Inheritance law regarding land
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
-
Latest posts...
-
92
UK British Citizens Being Left Behind? Councils Housing More Asylum Seekers Than the Homeless”
Isn't it just amazing how all of the papers you quoted (don't know much about The Sydney Morning Herald though but I'm assuming it's of the same ilk) were very recently the bastion of great journalism until Trump and the far-right started with all the 'fake-news' BS. It's like something straight out of Lawrence Britt's, 'Fascism, Anyone?' written in 2003 - Powerful and Continuing Nationalism Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause Supremacy of the Military Rampant Sexism Controlled Mass Media Obsession with National Security Religion and Government are Intertwined Corporate Power is Protected Labor Power is Suppressed Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts Obsession with Crime and Punishment Rampant Cronyism and Corruption Fraudulent Elections Maybe you show learn your history before snidingly remarking on someone's intelligence. But let me guess, we're all just sheeple and you guys are the only one's with your eye's truly open? That about right? -
26
USA Inside the 37-Hour Fordow Bombing Raid: How B-2 Bomber Crews Endured the Epic Mission
Who-da-guessed..................🙄 -
-
10
"Bed fellows" of the 3rd kind.
What ever your biter is spray your mattress both sides and the bed base with white vinegar they don’t like it because it kills them. Also if you buy yourself a rechargeable ( use your telephone charger if it does not come with one ) blue light bug killer and leave it on, it makes the bugs infertile so they do not breed and just die out, so any eggs the vinegar misses will hatch out infertile. Only flying bugs mosi’s ect will be captured by the bug killer but the blue light radiating out from it is what stops the bugs screwing so put it under your bed where the light will not annoy you -
7,099
Australian Aged Pension
I suppose my accountant needs some help as well then. Yet, you just replied. If you can't understand the impact the proposed changes to tax residency will have, why post about it at all? Here they are again, and these HAVE NOT been passed yet. Proposed tax residency rules Therefore, the Government in the 2020-2021 Federal Budget announced that it will replace the current individual tax residency rules with new primary and secondary tests to determine one’s tax residency. The primarily test is the 183-day test, that is, if a person who is physically present in Australia for a period of 183 days or more in any income year, this person will be considered as a resident for Australian tax purposes. The secondary test is a ‘Factor Test’ which applies to individuals who spend more than 45 days but less than 183 days in an income year. The secondary tests focus on four factors, two of which must be satisfied by that person to be deemed as resident for tax purposes. Factors include: The Right to reside permanently in Australia (e.g. citizenship or permanent residency); The ability to access accommodation in Australia (e.g. rights of ownership, leasehold interest, licenses); Whether the individual’s family (spouse or any of their children under 18) are generally located in Australia; The individual’s Australian economic connections (employment, carry on business, interests in Australia). The above is from an accounting firm from the first page of a Google search. https://hlb.com.au/tax-residency-changes-for-individuals/ You do realize the above are PROPOSED CHANGES and have not been passed into law yet, don't you? Now, see where it mentions the primary test is the 183 day test? They have called it a "bright line test." When these laws are passed, under this 183 day test, can you tell members how they can still remain a resident for tax purposes if outside of Australia for 183 days? Rather than personally attacking me, can you post some substance? Can you post what you are basing your opinion on, in relation to the proposed changes, not the current laws? The factor tests relate to being in Australia more than 45 days but less than 183 days. You don't get to be outside of Australia for 183 days, and then use the four factor tests to claim you are still a resident of Australia for tax purposes, hence, primary test and secondary test. So, do you agree with the 7 points I listed, or do you disagree with them? I note you did agree with some within your post. I know all about "domicile." I maintain a "domicile" in Australia. (house) Under the current 90 year old tax residency laws the ATO can't prove I do not have an "intention" to return to Australia to live. That's the loophole many have been using, for decades. The 183 days removes this loophole. Thailand has similar, so do other countries. It's not a new thing. Why do you think Australia will not move to a similar model? Hardly. My ducks are in a row. I can do the 45 days in Australia and meet two out of the four factor tests, should I have to, can you? May I suggest you stop posting about the current laws when we have clearly been discussing the proposed changes. You are either behind the time, or do no comprehend the sub-topic. Have you looked at the dates of the last posts on the old threads? I don't post that much, or that often, but do admit I feel compelled to point out misinformation spread by posters such as yourself. Have I broken any forum rules? Posters like yourself just keep positively re-enforcing such misinformation because the reality is too much to bare. You should seek some professional help if these proposed changes cause you some distress. Just dismissing such an important subject as scaremongering does nothing towards informing members of these proposed changes. They are real, and progressing through the system under both major political parties. What a funny comment. Thanks for the laugh. I have never, and will never, put anyone on my ignore list. I believe in freedom of speech and I'm prepared to read all other points of view. However, that doesn't mean I have to agree with them. It's not playing out a court case. You have the proposed changes. They are not my opinion. They are from the government. How they will impact individuals living overseas is clearly a source of debate, but why are you discussing the current laws when members have been discussing the proposed changes? Very strange. How is this relevant to this thread? It's off topic. That said, I couldn't care less about your witch doctor or backyard psychologist rubbish. Once again, you total misread the topic. Sure, I have no problem with that. I have admitted I was wrong on this forum in the past. It's hard to be wrong about something that hasn't even been passed yet, isn't it? Currently, no one is right and no one is wrong because they have not been passed yet, but due to the current laws being 90 years old, and having a lot of loop holes, and the fact Labor took Liberals proposed changes and progressed them, this tells me it's only a matter of time before they are passed. If you disagree, I have no problem reading why. Geez, I remember many members cheering when Albo got in and their posts being directed at me about how Albo would bin them. Well, he didn't, he progressed them to the next stage. What's that tell you? Then, the DTA got rolled out and many directed their posts at me under the belief the DTA covered pensions, only to find out it only covers service pensions. Who knows, when they pass them they may add an exemption for pensions, or a small $25,000 tax free threshold to non resident tax brackets to cover pensioners. You see, there is a lot of emotion around it, but not really from me. All I stand to lose is living in Thailand for 45 days a year. I suppose you could say I lose some airfare money, and that would be correct, but I do get to see my kids. The airfare is way less than the 30% tax in my case. The need to shoot the messenger comes from those with no where to stay in Australia for 45 days and / or can't even afford the airfare home. I understand their precarious position, but how does shooting the messenger or burying their head in the sand help their plight? I suggest these members start planning for best and worse case scenario, and everything in between, when these proposed changes are passed. Wouldn't you think that prudent, rather than just saying the proposed changes "are just for guys like Paul Hogan?" Given the pension is deemed to be an income, I'm still interested in your advice to members on how they can remain an Australian resident for tax purposes when the new laws are passed, and they haven't been back to Australia in years. -
31
Report Bangkok's Formula One Ambitions Face Potential Financial Deficit
Totally agree. The cars have outgrown many circuits, they have one racing line and it turns into a boring procession. Especially in a country where discipline and knowledge of road safety isn't endemic. Look at Singapore - a very disciplined place where people can be trusted to obey standards. Similar in Monaco. As to your other objection, usually i agree, but by changing the pit stop rules, this year's Monaco GP was much more interesting than previously. That's up to the FIA to adjust the rules appropriately.
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now