State Pensions, Australia & Others

[giddyup]

Great, except for the 'incapacitated' part ....

Incapacitated doesn't have to mean physically, it can mean PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), which quite often seems to appear at the same time as retirement. Always found that a bit odd.

[samran]

Great, except for the 'incapacitated' part ....

Incapacitated doesn't have to mean physically, it can mean PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), which quite often seems to appear at the same time as retirement. Always found that a bit odd.

i think it is fair to say that people can cover up the issues that lead to PTSD given the normal momentum of life, work, family etc. It is only when you start having more than a few moments to yourself that these things start to catch up with you.

[giddyup]

Great, except for the 'incapacitated' part ....

Incapacitated doesn't have to mean physically, it can mean PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), which quite often seems to appear at the same time as retirement. Always found that a bit odd.

i think it is fair to say that people can cover up the issues that lead to PTSD given the normal momentum of life, work, family etc. It is only when you start having more than a few moments to yourself that these things start to catch up with you.

"Cover up" for 40 years? Yeah, right.

[samran]

Great, except for the 'incapacitated' part ....

Incapacitated doesn't have to mean physically, it can mean PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), which quite often seems to appear at the same time as retirement. Always found that a bit odd.

i think it is fair to say that people can cover up the issues that lead to PTSD given the normal momentum of life, work, family etc. It is only when you start having more than a few moments to yourself that these things start to catch up with you.

"Cover up" for 40 years? Yeah, right.

I'm not trying to be controversial here. Each to their own and I realise you were probably referring to benefit scammers. Have a bit of personal experience in this.

Things do catch up with you if you don't deal with them. Time is of little significance.

[MrWorldwide]

OK, just not sure that genuine PTSD is worth a few hundred a week, particularly when someone with recurrent nightmares etc is likely to drink every cent. Still, we pay our money and take our chances - I'm not here to lecture TVers on the evils of welding a barstool to your butt.

[Will27]

hehehe Bar Talk. If there was ever a place to get the wrong advice it would be an Ex Pat Bar in Thailand. Blokes have been off the plane for 24 Hrs and think they know all the answers.

Having joined the military at 15, I have been on a Pension since I turned 35. Although the practise of paying Pensions to 20 Year Military Veterans ceased in the early nineties and no longer exists in the Australian Military today. IMHO it was the worst thing our government/s ever did. But this is another story.

However. There may be some element of truth in what you heard in the bar when it comes to Australian Taxation Laws.

If you intend to live outside of Australia permanently. I.E. Leaving no fixed address in Australia and declaring yourself a 'Non Resident For Taxation Purposes' AND if your Pension is being paid by an Australian Institution into an Australian Bank (which by law has to be paid this way) then the ATO will tax you from the first dollar you earn at the nominal rate! That's is, you will not receive the now $18,000 Dollar Tax Free Threshold. This can add up to a fair amount of money lost in Tax and cuts into your pension big time! Even if you claim it back at the end of the Tax Year. I have actually spoken to a high powered public servant in the Taxation Department about all this.

Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) Pensions are also paid at the same rate to Vets living overseas, and receive all the rises and adjustments.

But the fair dinkum answer is NO. They do not deduct anything from your Australian Pension based on geographical location. You also get the same increases etc., as if you lived in Aust.

As for Dole/Welfare (different kettle of fish) there have been some changes there. if you are on a Centrelink Disability Pension you can now only spend 6 weeks at a time out of the country before they stop paying you. But this only affects the bludgers.

Hope this clears things up a bit.

I live permanently in Thailand. I receive a government superannuation pension. I contacted the the Taxation department and spoke to an officer in their superannuation department. I was advised that as I am a recipient of a government superannuation pension that I would always be a resident of Australia for taxation purposes. As such I get the Taxation Free Threshold. Only downside is I have to pay the medicare levy. When I fill out my taxation return I tick resident and give my Thailand address.

I hope you're right, but I've got a feeling you are wrong.

Australians tax system is based on self assessment so you're being assessed as a resident

because that is what you've ticked.

Unless you have something in writing from the ATO such as a ruling, you could be in for a rude shock.

If you're audited and the ATO claim you to be a non-resident for taxation purposes, which I think you are,

you will be taxed at 32.5% with no threshold.

That is a huge chunk of change and personally I don't think it's fair.

Regards

Will

What I received from the ATO was an Oral Ruling.

http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm?docid=PSR/PS20083/NAT/ATO/00001#P147

Oral rulings under Division 360

145. An oral ruling is a form of legally binding advice that the ATO can provide in response to a taxpayer's oral application. If a taxpayer

relies on an oral ruling the Commissioner is bound to assess the taxpayer's liability in accordance with the oral ruling that is given and applies to them.

146. However, if the oral ruling is incorrect and disadvantages the taxpayer, then the law may be applied in a way that is more favourable for the taxpayer, provided the Commissioner is not prevented from doing so by a time limit imposed by the law

An oral ruling can only be given to a individual and not a business and what they consider a non complicated decision. I applied for mine early in 2012

When I submit my Taxation return I give my Thailand address.

Oral rulings under Division 360

145. An oral ruling is a form of legally binding advice that the ATO can provide in response to a taxpayer's oral application. If a taxpayer

Edit The above line was missing when I added the reply

Well it seems that you have done well for yourself, nice work.

I just can't find anything anywhere about govt super pensions

recipients being taxed as non-residents. If this was/is the case,

it would put a lot of minds at ease.

Regards

Will

[Will27]

My Australian friend living in Thailand is a retired tax accountant. In his opinion unless he deliberately rattles the ATO cage they will always assume he is a resident for tax purposes. He bases this on fact that the legislation everyone is so keen to quote here is designed for people who are trying to avoid Australian tax by claiming they are not residents of Australia in a given tax year, not to catch people who are not resident but are claiming to be so. He thinks the ATO will act only if Centrelink who administer pensions decide to make an issue of a pensioner who is claiming onshore benefits eg. Utility allowance but in fact is living offshore, and even then the likelihood the ATO will act is very low.

A mutual friend who lived in Australia most of his life until he retired and gets the full government pension happens to have a New Zealand passport as well, so he just enters and leaves Australia on his periodic visits there on his NZ passport while his Australian passport records show he is still in Australia.

I think your accountant friend is on the right track.

The whole issue is a hot potato and I think they (ATO/govt) generally

like to leave it alone. Also, the majority of people on govt super

pensions would be considered to be relatively low income earners

(in the scheme of things) and so would not be targeted.

I imagine there would be a furore if people on low income/pensions

we hit.

Regards

Will

[BookMan]

I'm not trying to be controversial here. Each to their own and I realise you were probably referring to benefit scammers. Have a bit of personal experience in this.

Things do catch up with you if you don't deal with them. Time is of little significance.

Id agree with Samran. Time is not a factor in identifying issues such as PTSD.

[BookMan]

Let's be clear here - are we talking Superannuation or the Australian Aged Pension ? The latter is taxpayer-funded, and was never intended to finance overseas holidays (of whatever duration) -very different to the British 'pension fund' each worker pays into for the duration of their working lives.

The aim of the Australian age pension is to provide an adequate safety net payment to older people unable to support themselves financially in their retirement. Its primary objective is thus the alleviation of poverty. If people can stretch their money further, and enjoy a better standard of living, in an Asian country then why shouldn't they be allowed to. The aged folk in question were/are generally tax-payers themselves and how or where they spend should be up to them to determine. The ongoing cutbacks to the amount of time the government allows people to spend overseas is motivated by popularism and not economic analysis.

Rather than banging on at length about this issue here, anyone who would like to read more about it then please have a look here

I realised later that your link had downloaded your submission.

Im not sure why you think that populism is the main motivation for cut back of time spent overseas though

[giddyup]

I'm not trying to be controversial here. Each to their own and I realise you were probably referring to benefit scammers. Have a bit of personal experience in this.

Things do catch up with you if you don't deal with them. Time is of little significance.

Id agree with Samran. Time is not a factor in identifying issues such as PTSD.

No, but it does seem strange that a lot of claims for PTSD are lodged just prior to retirement.

[BookMan]

I'm not trying to be controversial here. Each to their own and I realise you were probably referring to benefit scammers. Have a bit of personal experience in this.

Things do catch up with you if you don't deal with them. Time is of little significance.

Id agree with Samran. Time is not a factor in identifying issues such as PTSD.

No, but it does seem strange that a lot of claims for PTSD are lodged just prior to retirement.

I dont know the figures for the PTSD retirement claims. DO you have some further information on that?

Speculating:

Is the PTSD real and as such the person is retired from service.

or

Is PTSD falsely claimed so people can retire?

[giddyup]

I'm not trying to be controversial here. Each to their own and I realise you were probably referring to benefit scammers. Have a bit of personal experience in this.

Things do catch up with you if you don't deal with them. Time is of little significance.

Id agree with Samran. Time is not a factor in identifying issues such as PTSD.

No, but it does seem strange that a lot of claims for PTSD are lodged just prior to retirement.

I dont know the figures for the PTSD retirement claims. DO you have some further information on that?

Speculating:

Is the PTSD real and as such the person is retired from service.

or

Is PTSD falsely claimed so people can retire?

Let's just say it seems more than coincidental that a lot of PTSD claims are lodged just prior to a voluntary retirement. How do I know? I can't back my statement up without giving away details of my employment etc, but any Vietnam vet knows how the system works, so it's not a major revelation.

[BookMan]

Let's just say it seems more than coincidental that a lot of PTSD claims are lodged just prior to a voluntary retirement. How do I know? I can't back my statement up without giving away details of my employment etc, but any Vietnam vet knows how the system works, so it's not a major revelation.

The issue of PTSD , as well as a host of other government pensions and benefits is a very interesting one for Australia.

Is Australia at its 'peak' in its tolerance and awarding of different benefits? There has been a steady liberalisation of the criterias of awarding benefits within some categories. The future funding of the benefits is going to be a genuine issue for Australian taxpayers and governments

I can see many cases where people will not qualify for benefits in future. Just a few of the example I can see being steadily cut:

• Age pension living outside of Australia
• Rules governing assets for receiving age pension in or out of Australia will be dramatically reduced. (sell your assets first, then be eligible for pension)
• Forced sale of property assets over a certain benchmark amount before pension will be given. (could involve people having to move out of family home and downsize)
• Various disability benefits. We are already seeing an attempt to pass people fit for minimum working hours a week

[David48]

Is Australia at its 'peak' in its tolerance and awarding of different benefits? There has been a steady liberalisation of the criterias of awarding benefits within some categories. The future funding of the benefits is going to be a genuine issue for Australian taxpayers and governments

I can see many cases where people will not qualify for benefits in future. Just a few of the example I can see being steadily cut:

• Age pension living outside of Australia
• Rules governing assets for receiving age pension in or out of Australia will be dramatically reduced. (sell your assets first, then be eligible for pension)
• Forced sale of property assets over a certain benchmark amount before pension will be given. (could involve people having to move out of family home and downsize)
• Various disability benefits. We are already seeing an attempt to pass people fit for minimum working hours a week

I suppose a lot of it comes down to your philosophy.

Some believe that the Pension in it's various farms is an inalienable, untouchable right that a person has earned by building Australia.

Others maybe believe that the pension is a privilege not a right and should be paid to only those who desperately need it. Those, for whom there is no other option.

What BookMan describes above may become a reality in the near future and the Government's income is reduced further and they look for places to reduce their expenditure.

For example, take the case of the dear old grandmother who has a fibro shack, on a small block of land that she has lived in her entire life, bought up the children, assisted with the grandchildren, used to drive an old Corolla, but has recently lost her licence, and now living on the Old Age Pension.

Now she constantly complains about the cost of living and how difficult it is to eke out any lifestyle with dignity.

Feel compassion for her?

What now, if I added that this fibro shack is located on prime Gold Coast real estate valued in excess of $3,000,000.

Should she be paid the OAP? Be given rate relief?

One option would be for her to take a reverse mortgage on her property which could comfortable release $150,000 to see her off till her toes turn up.

Good idea or not?

Depends on your philosophical viewpoint.

What BookMan describes above could become a reality sooner then in the next decade.

That's the folly of having to rely on the government for your pension ... it's a chameleon ... easy to change it's colours depending on the political mood at the time.

Hence the vital need for a Nation whose future is strong with Superannuation, where the participant has defined choices.

Given my age ... I think I'll just get there.

For someone who only had the benefit of Super later in their working life, the options are indeed more limited.

.

[kurnell]

What is my pension likely to be in 18 years time? Will it cover a cappuccino, a six pack and a bit of slap and tickle?

In 18 years you'll be on hot chocolate. Six packs and slap and tickles will be long gone!

Let's have a bet. One carton of Horlicks?

[watcharacters]

.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/age-pension

[David48]

.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/age-pension

I won't qualify till I'm 67 ...

.

[Old Croc]

What is my pension likely to be in 18 years time? Will it cover a cappuccino, a six pack and a bit of slap and tickle?

In 18 years you'll be on hot chocolate. Six packs and slap and tickles will be long gone!

Let's have a bet. One carton of Horlicks?

[Old Croc]

I turned 65 a couple of weeks ago. I have no plans to return to Australia to apply for a partial OAP and then wait 2 years for portability.

I just don't want to pay 32.5% on my govt superannuation pension. I have a mailing address in Australia and maintain bank accounts. I will continue to claim my rights as a resident on E-Tax until the bastards stuff with it!

[oxymoron]

I turned 65 a couple of weeks ago. I have no plans to return to Australia to apply for a partial OAP and then wait 2 years for portability.

I just don't want to pay 32.5% on my govt superannuation pension. I have a mailing address in Australia and maintain bank accounts. I will continue to claim my rights as a resident on E-Tax until the bastards stuff with it!

They will 4sure in one or two years when the ATC starts 'data matching' with immigration to the level of Centrelink.

[samran]

OK, just not sure that genuine PTSD is worth a few hundred a week, particularly when someone with recurrent nightmares etc is likely to drink every cent. Still, we pay our money and take our chances - I'm not here to lecture TVers on the evils of welding a barstool to your butt.

That is the issue, self medicating. Getting the proper help for this requires - god forbid - seeing a quack. That costs and when you add it up, you are barely covering costs.

Edited June 1, 2013 by samran

[simple1]

I turned 65 a couple of weeks ago. I have no plans to return to Australia to apply for a partial OAP and then wait 2 years for portability.

I just don't want to pay 32.5% on my govt superannuation pension. I have a mailing address in Australia and maintain bank accounts. I will continue to claim my rights as a resident on E-Tax until the bastards stuff with it!

They will 4sure in one or two years when the ATC starts 'data matching' with immigration to the level of Centrelink.

Seven years ago I was away from Australia for 18 months. Within three months of return had a letter from ATO demanding payment of an assessment. At that time I had no Centrelink claim or tax payments that would have alerted ATO of my return. Could have been transactions with my Oz bank or as you say automated data mining of Immigration database

Edited June 1, 2013 by simple1

[mickjn]

False .. they get the same without the benefits . but you have to apply for your pension before you move overseas permanently . If you leave before 65 and you are out of the country for more than two years and return when you are 65 you will have to qualify again , that will be 2 years time . it sinks.

And I think you have to be careful.When it is your 65th birthday,3 months before they can send you out paper work to fill in.There can also call you in for an interview.I got thing information from Centre Link so I am not worried but I am in Australia now and will be here to mid September,and it is going to be a long cold winter.I hate that mettalic strip in the passport

[BookMan]

...

For example, take the case of the dear old grandmother who has a fibro shack, on a small block of land that she has lived in her entire life, bought up the children, assisted with the grandchildren, used to drive an old Corolla, but has recently lost her licence, and now living on the Old Age Pension.

Now she constantly complains about the cost of living and how difficult it is to eke out any lifestyle with dignity.

Feel compassion for her?

What now, if I added that this fibro shack is located on prime Gold Coast real estate valued in excess of $3,000,000.

Should she be paid the OAP? Be given rate relief?

One option would be for her to take a reverse mortgage on her property which could comfortable release $150,000 to see her off till her toes turn up.

G

(I have cut your post down David48 to save some room)

There are a lot of cash poor, asset rich people in Australia because of the property boom.

To be able to release the equity in your home and use the cash makes sense. It enables people to be able to pay for themselves and have greater responsibility for themselves and not have to rely on government handouts. You can't take money or property with you once you die, so if you have the asset it makes sense to have it used.

Of course there would have to be fail-safes in place where the house could not be sold etcetera.

As a thought bubble, perhaps the money from the house could be only accessesed at the rate of pension, Plus any council rates and insurances and maintenances.

There is a range of options

[BookMan]

Looking at the different policies of the Australian political parties it seems that The Greens have the best support for the old age pension.

http://greens.org.au/policies/care-for-people/older-people

1. Older people have the right to live with dignity.
2. The skills and life experience of older people benefit the whole community and the economy
3. Older people have an equal right to participate in social, economic and political aspects of life and to maintain their independence to whatever degree they feel able.
4. All older Australians are entitled to a decent income.
5. The federal government must play a central role in the provision, regulation and support of aged care services.
6. .....

14. A decent income for all older people, including an adequate age pension.

..

22.Availability and affordability of insurance for senior Australians, including insurance for volunteers and travel insurance.

Edited June 3, 2013 by BookMan

[SaintLouisBlues]

Does anyone seriously think a Greens Party anywhere in the world will have enough influence to implement these policies? Even their current coalition with the Labor Party in Australia has not produced that outcome.

[MrWorldwide]

I'm not worried about the Greens : the Coalition will have such a massive majority post September that I cant see anything resembling an effective Opposition to any of their policies, regardless of any backroom deals done by the (pitifully few) Labor survivors with their lunatic fringe buddies. Even issues that should be settled with a conscience vote will, IMO, be steamrolled through both houses. I wont miss Labor, but I just cant see how we arent trading one set of incompetent financial managers for another set, and that doesn't bode well for anyone planning their futures around either Superannuation or the Aged Pension. One can only wonder what visitors to our country think when they turn on the TV and see Clive Palmer, Bob Katter and Pauline 'Combeack' Hanson trying to drum up support .....

[simple1]

Does anyone seriously think a Greens Party anywhere in the world will have enough influence to implement these policies? Even their current coalition with the Labor Party in Australia has not produced that outcome.

No. recently they had a proposal for some element for change that was rejected outright as it was not costed - amateurs. In any case hopefully will be decimated, along with Labor in the September elections.

[samran]

Does anyone seriously think a Greens Party anywhere in the world will have enough influence to implement these policies? Even their current coalition with the Labor Party in Australia has not produced that outcome.

Its called the Senate. Balance of power. ALP votes will bleed to the left, as well as to the right.

[BookMan]

I'm not worried about the Greens : the Coalition will have such a massive majority post September that I cant see anything resembling an effective Opposition to any of their policies, regardless of any backroom deals done by the (pitifully few) Labor survivors with their lunatic fringe buddies. Even issues that should be settled with a conscience vote will, IMO, be steamrolled through both houses. I wont miss Labor, but I just cant see how we arent trading one set of incompetent financial managers for another set, and that doesn't bode well for anyone planning their futures around either Superannuation or the Aged Pension. One can only wonder what visitors to our country think when they turn on the TV and see Clive Palmer, Bob Katter and Pauline 'Combeack' Hanson trying to drum up support .....

Clive Palmer. It is hard to know what to say really. Perhaps a look at the Palmer United Party policies...

http://palmerunited.com/

Palmer United Party stands for and is committed in its efforts and vision to carry out the following functions:

• Party Officials should not be Lobbyists, thereby taking a strong position on Paid Political Lobbyists, saving tax payers dollars and introducing Fair Policies

• Abolish the Carbon Tax

• Revising the current Australian Government’s Refugee Policy to ensure Australia is protected and refugees are given opportunities for a better future and lifestyle

• Creating Mineral Wealth to continuously contribute to the welfare of the Australian community. This will be achieved by utilising mineral resources from Queensland and Western Australia, and incentives from the Commonwealth of Australia to establish downstream processing in the States of Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia; and exporting products at a higher dollar value, thereby creating more revenue, jobs, tax and more facilities.

• Establishing a System where people create wealth in various parts of the country and for that wealth to flow back to the Community that generates the wealth. For example, if a particular region creates wealth, a significant percentage of that wealth should go back to the region.