Australian Aged Pension

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

So what happens to your predictions if a pensioner says to the Australian government - I am resident in Thailand, and pay tax on my income to the Thai authorities. Therefore, under a double taxation agreement, you cannot tax me.

 

Personally, I think the returns from pensioners are too small, and would have a cost politically. It's probably why there is no rush to implement the proposals. Much juicier and more popular targets around.

 

It's not almost an impossibility you will stop posting the same repetitive material on this thread. It is.

 

Another view could be:  I don't pay tax on my old age pension (it's my only income), therefore under the double tax agreement the the tax authorities must follow the same principle and not tax my pension when it arrives in LOS. 

[Lacessit]

1 minute ago, scorecard said:

 

Another view could be:  I don't pay tax on my old age pension (it's my only income), therefore under the double tax agreement the the tax authorities must follow the same principle and not tax my pension when it arrives in LOS. 

At present, the tax situation in Thailand is as clear as mud. No one knows.

IMO it's a good idea to set up proof one is drawing on savings, and not income when transferring funds into Thailand. That's something I have already done.

[KhunHeineken]

41 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Another view could be:  I don't pay tax on my old age pension (it's my only income), therefore under the double tax agreement the the tax authorities must follow the same principle and not tax my pension when it arrives in LOS. 

Aren't you on a vet's pension?

 

[KhunHeineken]

37 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

At present, the tax situation in Thailand is as clear as mud. No one knows.

IMO it's a good idea to set up proof one is drawing on savings, and not income when transferring funds into Thailand. That's something I have already done.

How will that get around you being overseas for 183 days, thus deemed a non resident for tax purposes, and your pension / part pension? 

 

Australian immigration records have you on toast.  That's the big tax.   

 

You would need a major restructuring of your finances, or implement the strategy you mentioned and go back to Australia for 6 weeks / 3 months, if it's actually worth it for you to do so. 

[Lacessit]

33 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

How will that get around you being overseas for 183 days, thus deemed a non resident for tax purposes, and your pension / part pension? 

 

Australian immigration records have you on toast.  That's the big tax.   

 

You would need a major restructuring of your finances, or implement the strategy you mentioned and go back to Australia for 6 weeks / 3 months, if it's actually worth it for you to do so. 

Where in my post did I talk about anything to do with Australia? Are you losing the plot?

[KhunHeineken]

20 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Where in my post did I talk about anything to do with Australia? Are you losing the plot?

The main problem for many will be non resident tax rates in Australia. 

 

Options are there to move to Vietnam, Cambodia, Bali, Malaysia etc etc, BUT, the non resident tax in Australia will remain, no matter what country one may move to. 

 

You need to look past Thailand on this one, or, are you losing the plot? 

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, KhunHeineken said:

The main problem for many will be non resident tax rates in Australia. 

 

Options are there to move to Vietnam, Cambodia, Bali, Malaysia etc etc, BUT, the non resident tax in Australia will remain, no matter what country one may move to. 

 

You need to look past Thailand on this one, or, are you losing the plot? 

I think you are, if you are putting forward Vietnam ( no long term visa ) Malaysia ( too expensive ) or Cambodia ( a sh!thole ) as options.

 

Non-resident tax is a fact, its application under the current systems of definition is not, irrespective of how much you may wish it to be so.

[KhunHeineken]

15 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I think you are, if you are putting forward Vietnam ( no long term visa ) Malaysia ( too expensive ) or Cambodia ( a sh!thole ) as options.

 

Non-resident tax is a fact, its application under the current systems of definition is not, irrespective of how much you may wish it to be so.

You are correct, Vietnam does not offer an official retirement visa, but I do have some friends living there doing visa runs every 3 months.  Unlike Thailand, there is no problem with back to back tourist visas.  The married guys get a great deal.  They get a 3 year Temporary Resident Card for a reasonable one off fee. 

 

Yes, non resident tax brackets are a fact.  There is no tax free threshold in the non resident tax brackets.  I agree, the application of the current 90 years old tax residency laws are a joke. 

 

The current legislation has so many loopholes in it that it is no longer fit for purpose.  Indeed, I have benefited from these loopholes, as have many other, over decades.  Thus, the proposed changes, which appear to go the other way and have absolutely no loopholes to dispute as the legislation is a physical presence and time based model, backed up by immigration records which can not be refuted.  

 

Should 32.5% of pensions be withheld to non resident pensioners in the future, it may simply come down to affordability.  Some neighboring countries are more affordable than Thailand. 

 

We saw in the 2008 GFC many expats from all around the world retreat to the villages up north, due to affordability.  This may be an option for Aussie retirees with a diminished pension. 

 

Still, in my opinion, the countries I mentioned, despite their faults, are better then moving back to Australia. 

[4MyEgo]

On 1/23/2024 at 6:17 PM, Will27 said:

The key word there is may.

 

That is your interpretation.

I've told you previously, I don't agree with it.

I think they're talking about residents, not non-residents.

 

If you are a non-resident for taxation, you pay from the first dollar.

 

This is from the ATO help desk.

It does mention offsets and SAPTO but still says you have to pay tax on the balance.

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s0000002ngF/p00172380

 

I totally disagree with your opinion, respectfully.

 

You see, the age pension if your only source of income, is not taxable as a resident, or a non resident.

 

The above said, if you have any other source of income/s, whether you are a resident or a non resident, then you will pay tax on your age pension.

 

Forget about threshold and no thresholds, we know in Australia, residents get the $18,200 threshold and non residents get ZERO and are taxed at 32.5c in the $ from the word get go.

 

Do you honestly think the ATO would turn a blind eye if it were any different, it would be too easy to take down all of those sitting ducks, but they know themselves, well some do, that if the age pension is your only source of income, AGAIN, regardless if your a resident or a non resident, then your age pension is not taxable, add another source of income on it and it's a game changer.

 

It's really simple for those that believe that the above makes sense and not so simple for those that want to believe anything other than what I am saying.

 

Each to their own.

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 5:38 PM, KhunHeineken said:

"Everything on the table" in relation to changes to taxation.  I'd say the proposed changes to tax residency legislation would be on the table as well.   

 

Regardless of what you think, this won't affect age pensioners, WHY, because the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, in or out, i.e. resident or non resident.

 

The ONLY time it will become taxable income is when you have an additional source of income to the age pension, so can we stop scaremongering all those age pensioners and future age pensioners out there, and Bob from the ATO should get a swift kick up the rear for posting misinformation as far as I am concerned. 

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 5:48 PM, KhunHeineken said:

As mentioned in a previous post, we saw how quick the changes to the Stage 3 tax cuts happened.  The proposed changes to tax residency will have no where near the same media scrutiny and will be easily passed in by Labor because it's the opposition party that proposed them.   

 

Like I said, it won't make any difference to age pensioners, in or out of Australia, read my post above as to WHY, and you can quote me on that when nothing transpires.

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 5:53 PM, KhunHeineken said:

Where is the exemption for pensioners in the proposed changes?  Where is a new tax free threshold for non resident tax brackets in the proposed changes so pensions are not taxed? 

 

As I have said before, pensioners may very well be collateral damage, and given they don't vote at election time, where's the political damage in lost votes if they do have 32.5% of their pension withheld in non resident tax? 

 

Once again, your clutching at straws with the "what if's".

 

Let it go, there are a lot of "what if's" in life, just live.......

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 6:13 PM, KhunHeineken said:

One can prove their intention to return by maintaining a property, a vehicle, utility bills, club memberships, family ties etc etc etc etc. 

 

If you have the above, you can retain your residency, of course, however, this is about age pensions, and if you have the above, you will have Buckley's getting the pension.

 

As for not paying taxes as a non resident, or not, then that is something you and your account can work out and handle any changes in the legislation when and if it does change.

 

Nothing to do with age pensioners, i.e. if the legislation changes, e.g. age pensions are non taxable if your "only source of income".

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 6:21 PM, KhunHeineken said:

I am a resident for tax purposes, due to maintaining a domicile, and should I ever be questioned, I will say I am maintaining that domicile because I have every intention of returning to Australia to live. 

 

If you maintain a property, you have a good case, however, I believe you didn't mention this in an earlier post.

[4MyEgo]

On 2/1/2024 at 6:37 PM, KhunHeineken said:

Do tell. 

 

Paul Hogan tried that, and look what happened to him. 

 

Buying and selling shares on the ASX for one, ZERO capital gains tax.

 

I suppose I'm making that up too.

[KhunHeineken]

45 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Regardless of what you think, this won't affect age pensioners, WHY, because the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, in or out, i.e. resident or non resident.

 

The ONLY time it will become taxable income is when you have an additional source of income to the age pension, so can we stop scaremongering all those age pensioners and future age pensioners out there, and Bob from the ATO should get a swift kick up the rear for posting misinformation as far as I am concerned. 

This is what you posted in another thread a little while ago.

 

"This whole age pension tax thing living overseas is a huge balls up and confusing, but once you have a read of this, your not going to like it.

 

It's a real eye opener.

 

https://www.smsfmate.com.au/how-long-can-australian-pensioners-stay-overseas-without-losing-their-pension/#:~:text=The Age Pension and Taxation,-As an age&text=The pension is considered taxable,deduct tax from your payments.

 

And then there is SAPTO

 

https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/income-deductions-offsets-and-records/tax-offsets/seniors-and-pensioners-tax-offset/#Incomelimits

 

From my reading, they can take $0.32.5c in every $, no threshold as you are deemed a non resident, then they credit you SAPTO, $2,230, so this means you can lose a big chunk of your pension.

 

You don't have to be a resident to claim SAPTO, but you have to qualify for it to get it, it's not automatic.

 

Then if your like me, and have just enough assets to show you qualify, you get a double wammy, they apply a Deeming Rate of 2.5% on that, but allow you an income of $204 per fortnight.

 

At then end of the day in my case it works at at half the pension, so not worth it, others might want to do there calculations as well to see if it's worth it.

 

Maybe I can get rid of some of these assets in the next 4 years without them knowing ? 

 

At then end of the day, we can all play dumb and when the time comes, ah yeh, $50 per fortnight should be doable."

 

 

Now, either you are trolling in one, or both threads, or you are contradicting yourself.  Which one is it?

[KhunHeineken]

53 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

You see, the age pension if your only source of income, is not taxable as a resident, or a non resident.

You have posted before that a link proving this "does not exist." 

 

I guess that just leaves your opinion and interpretation, both are not worth much without a link to back up your claim. 

[KhunHeineken]

51 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Regardless of what you think, this won't affect age pensioners, WHY, because the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, in or out, i.e. resident or non resident

Can you post a link confirming this?

 

You say "Blake" from the ATO is wrong, but I have also posted another link from the ATO Community website from another ATO staff member saying the same thing as Blake, that's on top of Youtube clips and many other links.

 

Do you really expect members to believe those sources are all wrong, and you are right, without producing any evidence to back up your claim?   

 

 

[4MyEgo]

28 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Now, either you are trolling in one, or both threads, or you are contradicting yourself.  Which one is it?

 

Unlike some, I do continue with my research and can change my opinion, that said, I was providing you with other examples, e.g. worst case scenarios.

 

My latest research shows me that as I mentioned above, the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, regardless of residency status.

 

I am now done with this topic, nothing to prove.

[KhunHeineken]

43 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

If you maintain a property, you have a good case, however, I believe you didn't mention this in an earlier post.

If you maintain a "domicile" (property) you will have no case whatsoever when the proposed are passed.  It will no longer be relevant.  

 

45 days inside Australia and meet two of the criteria in the Factor Test = resident for tax purposes.

 

183 days outside Australia = non resident for tax purposes. 

 

The above will be all it comes down to, and I would suggest, most expat retirees will be outside of Australia for 183 days.  

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Once again, your clutching at straws with the "what if's".

 

Let it go, there are a lot of "what if's" in life, just live.......

Absolutely ZERO "what if's" in the proposed changes. 

 

The 90 year old laws that have a lot of loopholes will be replaced by a physical presence and time model, backed up by immigration records, which can not be refuted. 

 

You are still trying to cherry pick 90 year old legislation that will soon be redundant and replaced.  

 

The best pensioners can hope for is either an exemption, or a tax free threshold added to the non resident tax brackets.

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

If you have the above, you can retain your residency, of course, however, this is about age pensions, and if you have the above, you will have Buckley's getting the pension.

Wrong yet again. 

 

It still remains my principle place of residence.  I am just on a long holiday. 

 

(for the record, which I have stated in the past, I am not on the aged pension, but my point still stands)

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

As for not paying taxes as a non resident, or not, then that is something you and your account can work out and handle any changes in the legislation when and if it does change.

How do YOU propose my accountant gets around me being outside of Australia for 183 days?

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Nothing to do with age pensioners, i.e. if the legislation changes, e.g. age pensions are non taxable if your "only source of income".

Rubbish. 

 

Post a link or stop posting misinformation. 

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

If you maintain a property, you have a good case, however, I believe you didn't mention this in an earlier post.

Mentioned it many times since I raised this single most important issue facing expat pensioners in decades. 

[KhunHeineken]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Buying and selling shares on the ASX for one, ZERO capital gains tax.

 

I suppose I'm making that up too.

If one was doing that, to a decent degree, they would be on a part pension, not an aged pension.  So, you must be talking about fully franked shares.  If so, you have an interesting point, but how does this help those on a full aged pension, which is this forum title?

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

If you have the above, you can retain your residency, of course, however, this is about age pensions, and if you have the above, you will have Buckley's getting the pension.

 

As for not paying taxes as a non resident, or not, then that is something you and your account can work out and handle any changes in the legislation when and if it does change.

 

Nothing to do with age pensioners, i.e. if the legislation changes, e.g. age pensions are non taxable if your "only source of income".

The family home is exempted from the assets test for the age pension, although it is factored into the amount of pension a retiree gets.

[Will27]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

I totally disagree with your opinion, respectfully.

 

You see, the age pension if your only source of income, is not taxable as a resident, or a non resident.

 

The above said, if you have any other source of income/s, whether you are a resident or a non resident, then you will pay tax on your age pension.

 

Forget about threshold and no thresholds, we know in Australia, residents get the $18,200 threshold and non residents get ZERO and are taxed at 32.5c in the $ from the word get go.

 

Do you honestly think the ATO would turn a blind eye if it were any different, it would be too easy to take down all of those sitting ducks, but they know themselves, well some do, that if the age pension is your only source of income, AGAIN, regardless if your a resident or a non resident, then your age pension is not taxable, add another source of income on it and it's a game changer.

 

It's really simple for those that believe that the above makes sense and not so simple for those that want to believe anything other than what I am saying.

 

Each to their own.

This is where we will have to agree to disagree.

I can find nowhere it says you don't have to pay tax on your pension if you're a non-resident.

 

Only that your pension is not taxable if it's your only source of income.

Again, I'm pretty sure they're referring to residents.

 

In the actual example I gave you, the ATO says you will pay non-resident tax.

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s0000002ngF/p00172380

 

The ATO is turning a blind eye as the majority of expats declare they're residents for tax purposes.

 

It's not in their or the public interest to try and target low income pensioners IMO.

This has been discussed before.

 

OAP are right at the bottom of the totem pole.

[KhunHeineken]

21 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Unlike some, I do continue with my research and can change my opinion, that said, I was providing you with other examples, e.g. worst case scenarios.

Sounds like a double back flip to me. 

 

21 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

My latest research shows me that as I mentioned above, the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, regardless of residency status.

Link please. 

 

22 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

I am now done with this topic, nothing to prove.

Well, you could start with trying to post some links to "prove" you opinion, interpretation, theory etc. 

 

You claim to have done some "research" so it should be easy to post some of that "research" so we can all see how you came to your conclusion. 

[Will27]

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

Regardless of what you think, this won't affect age pensioners, WHY, because the age pension is not taxable if it is your only source of income, in or out, i.e. resident or non resident.

 

The ONLY time it will become taxable income is when you have an additional source of income to the age pension, so can we stop scaremongering all those age pensioners and future age pensioners out there, and Bob from the ATO should get a swift kick up the rear for posting misinformation as far as I am concerned. 

So you're pretty much saying you're correct on this matter and the ATO are incorrect?

Interesting.

[Will27]

22 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

If you maintain a "domicile" (property) you will have no case whatsoever when the proposed are passed.  It will no longer be relevant.  

 

45 days inside Australia and meet two of the criteria in the Factor Test = resident for tax purposes.

 

183 days outside Australia = non resident for tax purposes. 

 

The above will be all it comes down to, and I would suggest, most expat retirees will be outside of Australia for 183 days.  

IMO, even if the new laws aren't passed, people who pretty much live in Thailand fulltime are living in Laa Laa land if they think having a residential address or a property in Australia would make them a resident.

 

Under audit, how could anyone make a case, if for example they've lived in Thailand for 10 years and haven't even visited back home?

[KhunHeineken]

2 minutes ago, Will27 said:

I can find nowhere it says you don't have to pay tax on your pension if you're a non-resident.

The member has posted a link to such "does not exist" yet, he is to be believed that is the case.  Funny that. 

 

4 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Only that your pension is not taxable if it's your only source of income.

Again, I'm pretty sure they're referring to residents.

The pension is taxable.  (links previously provided) 

 

It's the tax free threshold that basically sees the pension not taxed.  There is no tax free threshold for non residents, yet, the member believes regardless of tax free thresholdes, and geographic location, the pension is not taxable.  Yet, no links provided by the member to back up the claim.

 

7 minutes ago, Will27 said:

In the actual example I gave you, the ATO says you will pay non-resident tax.

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s0000002ngF/p00172380

 

The ATO is turning a blind eye as the majority of expats declare they're residents for tax purposes.

 

According to the member, Blake from the ATO is wrong, yet, no link provided showing where Blake is wrong.