Australian Aged Pension

[David48]

You are making facts up to suit yourself Chiang2000. Saying that pensions are a basic human right is nonsensical.

BookMan and I are mates.

We disagree on many things ... and that's great ... keeps me on my toes.

He writes "Saying that pensions are a basic human right is nonsensical" ...

Pensions are a safety net, not an income source. They are a privilege, not a right.

That said, most likely when I retire, circa over 2 decades hence and Bookie closer to 3 decades, there will no pension as we know it today which you guys benefit from.

We will have to take care of ourselves through superannuation, a personal pension scheme.

Now, hawking back (pun intended) there were salary rises forgone so that there could be the 'Super' scheme. Back then, we could have had more toys to play with, more coin in the pocket ... but no, the Government made us have a forced saving scheme to help us in the times ahead, 37 years ahead in my case when we weren't working anymore.

It's our taxes which we pay now which, in part, gives you your pension ... as you did by paying your Father's.

None of us begrudge doing that.

It was the system with which you were raised.

Added to that, there was a sense 'of entitlement' ... that the State would take care of you.

That entitlement phase is over ... the country simply can't afford an ever increasing Welfare Bill.

.

[Chiang2000]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Bookman, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, BUT

1)The figure of 7% IS a somewhat arbitrary. From 1944 to 1950 it was a separate 'levy' of 13.33333%. Menzies put the 'new' levy of 7.5% into Consolidated Revenue. In 1985 Hawke-Keating put the balance of monies left in the separate National Welfare Fund into Consolidated Revenue. The levy of 7.5% is still collected but is no longer shown as a separate item. Google "truth about pensions" then follow up with other similar wording. Some sites are hard to find!

2)Pensions ARE a human right. First read ICESCR, especially article 9. Then read Britannica - "social insurance".

3) I can only assume that none of this affects you personally - for many thousands of us, it does!

You are making facts up to suit yourself Chiang2000. Saying that pensions are a basic human right is nonsensical.

There is NO levy for Pensions and there has never been a specific tax levied in Australia to pay for social security benefits.

Paying of pensions does indeed affect me personally, as I am currently paying income tax and will be for many years to come. It is income tax that will go towards funding pensions and other benefits, which are not sustainable on current trends. So it affects me very much.

If you have sites that support your position link them for scrutiny.

Bookman I suggest you do not show your ignorance by demanding sources instead of doing your own research. Bookman's facts are completely true as regards the National Welfare Fund which was a key plank of Federation to replace similar State Based funds,. There is one caveat. This fund and the associated levies only applied to Age, Widows and Disability benefits and did not cover other forms of social security.

Harrry, you are absolutely correct. The fund DID only apply to the benefits you mentioned. I apologize if I have inadvertently caused confusion, but the forum topic is 163135-australian-aged-pension although I should probably have been clearer in my posts. Thanks for pointing it out.

[Chiang2000]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You are making facts up to suit yourself Chiang2000. Saying that pensions are a basic human right is nonsensical.

BookMan and I are mates.

We disagree on many things ... and that's great ... keeps me on my toes.

He writes "Saying that pensions are a basic human right is nonsensical" ... alt=thumbsup.gif>

Pensions are a safety net, not an income source. They are a privilege, not a right.

That said, most likely when I retire, circa over 2 decades hence and Bookie closer to 3 decades, there will no pension as we know it today which you guys benefit from.

We will have to take care of ourselves through superannuation, a personal pension scheme.

Now, hawking back (pun intended) there were salary rises forgone so that there could be the 'Super' scheme. Back then, we could have had more toys to play with, more coin in the pocket ... but no, the Government made us have a forced saving scheme to help us in the times ahead, 37 years ahead in my case when we weren't working anymore.

It's our taxes which we pay now which, in part, gives you your pension ... as you did by paying your Father's.

None of us begrudge doing that.

It was the system with which you were raised.

Added to that, there was a sense 'of entitlement' ... that the State would take care of you.

That entitlement phase is over ... the country simply can't afford an ever increasing Welfare Bill.

.

You are basically absolutely correct David48! These are worrying times for all concerned.

Yes, it is the system I was raised in. I am now 67. I worked and paid taxes in Oz for 39 years. It wasn't until very late in my working life that the government started talking about the change to self-funding, yet even then there was never any mention of OUR generation not getting a state pension..

I agree that it WILL be the way of the future and if I was in my thirties - or even forties - I would have no problem with that.

However, the covenants from the UN, which Oz has ratified, clearly state that EVERYONE is entitled to an age pension. It should also be noted that it has been shown that pensions paid to people living abroad cost the government much less than for those living in Oz (ancillary benefits). Also the Oz government requires us to claim pensions from other countries that we have worked in and that any amount received be deducted from any Oz pension. Again, I have no real problem with that, although I fail to see, on moral grounds, why it should be deducted when I have worked in Oz for longer than the required time to receive a full pension. C'est la vie I guess. I am objecting to the perceived notion that I am being discriminated against simply because I choose to live outside Oz. It also appears that I am just one of many! I would like to see genuine moral justice for all of us.

Hawking? I like that one. Maybe I will have to go hawking to make a living - unfortunately that is strictly illegal here at the moment!

[BookMan]

Bookman, the quotes above are from HISTORY OF PENSIONS AND OTHER BENEFITS IN AUSTRALIA. This document was prepared by the Department of Social Security to give a precis of the history of pensions in Australia: it was not intended to show funding of such, only the benefits. However, had you continued your quoting you would have come to:

There was a further development of specific relevance to social security in 1945. The Commonwealth split the personal income tax into two components. One, the social services contribution, was to be used exclusively to finance social security cash payments. Revenue from the contribution was paid into the National Welfare Fund, from which all such cash payments were to be made, but there was no link between personal contributions and entitlements. The fund was supplemented by subventions from payroll tax and general revenue. In the event, the social services contribution was again merged into a single personal income tax in 1950. All cash payments are now made direct from general revenue.

which clearly shows that there HAVE been separate accounts for welfare which included a social service contribution. There was no specific tax levied in Australia for Pensions - read above!!!!! Yes, it was called a contribution. It was compulsory. Therefore it was a tax.

Why should you try and research against a fact? To be certain of ANY 'fact' you need to read all accounts, not just propaganda.

FULL details ARE available on the funding - if you have the nous to find them. I am spending a considerable amount of time doing research at the moment and simply posted to see if anyone on the forum had any CONSTRUCTIVE comments. I do not have the time to waste on teaching you how to research. The information in the last post SHOULD be enough to get you started in a quest to find the truth. Obviously you will not/ can not utilize the information. IF you have any constructive comments, please give them. If not . . .

When my research IS complete, and I know ALL the facts, I will post them here.

It must be exhausting being you. You have quoted against your initial argument.

The levy you talk of was simply an allocation split of income tax/general revenue that was already in place/being received. There was no specific tax levy. Any levy as you call it was simply legislation to provide a fund using monies already being collected into general revenue.

Let me reiterate for you; There is no special 7% levy/allocation of tax that has been redirected by the government. There never was any special 7%. You have paid no special Pension levy through your taxes your entire life in Australia. Zero. None. Past tax payments have no bearing on your future entitlements.

If you are going to spout your wildly inaccurate assertions here I do feel compelled to challenge them.

Any person who is suffering through lack of pension should be given actual facts, not told nonsense by yourself. It is hard enough for people who find themselves struggling financially, they don't need to be given hope there is a magical fund hidden away and your research will unlock the truth for all.

[harrry]

The original funding for the scheme was a transfer from the levies of the state welfare funds. Remember until the second world war the Commonwealths revenue raising powers were very limited. As a temporary wartime measure (and we all know what temporary means) the power to levy income tax was ceded to the Federal Government by the states, As part of this deal there was a transfer of some of the specific purpose levies and funds which became the foundation of the National Welfare Fund (this is why the National Welfare Fund was founded in 1940) This transfer was highly conditional. Of course it was only temporar and everyone can trust the Government can't they.

One problem with using the internet and WIkipaedea for this type of research is that the source material and commentaries were printed before the internet was even thought of and unless you are prepared to breathe some dust reading old documents you young ones will never find out.

Edited June 3, 2014 by harrry

[BookMan]

The original funding for the scheme was a transfer from the levies of the state welfare funds. Remember until the second world war the Commonwealths revenue raising powers were very limited. As a temporary wartime measure (and we all know what temporary means) the power to levy income tax was ceded to the Federal Government by the states, As part of this deal there was a transfer of some of the specific purpose levies and funds which became the foundation of the National Welfare Fund (this is why the National Welfare Fund was founded in 1940) This transfer was highly conditional. Of course it was only temporar and everyone can trust the Government can't they.

One problem with using the internet and WIkipaedea for this type of research is that the source material and commentaries were printed before the internet was even thought of and unless you are prepared to breathe some dust reading old documents you young ones will never find out.

Maybe it is easier to simplify things thus: There is no direct connection between contributions to the tax system and pension benefits and there never has been.

[harrry]

The original funding for the scheme was a transfer from the levies of the state welfare funds. Remember until the second world war the Commonwealths revenue raising powers were very limited. As a temporary wartime measure (and we all know what temporary means) the power to levy income tax was ceded to the Federal Government by the states, As part of this deal there was a transfer of some of the specific purpose levies and funds which became the foundation of the National Welfare Fund (this is why the National Welfare Fund was founded in 1940) This transfer was highly conditional. Of course it was only temporar and everyone can trust the Government can't they.

One problem with using the internet and WIkipaedea for this type of research is that the source material and commentaries were printed before the internet was even thought of and unless you are prepared to breathe some dust reading old documents you young ones will never find out.

Maybe it is easier to simplify things thus: There is no direct connection between contributions to the tax system and pension benefits and there never has been.

FALSE

[BookMan]

The original funding for the scheme was a transfer from the levies of the state welfare funds. Remember until the second world war the Commonwealths revenue raising powers were very limited. As a temporary wartime measure (and we all know what temporary means) the power to levy income tax was ceded to the Federal Government by the states, As part of this deal there was a transfer of some of the specific purpose levies and funds which became the foundation of the National Welfare Fund (this is why the National Welfare Fund was founded in 1940) This transfer was highly conditional. Of course it was only temporar and everyone can trust the Government can't they.

One problem with using the internet and WIkipaedea for this type of research is that the source material and commentaries were printed before the internet was even thought of and unless you are prepared to breathe some dust reading old documents you young ones will never find out.

Maybe it is easier to simplify things thus: There is no direct connection between contributions to the tax system and pension benefits and there never has been.

FALSE

How so?

Did you see evidence to the contrary handwritten on a scrap piece of paper in an unmarked folder in the secret hidden vault at the national archives?

I have provided evidence for my argument but all yourself and chiang2000 provide are vagaries.

You keep implying you are old, but age doesn't have to be an indicator of laziness

[Chiang2000]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The original funding for the scheme was a transfer from the levies of the state welfare funds. Remember until the second world war the Commonwealths revenue raising powers were very limited. As a temporary wartime measure (and we all know what temporary means) the power to levy income tax was ceded to the Federal Government by the states, As part of this deal there was a transfer of some of the specific purpose levies and funds which became the foundation of the National Welfare Fund (this is why the National Welfare Fund was founded in 1940) This transfer was highly conditional. Of course it was only temporar and everyone can trust the Government can't they.

One problem with using the internet and WIkipaedea for this type of research is that the source material and commentaries were printed before the internet was even thought of and unless you are prepared to breathe some dust reading old documents you young ones will never find out.

Maybe it is easier to simplify things thus: There is no direct connection between contributions to the tax system and pension benefits and there never has been.

FALSE

How so?

Did you see evidence to the contrary handwritten on a scrap piece of paper in an unmarked folder in the secret hidden vault at the national archives?

I have provided evidence for my argument but all yourself and chiang2000 provide are vagaries.

You keep implying you are old, but age doesn't have to be an indicator of laziness

Thanks to Harrry for some sense. Unfortunately it appears we may not be communicating with a logical person.

For Bookman, I agree age does not have any relationship to laziness. How old are you? I have sent you a PM which should clear everything regarding the original topic IF you can follow the links, read the words AND understand them. I personally never use 'light' sources. But I do not regard the various UN websites as light, do you?

[Oishii]

A friend of mine, who had lived in Thailand for a few years, returned to Oz to claim his age pension at 65 and was told he couldn't claim it, because he hadn't lived in Oz for the previous 2 years. He has had to live in Oz and take the odd holiday in Thailand for 2 years before he can get his age pension. He will then be restricted on the amount of time he can spend outside of Oz, otherwise his pension can be stopped.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[BookMan]

Thanks to Harrry for some sense. Unfortunately it appears we may not be communicating with a logical person.

For Bookman, I agree age does not have any relationship to laziness. How old are you? I have sent you a PM which should clear everything regarding the original topic IF you can follow the links, read the words AND understand them. I personally never use 'light' sources. But I do not regard the various UN websites as light, do you?

You and harrry remind me of a tag team comedy duo.

What is all this stuff about 'if I can follow the links, read the words AND understand them?

I feel like I am participating in a story about the Illuminati where I have to follow vague clues and decipher documents and once I solve the riddle, History will be changed forever!

Enough of the 'Boys Own Adventure Top Secret Document Club' eh?

Chiang2000, if you have sources and proof of your claims you can post it on this thread for all here to read and evaluate. I wont do it through PM.

Here is what you need to provide for proof of your following claims:

1. That Australians have paid for their pensions in advance

2. There is a 7% pension levy which is to be used only for pensions

3. Proof that monetary Pensions are a basic human right as mandated by the UN

You stated you have retired and you have time to research these issues and you state it all as fact so just link it up for us big fella

[degilbo]

A friend of mine, who had lived in Thailand for a few years, returned to Oz to claim his age pension at 65 and was told he couldn't claim it, because he hadn't lived in Oz for the previous 2 years. He has had to live in Oz and take the odd holiday in Thailand for 2 years before he can get his age pension. He will then be restricted on the amount of time he can spend outside of Oz, otherwise his pension can be stopped.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

From information that I have read on various forums my understanding is that if you are in Australia before you turn 65yrs that

You will get paid the OAP but you will have to stay in Australia for 2 years without leaving the country after that you are FREE to live anywhere and receive the basic OAP excluding any of the addons that would be received in Australia.

If you leave Australia during this period the 2 year NON PORTABILITY period resets to 2 years.

There is an interesting thread over at this link.

http://dspoverseas.proboards.com/thread/3132/extended-period-overseas-returning-claim

Apologies to MODS if this link should not have been posted thought OK because a non competing free forum

[lungdavid]

you can take short breaks overseas but your pension stops when you do and is recommenced when you return, after you have done your 2 years you may only leave for 26 weeks at a time from the website

[mcfish]

you can take short breaks overseas but your pension stops when you do and is recommenced when you return, after you have done your 2 years you may only leave for 26 weeks at a time from the website

Thats incorrect

[merlen10002]

Australian Working Life Residency changes

[merlen10002]

Australian Working Life Residency changes

Sorry will try again

[David48]

Australian Working Life Residency changes

Thanks for sharing ... we can see and read your 2 page letter.

[Will27]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

Edited June 8, 2014 by Will27

[harrry]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

[simple1]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

Will also need to be aware of Australian Residency criteria compliance rules after living in Thailand for 12 years, comes across as uninformed

[Will27]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

Will also need to be aware of Australian Residency criteria compliance rules after living in Thailand for 12 years, comes across as uninformed

IMO, a lot of these people have done no research when deciding to make the move.

I've read a lot of posts where people think they can go back to Oz the day before they

turn 65, apply and get the pension and then move away again.

Some people will be in for a rude shock.

I also found it typical that the article mentions most people reside in Europe,

yet they still manage to find and interview an Aussie bloke living in Thailand.

I guess it reads better than interviewing mama & poppa in a village in Greece or Italy

[raybal5]

Australian Working Life Residency changes

Thanks merlen10002. At last we get to see some facts rather than discussion and supposition.

For those interested, you might like to have a read of the rules as published by Dept Human Services which is the department which actually pays the pensions. (Centrelink is merely the public facing service agency for this and other departments).

From the letter merlen10002 posted, if you are already receiving an overseas pension then it will continue after 1/7/2014 and for as long as you stay overseas, the new rules will NOT apply. But as soon as you come back and stay for more than 26 weeks inside Australia, then the new rules will apply.

This is reflected on the website

If you are already outside Australia on 1 July 2014, you can continue to receive your payment under the 25 year rules, unless you return and stay in Australia for 26 weeks or more.

To the OP (Voiceover) and others who are yet to claim the Australian Old Age Pension, then the new rules will apply.

If you depart Australia on or after 1 July 2014, you will usually need to have lived in Australia as an Australian resident for 35 years in order to continue receiving your full rate of pension after 26 weeks. If you have lived in Australia less than 35 years you will receive a smaller rate of pension after 26 weeks outside Australia.

If you get a pension under a social security agreement, the amount that you get paid while you are outside Australia is decided by that agreement. Under most agreements, the amount that you get will reduce when you leave Australia.

To understand what amount you will be paid go to this link. And another important page is this one and understand that ...

Your pension payment is made up of 2 different parts: Age Pension and Pension Supplement. When you leave Australia and we calculate the amount of payment you will receive, we look at Age Pension and Pension Supplement individually. Both payments can change depending on your circumstances. .....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.

I have read other posts talking about cancellation of pension after 2 years away. I can find no mention of this on any official website.

I hope this clarifies things for you Voiceover.

Edited June 11, 2014 by raybal5

[raybal5]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

Will also need to be aware of Australian Residency criteria compliance rules after living in Thailand for 12 years, comes across as uninformed

IMO, a lot of these people have done no research when deciding to make the move.

I've read a lot of posts where people think they can go back to Oz the day before they

turn 65, apply and get the pension and then move away again.

Some people will be in for a rude shock.

I also found it typical that the article mentions most people reside in Europe,

yet they still manage to find and interview an Aussie bloke living in Thailand.

I guess it reads better than interviewing mama & poppa in a village in Greece or Italy

Residence requirements for Age Pension

To be eligible for Age Pension you must satisfy residence requirements. You must be:

• an Australian resident on the day you lodge your claim, and
• be physically present in Australia on the day you lodge your claim

You also need to have been an Australian resident for a continuous period of at least 10 years, or for a number of periods that total more than ten years, with one of the periods being at least five years, unless you:

• are a refugee or former refugee, or
• were getting Partner Allowance, Widow Allowance or Widow B Pension immediately before turning Age Pension age, or
• are a woman whose partner died while you were both Australian residents, and you have been an Australian resident for two years immediately before claiming Age Pension

[harrry]

Will also need to be aware of Australian Residency criteria compliance rules after living in Thailand for 12 years, comes across as uninformed

IMO, a lot of these people have done no research when deciding to make the move.

I've read a lot of posts where people think they can go back to Oz the day before they

turn 65, apply and get the pension and then move away again.

Some people will be in for a rude shock.

I also found it typical that the article mentions most people reside in Europe,

yet they still manage to find and interview an Aussie bloke living in Thailand.

I guess it reads better than interviewing mama & poppa in a village in Greece or Italy

Residence requirements for Age Pension

To be eligible for Age Pension you must satisfy residence requirements. You must be:

• an Australian resident on the day you lodge your claim, and
• be physically present in Australia on the day you lodge your claim

You also need to have been an Australian resident for a continuous period of at least 10 years, or for a number of periods that total more than ten years, with one of the periods being at least five years, unless you:

• are a refugee or former refugee, or
• were getting Partner Allowance, Widow Allowance or Widow B Pension immediately before turning Age Pension age, or
• are a woman whose partner died while you were both Australian residents, and you have been an Australian resident for two years immediately before claiming Age Pension

A very incomplete quote.

[raybal5]

Will also need to be aware of Australian Residency criteria compliance rules after living in Thailand for 12 years, comes across as uninformed

Residence requirements for Age Pension

To be eligible for Age Pension you must satisfy residence requirements. You must be:

• an Australian resident on the day you lodge your claim, and
• be physically present in Australia on the day you lodge your claim

You also need to have been an Australian resident for a continuous period of at least 10 years, or for a number of periods that total more than ten years, with one of the periods being at least five years, unless you:

• are a refugee or former refugee, or
• were getting Partner Allowance, Widow Allowance or Widow B Pension immediately before turning Age Pension age, or
• are a woman whose partner died while you were both Australian residents, and you have been an Australian resident for two years immediately before claiming Age Pension

A very incomplete quote.

If you say so harry. Would you please enlighten us all with the complete quote?

[harrry]

Residence requirements for Age Pension

To be eligible for Age Pension you must satisfy residence requirements. You must be:

• an Australian resident on the day you lodge your claim, and
• be physically present in Australia on the day you lodge your claim

You also need to have been an Australian resident for a continuous period of at least 10 years, or for a number of periods that total more than ten years, with one of the periods being at least five years, unless you:

• are a refugee or former refugee, or
• were getting Partner Allowance, Widow Allowance or Widow B Pension immediately before turning Age Pension age, or
• are a woman whose partner died while you were both Australian residents, and you have been an Australian resident for two years immediately before claiming Age Pension

A very incomplete quote.

If you say so harry. Would you please enlighten us all with the complete quote?

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/news/changes-to-australian-working-life-residence-rules

Age Pension and Pension Supplement

Your pension payment is made up of 2 different parts: Age Pension and Pension Supplement. When you leave Australia and we calculate the amount of payment you will receive, we look at Age Pension and Pension Supplement individually. Both payments can change depending on your circumstances.

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.

For more information on how the pension payment rates are calculated, go to Pension payment rates while absent from Australia.

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

If you returned to live in Australia and were granted or transferred to Age Pension within the last 2 years, you will not be able to receive your Age Pension outside the country. After you return, to be paid outside the country, you must have been living in Australia for two years since your last arrival for residence. If you travel to a country that Australia has a social security agreement with, you may be able to continue to get your payment under that social security agreement.

gives a more complet coverage of very imortant information.

[raybal5]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

I am very interested to see your source harry. I have looked at the DHS & Centrelink site extensively today and cannot find anything about a requirement to stay in Australia for 2 years after getting a grant of age pension. A website link would be very handy if you would be so kind.

[harrry]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

I am very interested to see your source harry. I have looked at the DHS & Centrelink site extensively today and cannot find anything about a requirement to stay in Australia for 2 years after getting a grant of age pension. A website link would be very handy if you would be so kind.

I suggest you send an email to international services at human services asking them about it. You must be in Australia and a resident to apply. If you have not been in Austrlia for about 2 years before applying you will not be able to leave for 2 years however you will be paid in Australia. It boils down to their test of Australian Resident.

Edited June 11, 2014 by harrry

[harrry]

This article on Aussie pensioners going overseas for a better

standard of living may interest some.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/pensioners-forced-to-flee-abroad-20140607-39q4y.html

I hope Mr Ron Craney knows that he will have to spend another 2 years in Australia before and/or after her gets his Age Pension. That is the present rules, who knows what it will be then.

I am very interested to see your source harry. I have looked at the DHS & Centrelink site extensively today and cannot find anything about a requirement to stay in Australia for 2 years after getting a grant of age pension. A website link would be very handy if you would be so kind.

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

gives some of it.

[Evilbaz]

As an OAP recipient overseas for 6+years (also CPP and OAP from Canada) the new rules are quite simple - 2 years in Australia before or after the grant before it is portable overseas.

And, return to OZ for more than 26 weeks you will be re-assessed on the 35 year rule.

Another little quirk to watch for is that if you are away from OZ continuously for more than 5 years you will have to re-establish "residency" in OZ before you are re-eligible for Medicare benefits.

Another one to consider with your forward planning.

It's almost as complicated as having a TG partner.

(no crossword puzzles needed to ward of that Alz syndrome)