Australian Aged Pension and Marrying

[simple1]

if you have 30/35 years working life you are entitled to the full pension,means tested,around about 857 dollars a fortnight single,[married 657 a fortnight married with one partner ineligible.]

ineligible meaning not of pensionable age or non citizen. if you reside in thailand you will lose about 67 dollars a fortnight,the extras paid for phone,electricity ect. i f you tell them you are married you will lose the extras plus 200 a fortnight. this is based on their theory that two can live more cheaply than one. i've been all through this and all appeals excepting the federal court. my only way to access the single rate of pay was divorce.

I'm 52 years old. I've lived in Thailand for 1 year and haven't returned to a Australia. I guess I will return at some point for a holiday but essentially plan is I live here forever. Just for clarity....your saying in 13 years time (in the unlikely event the rules dont change) I can return to Australia for a few weeks and organize them to send me a reduced pension to my Thai bank account? Sorry, not questioning your integrity it's just that I was 100% sure non resident = no pension

No. Putting aside eligibility / residency assessment, currently you would have to reside in Oz two years for portability

[heybuz]

if you have 30/35 years working life you are entitled to the full pension,means tested,around about 857 dollars a fortnight single,[married 657 a fortnight married with one partner ineligible.]

ineligible meaning not of pensionable age or non citizen. if you reside in thailand you will lose about 67 dollars a fortnight,the extras paid for phone,electricity ect. i f you tell them you are married you will lose the extras plus 200 a fortnight. this is based on their theory that two can live more cheaply than one. i've been all through this and all appeals excepting the federal court. my only way to access the single rate of pay was divorce.

I'm 52 years old. I've lived in Thailand for 1 year and haven't returned to a Australia. I guess I will return at some point for a holiday but essentially plan is I live here forever. Just for clarity....your saying in 13 years time (in the unlikely event the rules dont change) I can return to Australia for a few weeks and organize them to send me a reduced pension to my Thai bank account? Sorry, not questioning your integrity it's just that I was 100% sure non resident = no pension

you have to be resident in australia for 2 years b4 you can claim,you'd have to return when 63.

not quite correct.You have to live back in OZ for a period of 2 years but if you return at age 65 or over and apply for the aged pension you will receive payment straight away,although the first payment may take 3 months to get.

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

On the day you submit your claim, you must be:

• an Australian resident, and
• physically present in Australia

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 10 years with one of the periods being at least 5 years, unless you:

• are a refugee or former refugee
• 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 2 years immediately before claiming Age Pension

[samuibeachcomber]

"heybuz,i'll say it again you do not have to reside in OZ FOR 2 YEARS PRIOR TO APPLYING FOR THE PENSION.You do have to show them that you have returned to OZ to once again reside in australia,I have several friends who have done just this and they did not have to wait 2 years before receiving a pension.

[Kenny202]

Jeez, I'm sick of Australians here complaining about this and that re your pensions.

What you are is a "low class" drain on our economy. I'm early 40's and have accrued enough now where I will never qualify for the pension.

It angers me to know my tax dollars are funding old dudes here that never really made it at home financially. I really wish you'd all piss off back to Aus and keep working.

well bully for you.dont come whingeing and moaning and asking questions about the aged pension when you need it in 23 years cos there wont be a pension to get,and while you smugly tell us that you've already got enough to take care of yourself,just remember the gains you've made can easily go tits up,through no fault of your own.

U think I'm that dumb not to know a pension will not exist in another 23 years?

Smug? Maybe.

Every Australian has the opportunity to self fund retirement. No excuse if you have hands that can build or a brain to learn.

I'm smarter than that and smarter than you my dear man.

Properties in city fringe or CBD locations (on the east side). Blue chip securities with dividends reinvested.

These gains do not go tits up old fella.

Points to note;

This was done solo.

My wife is a savvy, well grounded hottie here in BKK with a business I'm part of.

She has money so it won't go tits up that way either.

I say again, you like many here are a low class drain in my tax dollars.

What an A hole

[heybuz]

ok mate i have got that wrong i spent 6 months fighting c/link over married and single payments as i lived in aus and my wife lived in thailand

[Kenny202]

Jeez. 2 years or not 2 years?

Do you have to convince them you plan to reside in Australia? Ie own a home or show rental, electricity etc?

Once you get it approved you can back to Thailand and live happily ever after?

[heybuz]

Jeez. 2 years or not 2 years?

Do you have to convince them you plan to reside in Australia? Ie own a home or show rental, electricity etc?

Once you get it approved you can back to Thailand and live happily ever after?

Living in Australia

Living in Australia means Australia is your usual place of residence. That is, Australia is where you make your home.

When we are deciding whether you are living in Australia, we will look at:

• the nature of your accommodation
• the nature and extent of your family relationships in Australia
• the nature and extent of your employment, business or financial ties with Australia
• the frequency and duration of your travel outside Australia, and
• any other matter we think is relevant

[rhodie]

Jeez. 2 years or not 2 years?

Do you have to convince them you plan to reside in Australia? Ie own a home or show rental, electricity etc?

Once you get it approved you can back to Thailand and live happily ever after?

If you are living out of Australia you have to come back and reside for 2 years before the pension is portable. EG. You can come back at 63, get the pension at 65 and then go anywhere and it will be paid. You can also come back at 65 and get the pension straight away and then stay for 2 years before you can leave and have it paid anywhere.

[samuibeachcomber]

Jeez. 2 years or not 2 years?

Do you have to convince them you plan to reside in Australia? Ie own a home or show rental, electricity etc?

Once you get it approved you can back to Thailand and live happily ever after?

yes its important,after the 2 years its still currently portable.the best advice comes out of "international pensions" in hobart,a lot also depends on the "case" officer at your centrelink local office.

[nev]

Just one point, the pension age is now 67 not 65 unless you was born before a certain date, I just fail 65 and have to wait until 67, they might even make the age higher in years to come and hope more die before ever getting the pension.

[samuibeachcomber]

Just one point, the pension age is now 67 not 65 unless you was born before a certain date, I just fail 65 and have to wait until 67, they might even make the age higher in years to come and hope more die before ever getting the pension.

what date of birth for 67 to apply?

[BookMan]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

[heybuz]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

yes

Edited November 27, 2015 by heybuz

[rhodie]

Just one point, the pension age is now 67 not 65 unless you was born before a certain date, I just fail 65 and have to wait until 67, they might even make the age higher in years to come and hope more die before ever getting the pension.

If you just fail 65 then it would be 65.5.

Period within which a person was born Pension age Date pension age changes

From 1 July 1952 to 31 December 1953 65 years and 6 months 1 July 2017

From 1 January 1954 to 30 June 1955 66 years 1 July 2019

From 1 July 1955 to 31 December 1956 66 years and 6 months 1 July 2021

From 1 January 1957 onwards 67 years 1 July 2023

Edited November 27, 2015 by rhodie

[Kenny202]

I don't think that's right unless it's changed? I was born 1963 and last time I checked eligibility 65 years

[heybuz]

I don't think that's right unless it's changed? I was born 1963 and last time I checked eligibility 65 years

To be eligible for Age Pension you must be 65 years or older.

From 1 July 2017, the qualifying age for Age Pension will increase from 65 years to 65 years and 6 months. The qualifying age will then increase by 6 months every 2 years, reaching 67 years by 1 July 2023.

Date of birth Qualifying age at 1 July 1952 to 31 December 1953 65 years and 6 months 1 January 1954 to 30 June 1955 66 years 1 July 1955 to 31 December 1956 66 years and 6 months From 1

[Sheryl]

Off-topic posts that bickered and eventually descended into flaming have been removed. The topic is what the pension rules/procedures are, it is not an invitation for people to spout off their personal opinions/philosophies

[AlexRRR]

To the guy that shall remain nameless the age pension is one of the perks that if you qualify as an Australian resident your entitled to get.

Just as other forms of tax saving measures that high income earners have access too, to take away one then the other should go too.

Get it sooner get it later one way or another, call it anything you like the fact is its built into the structure of what Australia is all about, were all playing the game by the rules that are there, if you don't like it join one of the political parties and try and get the changes you want.

[BB24]

Leaving politics out of this discussion - BUT the fact is that the Gillard Govt changed the eligibility to 30 years - Abbott changed it to 35. But all these changes are merely in line with International Conventions that have been introduced to stop people from 2^nd/3rd world countries (eg. Greece) living/working in 1st world countries until they get the Age Pension, and then going ‘home’ and living on their Age Pensions. Both Labs and Libs see the Age Pension as a drain on the budget - and just like with Super, they change the rules regularly to reduce the negative impact the costs of the Age Pension have on their Budget - both sides do it and it WILL get worse in the future. Those living overseas on the age pension are a 'target' and will be in the future.

This is the current proposal from this year’s Budget: All pensioners who leave Australia are entitled to the full pension for the first 26 weeks. That is when their pension is reviewed and any downwards adjustment is made if they have lived in Australia for less than 35 years. Under a change proposed in the federal budget that review period will be reduced from 26 weeks to six weeks from January 1, 2017. It is estimated that the measure will save the government $168.6 million over four years. Pensioners who have lived in Australian for less than 35 years will be paid at a reduced rate in proportion to their AWLR​ period. If their AWLR​ is 20 years, for instance, the proportion of the pension they will be entitled to be paid while living overseas will be 20 divided by 35 – or 57%.

There has been some correct advice given in this post about getting the age pension in the future, but there has also been some inaccurate advice too, and also some advice that may and may not apply to each person. There is plenty of information available on the web from Centrelink, DHS, etc. and anyone wanting to know the facts should research/read these sites – and I recommend avoiding any commercial sites as they are often wrong/outdated. And you can ring Centrelink and ask any question – you do not have to give your name/number (even if they try to get it).

Each person is different and their age pension entitlements are different. Two people in the almost exact same situation, can be (and often are), given different assessment outcomes. And the reason is that social security changes are not (cannot be) backdated. If you get the pension under the rules at that time, you keep it – even if the rules are changed later. That is why the proposed changes above are introduced from 1 January 2017 – and that is why eligibility (65 up to 70) was changed only in the future. What this means, as opposed to the Tax rules, is that there is no definitive rule that does or does not apply to you/I – anyone who says they got this and did that are not necessarily wrong – but they could be wrong for you. The rules are changing every year as Labs/Libs each try to save taxpayer’s money (as they call it). You need to stay up to date and across the changes, and then ascertain if those changes have impacted you.

Here’s another example of this clusterphak of a system in Aus - there has been many instances of where people on the age pension living overseas for many years have gone home for a period, and then when they go to leave again, they are informed that their eligibility for overseas payments now comes under the new rules. There are many Greeks getting the age pension in Greece, but if they ever return to Aus they will lose part/all of their age pension.

It is best to get to know the 'rules' and how they apply (and will apply) to you - for yourself (up keep across them).

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

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/outside-australia-pension-rates-payable

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/age-pension/age-pension-while-travelling-outside-australia

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

Regarding marriage and the reduction in the age pension. That is true for any age pensioner living in Australia and married under Australian law (live more than 12 months together) to a non-eligible (for the Age Pension) person. It also applies to anyone on the gae pension living overseas that officially marries overseas and advises the Australian Government (directly or indirectly) that they are married.

And great to see that the comments by that ‘Troll’ JoopJoop have been removed - someone should give him/her the number of a sympathetic doctor.

[heybuz]

answer,to debunkers of the right to a pension.

1951 to 1985 The compulsory levy of 7.5% now included in the tax continued to be collected and placed in Consolidated Revenue, and treated as general revenue and spent, until 1985.



1974 to 1975 Labor Leader, Mr. Whitlam, abolished income tests for all persons 70 years of age and over, and paid pensions to all people over that age.

1976 The newly-elected Coalition Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, cancelled the Whitlam achievement of abolishing the tests for all who were 70

years and over.



197 Malcolm Fraser with Treasurer Philip Lynch transferred the balance in the Welfare Fund account (approx. 470 million dollars) to the

Consolidated Revenue account.

1985 The Hawke-Keating Labor Government repealed Acts Numbers 39, 40 and 41 of 1945 (the National Welfare Fund Acts). Thus the

funds finally ceased to exist. Yet the 7.5% levy continues to be collected as a proportion of the Income Tax Revenue. It also introduced the much-maligned

Income and Assets Test, thereby excluding millions of levy and tax-paying Australians from receiving, Social Services pensions. This money - these self­

funded contributions - paid as a percentage of the total income tax collections - are to-day worth more than the amount of means-tested pensions paid out. Actuaries have calculatedthe non-means-tested

ENTITLEMENT due to EACH retiree to-day is in excess of $500 per week.

you were levied at 7.5 percent in your tax to pay for your pension this has never been repealed,it was just moved to consolidated revenue and eventually became part of your tax

[AlexRRR]

answer,to debunkers of the right to a pension.

1951 to 1985 The compulsory levy of 7.5% now included in the tax continued to be collected and placed in Consolidated Revenue, and treated as general revenue and spent, until 1985.

1974 to 1975 Labor Leader, Mr. Whitlam, abolished income tests for all persons 70 years of age and over, and paid pensions to all people over that age.

1976 The newly-elected Coalition Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, cancelled the Whitlam achievement of abolishing the tests for all who were 70

years and over.

197 Malcolm Fraser with Treasurer Philip Lynch transferred the balance in the Welfare Fund account (approx. 470 million dollars) to the

Consolidated Revenue account.

1985 The Hawke-Keating Labor Government repealed Acts Numbers 39, 40 and 41 of 1945 (the National Welfare Fund Acts). Thus the

funds finally ceased to exist. Yet the 7.5% levy continues to be collected as a proportion of the Income Tax Revenue. It also introduced the much-maligned

Income and Assets Test, thereby excluding millions of levy and tax-paying Australians from receiving, Social Services pensions. This money - these self­

funded contributions - paid as a percentage of the total income tax collections - are to-day worth more than the amount of means-tested pensions paid out. Actuaries have calculatedthe non-means-tested

ENTITLEMENT due to EACH retiree to-day is in excess of $500 per week.

you were levied at 7.5 percent in your tax to pay for your pension this has never been repealed,it was just moved to consolidated revenue and eventually became part of your tax

And lets not forget....the workingman's party did this to its its supporters.

Another thing people seem to forget, within 20 ys the superannuation that's been getting collected will well and truly kick in meaning a big easing on the social security at least for age pension.

If they really want to get serious then they should legislate that super can't be taken at as a lump sum payment from any age.

Its all spin coming out of both Labour and Liberal and the trouble is nong's like a poster in here who shall remain nameless get sucked up into it.

[bazza40]

If you are in Australia and in a defacto relationship, for the OAP Centrelink treats you as a couple and splits a lower pension between the two of you.

If you marry a Thai in Thailand and inform Centrelink, they will reduce your pension by about 25%. Your Thai wife will get nothing because she is not an Australian citizen and hasn't worked in Australia for the required 35 years.

Australia recognises defacto relationships. Thailand does not. So the best strategy is to be in a defacto relationship in Thailand, and say nothing.

I'm not going to get into a debate about entitlement to the Old Age Pension. However, I would point out if it wasn't for the total incompetence of ASIC and the public service before and during the GFC with respect to protecting investors, there would be a lot less people drawing part or full pensions now.

[harrry]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

Not really, many of the people who are objecting to pensions forget they were educated and recieved free or nearly free University based on the taxes paid by the people they now want to deny the pension.

[harrry]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

Not really, many of the people who are objecting to pensions forget they were educated and recieved free or nearly free University based on the taxes paid by the people they now want to deny the pension.

[bazza40]

Another thing people seem to forget, within 20 ys the superannuation that's been getting collected will well and truly kick in meaning a big easing on the social security at least for age pension.

If they really want to get serious then they should legislate that super can't be taken at as a lump sum payment from any age.

Its all spin coming out of both Labour and Liberal and the trouble is nong's like a poster in here who shall remain nameless get sucked up into it.

Excuse me, but that's my money accumulated through my efforts, and who are you to tell me how I should withdraw it? I'll be taking it out as a lump sum soon, so sticky-fingered politicians and public servants can't come up with new ways of filching it.

If you think Australia doesn't have death duties, think again. The government takes 15% tax out of all superannuation funds when the beneficiary dies.

[BookMan]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

Not really, many of the people who are objecting to pensions forget they were educated and recieved free or nearly free University based on the taxes paid by the people they now want to deny the pension.

5555.

What a bizarre statement.

[harrry]

us old dudes built the economy you enjoy,we never had super nor lurks and perks our only reward was the pension,we also fought wars for smart <deleted> like yourself.if you don't like it don't read this forum

hehehe

Come on mate, being a bit dramatic aren't you?

Not really, many of the people who are objecting to pensions forget they were educated and recieved free or nearly free University based on the taxes paid by the people they now want to deny the pension.

5555.

What a bizarre statement.

Not if you come from the UK or Australia

[AlexRRR]

Another thing people seem to forget, within 20 ys the superannuation that's been getting collected will well and truly kick in meaning a big easing on the social security at least for age pension.

If they really want to get serious then they should legislate that super can't be taken at as a lump sum payment from any age.

Its all spin coming out of both Labour and Liberal and the trouble is nong's like a poster in here who shall remain nameless get sucked up into it.

Excuse me, but that's my money accumulated through my efforts, and who are you to tell me how I should withdraw it? I'll be taking it out as a lump sum soon, so sticky-fingered politicians and public servants can't come up with new ways of filching it.

If you think Australia doesn't have death duties, think again. The government takes 15% tax out of all superannuation funds when the beneficiary dies.

Your excused, for the rest of us who want a fair system some of the things i propose will help rather than hinder, in the first place that super if it has been placed in a fund for you by an employer was always designed by the Labour govement with union backing back in the 80's and incidentally never your money for the provision to be used in retirement, if self employed or private contributor you would have gained tax advantages, argue all you like, but nothing will change what it was meant for only how it gets used/taken is flawed and it needs to be looked at.

[bazza40]

Another thing people seem to forget, within 20 ys the superannuation that's been getting collected will well and truly kick in meaning a big easing on the social security at least for age pension.

If they really want to get serious then they should legislate that super can't be taken at as a lump sum payment from any age.

Its all spin coming out of both Labour and Liberal and the trouble is nong's like a poster in here who shall remain nameless get sucked up into it.

Excuse me, but that's my money accumulated through my efforts, and who are you to tell me how I should withdraw it? I'll be taking it out as a lump sum soon, so sticky-fingered politicians and public servants can't come up with new ways of filching it.

If you think Australia doesn't have death duties, think again. The government takes 15% tax out of all superannuation funds when the beneficiary dies.

Your excused, for the rest of us who want a fair system some of the things i propose will help rather than hinder, in the first place that super if it has been placed in a fund for you by an employer was always designed by the Labour govement with union backing back in the 80's and incidentally never your money for the provision to be used in retirement, if self employed or private contributor you would have gained tax advantages, argue all you like, but nothing will change what it was meant for only how it gets used/taken is flawed and it needs to be looked at.

Utter rubbish. That money was taken from my salary and put into my employer's super fund. On an accountant's advice, I rolled it over into a self-managed super fund. Along came the ATO and slugged me $50,000 for the privilege. Pity I didn't have the money to sue the bastard.

In SMSF mode, I contributed as much as I could to repair the damage.

"The rest of us'? Yeah right. Obviously you represent all Australians except me. The system would be a lot fairer if politicians and the super industry didn't treat it as their pot of gold. To repeat - it's my money, Ralph.

[fang37]

For a number of expats living in LOS, the OAP is the difference between life & death.

They have a teeruk by their side.

Far happier than their colleagues living in Oz.

Oz - boarding houses or Vinnies.