Comment: Retirees hurt by tax cuts

Font Size:

On Wednesday, the Australian Senate voted in favour of the full three tranches of tax cuts for Australian workers. Stage one of the tax cuts – for those earning less than $126,000 – would be applied within the next few weeks. Stage two, effective from 2022-2023, involves a combination of changes to income thresholds and tax offsets. Stage three would start in 2024-25 and involve the removal of an entire tax bracket that would deliver big cuts for those with an income close to $200,000.

The total cost to the taxpayer over the next six years is $158 billion.

So what is the background? And what does it mean for retirees?

This is a policy that was taken to the electorate in May by the Morrison Government. And as this Government was re-elected in its own right, it is fair to assume that most Australians approved of all three tranches of cuts. But did retiree voters really consider the ramifications?

Initially opposed in total by the Opposition, under then leader Bill Shorten, more recently a chastised Labor Party argued for the first two stages to pass the House, but for the third stage to be split from the bill as it is beyond the next scheduled federal election.

Labor’s position is irrelevant however, as the Government has an outright majority in the House of Representatives, so the crossbench of the Senate is where the voting power lies. And three senators in particular have now wrangled deals with the Liberal/National Party in return for a yes vote to the full tax-cuts bill. Two Centre Alliance senators have requested a cap on gas prices and received an undertaking this will happen. Independent Senator Jacqui Lambie demanded relief for the $157 million Tasmanian social housing debt and has reportedly received an undertaking that this will be honoured. So, on the promise of receiving these two concessions, the three senators voted in accord with the Morrison Government.

At one level, you could say this is great news for workers, particularly those who will be more than $1000 better off when they file this year’s tax returns. Over time, those earning more will receive even more back.

But what about those on disability benefits, Newstart and the Age Pension?

Nada.

Zip.

Nothing.

And this is where this legislation is so very wrong for our nation. We are spending an eye-watering amount of money to refund tax to some who need it and many who don’t.

But those with the least will receive nothing as they do not usually get tax refunds.

They are not working because they are out of work – many for more than a year. Or they cannot work – most retirees leave the workforce due to ill-health or lack of a suitable job.

The Newstart payment has not increased in more than two decades.

The base rate of the Age Pension has not been increased since 2008.

And with yet another rate cut by the Reserve Bank on Tuesday, pensioners are even worse off as they are deemed to earn far more than market rates deliver. As YourLifeChoices has reported time and time again, the deeming rate has not been lowered since 2015.

Yet older Australians are continually told to hold some assets in cash in case of emergency.

If it wasn’t so serious and, at a cost of $158 billion so eye-wateringly expensive, this decision could be viewed as a farce.

We were told during the recent election that the only party that could be trusted to manage the economy was the LNP.

And so Australians voted it back in.

We are now told that the economy is in dire straits.

Both statements can’t be true. It has either been in safe hands – or it hasn’t.

Well managed or not.

We are also told that the health of this economy is dependent on tax cuts for all workers on low incomes or high incomes, passing as one piece of legislation – the full enchilada – or it won’t get the kickstart it needs.

Yet Anglicare research confirms that the poor are doing it tougher than ever.

And most economists agree that the fastest way to stimulate spending is to give relief to those who have least, as they will spend it immediately on essentials.

So why, oh why, are pensioners not even on the radar when it comes to stimulus packages?

Is it because they are old?

Marginalised?

Or simply don’t matter to our masters in Canberra?

Are you bewildered as to why  pensioners have been left out of this legislation?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

Join YourLifeChoices today
and get this free eBook!

Join
By joining YourLifeChoices you consent that you have read and agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

RELATED LINKS

Will Government finally act on deeming if cash rate cut?

Reserve Bank set to announce whether interest rates will be cut again.

Older Aussies going big on downsizing super contributions

Older Australians downsizing have contributed $1 billion to their superannuation funds.

Self-funded retirees now outnumber pensioners: report

Research strongly suggests that Australia's superannuation system is working.

Written by Kaye Fallick

270 Comments

Total Comments: 270
  1. 0
    0

    In answer to your question – So why, oh why, are pensioners not even on the radar when it comes to stimulus packages?

    Is it because they are old? YES

    Marginalised? YES

    Or simply don’t matter to our masters in Canberra? ABSOLUTELY YES!

    Are you bewildered as to why pensioners have been left out of this legislation? YES, BUT NOT SURPRISED

    And the above answers directly relate to why the Govt won’t change the deeming rate – seniors are seen as a soft target, easy to steal from.

    I don’t care what anyone says – there is absolutely NO incentive for seniors to work part time (with the hefty slashing of pension rate, and then tax), and if they have managed to save something for their retirement, the govt does their best to find ways to take it.
    I would still work if the Govt had kept the Pension Bonus Scheme. I missed out by 6 months. Those friends of mine who did get it, swear it made a huge difference to their financial status. Now – no incentive. Just punishment. Plus now the added fear of Centrelink coming back in X years to come, with a Robodebt, saying they have made a mistake. (as happened to my elderly aunt that I help care for. CL was proven wrong). What also concerns me is the govt constantly changing the rules. You cannot plan for your future.

    • 0
      0

      in2sunset I heard Morrison is going to look at the deeming rates with a view to reducing them!
      How far they will drop it only time will tell – but at least they are looking at it.

    • 0
      0

      in2sunset
      When GST was introduced Sales Tax was Removed, then we will LOOK into Stamp Duty.
      They LOOKED and IT IS STILL THERE.
      LOOKING is Just That, no mention of Revising In The Words Used so No Lie Was Told.
      Just words to shut up the Media Questions.

    • 0
      0

      in2sunset:
      You missed the most important reason. Seniors usually vote conservative, so giving them anything is wasted (in vote terms).
      Just in case, add a bit of scare tactics (Seniors’ Tax) and the seniors can be absolutely relied upon to vote LNP. (An inflated deeming rate is just that – A seniors’ tax!)
      Now a quote: “Labor was losing votes – as were centre-right parties – to people vulnerable to identity politics.

      “When people are feeling insecure … those insecurities are being fanned in social media and by under-the-radar campaigns in ways which override the economic concerns of those people.” They tend to vote conservative.
      And pensioners would be the most insecure – they/we have to be. We usually have dependents, we have a limited life-span and a fixed amount of assets to rely on.

    • 0
      0

      So true On the Ball, we reap what we sow at the ballot box so no good complaining.

    • 0
      0

      Chris BT, you conveniently forget that when GST was originally brought up, it was to be on everything, but the opposition and cross benches watered it down by taking a lot of things out of the scheme. Sales tax, stamp duty and payroll tax were all to be eliminated with the full GST on everything, but with the watering down of it there was not enough money to achieve all of the promises. So I would suggest you direct your complaints to those who amended the original plan. Sales tax was a Federal tax, and was eliminated. The other two were state taxes and the states could only drop them if the GST take was high enough.

    • 0
      0

      arbee
      What complaint other Than The Use Of The Word “LOOKING”

    • 0
      0

      I couldn’t agree more about the pension bonus scheme. I was one of the lucky ones. I ended up working well past my required 5 years and retired with a nice sum. Some months later I was offered a part time job but my PBS money was not required to be given back as I had legally retired. As I had very little super due to my age, it’s been a nice nest egg. My friend, who is younger than I, missed out by probably about a year on the scheme.It was a great incentive to keep working if you were able to and certainly saved the Government more in unpaid pension that it cost them to pay out the bonus. I could never see the benefit (to the Government) of changing to the current scheme where you are just allowed to earn a little more before it affects the pension….but greater minds than I…..

    • 0
      0

      Good comments, in2sunset, have to agree with all your answers. The key point is why “…seniors are seen as a soft target, easy to steal from.”
      It’s because Seniors including Retirees vote like zombies for one or the other Major party even though BOTH Labor and Liberal parties have attacked Retirees regularly, possibly because Retirees haven’t figured out that they CAN use their strength (being 20% of the electorate) to vote OUT the sitting MP of these Major parties by using the preferential voting system sensibly.
      It is also because these crooked parties have successfully put retiree groups against each other e.g. Pensioners against SFRs, etc. Very much evident in the YLC posts as well.

      This system can only be broken if Retirees join in together to demand a common benefit such as Universal Age Pension without bickering amongst themselves, thereby getting the politicians out of the area of Age Pension rules altogether.

    • 0
      0

      Actually, if Labor were smart and had the right focus on fairness, they could drop their extreme climate change & radical gender policies, and simply do the following 2 things and get re-elected next time by getting the votes of the majority of Retirees (many of whom especially SFRs do vote for Libs):
      a. Promise to reverse the Asset Test changes of Jan 2017, or better still implement Universal Age Pension with NO tests other than Age (65 years) and Residency (say 15 years),
      b. Promise to reverse the 3rd stage of the Tax Cuts which were just passed saving $95Bilion!
      Question is – do they have the brains, or are they going to remain tied to their extremist policies ensuring a long time in Opposition.

    • 0
      0

      Not a question of brains, GeorgeM. It’s a question of corrupt vested interests. They could have easily won the election if they had wanted to. But they begged and pleaded with the voters to vote against them.

      The sad thing is that implementing a universal aged pension and reversing the third stage tax cuts would give a massive boost to the economy. Add an increase to Newstart, which would help people into jobs rather than disincentivize them because crushing someone is never going to help them find work, a modest increase to all pensions, and a decent increase to the interest rates (accompanied by a solid relief program for anyone with a home mortgage who they could no longer service) and we’d see huge economic improvement immediately.

      But I read that the World Bank is now insisting governments introduce a staged program to abolish cash. Why? Because people won’t leave money in banks at negative interest, and negative interest is coming soon. So they need to abolish cash so you can’t withdraw your funds. Get ready. You think things are bad? You ain’t seen nothin’ yet!

  2. 0
    0

    Geez – talk about the permanent moaners & groaners of the press.
    I, for one, think that the glass is much more than half full not the reverse.
    That tax cuts are very good particularly for my children, their partners and grandchildren.
    We oldies have had our go – let the others have a turn.

    • 0
      0

      If any of them had half the ‘go’ some of us had – they’d be dead and buried…..

    • 0
      0

      I think there is much merit in your statement – the fact is the economy is weak – Reserve Bank can’t do much more on monetary policy with offical interest rates at 1% (as low as the great depression from 1930 to 1938. So Federal government and State government have to implement stimulus fiscal policies and that involves giving taxpayers more of their own money back – the rationale is that they will spend it and stimulate the economy (that is what has happened in the past). This aged pensioners who own their own home are not badly off – it is those who rent in retirement who are doing it really tough. I am not a fan of increasing Newstart – we have to find ways to incentivise people to want to get out to work.

    • 0
      0

      So those who ‘invest’ their income tax saving in an overseas trip or put it into dead stock serial house ownership, offshore shares and other areas that pay no other taxes – will be=ring benefit to the economy?

      It would be nice to simply say that people should get out to work – but the reality speaks otherwise – with more than ten applicants for one job – and not all applicants in any way suited to each job… easy to say there’s a job for a lawyer – how many unemployed are qualified as lawyers? I’ve been offered jobs as an RMO and a locum here – I’m not qualified to practice or give out prescriptions… so the issue is moot…..

    • 0
      0

      Agreed, BUT…
      The vast majority of the $158 BILLION goes to the mega-wealthy who will NOT spend it but simply bank it. Good for the rich bankers. Bad for the workers.
      If they benefit for the economy is so great, why not just implement the first and second stages? The third stage wont only not benefit the economy, but will slug it.
      I have kids that work as well. This measly $1080 per year wont even replace a month’s lost penalty rates.
      Most of us retirees would only dream of 1 million dollars. The cost of this package is 158 THOUSAND times that! ($158,000,000,000)

    • 0
      0

      Speak for yourself Not a Bludger, some oldies have never had a go as you call it.

    • 0
      0

      With job losses forecast due to technology and a wsorsening economy, how do you expect people to get jobs bob menzies?, not as easy as saying incentivise people unfortunately.

    • 0
      0

      Gee from where I sit the oldies have had it way too easy and had more than a go.

    • 0
      0

      paraphrasing Trebor, if we had half the ‘go’ some of us had – we would also be dead and buried … just saying 😉

    • 0
      0

      There is no reverse NAB because there is no such thing as half empty. Half of nothing is?
      Also, the lowest paid are not getting enough. Everything they get they spend.
      To prevent a recession we need to do more. We need to spend. Who spends?
      Labor was right to try to bring forward part B and hold off on the last one as too far off anyway. They still benefit from the first two parts.
      Another group that keeps getting put forward are the people looking for jobs. Maybe reward them for their efforts which would encourage them rather than making them feel so worthless. Aim at the youth in particular because they need that first job. When they apply they get some money, when they make the first interview a bit more, etc. and if they try to build their skills then give more incentive/reward.
      Why create an underclass?

    • 0
      0

      On the Ball says “the vast majority of the $158 BILLION goes to the mega-wealthy”, well that depends what you consider mega when an estimated 96% of Australians learn less than $156,000 and we know that $200,000 is no longer considered “the top end of town”. Only $26B or 17% of the benefit goes to those with incomes over $200,000.

      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/10/coalitions-income-tax-plan-will-gift-highest-earners-33bn

    • 0
      0

      Quick with the insults aren’t you arbee and as I told you once before I have worked hard all my life, my first job at 15 I used to walk 3 miles there and back, I lived in a small country town, no transport, my family never owned a car. I started nursing at 16 and have worked at that profession and also as a school assistant until I was 63, my husband worked in the mountains in snow and rain until he was 70 so DON’T YOU TELL ME I DON’T LNOW WHAT HARD WORK IS, and I am not complaining about my lot but people who are worse off. I could say a lot more but I won’t stoop to your level of insults arbee.

    • 0
      0

      The Lieberal trolls and toadies are out in force here today.

    • 0
      0

      whinging grandmother, Older and Wiser, Only Genuine Rainey or whoever you call yourself these days and arbee, neither of you have a clue about my finances so don’t even try to speculate because both of you would be wrong.People shoul not make insulting comments about other people’s lives that they haven’t got a clue about.

    • 0
      0

      i think it is a good idea…the tax cuts…the economy needs stimulating and in the end if people start spending everyone will benefit.

    • 0
      0

      Ardnaher the govt gives with one hand and takes away with the other, so many people will have their wages cut because the are losing theuir penalty rates, I don’t think they will be racing out to spend do you?.

    • 0
      0

      i have no idea what people will do with their tax refund…everyone is different.

    • 0
      0

      Exactly Ardhaher, everyone is different so it will be interesting to see if the tax refunds do stimulate the economy. Apparently the ATO has been so inundated with people calling about the new tax changes they are not taking any more calls until things quiten down.

    • 0
      0

      makes me wonder if there are a lot of very dumb people out there if they have to ring the tax office…it is clear what will happen…if you earn a certain amount your tax will be this or that….or maybe there are some out there who think that the amount will miraculous appear in their bank accounts all of a sudden and wonder why it has not. there has been enough mentioned in the media of what the new taxes will be.

    • 0
      0

      Well Ardnaher the gov t and media advertising can be a bit confucing if you don’t follow or listen closely, a lot of people will think they are getting the $1080.00 tax refund regardless of what they earn but it doesn’t work like that, people earning up to $37,000 will get %$255.00, the refund gradually increses uo to $51080.00 for people earning up to $48,000 but decreases then for people earning between $90,000 and $126,000, after that their is no special tax rebate. These are 1 off rebates for this tax year and each following year unless changed.

    • 0
      0

      Sorry about the mistakes, should be “confusing” and $1080,00 not the $51080,00 above, left an “a” out of increases and put an “o” instead of a “p” in up. Haven’t got my new glasses yet and the light is not good in this room.

    • 0
      0

      Jumping in here to defend Misty! Nasty OGR as usual aimed at pensioners and at people like Misty. Full pensioners usually do it tough unless they have extra funds and income.
      If it was such an enviable State then more would divest themselves and aim for the pension. Also, it is very judgmental to decide people have been wasteful because they are on the pension. All they may have managed is to have a roof over their heads and their children well educated.
      Nurses have never been highly paid and many women take off years with childbearing and child rearing. It is not for any of you to judge others. And there is no shame in receiving a pension which is put straight back Into circulation.

    • 0
      0

      Thanks for the support Paddington, I do appreciate it.

    • 0
      0

      Thanks again Paddington but did you see what Sydst has written about my comments at the bottom of thes posts and it seems OGR, O and W, whinging Grandma is now here anonymous.

  3. 0
    0

    If we aren’t paying tax how can we expect to get tax relief? Be real.

    • 0
      0

      If you genuinely want to stimulate spending into THIS economy – give the poor a pay rise…. gee… some of the might even buy a new microwave that the fat cats don’t need …. and help retailers out….

    • 0
      0

      franking credits

    • 0
      0

      franking credits

    • 0
      0

      Ha ha, I thought that too. I have not put in a tax return for five years.

    • 0
      0

      Gra said “If we aren’t paying tax how can we expect to get tax relief?”

      That seems to work for non-taxpayers who get franking credits.

    • 0
      0

      If you have franking credits you are a taxpayer. That is the only way you can get them.

    • 0
      0

      To get Franking Credits you have to be a shareholder with shares in a company that pays Australian tax.

    • 0
      0

      I have friends who are on the govt pension, pay no tax but have shares and get the Franking Credits Old Geezer.

    • 0
      0

      Yes they have to fill in a tax return to get them refunded so they are a taxpayer.

    • 0
      0

      Except that they will not be getting the $1080 that other taxpayers will receive, just the refund of Franking credits

    • 0
      0

      So they arer not taxpayers then Sunday?.

    • 0
      0

      Actually they don’t even need to fill out a Franking Credit form now the ATO does it for you.

    • 0
      0

      Not real ones Misty, they don’t qualify for the low and medium tax offset because they don’t pay tax!

    • 0
      0

      If they didn’t pay tax, they wouldn’t get franking credits.

      Joe works and has shares paying $100 in dividends, so Labor says he pays tax and the nearly $43 deducted from his dividend and sent to the ATO is tax and claimable.

      Fred is retired and has shares paying $100 in dividends, but Labor says the nearly $43 deducted from his dividend and sent to the ATO is NOT tax. Then what the f… is it, idiots? It’s deducted from income in the same way. It’s sent to the same ATO. It’s not fried eggs or mashed bananas. It’s TAX stupid! It can’t be one thing if taken from Joe’s income and something different if taken from Fred’s.

    • 0
      0

      Yes, you get to keep your Franking credits. Move on! The election is over.

      The article is about Tax cuts which includes $1080 offset for Paye Taxpayers which they will receive until 21/22 then a reduction in tax for 2 years. You don’t qualify unless you have taxable income. Shares alone are not counted.

    • 0
      0

      MAybe time to do what Rudd did and got us out of the doo doo — and was never given credit for it — time to do it again me thinks —

      But the Libs don’t think ahead like that — they are only interested in the top end — they have even taken penatly rates away from those that are trying to “HAVE A GO”

    • 0
      0

      The $1080 is tax offset so you have to have tax levied for it to be offset against.

  4. 0
    0

    There’s that sentence again, “THE TOP END OF TOWN”. Tut! tut!

    • 0
      0

      Laura, whilst that may annoy you, it is a lot more acceptable than what some people might want to call them :}

    • 0
      0

      Agree Laura …

    • 0
      0

      The so-called “Top end of town” really describes those who are the top earners in the community. They have access to no end of means to minimise their tax already and given that our economy is slowing down largely because wages have stagnated and the ordinary person’s confidence is low spending has also stagnated.
      Now the top end of town is inline for tax cuts they don’t need despite the economy suffering at the moment with potentially worse to come.
      Abbot used to trot out “class warfare” when attacking unions but the stage 3 of these tax cuts is a form of class warfare.

    • 0
      0

      The so-called “Top end of town” really describes those who are the top earners in the community. They have access to no end of means to minimise their tax already and given that our economy is slowing down largely because wages have stagnated and the ordinary person’s confidence is low spending has also stagnated.
      Now the top end of town is inline for tax cuts they don’t need despite the economy suffering at the moment with potentially worse to come.
      Abbot used to trot out “class warfare” when attacking unions but the stage 3 of these tax cuts is a form of class warfare.

    • 0
      0

      TOP END OF TOWN are real and it is an honest description. They usually pay no tax either. They are better at avoiding tax than the little guy on minimum wage. Who are they?
      They are in the minority but have majority of the wealth. Why shouldn’t the worker who has no means to avoid tax feel envious or bitter!

    • 0
      0

      Tanker, what is the cut-off to be considered a “top earner in the community” when 80% earn less than $78,000?

    • 0
      0

      According to the Labor Party it’s about $18,000 p.a if you happen to be a self-funded retiree struggling to live off share dividends. You’re the ‘top end of town’, with less than $450,000 to last you may be the next 30 years and an income way below the OAP.

    • 0
      0

      Even less than that if you are one of a couple.

  5. 0
    0

    Already said we need MORE tax brackets to take up the slack from the excessively fat who also get all the good deals to even reach their taxable income – division of society into the rich and poor is proceeding apace, it seems.

    This is not a fixing of ‘bracket creep’ with the abolition of an entire bracket (the top one, of course) – this is a fundamental change in direction for income tax in Australia.

    I’ve already posted elsewhere that the unemployed should be compensated as well – didn’t mention pensioners since that goes without saying, except in SloMo’s lexicon, where they are considered a new form a gutter rat….

    Noted with a laugh the ‘coffee shop manager’ who blithely said she was planning to take the family away for an offshore trip in October and this would really help (giggle, giggle) – so any ‘stimulus to the local economy’ is, as usual, a pipe dream,and making more people more affluent is having the opposite effect to encouraging spending here – unless they are so poor they have no other choice.

    Giving an extra handout will not mean more spending into the local economy – it will mean more spending on luxury tours into Offshoreland and purchases from Offshore, and more hoarding of extra cash into dead stock (such as serial house ownership or shares in offshore corporate parasites and leeches or into family companies and trust that end up paying nothing) that pays no taxes and employs buggar all……

    Stoopid is as stoopid does..

    • 0
      0

      eventually we will have a flat tax rate where it will be 30% from 30k to 200k – this will be aspirational to workers to try getting higher wages – wish this was in existence when I was working – I can recall 60% tax coming in at relatively low levels – I remember my first pay packet of $2.38 per fortnight and then getting over $250k some 30 years later and paying tax that paid more than 4 old age pensions. These new tax rates would have saved me thousands.
      Previously returning tax back to the owners namely the taxpayers has resulted in increased retail spending and I believe it will do so again this time.

    • 0
      0

      A single tax rate and equivalent salary cuts is something I mooted years ago… but no fat cat on a big salary and high tax would ever come at that, since their salary is their kudos…

      Workers won’t be getting higher wages due to tax cuts – they’ll still be treated the same as now – as worthless parasites and mouths to feed and who whine endlessly making business soooo hard …

      Most people won’t be getting much out of this, and it will soon be sucked up anyway with rising costs… a lose-lose situation I’ve explained over and over.

      Bracket creep is one thing – a structural change to income tax is another – and I don’t agree with Albo that it is ‘fiscally irresponsible’ – the world, contrary to the dreams of politicians, does not run around ‘their’ budget – but around OURS… the people they work for. They need a fundamental shift in thinking so as to absorb that simple reality…. and a responsible approach to income taxation would be to charge a high rate, including several higher levels, from those who already enjoy heaps of deductions to even get to their taxable income – either that or remove the deductions altogether and make it a level playing field. (Joe Bloggs the field hand doesn’t get to deduct his car to go to work, or his home office, or his meals away from home, or depreciation on his equipment (gasps)…….

    • 0
      0

      It is simply stupid to have a tax bracket higher than the company tax rate of 30% as the wealthy will just use companies instead of being paid as an individual.

    • 0
      0

      So the tax system is broken. That’s NOT a reason to make it more unfair by reducing taxes on the wealthy.

  6. 0
    0

    As the Hon. John Howard once said “Mandate is illusory”. There are people who either vote deliberatrely informal or do not vote at all – There are rusted on voters who vote tribally – and there are sheeples who make up their mind on their way into the polling booth on the basis of the latest scare campaign or horoscope or whatever. Ask Andrew Bolt or consult the IPA. To say the Australian electorate chose this form of economic management is like saying one chooses to catch Measles.

    • 0
      0

      There is no absolute mandate – the only mandate any political party has is what the people vote directly on – all else is whimsy …

      I’m an Equal Opportunity Employer of political parties – I vote for NONE and I oppose each Party equally for not doing the job. Consider me unforgiving, but both majors have manage to offend me thus far in life…. and have yet to change their ways one iota…

    • 0
      0

      We didn’t give any ‘mandate’ by voting AGAINST the evils of the Labor Party. We simply expressed disapproval with the only alternative presented. Doesn’t mean we agreed with the LNP’s policies. Where was the referendum on tax cuts? How many voted for them in a referendum solely on that issue?

  7. 0
    0

    My understanding is that “Your Life Choices” is meant to be an information portal for seniors, pensioners and those of us creeping up in years. Perhaps I’m wrong … Seems we should add that it is a biased political commentator too. The opening line in the email includes “benefits – mainly the top end of town – ” in referring to the tax cuts. Can’t we just get the information without the snipes and lefty tilt? We are old enough to make up our own minds about the politics and comments here won’t change the balance or our minds. I was over the election hype by 19th May, so am tired of the bemoaners, whether readers or writers, continuing to get their little snipey digs in. Can we please just have the facts … without the bias?

    • 0
      0

      Yes – illogically biased. Lucky we are old and wise.

    • 0
      0

      Some may be older but certainly not wiser.

    • 0
      0

      But the right tilt is ok? We have to swallow that although it is lacking morals.
      If you look at what left means you will see it is about fairness and compassion. I prefer that tilt!

    • 0
      0

      You are absolutely correct, and it is not hard to see who the left wing supporters on this page are. Mainly the have nots, because they have not worked hard enough, or prudently put enough away to be comfortable in retirement now.

    • 0
      0

      Fairness and compassion? From the Labor Party and Greens? You are deluded Paddington. The left brought in the shockingly cruel and unfair means tests. Remember that? The left wanted to grind all self-funded retirees who are not wealthy into hardship and misery by stealing up to 30% of their income – forcing them onto pensions and costing the nation a small fortune compared to the tiny benefit that would have let them be independent. The left wants to make property prices crash. I could go on and on. No. There’s no ‘fairness’ or ‘compassion’ anywhere. Not right. Not left. Not middle. Everything in today’s world is about greed and self-interest, and feathering the nests of the privileged.

    • 0
      0

      Agree. But the thing is, it us not in the remit of this site to be anything but negative. Everything here says the sky is falling whether it is or not. And the real problem is it is read by a load of expert wingers for whom nothing is ever enough.

    • 0
      0

      And it’s not hard to see who the dyed-in-the-wool right-wing Coalition supporters are either. These people need to know that a significant portion of the community has lived hand-to-mouth for all of their working lives and has never had the opportunity to stash money away for their old age, particularly since compulsory superannuation only commenced in 1992. It is all very well being smug and self-righteous because you have had the opportunity to stash funds away for your retirement through good superannuation, high salaries earned or sheer frugality, but there are a lot of older retired people who have not. I am one of the lucky ones but I still feel the pinch with low interest rates and low returns on investments.

    • 0
      0

      Spoken like a true right wing supporter arbee.

    • 0
      0

      What rubbish, Only Daughter. People on minimum wages with large gaps in their earning years due to unemployment or illness still managed to pay off a home and save a healthy sum for retirement. Virtually nobody who is now retired lived ‘hand-to-mouth’. I know women who lived their whole life on a widow’s pension and still paid off a mortgage and saved. Plenty of folk who had no superannuation and low wages still saved – yes, through frugality. And they should not be penalised for doing that. Nor should wasters be rewarded. Welfare for those who suffer illness, disability, natural disaster, etc. is fine, but in Australia it’s handed out as a reward for being a spendthrift, and the spendthrifts scream that the savers should be robbed to fund it.

    • 0
      0

      Anonymous…I agree with you…there are many who did not think about the future and bugger tomorrow. I am sure we all know the ones who spent every night at the pub after work and were also smokers. I have zilch sympathy for those. I do have sympathy for those who through no fault of their own could not get ahead through illness etc but I believe they are in the minority.

      For those who say young people cannot buy a home….I find that a load of rubbish. You need to be forward thinking and have a plan like this young man.

      Read this:

      https://www.
      ews.com.au/finance/real-estate/you-have-to-start-thinking-ahead-how-a-maccas-worker-on-500-a-week-bought-his-first-property-at-19/news-story/17df39ef63a8b3ce61b7eb3cc1c2e21d

  8. 0
    0

    The best way to stimulate the economy is to give relief to those with a greater propensity to spend and not to those with a greater propensity to save, The former group are those on low wages, Newstart and pensions because all of them are most likely to spend any extra dollar they earn (ie greater propensity to spend). However the government plans to ignore again those on Newstart, pensions and so on and to give great relief to those on high incomes.

    That group on high incomes tend to have a high propensity to save and a low propensity to spend because when they get the extra dollar (like an extra $10K per year) they7 don’f need to spend it as they are already buying everything they need and want so they will just add it to their savings and shareholdings and in turn the extra interest and dividends will add to their wealth.

    The LNP have a wonderful system to aid the wealthy and be damned to the poor! As well they are not doing as they claim to be doing and that us giving the economy a boost.

    • 0
      0

      This is the normal tax bracket creep adjustment. Its been happening since money was deemed the method of transacting sales.
      1985
      Income tax payable
      $0 – $5200 NIL
      $5201 – $17000 26 cents for each $1 over $5200
      $17001-$32000 $3068 plus 38 cents for each $1 over $17000

      2018
      Resident tax rates 2018–19
      Taxable incometTax on this income
      0 – $18,200t NIL
      $18,201 – $37,000t19 cents for each $1 over $18,200
      $37,001 – $90,000t$3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000

      Its not new. Its just the media are still sucking sour grapes because the nation didn’t vote the way they wanted us to do.

    • 0
      0

      If a person is getting less than the tax threshold then any change in tax threshold or in tax deductions for others are irrelevant. The government is flattening the progressive tax system to favour those on higher incomes. Perhaps we’ll eventually have what Joe Bjelke Petersen wanted decades ago – a flat tax of 10%. Great for the rich and bloody shocking for the poor.

    • 0
      0

      ……but what a great incentive to get ahead knowing that no matter how much you earn you will only pay a certain amount…

  9. 0
    0

    It is just the normal bracket creep adjustment in line with global income brackets.

    Does it hurt retirees – of course. We are a global society that works on the pyramid scheme of inflation so we never really pay for what we loan.

    However everyone retiring know this will happen and we count on the super fund providers getting their members a reasonable return to offset inflation.

    At the moment there is a perfect storm – bracket creep, artificial inflation, historically low reserve bank rates, surreal house prices and high energy costs.

    This should mean that bracket analysis should be applied to all welfare allowances. From Children’s allowances to Centrelink pension supplements. After all council rates and train fares are all about to go up in line with the CPI.

  10. 0
    0

    Pensioners simply don’t matter to our masters in Canberra !

    • 0
      0

      Of course not. Retirees are a burden on society.
      However they still keep fixing us so someone must care about the elderly.

    • 0
      0

      and retirees will continue to be unimportant while they remain loyal to Canberra when handing out their votes rather than influencing policy development

Load More Comments

FACEBOOK COMMENTS



SPONSORED LINKS

continue reading

Travel News

Australian government divided on lifting overseas travel ban

The federal government is divided about when international air travel will recommence for Australians, as consumers signal their intent to...

Food

Dietitian reveals the breakfast swaps worth making

If you're looking to live a healthier lifestyle, breakfast is a good place to start. It's the first meal of...

Finance News

COVID driving more older Australians into poverty

Many of us who endured lockdowns in Australia are familiar with the surge in energy bills at home. But for...

Lifestyle

Easy ways to make your home feel lighter and brighter

Homes tend to feel pokier the more time you spend in them - and at a time of worldwide claustrophobia,...

Technology

Why would people believe 5G causes COVID-19?

A significant number of people are concerned about 5G technology and believe it emits harmful radiation.  That's a rational fear...

Age Pension

Government's 'death tax' talks spark calls for universal basic pension

Federal government talk of scrapping the compulsory super guarantee and implementing a 'death tax' on drawdowns on deceased estates have...

Centrelink – Services Australia

Are legally blind pensioners entitled to more money?

Rob is legally blind and wants to know how this will affect his entitlements. Q. RobHow do I go through...

Health

Mozzies biting? Here's how to choose a repellent - and how to use it

Mozzies biting? Here's how to choose a repellent (and how to use it for the best protection) Shutterstock Cameron Webb,...

LOADING MORE ARTICLE...