Australian Aged Pension

[4MyEgo]

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

You have posted two links that are irrelevant. 

 

It would appear that you haven't caught up with the posts, that or you are insane.

 

Article 18 (legislation)

 

https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1989/36.html

 

Siam (not legislation), however relevant to the cause. 

 

https://www.siam-legal.com/thailand-law/relationship-between-the-new-thai-tax-law-retirement-visa-holders-and-long-term-residency/#:~:text=A Double Tax Agreement between,Article 18 of this DTA.

 

It's black and white, clear cut.

 

I am done, enough time wasted leading this donkey to the water, so to speak.

 

Edited February 4 by 4MyEgo

[4MyEgo]

20 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Yes, I am confused by the amount of conflicting information coming from the ATO.

Not only this instance but in general.

I suggest My Ego's response will be the definitive answer.

Though if aged pensions are now taxable in Thailand under its Amendment of the Revenue Code Act, the exercise will be moot.

 

8 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Good post. 

 

I agree with everything you have said.

 

I will now wait for the member to post that you are WRONG, and a loser also. 

 

What about his later post, you are so far behind, struggling to read everything except the latest posts, move along now, time to catch up to reality.

[Lacessit]

1 minute ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

It would appear that you haven't caught up with the posts, that or you are insane.

 

Article 18 (legislation)

 

https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1989/36.html

 

Siam (not legislation), however relevant) 

 

https://www.siam-legal.com/thailand-law/relationship-between-the-new-thai-tax-law-retirement-visa-holders-and-long-term-residency/#:~:text=A Double Tax Agreement between,Article 18 of this DTA.

 

It's black and white, clear cut.

KH would have to be living under a rock to miss multiple pronouncements on the DTA status of non-residents by the ATO.

 

Based on his current posts, I'm leaning to the second explanation.

 

 

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 5:36 AM, 4MyEgo said:

That is my strongest argument, "only source of income", i.e. as I have always maintained, if you have other sources of income, then that gets added on top and you are taxed appropriately.

 

Links have been posted previously showing the pension is deemed to be an income, and the pension is taxable.  Do you accept this a fact, yes or no?

 

On 2/3/2024 at 5:36 AM, 4MyEgo said:

If they do tax Age Pensioners as Non Residents, if they don't have any other source of income, then worse case scenario as I have mentioned in previous posts, it's $120 per week after SAPTO, which I believe isn't a great amount living here.

The amount has never been in dispute, it's a simple mathematical formula.  

 

All I have ever said, from day one, is expats should prepare for the loss of $120 per week because it could happen, then, there was a flood of absolutely ridiculous and funny comments as to why it can't / won't happen, followed by ridicule and abuse directed at me. 

 

At least you have crunched the numbers.  That's a start.That said, I would suggest there are many expats that need that $120 a week o maintain their current lifestyle here. 

 

Do you think it's something they should take seriously, or should they stick to the argument "it's only for guys like Paul Hogan" and "pensioners don't pay tax?"  

 

On 2/3/2024 at 5:36 AM, 4MyEgo said:

So you drop from 49,833 baht per month to 45,448 baht per month - (4,385 baht) per month, I suggest a single bloke can still live here on that amount.

Some may have commitments in which they rely on that $120 per week.  Everyone has their own individual circumstances. 

 

[4MyEgo]

3 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Seems likely I may be wrong, and I will be the first one to admit it.

I will give you an apology at the appropriate time if required.

But as I said "My Ego's response will be the definitive answer", so I will wait.

It would be foolish for me to again pre-empt a 'definitive' contextual response from the ATO.

 

But wait, there's more......

[4MyEgo]

3 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Links have been posted previously showing the pension is deemed to be an income, and the pension is taxable.  Do you accept this a fact, yes or no?

 

You really should turn on your notifications so that you could save all that time replying to every single post, the latter being the most relevant, but please, go ahead and knock yourself out, I did try to warn you, and also tell you that you were WRONG.....LoL

 

No doubt by the time you get to this post the water would have dried up.....LoL

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 5:39 AM, Will27 said:

It was really well articulated by LosLobo.

Yes, it was, yet, the member believe him to be WRONG and a loser also, despite putting forward nothing to back up his own interpretation and opinion. 

 

On 2/3/2024 at 5:39 AM, Will27 said:

The pension is taxable, that isn't in dispute.

It appears it's still in dispute. 

 

We;ll probably go around in a circle again where it's disputed that the pension in deemed "income" to then progress back to the circle of whether it taxable. 

 

On 2/3/2024 at 5:39 AM, Will27 said:

The only reason you don't pay tax on it if it's your only source of income,

is because of thresholds and tax offsets.

Correct.  A tax free threshold that does not exist for non residents for tax purposes, yet, a member is claiming it is still tax free for non residents for taxation purposes. 

 

Could you also be WRONG, and a loser? 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 5:52 AM, 4MyEgo said:

 

It's been a while since I did the calculations, maybe it's per fortnight, I will revisit it, thx.

Yes, you definitely need to do more research on the whole matter, not just the exchange rates. 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:27 AM, 4MyEgo said:

 

Correction, the per month reduced amount of the Age Pension would be 11.960 baht using 23 baht as the exchange rate for this calculation.

 

I previously used the fortnightly amount as the monthly amount, my bad, suffice to say the Age Pension for a single bloke, would still be reduced by $120 per week after the 32.5c in the $ was enforced, and SAPTO came off of that, meaning the pension amount would be around 38,000 baht per month, down from around 50,000 baht per month.

 

I would say that a single bloke could still live off of that here, rents are cheap, food is cheap and electricity isn't too bad, depending on where you live, that said, you wouldn't be running a car, a bike is doable.

 

Workings as follows:

$26,000 annual pension x 23 baht per $ = 598,000 baht -

a Non resident tax of 32.5c in the $ = $8,450 @ 23 baht - $2,230 SAPTO = $6,220 to the ATO.

 

Therefore $26,000 - $6,220 = $19,780 @ 23 baht = 454,940 baht/12 = 37,911 baht per month.

You were wrong on the maths.  It's ok.  It happens. 

 

Have you considered you may also be wrong, which in my opinion would doesn't make you a loser, but wrong never the less, about expat pensioners not having to pay non resident tax?  Just throwing it out there. 

[4MyEgo]

6 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Correct.  A tax free threshold that does not exist for non residents for tax purposes, yet, a member is claiming it is still tax free for non residents for taxation purposes. 

 

Could you also be WRONG, and a loser?

 

We have discovered that there is no tax for non residents, you are the only one who doesn't seem to have caught up, because you have to answer every post, I dare say you are 3 pages behind.

 

We also know who is WRONG and the loser.

 

On that not, I dare say I am done, enough is enough, and yes I do have a life that I must attend to as opposed to others.

[Nemises]

1 hour ago, KhunHeineken said:

If the tax law scares you so much, best to put me on your ignore list.

Better still why don’t you start a new thread about possible AU tax changes? Because what you are speculating about (and filling these pages with) may not happen for a long time, if at all. 

This thread was once helpful with facts and general information about the AU aged pension. Not any more. 

[4MyEgo]

1 minute ago, KhunHeineken said:

You were wrong on the maths.  It's ok.  It happens. 

 

Have you considered you may also be wrong, which in my opinion would doesn't make you a loser, but wrong never the less, about expat pensioners not having to pay non resident tax?  Just throwing it out there. 

 

The last laugh is on me m8ty, i.e. when you catch up.

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:33 AM, Lacessit said:

It seems to have escaped the notice of most posters the tax rate is reduced from 32.5 % to 30 % after July 1, 2024.

Do you have a link for this?

 

I know Albo has announced the changing of the resident tax brackets.  I did not read anything about a corresponding change to the non resident tax brackets. 

 

 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:36 AM, Will27 said:

That is quite the decrease if it happens.

Especially for people who have commitments.

 

It will also drop below 40 000 Baht per month for those

who use it as a monthly income for a marriage extension.

Why do you think I originally posted about it on here?

 

It will cause many to face major lifestyle and financial decisions.

 

On 2/3/2024 at 6:36 AM, Will27 said:

I also imagine a lot of expats will have partners.

 

Some people will have no option but to make it work if they want to live here.

Yes. 

 

It will be difficult for those with partners explaining it to the missus.  They will be thinking, "he's got a mia noi." 

 

On 2/3/2024 at 6:36 AM, Will27 said:

I'm still of the opinion it won't get passed.

Happy to here your argument on this. 

 

The Liberal government proposed the changes.  The Labor government haven't binned them and have taken them to the "Discussion Paper" stage, which ended September 2023.  Why would they do that if they have no interest in putting them before parliament?  

 

Where are the numbers going to come from to vote it down?  Labor will basically be presenting legislation proposed by Liberal.  It would be highly unlikely Liberal would vote down their own proposed changes.  

 

The current laws are 90 years old.  How much longer do you think they can remain relevant?   

[Lacessit]

7 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Do you have a link for this?

 

I know Albo has announced the changing of the resident tax brackets.  I did not read anything about a corresponding change to the non resident tax brackets. 

 

 

The non-resident tax brackets are irrelevant for anyone living in Thailand.

You may be right, there may be no change to non-resident tax brackets. It's a non-issue now.

Still refusing to admit you were WRONG, or apologizing. P!ss off.

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:36 AM, 4MyEgo said:

 

Agree, if the change ever happens.

Labor are running with the proposed changes, and it would find it highly unusual for Liberal to vote it down, given they proposed them. 

 

Labor took the proposed changes to the "Discussion Paper" stage, which show they are not dead in the water under Labor. 

 

Why do you think under the current Labor government, and any future Liberal government, the proposed changes will never be legislated? 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:39 AM, 4MyEgo said:

Agree with you and Lacessit.

You have contradicted yourself again.

 

You said in previous posts that a single guy living in Thailand should be fine losing $120 per week.  Now you say you agree that it's a considerable loss of income, and will pose problems for visa extensions. 

 

On 2/3/2024 at 6:39 AM, 4MyEgo said:

The above said, if it ever did pass, it definitely wouldn't be feasible for lots of expats to return for the 2 year prison term.

Interesting comment.

 

Expats under 65 years of age would be self funded, so that's the loss of 32.5% of their income.  I would suggest this demographic are looking at losing a lot more money than pensioners.  They very well may burn through cash getting to 63 and then have to go back for the 2 year prison sentence.  Of course, everyone's situation and financial capacity is different.  

 

On 2/3/2024 at 6:39 AM, 4MyEgo said:

Others might have to as they will be under the 40k baht amount required as you mentioned.

 

Fingers crossed, as I know HK prays every night it gets passed so he can say, see, I told you so, and if it doesn't, we can ask him what other scaremongering he has to offer us so that we don't get bored.

I am sure a friendly Thai visa "agent" can offer a service for those who will not be able to meet the marriage visa extension requirements on paper.  

 

You are another member taking it personally.  I don't know why.  From day one I have said I am self funded, so I'm set to lose 32.5% of my income. 

 

I posted the proposed changes on here as a heads up to pensioners because I knew the pension was deemed an income, and I knew the pension was taxable, and I knew the non resident tax brackets were from dollar zero. 

 

Then came the ridiculous comments as to why it can not / will not ever happen, followed by abuse, trolling, personal attacks etc etc when confronted by links I posted to back up my claims. 

 

I stand to lose financially, so why do you think I want to see the proposed changes passed?  I don't.  It's all a fantasy in your own head.  I was hoping Labor binned them and bought us all some time until the next Liberal government was elected, but Labor hasn't binned them and I have posted links showing this. 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:40 AM, Lacessit said:

I simply don't know. I do know discussion papers are a few streets away from actual implementation.

It was a "Consultation Paper" which is different to a "Discussion Paper."  Said it 10 times now. 

 

Labor put it out for submission in July 2023 which tells me Labor are running with the proposed changes. 

 

Submissions closed in September 2024, so I would suggest we are a few street closer to them being legislated than you think.

 

On 2/3/2024 at 6:40 AM, Lacessit said:

To quote Jack Reacher, hope for the best, plan for the worst.

Funny you post this quote because it was the main reason I posted the proposed changes why back then. 

 

All I ever suggested was pensioners consider the possibility of their pension being reduced by 32.5% in the future.  What followed has been quite the ride. 

 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:48 AM, Lacessit said:

IIRC the 2 year prison term only applies to those who are waiting to qualify for the OAP. It does not apply to retirees who are already receiving the pension.

The kicker for many will be the requirement to stay in Australia for 183 days to be considered as resident in Australia for tax purposes. Some will be able to do that, although most would want to be in Thailand.

Don't forget the possibility of the 45 days, and meeting two of the factor tests.  This could be an option for quite a few. 

 

They could plan their 6 weeks in Australia each year around medical check ups and possible procedures.  

 

That said, due to submissions from expats, the Labor government is looking at tweaking the 45 days.  Working expats were calling for 90 days, which is inline with other countries.  We'll have to wait and see what they come up with.   

[Lacessit]

2 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

It was a "Consultation Paper" which is different to a "Discussion Paper."  Said it 10 times now. 

 

Labor put it out for submission in July 2023 which tells me Labor are running with the proposed changes. 

 

Submissions closed in September 2024, so I would suggest we are a few street closer to them being legislated than you think.

 

Funny you post this quote because it was the main reason I posted the proposed changes why back then. 

 

All I ever suggested was pensioners consider the possibility of their pension being reduced by 32.5% in the future.  What followed has been quite the ride. 

 

If you want to split hairs over the difference between the two types of papers, go ahead. Find me someone else on this thread who gives a sh!t about what you post now.

You have lost all credibility, and obviously have the empathy of a scorpion. End of ride.

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:51 AM, Will27 said:

I've debated this with KH on numerous occasions.

 

If it does get passed, I'm of the opinion it will still be up to the ATO to collect tax so a lot of expats I imagine will just take their chances and don't lodge returns or keep ticking that they're residents.

 

HK is of the opinion that the non-resident tax will !00% be taken from the pension by Centrelink before it's allocated. 

 

I don't agree with that at all but I'm not going to go around in circles with him over it again.

Yes, it is debatable. 

 

I have stated many times that it is only my OPINION as to how I think the ATO will get their non resident tax from pensioners. 

 

After 183 days outside of Australia, I can't see Centerlink forwarding full pension payments to non residents for tax purposes, only to have the ATO try to chase people overseas and place airport warnings etc etc.

 

In my opinion, it will implemented in the same way the supplements are cut off after 6 weeks.  In the same way the cash for supplements is withheld it's my opinion the 32.5% will be withheld in the same manner. 

 

Once again, just my opinion, nut as I have said in the past, why would the payer (government) then be the collector at a later date?  They will just collect at the time of payment, similar to PAYG tax and people's employers.  .     

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:52 AM, Will27 said:

Some will just ignore it and continue on as usual and hope to fly under the radar I imagine.

Not sure how that strategy can work, given the government (immigration) know you are outside of Australia for 183 days, and Centerlink (government) is the department that pays pensions, and the ATO (government) want their tax revenue.  They have pensioners on toast.   

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:53 AM, 4MyEgo said:

 

Correct, for those who have been in Australia for 2 years leading up to pension age, they can have it made portable, those returning must return for the 2 years, not 183 days.

 

I say not 183 days because the legislation states that it cannot bend those rules so to speak.

I agree. 

 

I am not requesting you post a link to this.  I know it to be true. 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 6:57 AM, HighPriority said:

You may well be correct, this year… anyone who is not expecting it to happen at a future time has their head in the sand at best.

Just hope it happens after you shuffle off.

 

Yes, Labor are running with it, and if they didn't, it would only buy some time until the next Liberal government were elected, but we are not so lucky as Labor are picking up where Liberal left the proposed changes.  I have said why I think this to be the case in a previous post. 

Edited February 4 by KhunHeineken

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:10 AM, HighPriority said:

Sorry, I don’t think you have your head in the sand.

 

I personally think that at some point the Australian Government will want the money, will it be this year, next year or 2034, know one knows.

Long term (undefined) it will change and likely to a similar model that KH has proposed, hopefully it’s after we have shuffled off.

Im 57, still working in Oz and I doubt I’ll accumulate enough to not be on the AAP, such is life.

The current laws are 90 years old, full of loopholes, and no longer fit for purpose.  At some stage they were going to be "modernized" which is a term used to described the change.

 

The party couldn't last forever. 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:14 AM, Will27 said:

If they do bring in the proposed changes, there's nothing to stop the government saying it won't be applied to the OAP.

 

That wouldn't cost them much in the scheme of things and won't get negative publicity about hurting pensioners.

I agree.

 

It's a stroke of the keyboard for government to make an exemption for pensions.  Let's hope they do. 

 

I doubt they will add a tax free threshold to the non resident tax brackets because that gives every non resident a small "gift." so the most likely thing to do would be exempt pensions from non resident tax. 

 

I have said before in my opinion any loss of votes is nothing the government would care about because most expats don't make their way to an Embassy to vote at election time. 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:20 AM, Lacessit said:

IMO the ATO and Centrelink have the Robodebt debacle as a glaring example of what eventually happens to people who think targeting the poor and vulnerable is fair game.

Robotdebt is yesterday's news, and was perpetrated by a previous government.  

 

 I  disagree.  Robodebt will have nothing to do with bringing in these proposed changes.  

 

If the current Labor government is concerned about Robodebt, why are they continuing on with the proposed changes?   

[Olmate]

21 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Yes, Labor are running with it, and if they didn't, it would only buy some time until the next Liberal government were elected, but we are not so lucky as Labor are picking up where Liberal left the proposed changes.  I have said why I think this to be the case in a previous post. 

It may be an opportune time for you to visit your local ALP branch to run your theories by them, be prepared to be "told" tho.! 

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:32 AM, HighPriority said:

I’m not so sure the Australian Government really care about Australian pensioners who live and most importantly (to them) spend overseas.

I agree, and they don't vote anyway, so why would a political party care?

 

On 2/3/2024 at 7:32 AM, HighPriority said:

Welfare payments are really only popular with the recipients and amongst “lefties”, there’s a philosophy of it’s good for the economy because it almost all goes back into circulation but if the money is going overseas however…

I addressed this quite some time ago. 

 

Many members were under the believe that it would be financially detrimental for the government to force pensioners back to Australia for 6 months of the year.  The old, "we would cost them to much in Medicare if they did that" argument. 

 

Yes, another funny reason put forward to help people cope psychologically with the possibility the proposed change may be passed. 

 

I remember posting that, basically, Medicare is already paid for, and returning expats will not cost more, but just make the waiting lists longer.  The government is not going to employ more doctors, nurses etc, or build new hospitals, for returning expats.  I still stand by this as a reason the government couldn't care lease about the "Medicare" argument of expats. 

 

On the other hand, as you say, all that pension money going back into the Australia economy, and not another country's economy, returning back to government in the form of GST, taxes and excise, fees, levies, licenses, insurances, income tax due to more employment etc etc, far outweighs some longer Medicare waiting time.  

 

On 2/3/2024 at 7:32 AM, HighPriority said:

There isn’t going to be anyone protesting in the streets about reducing pensions to people living overseas and when the government of the day says “This budget measure will save X $Aud which will be focused on healthcare and policing for hard working Australian Citizens”

Some put forward a big pensioner "backlash" and pensioners being "up in arms."  Once again, whatever helped them psychologically to deal with the issue. 

 

Alas, Labor are pushing forward with the proposed changes, so it really is just a matter of time now.     

 

Edited February 4 by KhunHeineken

[KhunHeineken]

On 2/3/2024 at 7:37 AM, HighPriority said:

They’ll slap a coat of “rich wasp living a Christopher Skase lifestyle funded by Mr & Mrs Little Ozzie Battler” paint on you and throw you to the witch burning mob who will sing and dance while you bbq.

You are correct in that they wouldn’t do it to Australian Residents, but by this time they’ve figured out that you’re not.

100% agree, and well put, but I don't think the impact on pensioners will even make the media.  

 

It will "sold" to the Australian public as forcing wealthy tax dodgers to pay their fair share, to which the general Australian public will cheer in approval. 

 

The impact to expat pensioners will just be collateral damage of the policy.