waffle on about budget repair and the budget deficit. That would be achieved overnight by restricting negative gearing to new construction, and eliminating the capital gains tax discount on property. Grandfather existing arrangements if you want. You don't get that discount on share trading profits, so why should you get it on flipping property?

By now, you're probably thinking of me as a socialist. I don't see anything wrong with a level playing field.

[David Walden]

12 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

So what your saying in essence is that if I have $470,000 in the bank or less and am married to a Thai who has Australian Citizenship and has been in the country for 10 years, I will get the full pension, but halved because she is 21 years my junior and can find a job to support me, regardless if we returned to live in Thailand ? 

Now, this where it all gets sticky.  You have to be in Aus for 2 years to apply, presently about 66y/o. So you must live in Aus from 64 to 66y/o. You don't have to be an Aussie citizen you have to be resident for 10 years a least and that is from the time you are 16 y/o. (plenty of UK blokes who worked in Aus for 25 years get the Aus pension and a part UK pension and are still Brits). They are extending the age to receive the pension to 70 years (maybe only 67 so far authorized) it's being introduced over a 20 year period. So it's about 66y/o presently.  If you are married and your wife qualifies and has lived in Aus for 10 years she will get 10/26ths of the married rate or about $270 p/f but not until she is about 70 y/o. You will get the full married rate about $720/p/f if you have lived in Aus for 26+ years.  If living in Thailand you may be better off getting divorced, (sorry could be true and simpler, you'll get the full single rate $858 after 6 weeks absent from Aus).  However, if you are married the combined asset threshold goes up to near $600,000 if you have that much could be better for you.  Invest it maybe in super and receive $30,000 odd per year tax-free?? Capital preserved.  Your wife cannot get the pension until she is 70y/o or 67y/o that part still up in the air with politics, if she is 21 years younger then you perhaps it's not going to happen (sorry).  If the Govt changes at the next election the new govt will only raise the entitlement age to 67 y/o. (again maybe).  Plenty of blokes got married in Thailand and got divorced the next week when they found out that their pension dropped by 1/3rd.  Bloody awful I know but true.  I know a few personally.

[David Walden]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

I have been where you are coming from and totally understand what your on about.

 

With regard to negative gearing, let me put it mildly to you, working and making a salary in the 6 figures doesn't do much for you if you live in Sydney and have a young family, one working the other a full time mum/wife, that said without a vehicle, not the one you drive, I am talking investing in property or the stock market, you only survive on what you make, suffice to say negative gearing is their to give you that lift later in life if you make the sacrifice, yes there are tax benefits, but don't forget, they get you by the short and curlys when you sell, i.e. you pay capital gains tax, but like I said, making a salary doesn't cut it, you need an investment vehicle, either property or stock market, don't forget, you have to be willing to sacrifice as well and put up with all the BS changes when your in it.

I THOUGHT THIS SITE WAS ABOUT THE AUSTRALIAN AGE PENSION (AAP).  YOU ARE GETTING INTO SOME VERY HEAVY STUFF ABOUT AUSTRALIAN TAXATION MATTERS THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AAP.

[Lacessit]

7 hours ago, David Walden said:

I THOUGHT THIS SITE WAS ABOUT THE AUSTRALIAN AGE PENSION (AAP).  YOU ARE GETTING INTO SOME VERY HEAVY STUFF ABOUT AUSTRALIAN TAXATION MATTERS THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AAP.

Turn off your caps lock, please.

[LosLobo]

14 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

So what your saying in essence is that if I have $470,000 in the bank or less and am married to a Thai who has Australian Citizenship and has been in the country for 10 years, I will get the full pension, but halved because she is 21 years my junior and can find a job to support me, regardless if we returned to live in Thailand ? 

Money in the bank is a financial asset and will be deemed as income.

 

The threshold for the full pension under the income test for a single non-homeowner is still $161k not $470k.

[David Walden]

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Turn off your caps lock, please.

I know what I'm doing...thank you.

[Hoppyone]

On 12/9/2018 at 6:51 PM, Lacessit said:

If Centrelink finds out you are married to someone who is not an Australian citizen, your pension will be cut in half at minimum. They will treat you as a couple, give you the couple's pension, then say your wife does not qualify. Isn't Australian bureaucracy wonderful?

My personal bitch with Centrelink is they won't pay rent support to pensioners living overseas. They would only have to pay one-quarter to one-third of what they would have to pay if I was renting in Australia, but no. Skinflints.

They do pay rent relief while you overseas but once your out of country for 6 mths continuous your rent relief payment stops being paid to you on the day of being out of country for 6 mths,you could always fly home for a day to kick start it again but that depends if you can get a cheap enough fare to warrant returning

[Hoppyone]

On 12/9/2018 at 7:12 PM, Lacessit said:

It's not the same, because outside Australia one loses the pension supplements for phone and electricity.

You lose it after 6 weeks being  out of country 

[madmen]

I save my pension because I don't need it until the end of the financial year, when I transfer a lump sum. I don't know what relevance having your pension paid by the RBA has to the discussion. I know what I get and don't get too.
Perhaps the difference is I go back to Australia every six months for medical checks, whereas you state you are living permanently in Thailand.

When I changed to RBA I was declared a non resident. So I don't automatically get supplemental when I back to oz which every few years and no pension card until I reastsblish residancy

I'm dsp but don't think it makes a difference

[Hoppyone]

On 12/9/2018 at 7:50 PM, Lacessit said:

Disagree. Every time I land in Australia, my electricity, water and phone concessions are restored. I don't lose them again until six weeks have elapsed after I leave Australia. I don't have to re-apply for them.

Correct and you you don’t lose rent assistance until you been out of country for 6 months but is restored when you arrive back in Australia