Australian Aged Pension

[expatdreamer]

Agreeing with Will27 above.

I'm surprised and disappointing with a system which treats the accumulated superannuation and taxed in this way ... and Old Croc ... my sympathies.

Now Will27 did not say this ...

I maintain that the OAP is a privilege and not a right.

Yes, you did work the majority of your life in Australia and paid your taxes ... but you also enjoyed, at the time, the benefits of those taxes through the various services you used, schools, hospitals, roads and the like.

The OAP, disability pension and the like, should only be paid in Thailand at a reduced rate to reflect the cost of living in Thailand ... or elsewhere in the world.

If you wanted financial independence ... you should have planned for it 20 or 30 years ago.

Your current pension is being paid for by your children and grandchildren's taxes ... not yours ... despite what you might believe.

Don't blame the government now for tightening the rules as the rules and the concept of the OAP were written in a different world, for a different age.

Actually access to a pension, if you are entitled to one is just that - an entiltlement. And therefore a right. After all that person on a pension has supported the children and the pensioners all their tax paying life. Also, if you think a lower rate should be paid beacause the pension is being paid to someone living in a lower cost of living counyry then surely a higher pension should be pauid if the pensioner is living in a more expensive country? I would also point out that a pension recipient living abroad relieves the tax payer of subsidising health, public transport and all those other things their taxes paid for during their working life. In addittion they are freeing up much needed housing (if from Australia). Based on this I should say that the pension should be increased not decreased if the recipient lives abroad. By the way, I am not retired and don't receive a pension.

I think that finding a country more expensive than Australia would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Just ask anybody who have been there recently. Living costs are exorbitant , but this what happens when one gets a Labour govt who claim to have the worlds best treasurer !

too right, I predict I can retire about 5-10 years earlier moving to Thailand, than staying in Oz which has now become one of the most expensive countries to reside, particularly when it comes to housing

[BookMan]

Agreeing with Will27 above.

I'm surprised and disappointing with a system which treats the accumulated superannuation and taxed in this way ... and Old Croc ... my sympathies.

Now Will27 did not say this ...

I maintain that the OAP is a privilege and not a right.

Yes, you did work the majority of your life in Australia and paid your taxes ... but you also enjoyed, at the time, the benefits of those taxes through the various services you used, schools, hospitals, roads and the like.

The OAP, disability pension and the like, should only be paid in Thailand at a reduced rate to reflect the cost of living in Thailand ... or elsewhere in the world.

If you wanted financial independence ... you should have planned for it 20 or 30 years ago.

Your current pension is being paid for by your children and grandchildren's taxes ... not yours ... despite what you might believe.

Don't blame the government now for tightening the rules as the rules and the concept of the OAP were written in a different world, for a different age.

Spot on

Another aspect is the massive pensions and benefits that the politicians have awarded themselves, gold card travel worldwide, free office with secretary and so on. This should all be stopped immediately when they leave office.

Politicians, federal and state, are on a rort. Consistently higher superannuation contributions with ability to access funds earlier than the general population. Also the Pollies often have pensions for life after 7 years service, or thereabouts. It leave a bad taste in the mouth every time i read about it.

I think Federal and NSW schemes were tightened, due to public discontent, but I am not 100% sure when and by how much

[BookMan]

Agreeing with Will27 above.

I'm surprised and disappointing with a system which treats the accumulated superannuation and taxed in this way ... and Old Croc ... my sympathies.

Now Will27 did not say this ...

I maintain that the OAP is a privilege and not a right.

Yes, you did work the majority of your life in Australia and paid your taxes ... but you also enjoyed, at the time, the benefits of those taxes through the various services you used, schools, hospitals, roads and the like.

The OAP, disability pension and the like, should only be paid in Thailand at a reduced rate to reflect the cost of living in Thailand ... or elsewhere in the world.

If you wanted financial independence ... you should have planned for it 20 or 30 years ago.

Your current pension is being paid for by your children and grandchildren's taxes ... not yours ... despite what you might believe.

Don't blame the government now for tightening the rules as the rules and the concept of the OAP were written in a different world, for a different age.

Actually access to a pension, if you are entitled to one is just that - an entiltlement. And therefore a right. After all that person on a pension has supported the children and the pensioners all their tax paying life. Also, if you think a lower rate should be paid beacause the pension is being paid to someone living in a lower cost of living counyry then surely a higher pension should be pauid if the pensioner is living in a more expensive country? I would also point out that a pension recipient living abroad relieves the tax payer of subsidising health, public transport and all those other things their taxes paid for during their working life. In addittion they are freeing up much needed housing (if from Australia). Based on this I should say that the pension should be increased not decreased if the recipient lives abroad. By the way, I am not retired and don't receive a pension.

I think that finding a country more expensive than Australia would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Just ask anybody who have been there recently. Living costs are exorbitant , but this what happens when one gets a Labour govt who claim to have the worlds best treasurer !

Cost of living and housing ridiculous.

Hardly the fault of any one government, Labor or the Coalition. They combine for their ineptness and they both spout populist and reactionary policies to be re-elected. A longer term, maybe 5 years, might see some sensible long term policies

[expatdreamer]

Oldcroc,

It seems your problem is that unlike other super schemes which are defined contribution and get taxed on the way in, yours is a government defined benefits fund which are not taxed on the way in.

Defined contributions have 15% tax on each contribution going in during accumulation phase, and 15% tax on earnings as well also during accumulation phase. Over 60 of age, they become tax free.

However governed defined benefits funds are generally unfunded and untaxed until you start drawing a benefit. Once you start drawing a benefit, you then have to pay tax as they have a different tax regime to normal super funds.

Now if you cant change from a pension to a lump sum arrangement (personally believe this will be extremely unlikely as the govt has the signed forms showing your choice at the time, unless you can convince them that somehow the lump sum you now choose to take will cost them a lot less than your existing pension for your remaining life expectancy plus any reverting pension to your spouse on your death) the only option seems to be to prove to the ATO that you are still a resident for tax purposes. Note that if you can show that you move around within the same overseas country, then you can still be a resident under the domicile test. I dont know how possible that will be in your circumstances, eg can you spend time in different parts of LOS during the year.

http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/content/36263.htm

[Xangsamhua]

I think that finding a country more expensive than Australia would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Just ask anybody who have been there recently. Living costs are exorbitant, but this what happens when one gets a Labour govt who claim to have the worlds best treasurer !

Cost of living and housing ridiculous.

Hardly the fault of any one government, Labor or the Coalition. They combine for their ineptness and they both spout populist and reactionary policies to be re-elected. A longer term, maybe 5 years, might see some sensible long term policies

We're just back in Australia (2 months) after 11 years in Thailand.

Yes, everything's very expensive, though one can pick up things like tools, gardenware, containers, cabinets, etc very cheaply at garage sales, and our children are helping find things for us online through e-bay, gumtree, etc, which is what they do to get good items cheaply.

[Old Croc]

Not sure I understand your concern. If you live in Thailand, then you obviously cannot benefit from claiming Medicare benefits, therefore you are better off being a non resident for tax purposes as you dont pay the 1.5% medicare tax levy.

Now if you decide to return to Australia to live permanently, all you need to do as far as I know is inform Centrelink that you are back for good and you can get yourself a new Medicare card. See http://www.humanserv...rning-residents There does not appear to be any waiting period, just need to show a couple of documents like a new rental agreement for a place in Australia.

I dont know anything about the 5 year thing but someone else may.

If your concern is about having access to being able to claim Medicare benefits whilst coming back to Australia for holidays, that too I dont know anything about. However if you have kept your Medicare card, then I dont see any reason why you couldnt try to use it assuming it still is within the expiry date. In fact, that may be where the 5 year thing comes from as your Medicare card normally has a 5 year expiry period from issue. The Medicare card also needs to be tied to an Australian address.

You obviously didn't read the thread properly.

I'm not at all concerned about Medicare and am aware that as a non resident I won't have to pay it and consequently will have some small savings. (I addressed that issue a number of posts back!).

My problem is being declared to be a non-resident under ATO legislation, and having to pay a high tax on my superannuation as it comes back to me as a pension. Where I decide to live in retirement shouldn't effect my money

I paid tax on this money when it was earnt, albiet at a special rate for the purpose. Same as everyone else in Australia.

[Old Croc]

Oldcroc,

It seems your problem is that unlike other super schemes which are defined contribution and get taxed on the way in, yours is a government defined benefits fund which are not taxed on the way in.

Defined contributions have 15% tax on each contribution going in during accumulation phase, and 15% tax on earnings as well also during accumulation phase. Over 60 of age, they become tax free.

However governed defined benefits funds are generally unfunded and untaxed until you start drawing a benefit. Once you start drawing a benefit, you then have to pay tax as they have a different tax regime to normal super funds.

Now if you cant change from a pension to a lump sum arrangement (personally believe this will be extremely unlikely as the govt has the signed forms showing your choice at the time, unless you can convince them that somehow the lump sum you now choose to take will cost them a lot less than your existing pension for your remaining life expectancy plus any reverting pension to your spouse on your death) the only option seems to be to prove to the ATO that you are still a resident for tax purposes. Note that if you can show that you move around within the same overseas country, then you can still be a resident under the domicile test. I dont know how possible that will be in your circumstances, eg can you spend time in different parts of LOS during the year.

http://www.ato.gov.a...ntent/36263.htm

Yes, I've previously studied the Domicile and Place of Abode tests, and you may be right, it could provide a way out if you can convince someone you don't maintain an abode outside Australia.

At this stage i prefer not to try to test it.

[Will27]

The current statisticians state that the average income earner in Australia would require 40 years of full time employment to have sufficient funds for a "reasonable" life style in retirement at 65. This is based upon the current rate of employer superannuation contribution, plus 3% salary sacrifice.

I worked full time for about 35 years and never once went on the dole.

I was lucky to have finished on a fairly high salary, retired early mainly for health reasons, and planned that my superannuation would support me for the rest of my days. I want to spend those days in Thailand where I can live more than comfortably on that super.

I didn't plan that the ATO would move the goal posts, declare me to be a non Australian, and want to tax my retirement money at 32.5%!

Hence my whinge.

I'm with on this one Old Croc as I'm in a similiar position.

However, I don't think the ATO has moved the goal posts.

AFAIK, the current residency legislation has pretty much

been in place for a long while.

The trouble is, it's not common knowledge and people deciding to

retire early aren't advised of this by their pension schemes or employers.

Regards

Will

[expatdreamer]

Not sure I understand your concern. If you live in Thailand, then you obviously cannot benefit from claiming Medicare benefits, therefore you are better off being a non resident for tax purposes as you dont pay the 1.5% medicare tax levy.

Now if you decide to return to Australia to live permanently, all you need to do as far as I know is inform Centrelink that you are back for good and you can get yourself a new Medicare card. See http://www.humanserv...rning-residents There does not appear to be any waiting period, just need to show a couple of documents like a new rental agreement for a place in Australia.

I dont know anything about the 5 year thing but someone else may.

If your concern is about having access to being able to claim Medicare benefits whilst coming back to Australia for holidays, that too I dont know anything about. However if you have kept your Medicare card, then I dont see any reason why you couldnt try to use it assuming it still is within the expiry date. In fact, that may be where the 5 year thing comes from as your Medicare card normally has a 5 year expiry period from issue. The Medicare card also needs to be tied to an Australian address.

You obviously didn't read the thread properly.

I'm not at all concerned about Medicare and am aware that as a non resident I won't have to pay it and consequently will have some small savings. (I addressed that issue a number of posts back!).

My problem is being declared to be a non-resident under ATO legislation, and having to pay a high tax on my superannuation as it comes back to me as a pension. Where I decide to live in retirement shouldn't effect my money

I paid tax on this money when it was earnt, albiet at a special rate for the purpose. Same as everyone else in Australia.

OldCroc, this post on medicare stuff wasnt directed at you. I did read the thread properly. My post on medicare was directed at Sanuk21 (see his post #799 where he asked for more info on medicare). You will seee I quoted Sanuk21 but you have edited his name out above. Anyway, this was not directed at you. I did however provide some info for you on the domicile test, which was directed at you in another post, and you provided a fair enough responses to that, which I agree with. Anyway, I am probably done with this thread.

[BookMan]

Apparently this year has been a good year for super funds..

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/aussies-super-nest-eggs-are-growing/story-e6freuy9-1226544784562

[Old Croc]

Not sure I understand your concern. If you live in Thailand, then you obviously cannot benefit from claiming Medicare benefits, therefore you are better off being a non resident for tax purposes as you dont pay the 1.5% medicare tax levy.

Now if you decide to return to Australia to live permanently, all you need to do as far as I know is inform Centrelink that you are back for good and you can get yourself a new Medicare card. See http://www.humanserv...rning-residents There does not appear to be any waiting period, just need to show a couple of documents like a new rental agreement for a place in Australia.

I dont know anything about the 5 year thing but someone else may.

If your concern is about having access to being able to claim Medicare benefits whilst coming back to Australia for holidays, that too I dont know anything about. However if you have kept your Medicare card, then I dont see any reason why you couldnt try to use it assuming it still is within the expiry date. In fact, that may be where the 5 year thing comes from as your Medicare card normally has a 5 year expiry period from issue. The Medicare card also needs to be tied to an Australian address.

You obviously didn't read the thread properly.

I'm not at all concerned about Medicare and am aware that as a non resident I won't have to pay it and consequently will have some small savings. (I addressed that issue a number of posts back!).

My problem is being declared to be a non-resident under ATO legislation, and having to pay a high tax on my superannuation as it comes back to me as a pension. Where I decide to live in retirement shouldn't effect my money

I paid tax on this money when it was earnt, albiet at a special rate for the purpose. Same as everyone else in Australia.

OldCroc, this post on medicare stuff wasnt directed at you. I did read the thread properly. My post on medicare was directed at Sanuk21 (see his post #799 where he asked for more info on medicare). You will seee I quoted Sanuk21 but you have edited his name out above. Anyway, this was not directed at you. I did however provide some info for you on the domicile test, which was directed at you in another post, and you provided a fair enough responses to that, which I agree with. Anyway, I am probably done with this thread.

apologies.

[ozbrew]

Happy NY all. I return to a question is raised a while ago. Currently working in LOS for 6 years. I am 62 and have resigned myself to going back to OZ before I am 63 so I can satisfy the residence requirement to make my oap portable at 65. Could not convince anyone at c/l that "i am still OZ resident as i am forced to live here due to my work" argument. So currently turning my life upside down to qualify..... I guess that is what the OZ government want. Have any of more learned forum members heard of anyone in my position who obtained portability straight away when applying for oap at 65? I ask because c/l have too many different answers and I seek an exception to help me. Cheers!

[oldsailor35]

Agreeing with Will27 above.

I'm surprised and disappointing with a system which treats the accumulated superannuation and taxed in this way ... and Old Croc ... my sympathies.

Now Will27 did not say this ...

I maintain that the OAP is a privilege and not a right.

Yes, you did work the majority of your life in Australia and paid your taxes ... but you also enjoyed, at the time, the benefits of those taxes through the various services you used, schools, hospitals, roads and the like.

The OAP, disability pension and the like, should only be paid in Thailand at a reduced rate to reflect the cost of living in Thailand ... or elsewhere in the world.

If you wanted financial independence ... you should have planned for it 20 or 30 years ago.

Your current pension is being paid for by your children and grandchildren's taxes ... not yours ... despite what you might believe.

Don't blame the government now for tightening the rules as the rules and the concept of the OAP were written in a different world, for a different age.

Actually access to a pension, if you are entitled to one is just that - an entiltlement. And therefore a right. After all that person on a pension has supported the children and the pensioners all their tax paying life. Also, if you think a lower rate should be paid beacause the pension is being paid to someone living in a lower cost of living counyry then surely a higher pension should be pauid if the pensioner is living in a more expensive country? I would also point out that a pension recipient living abroad relieves the tax payer of subsidising health, public transport and all those other things their taxes paid for during their working life. In addittion they are freeing up much needed housing (if from Australia). Based on this I should say that the pension should be increased not decreased if the recipient lives abroad. By the way, I am not retired and don't receive a pension.

I think that finding a country more expensive than Australia would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Just ask anybody who have been there recently. Living costs are exorbitant , but this what happens when one gets a Labour govt who claim to have the worlds best treasurer !

Cost of living and housing ridiculous.

Hardly the fault of any one government, Labor or the Coalition. They combine for their ineptness and they both spout populist and reactionary policies to be re-elected. A longer term, maybe 5 years, might see some sensible long term policies

Sorry mate, i cannot agree with that. The Howard years were really easy for pensioners, but the present Labour government have gone crazy with their spending of borrowed money forcing everything up. However even though there have been increases in pensions under labour, the other massive increases in the cost of living has by far outstripped the pension rises. I was back there last june for 4 months and just could'nt afford to pay the big rents and live worry free. Here, even though i live on the "so called" expensive island of Koh Samui i am living quite comfortably.

[David48]

The Gillard government won’t rule out any changes to superannuation beyond its commitment to keep ­withdrawals tax-free for those aged over 60.

In his first public comments on super tax concessions, Superannuation Minister Bill Shorten on Thursday emphasised the need for super to be fair and fiscally sustainable.

A Treasury analysis released this month forecast super tax concessions would cost $45 billion by 2015-16 – more than the age pension – raising questions about their sustainability.

Afr

[David48]

The government has come under increasing scrutiny to reveal the nature and scope of its planned reforms, since it was revealed it was looking at the super system as a possible funding avenue for big-ticket programs like the national disability insurance scheme (NDIS) and the Gonski education overhaul.

From the businessspectator here

[ozbrew]

Hello again. I seem to have no takers for my question in my post #822.

Can someone help please!!

[simple1]

Hello again. I seem to have no takers for my question in my post #822.

Can someone help please!!

For some assistance try contacting either of the organisations below:

http://www.australianpensioner.org/index.html

https://www.welfarerights.org.au/

[sceadugenga]

TodayTonight (Australia) ran a story tonight about Old Age Pensioners living in Asia.

The key point appears to have been the amount of money leaving the country.

A similar story in the corporate media three years ago lead to a huge crack down on Diasability Support Pensioners living overseas.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Contact your MP now.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/latest/article/-/16210680/retirement-in-paradise/

[OLDAUSSIE]

TodayTonight (Australia) ran a story tonight about Old Age Pensioners living in Asia.

The key point appears to have been the amount of money leaving the country.

A similar story in the corporate media three years ago lead to a huge crack down on Diasability Support Pensioners living overseas.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Contact your MP now.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/latest/article/-/16210680/retirement-in-paradise/

I read about this and its scary to think the Government would crack down on OAP living overseas, I don't think its a case of IF it will happen but WHEN it will happen... Its all about having more control over the people.

I think to contact your local MP is a good start.

[bat69]

Iliad gh

[OLDAUSSIE]

Iliad gh

Very interesting post bat69.

[chiangmaibruce]

I thought readers might be interested in seeing this recent Aust. Gov't research about portability of benefits:

See http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2012/prp_no_16.pdf

The findings only further reinforce the notion that Gov't policy on this matter is driven more by ill-informed popularism than by hard facts and economic analysis

[harrry]

I thought readers might be interested in seeing this recent Aust. Gov't research about portability of benefits:

See http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2012/prp_no_16.pdf

The findings only further reinforce the notion that Gov't policy on this matter is driven more by ill-informed popularism than by hard facts and economic analysis

I wonder if they would get similar results if the question was....Would you pay extra to finance actions in Afghanistan?" or Would you pay extra to finance more overseas trips for politicians. My guess is there would be a larger percentage who would not pay.

[OZEMADE]

Happy NY all. I return to a question is raised a while ago. Currently working in LOS for 6 years. I am 62 and have resigned myself to going back to OZ before I am 63 so I can satisfy the residence requirement to make my oap portable at 65. Could not convince anyone at c/l that "i am still OZ resident as i am forced to live here due to my work" argument. So currently turning my life upside down to qualify..... I guess that is what the OZ government want. Have any of more learned forum members heard of anyone in my position who obtained portability straight away when applying for oap at 65? I ask because c/l have too many different answers and I seek an exception to help me. Cheers!

If you were born in OZ you are an Australian citizen by birth. Going on you stated age; you must have done at least 45yrs of work in OZ and paid Taxes for whatever how many companies you worked for.

At attaining the age of 65 you are therefore entitled to the Old Age Pension (OAP) and any other benefits that come with it such as phone allowance and travel

allowance etc. However if after retiring you move back to Thailand to live on a permanent or semi-permanent basis you will lose your benefits but not you full pension. If Thailand and Australia have an agreement, your pension can be paid into your bank in Thailand.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

[simple1]

Happy NY all. I return to a question is raised a while ago. Currently working in LOS for 6 years. I am 62 and have resigned myself to going back to OZ before I am 63 so I can satisfy the residence requirement to make my oap portable at 65. Could not convince anyone at c/l that "i am still OZ resident as i am forced to live here due to my work" argument. So currently turning my life upside down to qualify..... I guess that is what the OZ government want. Have any of more learned forum members heard of anyone in my position who obtained portability straight away when applying for oap at 65? I ask because c/l have too many different answers and I seek an exception to help me. Cheers!

If you were born in OZ you are an Australian citizen by birth. Going on you stated age; you must have done at least 45yrs of work in OZ and paid Taxes for whatever how many companies you worked for.

At attaining the age of 65 you are therefore entitled to the Old Age Pension (OAP) and any other benefits that come with it such as phone allowance and travel

allowance etc. However if after retiring you move back to Thailand to live on a permanent or semi-permanent basis you will lose your benefits but not you full pension. If Thailand and Australia have an agreement, your pension can be paid into your bank in Thailand.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

A few corrections, if you are a naturalised Australian citizen Aged Pension also applies, as well as for holders of permanent resident visas. As of 01/2014, subject to legislation being enacted, Australian Working Life Residence (AWLR) criteria will be 35 years, not 45. If not complying to the 35 year AWLR at time of application after 01/2014, the full pension will be pro rata. I understand the pro rata rates have not yet been published. Centrelink International Services have informed me that Aged Pension is paid into a Thai bank account in Australian dollars, has this changed?

[OZEMADE]

Happy NY all. I return to a question is raised a while ago. Currently working in LOS for 6 years. I am 62 and have resigned myself to going back to OZ before I am 63 so I can satisfy the residence requirement to make my oap portable at 65. Could not convince anyone at c/l that "i am still OZ resident as i am forced to live here due to my work" argument. So currently turning my life upside down to qualify..... I guess that is what the OZ government want. Have any of more learned forum members heard of anyone in my position who obtained portability straight away when applying for oap at 65? I ask because c/l have too many different answers and I seek an exception to help me. Cheers!

Hope this answers most of your questions, if not link below.

This is up to date as from 19/3/13.

Disability Support Pension (DSP)

If you leave Australia to live in another country you will not be able to receive Disability Support Pension (DSP) in the other country, unless you:

are terminally ill and are leaving Australia permanently to be with or near a family member, or to return to your country of origin, or

left Australia prior to 1 July 2004, and at the time of leaving you were told that you could be paid indefinitely, and you have not returned to Australia to live since that time, or

have been assessed in Australia prior to the departure as having a permanent, severe impairment and no future work capacity. Assessment involves a review of your DSP qualification and a Job Capacity Assessment.

In these situations, you can keep your DSP payments for the whole time youre outside Australia, however, the amount that you get may change.

When you leave Australia temporarily, you can usually get your DSP payments for up to six weeks while you're away.

You may be able to get your DSP for more than six weeks if you:

are studying outside Australia as part of a full-time Australian course, or

are severely disabled and dependent on and living with, a family member who has been temporarily posted to work outside Australia by their Australian employer.

If you returned to live in Australia and were granted or transferred to DSP within the last two years, you will not be able to receive DSP outside Australia. After you return, to be paid outside the country you must have been living in Australia for two years since you last arrived in Australia to live.

If you stop receiving your DSP under the rules mentioned above, you may be able to get a pension from the country you're going to, if it has a social security agreement with Australia that covers DSP. However, this normally requires you to be 'severely disabled'.

If you are travelling to New Zealand, your payment rate may be affected by the social security agreement between Australia and New Zealand.

For more information, such as whether the country that you are going to has a social security agreement with Australia, visit Countries that have a agreements with Australia[2] or call International Services on 131 673.All other items re DSP link below.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/outside-australia#a3

[David48]

I started a topic entitled rates-cuts-and-a-short-george-the-end-in-sight in discuss the Aussie vs Thai Baht exchange rate.

There is a case to be made that the Aussie has peaked this cycle and that, if it's value continues to fall against the Thai Baht, it will diminish the pension benefits you receive.

Just a heads up.

[Xangsamhua]

Has anyone spoken to Centrelink International regarding the changes in pension portability since 1 July and their impact on people who may be planning to retire in Thailand and have met all the requirements to access the OAP?

I'm in Oz now and have kept open the possibility of returning to Thailand for an extended period once I've been back here for two years, but pensioners I know have been advised that portability is now reduced to 6 weeks, and have changed their plans as a result.

I have been aware of the (now in place) reduced allowable period outside Australia for quite a while, but understood it to apply to (1) people who are resident in Australia and (2) to allowances, not the core pension. However others have been advised differently.

I assume from the absence of complaint in this forum that Australian age pension recipients resident in Thailand have not been affected. However, I'm not sure how potential retirees in Thailand may be affected.

There is some ambiguity in my mind in the following statements from the Australian Government page on the topic. I've highlighted in red the parts that seem especially relevant.

Portability rules introduced on 1 January 2013

From 1 January 2013 generally all payments are portable for up to 6 weeks (for most payments, only for temporary absences). Specific conditions must be met for some payments.

The 6 week portability period is subject to continuing qualification for the payment and nothing in the portability rules confers a right on a recipient to continue to be paid if the recipient is not qualified for the payment (section 1212D). This means that qualification for the payment overrides any portability provisions.

Portability is defined in terms of payability, i.e. as long as a person qualifies for a payment the payment can be paid for temporary absences of up to 6 weeks. Ancillary payments such as RA and PhA are also portable for up to 26 weeks (6 weeks for TAL) for temporary absences only if the main payment is portable indefinitely.

Entitled WidB, entitled WP and Age are portable indefinitely. Terminally ill DSP recipients who are severely disabled and those who have a severe and permanent impairment and no future work capacity, may also have unlimited portability for permanent departures. These recipients with unlimited portability may have their payments proportionalised after 26 weeks of absence if their AWLR is less than 25 years (there are special rules if the recipient is departing to New Zealand). Some of these recipients may also retain the 20 September 2000 savings provision (see below).

http://guidesacts.fahcsia.gov.au/guides_acts/ssg/ssguide-7/ssguide-7.1/ssguide-7.1.1/ssguide-7.1.1.10.html

[SaintLouisBlues]

"Age Pension

You can get Age Pension for the whole time you are overseas, regardless of whether you leave Australia temporarily or permanently.

However, the amount of pension you receive may change if you remain outside Australia for more than 26 weeks. Whether or not your payment amount changes will depend on how long you have lived in Australia between age 16 and age pension age. "

From the Human Services web site. Where's the ambiguity?

[Xangsamhua]

"Age Pension

You can get Age Pension for the whole time you are overseas, regardless of whether you leave Australia temporarily or permanently.

However, the amount of pension you receive may change if you remain outside Australia for more than 26 weeks. Whether or not your payment amount changes will depend on how long you have lived in Australia between age 16 and age pension age. "

From the Human Services web site. Where's the ambiguity?

Thank you SLB.

I can now see the sentences you've quoted on the website.

That looks quite clear to me. But it looks like Centrelink branches have been advising people differently.

I have been told by three people that they can't have their pensions transferred abroad now. One is a dual (Thai-Australian) national; another is a friend who has cut back to six weeks a planned 3-month trip to the States paid for by people over there. Another is a friend of a friend who was planning to spend six months in the US and six months in Oz each year, but has been advised to abandon that idea.

I guess people in this situation should always seek advice from Centrelink International in Hobart.

Cheers

Xangsamhua