Honeymoon Period Over for Kamala Harris Polls Show Tight Race

[Artisi]

27 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Can you clarify your stance?  Do you think the proposed changes will be eventually passed?  If passed, do you think Centerlink will automatically withhold 30% of one's pension after 183 days, in the same way they cut off the supplements?  Or, if passed, do you think nothing will happen to pensions?

 

To that I cannot answer, and neither can anyone else, although many would like to think they know the answer. 

[KhunHeineken]

4 minutes ago, Artisi said:

To that I cannot answer, and neither can anyone else, although many would like to think they know the answer. 

Ok.  I'll make it more simple. 

 

What's stopping the government from doing it? 

 

There are no exemptions, means testing, asset testing, or tax free threshold changes in the proposed changes.  I don't see where pensions get a free pass.   

 

The DTA was put forward, but that is for government service pensions, and that's not an aged pension from Centerlink. 

Edited 2 hours ago by KhunHeineken

[Artisi]

1 minute ago, KhunHeineken said:

Ok.  I'll make it more simple. 

 

What's stopping the government from doing it? 

 

There are no exemptions, means testing, asset testing, or tax free threshold changes in the proposed changes.  I don't see where pensions get a free pass.   

Nothing is stopping the government from doing whatever they like. If they felt inclined, they could stop any pension for any Aussie who leaves the country and doesn't return within a given period. 

[Lacessit]

21 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Nothing is stopping the government from doing whatever they like. If they felt inclined, they could stop any pension for any Aussie who leaves the country and doesn't return within a given period. 

Not quite - the ballot box is a deterrent, and people of pension age are a reasonably large voting bloc.

 

IMO the measure you put forward hypothetically would result in considerable backlash.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 hour ago, KhunHeineken said:

I agree, but what the proposed changes seemed to be focusing on is enforcement.  It makes it sooooooo easy for them to enforce non resident tax. 

 

One should ask themself "why" focus on enforcement, if they are not going to chase dollars from non residents, including pensioners.

 

Interesting. 

 

So, in your view, an Aussie expat pensioner, who has not been back to Australia in, say, 5 years, who is clearly a non resident for tax purposes, has nothing to be concerned about.  Is this not the case with the majority of expats?  Many haven't back in years.  This is the demographic we are discussing, not people coming and going from Australia. 

 

I find it interesting that an Aussie pensioner can go to Thailand, not inform Centerlink they are leaving the country, and "automatically" have their supplements cut off after 6 weeks.  This tells me Centerlink is linked to Immigration, does it not?  We have read many account of it happening.  You use the word "automatically."  This is one case of "automatically" having money reduced, yet, many do not consider the same system could be used for non resident pensioners. 

 

Questions:  Are you at all concerned there are no exemptions for pensions mentioned in the proposed changes?  Why do you think pensioners will get a free pass? 

 

I see nothing in the proposed changes exempting any non resident, no matter the size of their income being derived in Australia.  

Right now a pensioner who has been away for 5 years is a non-resident and the pension is taxable. They are not a focus it seems. Same under the new rules - they are a non-resident and nothing new proposed - as far as I know - suggesting new enforcement rules to affect them as such. If there is a sudden appetite to deal with such taxpayers then that alters the situation. They are non-residents now and they'll be non-residents if and when there are new rules . 

An automatic reduction in payment for long term expats  is of course technically possible but that is possible now and not done. As has been pointed out to you they could not use automatic reductions in the first years away because  the rules are not clear cut e.g. you are not automatically a non-resident after 183 days outside Australia. You have suggested the latter - been corrected - but keep saying it for some reason or other. 

Edited 50 minutes ago by Fat is a type of crazy

[Artisi]

51 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Not quite - the ballot box is a deterrent, and people of pension age are a reasonably large voting bloc.

 

IMO the measure you put forward hypothetically would result in considerable backlash.

In theory maybe, but the number of expats  and the number that vote as expats is insignificant in the overall plan. 

Having said that, as an (ex) expat I would certainly vote against it, but that's just me, as I've been there etc and don't agree with that idea. 

Plus, the 99.9% of pensioners wouldn't even be aware of this tax ruling