Australian Aged Pension

[KhunHeineken]

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Thanks for that, but I wouldn't know how to address that one, all I know is in Australia, you are either a tax resident of Australia or a tax resident of Thailand, all I know is in Australia, you are either a tax resident of Australia or a tax resident of Thailand, and if you are a tax resident of Thailand by choice, you would be deemed a Non Resident by Australia and you will pay tax on the income you earn with no threshold applicable, e.g. $32.5c in every $ earned as a non resident.

Wrong.

 

You can be a tax resident of both. 

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

It gets confusing, but if you are deemed a resident by Thailand because you stay in Thailand for 180 days, or more, you can still be a resident of Australia for tax purposes, so in part you are technically correct I suppose.

 

You just said, "all I know is in Australia, you are either a tax resident of Australia or a tax resident of Thailand." 

 

You have contradicted yourself again. 

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Australians are taxable on their worldwide income, but can elect to remain residents of Australia for tax purposes, subject to fulfilling certain criteria's. 

No.  One can't "elect" to be a tax resident  One either meets the criteria, or they don't, and that criteria will soon change to a physical presence and time based model, making the criteria even more clear cut.

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Now with Thailand having a DTA with Australia, it allows Thailand to tax Australians for example as residents living in Thailand for more that 180 days, as they would be deemed by the Thai government as "a resident" of Thailand for tax purposes, e.g. it's automatic, yes, anyone living in Thailand for 180 days, is deemed a resident of Thailand for tax purposes, and if an Australian has elected to remain an  Australian Resident for tax purposes with Australia, they will receive a credit on the tax amount that they have been taxed on in Thailand.

 

The above has nothing to do with the Age Pension, that is what I and others have been trying to get through a particular members head. 

 

How can it have nothing to do with it when A) the pension is deemed an income and B) the pension is taxable? 

 

How can one "elect" to be a tax resident of Australia when they live in Thailand????

 

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

Another way to look at it for example, is that I choose to remain a resident of Australia for tax purposes, i.e. I have a home back in Oz, a car, family, etc etc and will return one day, maybe in 1 year, maybe in 10 years.

 

I choose to teach English in Thailand as I want a change as it all became a bit to boring for me back in Oz, and my family have been breaking my balls to get married etc etc, that, and I want to travel around Thailand and maybe some neighboring countries during my time overseas.

 

So I stay in Thailand for over 180 days a year, therefore I am a tax resident of Thailand and pay tax in Thailand, and at the same time, I am a tax resident back in Australia for tax purposes, as that is what I have elected to be, so when I lodge my tax return, I let them know that Thailand has already (for example) taxed me on my wages, and the Australia Taxation Office will credit me that tax taken by the Thai government, and make the necessary tax adjustments against the tax I have to pay to Australia, and will also provide me with a tax threshold of $18,200 before they make the adjustments.

 

The above said, if I elected to be a non resident, e.g. no family, house, car in Oz, breaking free, as I have done, then I am a non resident for tax purposes and will pay $32.5c in the $ if I make an income, no threshold, no credits.

 

Nothing to do with the "Age Pension".

 

With Australia, it's one or the other, you can't be resident in two countries as far as I know, that said they would allow Thailand to deem you as a resident for tax purposes though through no fault of your own because you chose to be here for more than 180 days and will therefore sort it when they get their slice of your pie, that is how I interpret it, but I could be wrong, seldom I should say......LoL. 

You can't "choose."  You are deemed one way or another, and the proposed changes are set to make that easier, and more profitable for the government.

 

When the proposed changes come in, how can you argue you are still a tax resident of Australia when you have been outside of Australia for 183 days?  There will be no tax free threshold for you as a non resident, but that's ok, because you have no income being generated in Australia, unless you receive a pension, which is deemed an income, and is taxable, then you will get the credits you mentioned, but will pay the 32.5% tax between Thailand and Australia. 

 

Can you tell me how a pension then stands outside of non resident tax?  Yeah, yeah, Article 18 that is subject to the provisions of Article 19.  Those pesky "provisions" again. 

 

You can be a resident of two countries.  I have posted an easy example of how to be.  I say it again for you. 

 

You do 45 days and meet two of the criteria in the factor test, then do 180 days in Thailand.  You are a resident for tax purposes of Australia and Thailand. 

 

You can also be a double non resident.  Spend 183 days outside of Australia and 180 days outside Thailand. 

 

Yeah, you could be wrong. 

[KhunHeineken]

42 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO if someone actually was tax resident in two countries at once, they were fast asleep and snoring in arithmetic class. Why would anyone want to make their life that complicated?

Well, let's see now. 

 

If a tax resident in Australia, you benefit from the tax free threshold, and you may only have to do 45 days and meet two easy criteria in the factor test, although Labor looks like changing the 45 days to be longer.

 

Then, you can spend the resit of the year in Thailand, where you only pay about 10%, or as you say, "token tax." 

 

Yeah, yeah, I know.  Article 18 that's subject to the provisions of Article 19, yet, no one wants to discuss the "provisions" of Article 19. 

[Lacessit]

There are two types of expat in Thailand. One is people such as 4MyEgo, who are still working. There are people such as me, who retired years ago, and are drawing a full or part pension. Some of us have taken the extra step of putting in a non-lodgment advice with the ATO. Mine went in about 3 years ago, and I haven't heard a peep out of the ATO since then.

 

The OFFICIAL advice from the ATO, as shown in the attachment, could not be any clearer. Pensions are only taxable in the country of residence.

 

"if a person is a resident of Thailand for tax purposes, their age pension is taxable only in Thailand".

 

No ifs, buts or maybes. No bullsh!t consultation/ discussion papers. Straight from the horse's mouth, in writing.

 

 

[KhunHeineken]

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

Article 19

Government service

 

1. Remuneration (other than a pension) paid by one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State to any individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions shall be taxable only in that State. However, such remuneration shall be taxable only in the other Contracting State if the services are rendered in that other State and the recipient is a resident of that other State who:

 

(a) is a citizen or national of that other State; or

 

(b) did not become a resident of that other State solely for the purpose of performing the services.

 

2. Any pension paid to an individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions to one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State shall be taxable only in that State. Such pension shall, however, be taxable only in the other Contracting State if the recipient is a resident of, and a citizen or national of, that other State.

 

3. The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to remuneration or a pension in respect of services rendered in connection with any trade or business carried on by one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of one of the States or a local authority of one of the States. In such a case, the provisions of Article 15, 16 or 18, as the case may be shall apply.

I can see your highlights, but I would be interested in your "interpretation" of the "provisions" in Article 19 that Article 18 relates to. 

 

[KhunHeineken]

23 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

There are two types of expat in Thailand. One is people such as 4MyEgo, who are still working. There are people such as me, who retired years ago, and are drawing a full or part pension. Some of us have taken the extra step of putting in a non-lodgment advice with the ATO. Mine went in about 3 years ago, and I haven't heard a peep out of the ATO since then.

 

The OFFICIAL advice from the ATO, as shown in the attachment, could not be any clearer. Pensions are only taxable in the country of residence.

 

"if a person is a resident of Thailand for tax purposes, their age pension is taxable only in Thailand".

 

No ifs, buts or maybes. No bullsh!t consultation/ discussion papers. Straight from the horse's mouth, in writing.

 

 

Yet, the advice from the ATO is also this, from two members of staff. 

 

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

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s000000O2y4/p00197245

 

Why is Jim right, and the other two wrong? 

 

Why is Jim's advice "official" and the above two staff members of the ATO unofficial? 

 

 

 

[norbra]

45 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Yet, the advice from the ATO is also this, from two members of staff. 

 

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

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s000000O2y4/p00197245

 

Why is Jim right, and the other two wrong? 

 

Why is Jim's advice "official" and the above two staff members of the ATO unofficial? 

 

 

 

Both of these links are describing ATO conditions, nothing about Thai tax residency "rules"

[Lacessit]

16 minutes ago, norbra said:

Both of these links are describing ATO conditions, nothing about Thai tax residency "rules"

Why is it I perceive a drowning man, clutching at straws?

[KhunHeineken]

20 minutes ago, norbra said:

Both of these links are describing ATO conditions, nothing about Thai tax residency "rules"

Huh? 

 

Perhaps you should elaborate on what you mean by "ATO conditions."  The links are clearly discussing the residency status of pensioners, and the tax implications.  

 

Bob - "I will be retiring overseas soon on Australian age pension. I will be non-Australian resident for tax purposes and therefore I will not have the benefit of the tax threshold. My basic tax calculation on ATO site show that I will be paying approx. 30% tax on the age pension, where there would be no tax if resided in Australia. Is this correct?"

 

Blake - " As a foreign resident for tax purposes, you will pay income tax according to foreign resident rates. This means for all income under $180k, you'll pay 32.5c per dollar. You would only report and pay tax on your Australian-sourced income to us."

 

 

[KhunHeineken]

7 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Why is it I perceive a drowning man, clutching at straws?

Why is it I perceive a one link wonder who's not gathering all the info and viewing it subjectively? 

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

 

I said I wasn't going to reply, BUT, you still don't get it, Article 19 relates to Government Pensions, i.e. people who worked for the government, not Age Pensioners, hence the reason I told you to forget about Article 19.

 

But hey, you believe what you want to believe, they are both law and they both apply to each respective pension, in layman's terms, once again, Article 18 for Age Pensions, taxable only in Thailand, Article 19 for Government Pensions, i.e. those that worked for the Government and received a Government Pension, but you know all this don't you, and still can't admit that your WRONG.

 

The above said, it's ok, we ALL know you are, except for you, must be lonely at the top of your heap.

 

 

You don't say, we are all waiting for you to concede, all I can say is I'm glad your not a politician, because even those ba-stards know when to concede.

 

"But hey, you believe what you want to believe, they are both law and they both apply to each respective pension, in layman's terms, once again, Article 18 for Age Pensions, taxable only in Thailand,"

 

The bold text above seems to have been confirmed several times.

 

So that leaves Oz citizens who receive OAP funds into their Thai bank accounts (specifically those who have no other income) and how will these funds be taxed by the Thai Revenue Department?'

 

There's been multiple postings re this very specific scenario but I'm still wondering what the answer is.

 

What's your thoughts? 

 

 

[rhodie]

This used to be a great thread on useful information about the OAP. It has been hijacked by a troll. Stop giving him oxygen guys, please.

[Lacessit]

7 hours ago, rhodie said:

This used to be a great thread on useful information about the OAP. It has been hijacked by a troll. Stop giving him oxygen guys, please.

Everyone stops responding to his posts, as I have done.

[scorecard]

9 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Everyone stops responding to his posts, as I have done.

 I blocked his posts many months ago.

[KhunHeineken]

Lacessit used a link from an Australian law educational website, so I used that website as well. 

 

Below are the definitions of the word "provisions" at law.

 

https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_act/la2001133/s16.html#:~:text=A provision of an Act,subparagraphs%2C sub-subparagraphs%2C examples

 

"A provision of an Act or instrument is any words or anything else that forms part of the Act or instrument.

Examples—provisions consisting of groups of words

sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, sub-subparagraphs, examples

Examples—provisions consisting of groups of other provisions

chapters, parts, divisions, subdivisions, schedules"

 

Cambridge dictionary.

 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/provision

 

"provision noun (LAW)

 

[ C ]

a statement within an agreement or a law that a particular thing must happen or be done, especially before another can happen or be done:

We have inserted certain provisions into the treaty to safeguard foreign workers.

[ + that ] She accepted the job with the provision that she would be paid expenses for relocating."

 

NOTE:  "a particular thing must happen or be done, especially before another can happen or be done."

 

Article 18

 

Article 18

Pensions and annuities

1. Subject to the provisions of Article 19, pensions and annuities paid to a resident of one of the Contracting States shall be taxable only in that State.

 

Article 19

 

Article 19

Government service

1. Remuneration (other than a pension) paid by one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State to any individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions shall be taxable only in that State. However, such remuneration shall be taxable only in the other Contracting State if the services are rendered in that other State and the recipient is a resident of that other State who:

(a) is a citizen or national of that other State; or

(b) did not become a resident of that other State solely for the purpose of performing the services.

2. Any pension paid to an individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions to one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State shall be taxable only in that State. Such pension shall, however, be taxable only in the other Contracting State if the recipient is a resident of, and a citizen or national of, that other State.

3. The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to remuneration or a pension in respect of services rendered in connection with any trade or business carried on by one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of one of the States or a local authority of one of the States. In such a case, the provisions of Article 15, 16 or 18, as the case may be shall apply.

 

As per the austlii website, "provisions" are sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, even sub-subparagraphs etc etc. 

 

As per the Cambridge dictionary, "provisions" are a "particular thing must happen or be done, especially before another can happen or be done."

 

One member says, "forget about Article 19."  I don't think so.

 

Some other members say Article 18 relates to the aged pension and Article 19 relates to services pensions.  Worthy of some discussion, but Article 18 relies on the "provisions" of Article 19, and if Article 19 is about service pensions, where's that leave the aged pension?

 

See Article 19 Section 1 - "Remuneration (other than a pension) paid by one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State to any individual in respect of services rendered" - no services rendered for the aged pension.

 

See subsection (a) - "is a citizen or national of that other state."  Well, there's only a handful of foreigners that have been granted Thai citizenship, so I think it fair to say no members on this thread are Thai citizens.  

 

The interesting part of that subsection is "or"

 

Subsection (b) -   "did not become a resident of that other State solely for the purpose of performing the services."  Once again, services mentioned. 

 

Section 2 - "Any pension paid to an individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions" No government functions performed.

 

Section 3 - "The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to remuneration or a pension in respect of services rendered in connection with any trade or business" - No services rendered in connection with any trade or business. 

 

Some interesting "provisions" in Article 19 that Article 18 are subject to. 

 

How do members meet the provision of Article 19? 

 

Interesting how no one wants to comment on this, which comes from a link on the Treasury website in relations to Australia and Thailand's double tax treaty.

 

  "The agreements work be giVing the country of residence the exclusive right to tax certain catagories of income and allowing the remaining income to be taxed by the country where it was sourced. If the income is then taxed by the country of residence, it is to allow a credit for tax paid in the country of origin. Examples of catagories reserved for tax by the country of residence include:

"Industrial or commercial profits where the taxpayer has no permanent establishment in the country where the profits are earned;

-Most pensions and purchased annuities;"

 

Scroll down to Thailand. 

 

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

 

 

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

 I blocked his posts many months ago.

I don't block him. I enjoy watching his pathetic attempts at gaslighting.

[KhunHeineken]

BREAKING NEWS 

 

As I mentioned before, Australia is looking at updating its tax treaties with other countries.  (link previously provided)

 

I had a quick look for a more updated tax treaty so I could know what to expect when Australia updates its tax treaty with Thailand, which is dated 1989. 

 

I found a newer tax treaty with Germany, dated late 2015, to start in 2017. 

 

There is some good and bad news in it.  I have quoted the relevant section. 

 

This is the media release setting out the treaty.

 

https://www.financeminister.gov.au/media-release/2015/11/13/new-tax-treaty-signed-germany

 

Pensions

Pensions are generally taxable only in the country of residence of the recipient. However:

• Social security benefits first paid after 31 December 2016 may also be taxed by the source country but the source country tax is limited to 15 per cent of the gross payment;
• Contributory pensions first paid after 31 December 2016 may be taxed in the source country if the pension is attributable to contributions that received certain tax concessions in the source country for at least a 15 year period;
• War persecution and similar pensions are exempt from taxation; and
• Government service pensions are taxable only in the country of residence if the individual is also a national of that country – otherwise, the pension is taxable only in the source country.

It appears to me that should Australia and Thailand have a similar treaty, the pension will be taxed at 15% in Australia, being the source country, and due to Thailand having the lesser amount, being 10%, one should receive "credits" from the 15% tax paid in Australia which would mean Thailand does not get to tax the pension. 

 

15% is a lot better than 32.5%. 

[KhunHeineken]

57 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I don't block him. I enjoy watching his pathetic attempts at gaslighting.

Follow the research and educate yourself. 

[KhunHeineken]

2 hours ago, scorecard said:

 I blocked his posts many months ago.

Hopefully another member will alert you to a recent post I made. 

 

If Australia makes a similar tax treaty in the near future with Thailand, as it did with Germany, your services pension gets a free pass from being tax in Australia, the source country. 

[KhunHeineken]

10 hours ago, rhodie said:

This used to be a great thread on useful information about the OAP. It has been hijacked by a troll. Stop giving him oxygen guys, please.

The proposed changes to tax residency is the single biggest issue facing expat retirees in years.  It will impact on many.  It's extremely useful information. I don't expect you to reply. 

[KhunHeineken]

11 hours ago, norbra said:

Both of these links are describing ATO conditions, nothing about Thai tax residency "rules"

Australia is in the process of updating its tax treaties.  (link previously provided)  Check out a recent post I have made for what a tax treaty with Thailand may look like in the future.  

[Olmate]

5 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

BREAKING NEWS 

 

As I mentioned before, Australia is looking at updating its tax treaties with other countries.  (link previously provided)

 

I had a quick look for a more updated tax treaty so I could know what to expect when Australia updates its tax treaty with Thailand, which is dated 1989. 

 

I found a newer tax treaty with Germany, dated late 2015, to start in 2017. 

 

There is some good and bad news in it.  I have quoted the relevant section. 

 

This is the media release setting out the treaty.

 

https://www.financeminister.gov.au/media-release/2015/11/13/new-tax-treaty-signed-germany

 

Pensions

Pensions are generally taxable only in the country of residence of the recipient. However:

• Social security benefits first paid after 31 December 2016 may also be taxed by the source country but the source country tax is limited to 15 per cent of the gross payment;
• Contributory pensions first paid after 31 December 2016 may be taxed in the source country if the pension is attributable to contributions that received certain tax concessions in the source country for at least a 15 year period;
• War persecution and similar pensions are exempt from taxation; and
• Government service pensions are taxable only in the country of residence if the individual is also a national of that country – otherwise, the pension is taxable only in the source country.

It appears to me that should Australia and Thailand have a similar treaty, the pension will be taxed at 15% in Australia, being the source country, and due to Thailand having the lesser amount, being 10%, one should receive "credits" from the 15% tax paid in Australia which would mean Thailand does not get to tax the pension. 

 

15% is a lot better than 32.5%. 

 Thats in the case of a new  tax treaty with Thailand that does not exist? Right! Geezus .... 😂

[KhunHeineken]

1 minute ago, Olmate said:

 Thats in the case of a new  tax treaty with Thailand that does not exist? Right! Geezus .... 😂

Correct.  Just like the proposed changed to tax residency don't exist.    

[LosLobo]

I unreservedly apologise to @My Ego and this forum for unknowingly posting an incorrect viewpoint and the out of context information of ATO Blake.

 

Though I have not seen any definitive information to say otherwise, I can accept my viewpoint on paying tax on the AAP in Australia was incorrect, through the preponderance of anecdotal evidence here.

 

I suggest my error was accepting the ATO community Blake as gospel instead of consulting my own 'tax professional'.

 

Paradoxically Blake as an ATO nominated tax professional should have qualified his response by including a rider that his decision may not apply if a DTA was in force.

 

Seems many others also may have failed to factor in the DTA issue as well, we were lucky to have @Norbra's input.

 

Nevertheless, on the personal side, the consensus of no tax payable on the AAP in Australia, is welcome as my Thai tax liability will be minor and any tax on minor bank interest in Australia will be offset by SAPTO and possibly no Australian tax return will be necessary.

 

The sad part of this saga is that this forum once a Book of Knowledge is now contaminated with over 600 posts of repetitive seemingly 'bogus' information.

 

Possibly going forward we could request this forum be closed and a new chapter opened.

 

This will not necessarily rid the forum of the 'resident troll' but now we are all cognisant of what havoc 'feeding the troll' has wrought.

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

[Lacessit]

4 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

I unreservedly apologise to @My Ego and this forum for unknowingly posting an incorrect viewpoint and the out of context information of ATO Blake.

 

Though I have not seen any definitive information to say otherwise, I can accept my viewpoint on paying tax on the AAP in Australia was incorrect, through the preponderance of anecdotal evidence here.

 

I suggest my error was accepting the ATO community Blake as gospel instead of consulting my own 'tax professional'.

 

Paradoxically Blake as an ATO nominated tax professional should have qualified his response by including a rider that his decision may not apply if a DTA was in force.

 

Seems many others also may have failed to factor in the DTA issue as well, we were lucky to have @Norbra's input.

 

Nevertheless, on the personal side, the consensus of no tax payable on the AAP in Australia, is welcome as my Thai tax liability will be minor and any tax on minor bank interest in Australia will be offset by SAPTO and possibly no Australian tax return will be necessary.

 

The sad part of this saga is that this forum once a Book of Knowledge is now contaminated with over 600 posts of repetitive seemingly 'bogus' information.

 

Possibly going forward we could request this forum be closed and a new chapter opened.

 

This will not necessarily rid the forum of the 'resident troll' but now we are all cognisant of what havoc 'feeding the troll' has wrought.

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

I have been calling out said troll for many months. And in turn called a troll for my efforts.

At least you have had the good manners to apologize.

[LosLobo]

25 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I have been calling out said troll for many months. And in turn called a troll for my efforts.

At least you have had the good manners to apologize.

Thanks.

I posted a relevant 'Do Not Feed the Troll' meme possibly two years ago when the problem first 'raised its ugly head'.
 

I would repost it but don't have an hour to find it in this current morass.

 

[4MyEgo]

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

I would be very interested in your "interpretation" of the "provisions" in Article 19.

 

Seriously, we will continue to go around the merry go round until you get it, i.e. you can interpret it yourself, however I will give you a BIG clue, the key word that relates to Article 19 is:

1. Remuneration (other than a pension)

 

so if 1. in Article 19 doesn't apply to you, neither do the other Sections and Subsections in Article 19.

 

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

One can't simple accept Article 18 when Article 18 states "Subject the provisions of Article 19."  

 

You said, "forget about Article 19."  You simply can't, when Article 18 s subject to the provisions of Article 19.

 

Oh yes you can.

 

I will say it again, "forget about Article 19" because there is no other, (from Section 1. Article 19:

 

1. Remuneration (other than a pension)

 

and as Article 18 relates to Pensions and annuities only, as mentioned 1,000 times, Article 19 doesn't apply to Article 18 if there is no

 

1. Remuneration (other than a pension) 

 

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

I see you have highlighted Section 2, but disregarded Section 1 and Subsections (a) and (b)   Can you tell me what, exactly, at law, the provisions of Article 19 are that Article 18 relies upon?

 

Highlighting Section 2 was to spell it out further for you, albeit it that it does go onto say that if the recipient is a resident of, and a citizen or a national of, that other state.

 

What they are talking about is any individual government employee who gets paid a Government Pension for their services to the government, while in their employ, after discharge, etc etc etc, NOTHING TO DO WITH AGE PENSIONS, therefore Article 18 relates to Age Pensions, but looks like that didn't work, so have another read, might take you 4-5 reads to sink in.....LoL 

 

2. Any pension paid to an individual in respect of services rendered in the discharge of governmental functions to one of the Contracting States or a political subdivision of that State or a local authority of that State shall be taxable only in that State. Such pension shall, however, be taxable only in the other Contracting State if the recipient is a resident of, and a citizen or national of, that other State.

 

Subsection (a) & (b) of Section 1 in Article 19 don't apply because of what, wait for it........, there is....., no what ?

1. Remuneration (other than a pension)

[4MyEgo]

18 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

You posted it.

 

These are your words: 

 

"Not to get off track here, the above highlighted states: while pensions will generally only be taxable in the country of residence."

 

Are they your words, or not? 

 

Are you now denying you wrote them? 

 

You obviously are quoting my words from an article or articles, not the legislation, another deflection from your part.

 

18 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Once again, I would be interested in your "interpretation" of the "provisions" in Article 19.

 

No need to hightlight Article 19, you have already done that a dozen time, but can you discuss your interpretation of the provisions in Article 19?

 

I have done that in the above post reply.

 

18 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Aren't you putting it forward to be all about the aged pension?  After all, it is the pension thread.

 

 

 

You just put your foot in it M8, of course " I have been talking about the Age Pension" this is after all what this thread is all about, trying to deflect again ?

 

Australian Aged Pension

---

By VOICEOVER
January 11, 2008 in Australia & Oceania Topics and Events

 

With regard to commenting on the video you posted, I DO NOT take what anyone says on a video or a website as Gospel, I quote legislation, as stated and as I have done.

 

Yes, like it or not, legislation, is law and precedents can be made from challenging laws, if the courts/tribunals rule in favor of the challenging party. To date I am not aware of anyone having challenged the DTA, in particular, Article 18 is intact to this day. That is fact or my evidence, what have you provided, except, "what is your perspective on this or that, have you seen the video, oh lets not forget Blake and others.

 

Know when to surrender and stop wasting our time, there is more than enough evidence to back up what I have stated, i.e. that the Age Pension under Article 18 is only taxable in the state of which that individual is resident, period !

 

No credits, no if, no buts, but you are the exception of course....LoL, I was going to add, but I won't because you would pull the "don't make it personal" card on me, so I have spared myself.

 

[4MyEgo]

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

You just said, "all I know is in Australia, you are either a tax resident of Australia or a tax resident of Thailand." 

 

You have contradicted yourself again. 

 

How's that ?

 

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

No.  One can't "elect" to be a tax resident  One either meets the criteria, or they don't, and that criteria will soon change to a physical presence and time based model, making the criteria even more clear cut.

 

A movie just came to mind, was it Dumber getting Dumber or Dumber & Dumber, same, same.

 

If I elect to be a tax resident of Australia by meeting the criteria, then I have elected to be a tax resident of Australia, and lodge a tax return annually, how simple was that....LoL 

 

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

How can it have nothing to do with it when A) the pension is deemed an income and B) the pension is taxable? 

 

You keep saying that, but an Age Pensioner living in Thailand only pays tax in Thailand, if Thailand wishes to tax the pension, then it will be deemed and income. It really boils down to how the Thai Government wants to approach it, that said, they haven't taxed Age Pensioners from Australia as far as I know, so why would they now. Don't bother replying to that, just speaking out aloud. 

 

17 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

How can one "elect" to be a tax resident of Australia when they live in Thailand????

 

Um, excuse me, aren't you the one saying you are a tax resident of Australia, yet here you are living in the LOS....LoL, or are you trolling ?

 

18 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Yeah, you could be wrong.

 

Yet you have provided nothing to show that I am wrong, yet you keep deflecting, talking about changes coming, or are you know talking about the age pension etc etc, but we all know your in a corner and are WRONG.

 

Time for my coffee break, I earned this little victory......

[4MyEgo]

16 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Perhaps you should elaborate on what you mean by "ATO conditions."  The links are clearly discussing the residency status of pensioners, and the tax implications.

 

Incoming missile.......prepare for impact......LoL

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0JRF000000iq692AA/p00272926

[4MyEgo]

16 hours ago, KhunHeineken said:

Why is it I perceive a one link wonder who's not gathering all the info and viewing it subjectively? 

 

Careful now, as all it takes is one link to sink your yellow submarine.

 

https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0JRF000000iq692AA/p00272926