On 9/9/2026 at 5:33 PM, AussieBob said:

Try talking to the Public Trustee in your State. They will give free advice about Wills and they charge no fees to set up your Wills - they only charge when the become Trustee of the Estate. They are far more reliable and honest than most Aussie lawyers, and if/when it comes to you passing IMO they will help the Thai wife a lot better than a local lawyer who will seek to charge her for anything that moves, of that they move (so to speak). Both my Thai wife and I have Wills with the QLD Public Trustee.

Never appoint the Public Trustee, the commission they charge and fees they charge are daylight robbery-they might be trustworthy but look at their fee structure.

NSW example QLD would be no different.

📉 First $100,000: Charged at 4.0% (minimum fee of $200).

📉 Next $100,000 ($100k–$200k): Charged at 3.5%.

📉 Next $100,000 ($200k–$300k): Charged at 2.5%.

1. 📉 Amounts exceeding $300 Charged at 1.5%
   

   For a simulated estate with $500,000 in gross assets managed by the NSW Trustee and Guardian:

   • First $100,000 @ 4% = $4,000

   • Next $100,000 @ 3.5% = $3,500

   • Next $100,000 @ 2.5% = $2,500

   • Remaining $200,000 @ 1.5% = $3,000

   • Total Establishment Fee: $13,000 (plus ongoing annual asset management fees of 0.7% if administration is prolonged)
     $500,000 Estate Solicitor indicatively $3,557.95 TAG $13,000.00 TAG is $9,442 costlier
     
     TAG are thieves-they are Government entities irrespective of what state they are based in.
     Have a nice day!
     

     Gross Asset Value of Estate	Private Solicitor Probate Fee (Inc. GST)	NSW Trustee & Guardian Fee	Cost Difference
     $100,000	~$1,511.00	$4,000.00	TAG is $2,489 costlier
     $250,000	~$2,328.70	$8,750.00	TAG is $6,421 costlier
     $500,000	$3,557.95	$13,000.00	TAG is $9,442 costlier
     $1,000,000	~$6,016.45	$20,500.00	TAG is $14,483 costlier

   Gross Asset Value of Estate	Private Solicitor Probate Fee (Inc. GST)	NSW Trustee & Guardian Fee	Cost Difference
   $100,000	~$1,511.00	$4,000.00	TAG is $2,489 costlier
   $250,000	~$2,328.70	$8,750.00	TAG is $6,421 costlier
   $500,000	$3,557.95	$13,000.00	TAG is $9,442 costlier
   $1,000,000	~$6,016.45	$20,500.00	TAG is $14,483 costlier

Edited Tuesday at 11:33 AM5 days by Sid Bream

On 9/9/2026 at 8:46 PM, KhunHeineken said:

The changes were proposed by a former Liberal government, and when Labor took power they progressed the proposed changes into the consultation stage. Labor did not bin them. (link previous posted)

This means, the proposed changes have the support of both major parties, so it's only a matter of time before they are put before parliament and passed into legislation.

Is this lady wrong? Is it AI? Is it fake news? Is she a scammer?

Wrong.

30% tax from $0 to $135,000 from income from Australia, and the aged pension is deemed an income, and is taxable.

Which will be redundant when the proposed changes are passed.

183 days inside Australia, resident for tax purposes. 183 days outside Australia, non resident for tax purposes.

Note, there are no exemptions in the proposed changes for the aged pension.

Foreign resident tax rates 2020 to 2026

Foreign resident tax rates for 2019–20 to 2025–26.

Foreign resident tax rates 2025–26

Taxable income	Tax on this income
0 – $135,000	30c for each $1
$135,001 – $190,000	$40,500 plus 37c for each $1 over $135,000
$190,001 and over	$60,850 plus 45c for each $1 over $190,000

The 183 day rule is not black and white I hate to say. You should check with a higher level accountant, there is a multi factor rule used by the ATO, but I am sure you know that given your posts on the subject.

1 hour ago, Sid Bream said:

The 183 day rule is not black and white I hate to say. You should check with a higher level accountant, there is a multi factor rule used by the ATO, but I am sure you know that given your posts on the subject.

Currently, the 90 year old residency laws are based around where one is domiciled, and they have more holes in them than Swiss cheese.

For decades, those who were non residents for tax purposes were able to remain residents, and those who were residents were able to be non residents. This is due to the ATO losing many cases in court of the years, because they couldn't prove one's "intention" of returning, thus, it was inevitable the laws had to be modernized. Along the way, these loopholes cost the Australian government a lot of lost revenue.

The proposed changes do away with where one is domiciled and move towards a physical presence and time based model, similar to Thailand.

The bright line test is 183 days.

Basically, inside Australia for 183 day equals resident. Outside Australia for 183 days equals non resident.

Inside Australia between 45 days and 183 days means they move to four factor tests in which the individual must meet two out of the four to remain a resident. One is very easy, that is, right to reside, which you get from your Aussie passport.

Immigrate data bases prove beyond doubt time in and out of Australia.

A Liberal government proposed the laws, and the Labor government progressed the laws to the consultation stage, so they have not, and most probably will not be scrapped by either major party.

The current laws are 90 years old. The party couldn't last forever.

Many members seem to think the laws will never be passed, yet Thailand has the same tax residency model, so do many other countries. It's just a matter of time before Australia does also.

5 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Currently, the 90 year old residency laws are based around where one is domiciled, and they have more holes in them than Swiss cheese.

For decades, those who were non residents for tax purposes were able to remain residents, and those who were residents were able to be non residents. This is due to the ATO losing many cases in court of the years, because they couldn't prove one's "intention" of returning, thus, it was inevitable the laws had to be modernized. Along the way, these loopholes cost the Australian government a lot of lost revenue.

The proposed changes do away with where one is domiciled and move towards a physical presence and time based model, similar to Thailand.

The bright line test is 183 days.

Basically, inside Australia for 183 day equals resident. Outside Australia for 183 days equals non resident.

Inside Australia between 45 days and 183 days means they move to four factor tests in which the individual must meet two out of the four to remain a resident. One is very easy, that is, right to reside, which you get from your Aussie passport.

Immigrate data bases prove beyond doubt time in and out of Australia.

A Liberal government proposed the laws, and the Labor government progressed the laws to the consultation stage, so they have not, and most probably will not be scrapped by either major party.

The current laws are 90 years old. The party couldn't last forever.

Many members seem to think the laws will never be passed, yet Thailand has the same tax residency model, so do many other countries. It's just a matter of time before Australia does also.

If I was in Thailand for 210 days hypothetically and flew back to Australia, as I have a house and my main bank accounts are there, the ATO are going to look at, where my main bank accounts are held, where is my super held etc etc. People do go for holidays for one year or more, as long as they are still paying their taxes in Aust. their main bank accts are there etc they will be considered as a resident for tax purposes. It's not cut and dried, this is a common misconception.

10 hours ago, Sid Bream said:

If I was in Thailand for 210 days hypothetically and flew back to Australia, as I have a house and my main bank accounts are there, the ATO are going to look at, where my main bank accounts are held, where is my super held etc etc. People do go for holidays for one year or more, as long as they are still paying their taxes in Aust. their main bank accts are there etc they will be considered as a resident for tax purposes. It's not cut and dried, this is a common misconception.

You are correct. This is the current system, under the current 90 year old laws, with all its loopholes. The laws are based around where one is domiciled.

I've been living in Thailand, full time, for several years, and generate an income out of Australia, yet I've never paid a cent in non resident tax. I have some Aussie friends here in the same position. This also extends to aged pensioners living overseas. It is "the party" that will come to an end. We all should have already been paying non resident tax.

The future is, if one is outside of Australia for 183 days, they will be a non resident for tax purposes. It will not matter if you maintain a house in Australia, a car, bank accounts, utility bills, club memberships, and ties with family and friends etc etc. These will mean nothing when the new laws are passed. Even if one is outside Australia for a holiday longer than 6 months, you will be up for non resident tax that year.

The way I see it, for self funded people like myself, there are a couple of options. One is, spend 6 weeks (45) days in Australia a year, meeting two of the four factor tests, which is easy, as I still have a house there. Two, sell every income generating asset I own, and put the cash in the bank and declare myself a non resident and pay a flat 10% tax on the interest.

For aged pensioners, it's 6 weeks in Australia a year, meeting two of the four factor tests, or have 30% of their aged pension withheld each fortnight.

This guy is a qualified Aussie accountant, and I believe he's based in Bangkok. He explains it quite well, similarly to the lady in the previous video I posted.

Note it's pre Thailand tax, and the non resident tax brackets have changed a little.

Once again, is he lying? Is it fake news? Is he wrong? Is he inaccurate? Is he scaremongering? Is he trying to drum up business?

On 9/22/2026 at 9:31 PM, Sid Bream said:

Never appoint the Public Trustee, the commission they charge and fees they charge are daylight robbery-they might be trustworthy but look at their fee structure.

NSW example QLD would be no different.

📉 First $100,000: Charged at 4.0% (minimum fee of $200).

📉 Next $100,000 ($100k–$200k): Charged at 3.5%.

📉 Next $100,000 ($200k–$300k): Charged at 2.5%.

1. 📉 Amounts exceeding $300 Charged at 1.5%
   

   For a simulated estate with $500,000 in gross assets managed by the NSW Trustee and Guardian:

   • First $100,000 @ 4% = $4,000

   • Next $100,000 @ 3.5% = $3,500

   • Next $100,000 @ 2.5% = $2,500

   • Remaining $200,000 @ 1.5% = $3,000

   • Total Establishment Fee: $13,000 (plus ongoing annual asset management fees of 0.7% if administration is prolonged)
     $500,000 Estate Solicitor indicatively $3,557.95 TAG $13,000.00 TAG is $9,442 costlier
     
     TAG are thieves-they are Government entities irrespective of what state they are based in.
     Have a nice day!
     

     Advertisement

     Gross Asset Value of Estate	Private Solicitor Probate Fee (Inc. GST)	NSW Trustee & Guardian Fee	Cost Difference
     $100,000	~$1,511.00	$4,000.00	TAG is $2,489 costlier
     $250,000	~$2,328.70	$8,750.00	TAG is $6,421 costlier
     $500,000	$3,557.95	$13,000.00	TAG is $9,442 costlier
     $1,000,000	~$6,016.45	$20,500.00	TAG is $14,483 costlier

   Gross Asset Value of Estate	Private Solicitor Probate Fee (Inc. GST)	NSW Trustee & Guardian Fee	Cost Difference
   $100,000	~$1,511.00	$4,000.00	TAG is $2,489 costlier
   $250,000	~$2,328.70	$8,750.00	TAG is $6,421 costlier
   $500,000	$3,557.95	$13,000.00	TAG is $9,442 costlier
   $1,000,000	~$6,016.45	$20,500.00	TAG is $14,483 costlier

Youare vastly over-estimating the costs of the public trustee, and vastly under-estimating the costs of a private lawyer. Have a great day.

On 9/22/2026 at 12:19 PM, Lacessit said:

I have no problem with being called an ATM. We joke about it.

Compare the transaction cost of aged care in Australia with that of Thailand. It's a no-brainer.

Who is going to take care of you when you are in a wheelchair? It won't be a one-night stand.

For me it will be my Thai wife - here in Aust. Both my parents went through it all here - the costs were way lower than what they charge in Thai hospices/places. Now USA or a European country - probabaly a lot lot more than Thailand.

My Wife's middle name is 'Trouble' and mine is 'The Bank' 😁 Win/Win.

2 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Both my parents went through it all here - the costs were way lower than what they charge in Thai hospices/places.

That's interesting.

Is it because of government subsidies?

If someone has been living outside of Australia for decades, can they just fly back and get straight onto subsidized aged care?