Baby Bonus - Poof - Gone In 60 Secs

[David48]

Baby Bonus - Poof - gone in 60 secs of the Australian Budget Speech

The Federal Government has taken a swipe at so-called middle-class welfare by abolishing the baby bonus in a deficit budget that delivers almost no traditional election-year sweeteners.

Instead Treasurer Wayne Swan says there will be "targeted, sustainable" cuts to bring the budget back into the black in four years' time.

"We haven't approached this budget in relation to opinion polls. We're in this for the long run - the long-run reforms," he said.

The centrepiece of Mr Swan's sixth budget is long-range funding for the Government's signature multi-billion-dollar measures to introduce a national disability insurance scheme and the Gonski school education changes.

Here

So, for those Australians who have chosen to have your child/children in Thailand and plan to return to Australia. The Baby Bonus, in it's current form, will be axed from March 1, 2014 and a smaller bonus will be part of the FTB-A (Family Tax Bonus - Part A) will be $2,000 for the first child and an additional $1,000 for subsequent children. What is not clear is if March 1, 2014 is a claim date, a birth date ... or something else.

.

[BookMan]

Im glad they got rid of that ridiculous bonus. That was Howard at his vote buying worst.

[samran]

Good in my book too.

Now they just need to get rid of negative gearing, the private heath insurance rebate, the first home buyers grant and a few other things, and Australia will be a much fairer place to live.

[Spoonman]

Australians (Iam one) need to be more pro-active and responsible for bringing new life into this world rather than doing it for a govment payout........

Grow a set fellow ossies and pay your way, if you rely on the govment your nothing but a leach waiting for the next dole cheque.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Spoonman

[FDog]

Agree, all that bonus did was encourage teenage girls to have babies so they could get a plazma tv. Then another baby, then another. They were on the road to professional recipients of government benefits for the rest of their lives.

Plenty of single mothers because of this debacle, and lots from low socio economic areas wanting a quick dollar.

Next I hope it is the first home buyers scheme. All that did was make it easier for real estate agents and sellers to up the price of the home as the govt is paying a percentage of it. Artificial inflation of house prices.

After that can we please get rid of the 50% or whatever it is the govt refunds parents with their children in childcare? All that has done is drive up the price of childcare an equivalent amount as the refund.

I just wish one day that those who want children will actually be able to afford them.

Edited May 15, 2013 by FDog

[David48]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

[BookMan]

I

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

None at all. Pure vote buying.

Has it encouraged some demographics to have babies earlier/at a younger age? For those planning to have children anyway it was simply an added bonus.

There was some bonus a few years back that EVERYONE one got from the government. $1000 or some such thing? That was when sales of flat screens went through the roof. Mine went straight to the bank account. That was the same cynical politicking as the baby bonus.

Negative gearing for property investment is also a crazy system. It rewards people for 'losing' money. Negatively geared investors 'lost' $13 billion in 2010/11. Generally the higher the wage earner, the larger their average loss. Perhaps if negative gearing ONLY applied to newly built properties it could be justified.

Fuel tax excise and certain tax benefits on superannuation are also contentious.

[samran]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

Not really, it was simply a electoral bribe. But like all things money wise, once it is there, people start to include it in their budget.

I also think you are forgetting that you should be eligible for family payments Part A, and if you are low income, Part B. So that is a bit of cash each week the government still gives you to help with the costs you describe.

[fletchsmile]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

I don't really see that as a positive for society as a whole. Just a positive for individuals because they benefiting from state funding. To me that's the essence of the issue, people accepting personal gains and handouts as the norm, which eventually lead to feelings of "expectation and "entitlement".

Effectively what you're saying is it's expensive for people to have kids and rather than wait a while until they can fund it themselves it's good that the country gives them money (from their perspective). Meanwhile the money needs to come from somewhere - possibly from an area which is more "needy", but just not the same in terms of PR and popularity to get elected.

The policy was largely votebuying and encouraging freeloaders - a slippery slope. Good that the current government is putting what's needed above what's popular and buys votes.

BTW not saying you personally are a freeloader. Just that the policy encourages people to... and is the thin end of a very big wedge

Fletch

[krisb]

Im glad they got rid of that ridiculous bonus.  That was Howard at his vote buying worst.

Anytime the government wants to give you money it's not ridiculous.

Sent from my LG-E612 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[krisb]

Actually means you have 8 days left to get her pregnant!

This is how dumb social security are, I got a letter last week from them saying sorry we can't pay your baby bonus as you and your wife aren't the primary carers of your daughter. <deleted>!! If it was just a grand I'd say stuff em, couldn't be bothered. But it's 5grand so when I've got a free day to spend in their office.

Imagine if Thailand offered 150ish thousand baht for ne babies!!..

[krisb]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

 

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

 

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future.  That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

 

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

 

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

 

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

Here's a positive David, population growth. Any incentive helps.

[harrry]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

Here's a positive David, population growth. Any incentive helps.

In that case should theey stop handing out condoms?

That should save a few dollars aqnd ensure a matching population boost.

The medical insurance subsidy is a farce as the government pays all the medical charges at private hospital as well as those in government hospitals. I think they should stop funding procedures in Private hospitals and put the money into the govt hospitals.

Edited May 17, 2013 by harrry

[althemighty]

My Thai wife is pregnant right now so we will still get the bonus. However, the second child is going to be where most people feel the pain. I think encouraging women to go to work for a few months in order to qualify for maternity leave before having a second child is annoying. We planned to have our children close together but from the way the governments are managing maternity pay and removing the baby bonus what we are doing is penalized

[krisb]

The baby bonus is just that, a bonus. Its a drop in the ocean of raising children. Its by no means the determining factor for us having another. Can't wait for the next!

Interesting fact I learned was Australia had a baby bonus scheme in 1912. It paid 5pounds to parents back then. To be eligible, you had to be white!...My how times have changed.

[David48]

Baby Bonus Update ...

Current Situation ...

Under the baby bonus, stay-at-home mothers in families with incomes
of up to $150,000 get paid $5000 for the birth of each child.

Labor (Government party) ...

Labor wants to reduce those payments to $2000 for the first
child and $1000 for each subsequent child. Labor has also changed the
eligibility. Under the new arrangement, the threshold would be about
$101,000 in family income for first child payments and about $112,000
for subsequent babies.

Coalition Policy (opposition party) ...

In a radio interview on Monday morning, Mr Hockey said that
the Coalition would ''not support new spending measures from the Labor
government other than those we specifically identify, and [family tax
benefit part A] is not on the list''.

From

What the cut off date applies, I haven't been able to discern the facts.

[dave111223]

Here's a positive David, population growth. Any incentive helps.

In that case should theey stop handing out condoms?

Nah they should keep handing out condoms but poke holes in them first. Now that's how to stimulate population growth.

[harrry]

Here's a positive David, population growth. Any incentive helps.

In that case should theey stop handing out condoms?

Nah they should keep handing out condoms but poke holes in them first. Now that's how to stimulate population growth.

Actually if you check the number of government (Medicaire) funded abortions I think the medical fraternity have set up a seperate company to ramdomly pinhole test each condom.

Not that I am against either but maybe less govt involement and more personal responsibility would help everybody and leave more for those needing it.

Edited May 21, 2013 by harrry

[BookMan]

Baby Bonus Update ...

Current Situation ...

Under the baby bonus, stay-at-home mothers in families with incomes

of up to $150,000 get paid $5000 for the birth of each child.

Labor (Government party) ...

Labor wants to reduce those payments to $2000 for the first

child and $1000 for each subsequent child. Labor has also changed the

eligibility. Under the new arrangement, the threshold would be about

$101,000 in family income for first child payments and about $112,000

for subsequent babies.

Coalition Policy (opposition party) ...

In a radio interview on Monday morning, Mr Hockey said that

the Coalition would ''not support new spending measures from the Labor

government other than those we specifically identify, and [family tax

benefit part A] is not on the list''.

From

What the cut off date applies, I haven't been able to discern the facts.

The article says the Coalition would scrap the baby bonus entirely, including the revised Labor government offer

[David48]

Baby Bonus Update ...

Current Situation ...

Under the baby bonus, stay-at-home mothers in families with incomes

of up to $150,000 get paid $5000 for the birth of each child.

Labor (Government party) ...

Labor wants to reduce those payments to $2000 for the first

child and $1000 for each subsequent child. Labor has also changed the

eligibility. Under the new arrangement, the threshold would be about

$101,000 in family income for first child payments and about $112,000

for subsequent babies.

Coalition Policy (opposition party) ...

In a radio interview on Monday morning, Mr Hockey said that

the Coalition would ''not support new spending measures from the Labor

government other than those we specifically identify, and [family tax

benefit part A] is not on the list''.

From

What the cut off date applies, I haven't been able to discern the facts.

The article says the Coalition would scrap the baby bonus entirely, including the revised Labor government offer

True, but under the 'fair use rule' I'm only allowed roughly 3 quotes from the article ... but BookMan is correct 100%.

Under a Coalition government it's dust.

.

[BookMan]

The baby bonus is to be scrapped march 1, 2014. So that would mean if you give birth before then you would qualify.

Interesting that the Newspoll and I htink the Nielsen poll found about 65% public support for scrapping the bonus. I was surprised it was so high

[David48]

The baby bonus is to be scrapped march 1, 2014. So that would mean if you give birth before then you would qualify.

Interesting that the Newspoll and I htink the Nielsen poll found about 65% public support for scrapping the bonus. I was surprised it was so high

Is that the Labor Party or Coalition policy that the baby bonus is to be scrapped march 1, 2014

Have you got a link for that info above ... I've been able to find any date from the Coalition policy.

I would have presumed that it would have to be 9 months after the election if the Coalition were successful in winning.

.

[BookMan]

The baby bonus is to be scrapped march 1, 2014. So that would mean if you give birth before then you would qualify.

Interesting that the Newspoll and I htink the Nielsen poll found about 65% public support for scrapping the bonus. I was surprised it was so high

Is that the Labor Party or Coalition policy that the baby bonus is to be scrapped march 1, 2014

Have you got a link for that info above ... I've been able to find any date from the Coalition policy.

I would have presumed that it would have to be 9 months after the election if the Coalition were successful in winning.

.

That is the labor budget. The coalition has said they wouldnt tinker with those parts of the budget?

here is the labor budget part.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2013-14/content/glossy/tax_policy/html/tax_overview_16.htm

[patongphil]

Quick question here. How does it appply to kids born overseas and one parent is not an Aussie? Just interested as we have a 2 year old and another on the way and never thought this would apply to us.

[samran]

Quick question here. How does it appply to kids born overseas and one parent is not an Aussie? Just interested as we have a 2 year old and another on the way and never thought this would apply to us.

You won't be eligible unless you return to live in Australia within 28 weeks of the child's birth.

[patongphil]

Quick question here. How does it appply to kids born overseas and one parent is not an Aussie? Just interested as we have a 2 year old and another on the way and never thought this would apply to us.

You won't be eligible unless you return to live in Australia within 28 weeks of the child's birth.

Oh well not much chance of that - thanks anyway.

[David48]

There is a reasonable chance that the Coalition will be elected to Government later this year.

I couldn't find any information about the timing of their policy in relation to the Baby Bonus ... so I wrote to a sitting Federal Member ... and fair cop to him ... within a week I had my reply.

Edited email (just cutting out the self promotion and the bagging of the sitting government)

As you know, the Labor Treasurer the Hon Wayne Swan MP, announced Labor has scrapped the baby bonus effective from 1 March 2014.

To implement the changes to the baby bonus, legislation changing the Social Security Act will need to be introduced into Parliament and passed before Parliament rises for the winter recess on 27 June. If this legislation is passed then the baby bonus scheme will be phased out by 1 March 2014.

However, if Labor does not introduce the legislation prior to Parliament rising, then it will be a future Government which must attempt to make the budget 'stack up'. <snip>

... it is impossible to say definitively at this point in time what the Coalition will do in terms of the baby bonus if we are fortunate to be elected to Government at the next election and if Labor doesn't actually legislate the change they announced in the budget.

We can't say what we'll do because we don't know the real state of Australia's budget. And we won't know until after the election.

<snip>

So, no definite plans and a 'Watch this space'

[oxymoron]

Negative gearing for property investment is also a crazy system. It
rewards people for 'losing' money. Negatively geared investors 'lost'aluable
$13 billion in 2010/11. Generally the higher the wage earner, the
larger their average loss.

Another blind unsupported quantative statement put out by a boffin promoting tax reform.

1. Australia currently has a chronic shortage of rental houses, particularly in the affordable $350 to $450 range.

2. Governments of all states are not addressing this and their inventory of homes are not adequately maintained, in WA around 10% are in a state of disrepair.

3. Investors fill a valuable role in assisting with the supply of homes for the above purposes.

4. The $ 13 Billion quoted was gross, no offset given for the Capital Gains Tax payable when the negatively geared asset is sold, and I assure you at around 40% of the 50% of the gain made after the first year multiplied by the number of properties sold, it is nowhere near the $13 Billion quoted.

Australian News and some idiots like those that advise governments for large sums have a habit of creating what they believe is wanted.

Remember the old adage " Lies, More lies and Statistics.

BTW was into negative property gearing for 40 years, sold out paid the tax as with the Australian Tenancy Act you would have to be a mug to be a landlord.

[watcharacters]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

.

I thought Australia had one of the world's best health care systems. My Aussie friends have told me often about its low cost.

I think I pay a lot more for things than they do.

"My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia."

[harrry]

I agree with the sentiment of what you guys have written about above (though I don't about the negative gearing aspect if that just relates to housing) however ...

There was a positive case to be made in relation to the Baby Bonus also.

My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia.

So the baby bonus was part of our plan to settle in Australia and to use that money as intended ... to defray the costs of setting up all those things that you need to start family life.

But our situation is but one of a thousand different stories.

Can anyone see the positive side of the (current version) Baby Bonus?

.

.

I thought Australia had one of the world's best health care systems. My Aussie friends have told me often about its low cost.

I think I pay a lot more for things than they do.

"My partner and I are hoping for a child in the near future. That's not possible to be born in Australia as my partner doesn't have any status there and I can't afford the cost of childbirth in a Private Hospital in Australia."

Have a check what the cost would be at a Govt hospital for her. It may be a bit more reasonable than you think.