Change to Labor 'tax grab' will benefit 350,000 older Australians

Font Size:

While the Labor Party was defeated in the South Australian State Election on the weekend, it was buoyed by a federal win in the Batman by-election in Victoria, prompting Bill Shorten’s resolve to restore “fairness” to the budget by pushing ahead with targeting cash refunds for wealthier Australians who own shares – with a twist.

After significant backlash over Shorten’s ‘tax grab’, recently revealed modelling suggests that a minor adjustment the initial plan may relieve retirees of the full burden of the reform. The policy is expected to raise over $5.6 billion each year.

The new modelling, prepared by Treasury officials for Industry Super Australia, could mean around 350,000 retirees won’t lose cash refunds from the Australian Tax Office that would otherwise be used to cover the franking credits on their dividend incomes.

The Opposition Leader hinted at plans to adjust the policy by placing a $1000 cap of cash refunds instead of cancelling them entirely.

Mr Shorten claims he is on the side of older Australians, saying: “When it comes to pensioners, pensioners are always going to do better under Labor.”

“We want to decrease the gap and out of pocket costs paid for by pensioners. We don’t support the Turnbull Government creating the world’s oldest pension age, the age of 70,” he said at Ged Kearney’s press conference yesterday.

“So, we’re far more fair dinkum on pensioners, and we will have more to say in the future about our good deal for pensioners.”

Treasurer Scott Morrison on Sunday called the Labor plan “sneaky” and “shifty” labelling the cap on refunds as bad policy.

“Bill Shorten is saying to the Australian people ‘give me all of your money and trust me about what I’ll do with it’. We don’t agree with that. We don’t think any government should say that to Australians. That’s why we want to keep taxes as low as possible,” said Mr Morrison.

Analysis of Labor’s policy revealed that age pensioners account for about $238 million of the $5.6 billion annual revenue. A $500 cap would reduce that to $170 million, while a $1000 cap would take that number down to $130 million.

Self-funded retirees over 65 would account for $645 million a year. The $500 cap would reduce that to around $520 million and a $1000 cap to about $445 million.

The policy will primarily target about 200,000 self-managed super fund holders and investors with low taxable incomes but large share portfolios.

According to the analysis: “Fine-tuning the policy to ensure pensioners and retirees with smaller parcels of shares are not affected would be quite inexpensive because the burden of the policy falls elsewhere.”

“There’s a need for members to be reassured that the impacts on them are likely to be insignificant, if they exist at all,” said Industry Super Australia Chief David Whiteley.

What do you think of Labor’s proposal? Will you be affected by the ‘tax grab’?

Updated 10.40am

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

Labor targets wealthy retirees with $59b tax plan

Shorten to announce plan to save $59b over 10 years.

Labor pledges to crack down on family trust rort

The ALP wants to impose a 30 per cent tax rate on family trusts.

Labor plans to cap private health premiums if it wins election

Labor will cap private health insurance premiums should it win the next election.

Written by Leon Della Bosca

Leon Della Bosca is a voracious reader who loves words. You'll often find him spending time in galleries, writing, designing, painting, drawing, or photographing and documenting street art. He has a publishing and graphic design background and loves movies and music, but then, who doesn’t?

Contact:
LinkedIn
Email

254 Comments

Total Comments: 254
  1. 0
    0

    Can you trust this man, NO, there is already talk of removing or reducing other concessions, it will be the usual excuses that all political parties make when they come from opposition to being the government, and that is, we didn’t know how bad things were, so get used to more back tracking and more information on the supposed class war in Australia. The deals labor are making with the greens to allow more refugees in and to relax our border control will come at a cost, guess who is going to pay for it.

    • 0
      0

      Couldn’t agree more Jim.

    • 0
      0

      Jim – may your words reach God’s ear!! You hit the nail on the head.And you should be in Parliament.

    • 0
      0

      Jim…I can’t see why anyone should be receiving tax payer money for their tax exempt investments.

    • 0
      0

      Yes – can’t wait for the “desperate and well hidden terrible Black Holes in the Budget creating an emergency and cuts will have to be made somewhere so we all share the burden of LNP mishandling of everything from equality to simple handling of the cash” – which is what you get every time an opposition gets in the hot seat.

    • 0
      0

      I thought the article was about tax changes not politics.

    • 0
      0

      Jackie, not sure who you are listening to, dividends are not tax exempt, the tax is paid by the company the shares are invested in, I only have. Small ammount of shares, I think last year my wife and I recieved less than $200 between us, on my statement, there is two ammounts, one is the dividend that I recieve the other ammount is the franked dividend that I don’t recieve that goes to the government, if the dividend isn’t franked I then I get a larger unfranked dividend which I am liable to pay tax on, because the only income I have is my pension, my dividend and a small ammount of interest from my other investments, I don’t earn enough to be liable for tax, this is the same for every tax payer, if you pay tax then at the end of the year when you fill out your tax form, if it turns out you are not liable for tax, you then get all of the tax back.
      Hope that explains it clearly enough.

    • 0
      0

      Jim….Here is the link I got my information from. If you only receive $200.00 per annum. I am sure it will not affect you.

      https://theaimn.com/we-need-to-talk-about-jean/

    • 0
      0

      Jim, most company’s don’t pay any tax. the libs are not doing much about it, if they are, there draging it out through the tax dept. Money for the budget has to come from somewhere, lets see if Lab refines this policy, if not, then we will all start wining.

    • 0
      0

      Surely the confusion by Mr Shorten and others is that Company Tax is not income tax! Someone owning shares owns a small part of the company. The Company is liable for tax = the shareholders pay tax. The Franking credits are when the company has paid the company tax on your behalf so you as an individual shareholder don’t have to.

      Completing a tax form at the end of the year brings together all your different tax liabilities e.g. earned income e.g. salary; unearned income e.g. interest or dividends; tax already paid;any deduction allowed; etc. Any franked credits are deducted from any tax liability (because it has already been paid by the company on your behalf).

      The final figure may mean you owe the tax office more tax because you underpaid, or the tax office owes you a refund because you have paid too much. In some cases the franked credits can reduce your overall tax liability if you have one; but for people who have no tax liability (because they have no earnings, interest, etc or because the amount earned is not enough to be taxed on) and are below the tax threshold even if the franked credits were unfranked, they get a credit for tax paid by the company whose shares they own and this credit is repaid in cash by the ATO.

      Now, depending on the day of the week and which report you believe, Mr Shorten wants to either remove those refunds completely, or only pay back part of the tax paid by capping the amount you receive. Result: low income owners with a few shares (or in fact superannuation) will lose money.

      Great work Mr Shorten! You would have done better to agree to remove the energy subsidy for a tax that no longer exists and that was only to be applied to new claimants not those already on a pension.

    • 0
      0

      To Jackie and geo, thanks for the link, I couldn’t find anything in the article that supports your understanding, the article is about self funded retiree’s, I can’t see anything that states I wouldn’t be affected by Shorten’s claim, in fact it seems to be a rant against self funded retiree’s by a left winger, if you can find the passage where it states people like myself wouldn’t be affected.
      To geo if the company that I have shares in doesn’t pay tax then I wouldn’t be able to claim tax that they have payed on my behalf, that’s my understanding anyway, if you have a different understanding then I would be interested in where you got the information. As I said in my original post, if the dividends are not franked then I am not entitled to claim anything, but I do have to declare that income and pay tax on it if I am assessed to pay tax, ie if my total income is above the tax free threshold, that applies to every othe tax payer.

    • 0
      0

      Shorten is more trustworthy than the nefarious Lieberal-Hillbilly COALition who have almost completely destroyed this once great nation.

    • 0
      0

      KSS Good work and facts well put. Shorten does not want to know the truth or facts and is misleading the public for political divisionand gain Usually all income earned by super funds are tax exempt and accordingly tax free and then imputation credits are paid to the fund as a rebate or tax offset after funds tax / annual return is lodged by Oct each year After the refund is paid the members accounts is credited allowing more retirement withdrawals to be funded . and yes the ATO refund is only return of the tax paid by the company on behalf of the shareholders who own the company and received dividends after the tax is deducted It is not government money it is the shareholders money / dividends tax free because retiress incomes
      from superannuation funds are tax exempt . Shorten will blow any extra tax money just like Rudd and Gillard did and no debt reduction ever

    • 0
      0

      The REAL question is can you trust the current government which has already come after retirees like a madman? NO NO NO.
      Better the devil you trust than the likes of Morrison whose rhetoric is deceitful and dishonest almost all of the time.
      Always nice to see the coalition machine hard at work when they see an opportunity to lie to the public AGAIN.
      I have not voted Labor for decades but I might on the next occasion. The dictatorship currently in power has to be cut out like the cancer it is.

    • 0
      0

      Jackie, I will be affected by Shorten’s policy. When I finally have to quit work, unless I sell my shares and buy foreign shares or property, I’ll lose about $7000 a year from an income of $26,000 a year to support TWO people – one of whom has high medical and care costs due to a disability. Now of course I can erode my savings, drawing $16000 a year to achieve the income of a pensioner. In two years, I’ll be a part pensioner. My question is this: Why would anyone go without holidays, restaurant dinners, new clothes, new car, nice furniture, electrical goods, etc. in order to effectively gift $16000 a year to the taxman, when they can have all those goodies and draw a pension instead? It makes no sense.

      Second question: Why should I have to pay $7000 in tax on an income of $26000 a year, just because that income comes from share investment? Can you answer that? Would YOU be happy to be taxed at the rate of 27% in retirement, PLUS deprived of all pension benefits and concessions, while others are getting handouts and retirement income is supposed to be tax free?

      I don’t plan to let Shorten’s BS plan hurt me. I’ll divest my assets before I quit work and I’ll go on the pension. I don’t need to, but I will because I’m heartily sick of these constant attacks on everyone who planned and saved for retirement. When there are tens of thousands more on pensions, there will be less to go around and far more pressure on the government to reduce pensions, and then people like you will be screaming. But you’ll have only yourselves to blame. You won’t support FAIRNESS to people who tried to lighten the burden on taxpayers so there would be more for needy pensioners, so you will have to learn that hard way that greed and envy doesn’t pay.

    • 0
      0

      Way too little, way too late, Short-on.

    • 0
      0

      KSS I wrote all that down last weekj- only in a few lines . Why make your coirrespondence so long-winded. OIr are you a solicitor or accountant who is used to “padding” the advice to justiufy a larger fee. My advice was crisp, 100% factual, and FREE.

    • 0
      0

      Rainey: Shorten will realise that he has not got it right and hopefully fix his policy. The current batch of dictators on the other hand have made it clear they intend to take form the poor and give to the rich. Nothing other than electoral annihilation will change that as these cretins take the mandate BS.
      You might want to consider that Labor does not come after the bottom end of town and give Shorten a bit of slack.

      Like you we are self funded and I find it distressing that the current batch are after everything we have saved over a lifetime to avoid the old age pension. Be aware if your strategy is adopted then an inheritance tax will arrive faster than expected. Something to dwell on.
      Cheers

    • 0
      0

      OGR Doing that is the only sensible decision now.

      After the constant changes and attacks on self funded retirees one thing is very obvious,

      The Government has no money, no new revenue as they have sold everything and the only money left is the savings of those who worked for 40 or 50 years.

      They are coming after it bit by bit by bit.

      There is absolutely no point going without to save to pay for a pension the same as the OAP when you can get it by not saving.

      It makes absolutely no sense.

      Problem is these politicians are paid so much they are the new 1% and have absolutely no idea how ordinary people live and survive on very little.

      This will encourage many who have strived to be self funding to give that idea away completely and hold the maximum for the OAP only. Any extra saving is pointless.

    • 0
      0

      Mick, I don’t think ANY politician has the brains to get it right. They are far too self-focused and greedy, and wearing blinkers. They work on stupid assumptions and they don’t give a damn for the welfare of the people.

      Shorten is now proposing a $1000 handout to compensate. So people who have a handful of shares will profit and people who live off share income will lose close to 30% of their income. Strong motive to sell off and blow the lot or hide it under the mattress!

      I agree with you about the LNP, but Labor is no better. Labor’s flawed socialist approach will stuff the country totally.

      Inheritance tax? Very likely. All the more reason to give it all away to my kids NOW and claim a pension for the rest of my life. My kids can pay for anything the pension doesn’t stretch to. I condemned BigBear for doing that, but BOTH parties are driving that mentality. It might blow up the pension system, but clearly pensioners aren’t smart enough to figure that out and support fairness to SFRs. If they had the brains they were born with, pensioners would be screaming blue murder and demanding both that Shorten leave franking credits alone and that the LNP reverse the cruel change to the taper rate, so SFRs have and incentive to remain SFRS and not further burden an apparently overloaded pension system.

    • 0
      0

      And yet, Rae, we still have self-centred pensioners supporting any measure to strip savers of all they have and force more onto the pension. Don’t these green-eyed fools see that more people on the pension will hurt THEM? More on the pension means less to go around and more pressure on the government to make cuts. Those of us who saved and resorted – out of sheer desperation – to the mattress bank or gifting to kids will have cash or help to fall back on, but those who shouted ”hurrah” to proposals to bash the SFRs will suffer.

    • 0
      0

      Yes, Jim, a key issue is – can you trust this man? Labor and Liberal have BOTH stuffed ordinary people, especially Pensioners & other Retirees over decades, and I can’t believe anyone can seriously vote for either or them, or the Greens.

      The real issue is – how come rich people (and companies) are able to avoid paying reasonable tax – for individuals to claim refunds based on paying less than the 30% company tax. Far better solution would have been to have a MINIMUM TAX (which caught out even Trump in USA) of say 20% for Companies and 30% for Individuals (as it includes 7.5% tax for Pensions), without allowing Deductions. And then, pay all Universal Pension based only on Age (65 as in NZ) and Residence years (say 15). No Assets, Income, Partner, or any other moronic tests.
      NO NEED for such USELESS THOUGHT BUBBLES from a dopish party.

  2. 0
    0

    What I’d like to know is this….. a certain person we know has $3.2 mil in imputation credits. He actually stopped paying tax over 6 years ago. Why should he still be getting a tax refund or handout? Even now when the government is chasing 165 cases of Centrelink “fraud”

    • 0
      0

      It does seem a serious anomaly – someone explained it as the ATO takes tax from the company direct and holds it in ‘trust’ – and therefore when the company tax obligation is worked out, that money goes to the shareholders.

      Sounds like the whole deal needs a full look at.

    • 0
      0

      165 cases? Is that all they could come up with after that massive furore and witch hunt throughout the land?

    • 0
      0

      If this person has $3.2 million in imputation credits does that mean they have over $10 million in investments, or am I mistaken, I thought imputation credits are worked out at a tax rate of 30% ?

    • 0
      0

      It does seem odd, Jim, that someone with that amount would be copping a free gift as well…

      Like a lot of ideas this kind of thing needs careful figuring to arrive at cut-off points etc.

      Now then – buggar – just in need of some dental care – cracked this morning…

    • 0
      0

      $10million a year in dividend income which means that person must have around $150milliion in shares

    • 0
      0

      I think a lot of you are seriously missing the point. If you (or I), had $10million in the bank, in say a term deposit, then we would get a return of around $300,000 (in interest, annually). That is small bananas, in investment terms. You would pay tax on that $300,000 (unless you were significantly negatively geared elsewhere in your investment strategy). So if this investor cited above has $3.2 million in imputation credits, I agree with Raphael above – he/she must have in excess of $100 million worth of shares. It can only be the politics of envy to suggest that he/she should not derive a significant benefit from such a substantial portfolio.

    • 0
      0

      Surely you can’t be serious. If someone is earning in excess of $3.2 they must be paying tax. How can they not? The ATO would be well aware of this income and they aren’t going to miss out on their share.

    • 0
      0

      They are Gra
      They have already paid the $3.2 Million to the taxman.

      Its just that if they received it into their super,

      If it had been out of super, they would have had to pay the marginal tax rate which is another (45-30) = 15% on the $10 M

      Shorten wants to take the full 30% – stupid bastard

    • 0
      0

      SRS21 Feel free to confer with JKSS. This page is FREE. The franked credits are money the company has paid the ATO, so if he has a refdubnd it is because these credits of tax already paid, are in excess of his overall tax liability. Compre.?

    • 0
      0

      Not sure I believe your info srs21.
      If correct there is a way somebody could be earning $3.2 million and not paying a razoo in tax to my understanding.
      If somebody has no other investments other than shares which have dividend imputations attached to them (many do not!) then this would be quite correct. The issue Shorten SHOULD be addressing is to have limit on tax free income like this…..maybe $50,000???? That wat the top end of town which knows how to plunder any system would be thwarted from avoiding the tax system average citizens have no choice but to comply with.
      I’m sure Shorten has had this pointed out to him and that he will modify his policy. If he doesn’t then look for the bullet holes he has in both feet where he shot himself.

    • 0
      0

      Mick, srs21’s claims just don’t stack up. If this person has $3.2 imputation credits, then he WOULD pay tax. His income would be assessed and tax applied to that portion that is above the tax threshold, then any tax already paid by deductions from dividends would be correctly credited against his assessed tax debt, but it would NOT cancel it out.

      Given that he can only have $1.6 million in a superannuation pension account, there’s simply no way he can get $3.2 million in imputation credits and remain tax free unless he has extensive other rorts that have nothing to do with imputation or franking credits.

      With $1.6 million fully invested in shares that pay franked dividends (and few would have this as super investments are required to be ”balanced”), someone MIGHT achieve an income of $240,000 in dividends (if all shares return quite well). They might get a tax refund of $72,000, giving them a total income of $312,000. I agree, that sort of income should definitely be taxed. But changing imputation credits to decimate the income of ordinary Australians is NOT the way to address this problem. And neither is it reasonable to tell huge furphies to justify bad policy, and both srs21’s claims and Shorten’s ARE false. It simply isn’t possible under current legislation.

      Bottom line – NOBODY gets $3.2 million or even Shorten’s claimed $2.5 million in imputation credits AND pays no tax unless they are Gina Rinehart or someone in a similar financial position. It’s total BS. The amount of shares they would need would be astronomical – a portfolio worth in the hundreds of millions – and they would sure want some fancy accountants and elaborate rorts to escape tax at that level. But the bottom line is that these are the people who ARE escaping tax, and it’s THESE PEOPLE – NOT average retirees struggling to scratch out a living wage – who Shorten should be attacking.

    • 0
      0

      Unless that person was incorporated he would have been already refunded the $3.2 million. That’s how it works.

  3. 0
    0

    Shareholders are owners of a company and as such the dividends we receive are a profit on our investment. We have paid 30% tax on the dividends and we should be entitled to a rebate if our taxable income is under the $18,200. Effectively what they are doing is penalising people who have a small income but have managed to get a nest egg of shares. If the money was invested in the bank and they took Withholding Tax from the interest we are entitled to that money so why not from shares?

    • 0
      0

      Because only ‘rich’ people have shares les.61

    • 0
      0

      That may not be totally true, as you allude, KSS – and I’m sure many small holders have shares – the point is that for those people the amount is trivial compared to what the larger fish are getting away with.

      I can see the point Shorten has when companies that pay no tax, meaning they have no profit (hello) can afford to frank dividends.

      That quite simply smells to high heaven and shows clearly that such companies ARE earning profit untaxed. And Morrisson wants to cut company tax – what a joke.

      Shorten simply seems unable to ‘sell’ the idea on its merits.

    • 0
      0

      The answer to your question les.61 is that the dividend imputation system was/is a contrived system to avoid double taxation for the wealthy. That it has done very well for decades.
      A better way to look at dividends where the company has paid the tax due is to have a sliding scale of income and/or the amount of dividends received and set a rate of tax at each new step, just like the tax system does on oncomes. Of course the wealthy will fight that tooth and nail. They won’t give up their nice little rort easily or voluntarily.

    • 0
      0

      Mick, the dividend imputation system is NOT contrived for the wealthy. It was devised CORRECTLY to fix a wrong in the tax system that was seeing MANY shareholders (most especially the poorer who weren’t liable to pay tax) being OVERTAXED. Just like with PAYE tax, the tax was deducted and sent to the ATO before the payment was made to the individual, so if the individual’s tax rate was less than 30%, they had been overtaxed. The imputation system was designed to remedy that by refunding any excess tax paid, but if the tax rate for the recipient was more than 30%, they were credited with the 30% paid and billed for the balance.
      This is how it SHOULD be. PAYE earners would scream blue murder if the ATO didn’t refund overpayments to those who earn the least. Shorten’s proposal denies low income earners fair dealing. It does very little to change the status of higher income earners because most will have other earnings to offset their credits against. It will hurt those who no other means of support most.

  4. 0
    0

    I lost my part pension with the change in the asset test with the Libs and now Labor want the few I hundred dollars I get with this scheme just where will this end people who planed and saved for retirement are just getting shafted from all sides

    • 0
      0

      In that case you might qualify for a part pension – who knows? If you don’t it seems you’re already doing quite well, thank you.

    • 0
      0

      Trebor, that’s an assumption that has no basis. Yes, if stevek doesn’t qualify for a part pension, he probably has assets. Whether those assets are actually saleable or not may be questionable, but regardless, if X and Y both earn an average of $50,000 a year over a period of time, and X gambles, drinks, holidays, etc. while Y goes without lifestyle to put $10,000 a year in the bank, why should X then get a $1 million (approx.) handout from the taxpayer in retirement while Y is forced to live on the savings accrued by going without? That’s grossly unfair deprivation, and it’s economically destructive because it deters people from saving for retirement.

      Your previous posts suggest you have a much fairer and more respectful view, so please don’t change your position now to that of the green-eyed monsters who think anyone who has a little should be deprived of it.

    • 0
      0

      OGV how right you are. It seems that a bum who squanders the money they receive, is looked after and are called ” under privilged”. While a WORKER ( defined as a person who has had work for 40 years or more- not a layabout looking grim as labor paints them) is told to **** off. This seems like an absolute insult- yetr we allow it to happen. Why ?????

    • 0
      0

      Been there done that guys. Not often I agree with you Oars but you are on the money here. Unfortunately those who have squandered their retirements will not agree with you and no amount of facts will convince many that they are doing ok all things considered and should leave those who are not a burden on the rest of us alone. We live in a strange world.

    • 0
      0

      As Rainey says above – and Big Al – ‘squandering’ one’s money by giving it away to family in return for payment of services in retirement etc is becoming a more attractive proposition under these rules.

      Again OGR – you know I’ve long argued against an assets tested pension and against the anomaly that a SFR can fall below pensions income level and not receive top-up by adhering to Centrelink rules AND often paying some tax and not receiving benefits such as PBS.

      There are many anomalies in the current system – and we are exploring them one at a time here.

      I hope YLC takes not and passes these on.

  5. 0
    0

    Canberra Three Step – one step forward and two steps back…

    • 0
      0

      Trebor. Why don’t you STEP UP and show ’em the way. You have a lot of views- so let’s see if they work for the majority.

    • 0
      0

      I’m considering it – again, but I’ve said before that I’m more suited to be an advisor than a public mouth-piece. Even though I’m a trained actor I am essentially a very shy person who hates confrontation, and the media and oppositions can be very confrontational, on purpose, so as to unsettle people and make them look weak and confused.

      You see that with the gutter press all the time, which is why the old adage that only a fool would trust the media holds as true today as it did when it was first raised.

  6. 0
    0

    I thought the article was about tax changes no the usual rabid right scare mongering

    • 0
      0

      80 plus. It’s a bit of change from the sheepy left whitewashing- ey?

    • 0
      0

      Personally I’ll rip into whatever side of politics are low life scum.
      Sabre rattling? If required yes. Let’s tell the story so that the mentally challenged amongst us who believe the propaganda awake from their slumber and cut the cancer out of our governments. Not holding my breath though! Some people are sheep to the slaughter.

  7. 0
    0

    Don’t think this affects me, but after all the weird stuff coming from labor and the greens,
    I have gone deaf to anything they say.

    • 0
      0

      Then vote for your own execution at the hands of the current dictatorship. You will deserve what happens and one might think the last 6 years have shown some people who not to vote for. Apparently not enough pain yet Charlie so suffer some more maybe.

  8. 0
    0

    This is a handout and it should be stopped and I am one of the 350,000 that receives a handout it is a burden on the taxpayer. We are one of the wealthiest nations in the world yet we have people living in poverty it needs to stop.

    • 0
      0

      ollie…I agree this is a handout to the well off brought on by Mr John Howard. Yes it is a disgrace and needs to end.

    • 0
      0

      I cant believe either of you is saying this! So, is the aged pension a handout that should be stopped? Is Newstart a handout that should be stopped? How may people are on a Newstart benefit who have never paid tax? If you have worked hard all your life and paid your taxes, surely you are entitled to the aged pension (or part thereof), and any benefits that go with having a small share portfolio – that is the position I am in. If Short-on ideas goes ahead with his envy driven tax grab, what I will do is liquidate my small share portfolio, use the proceeds for some slap up holidays, and as I have now reduced my asset base, I will be eligible for even more of the aged pension. Now that seems to me to be a ridiculous outcome – but then look at the economic nous of Bill’s colleagues in Victoria, who spent $1.1 billion to not build a road!

    • 0
      0

      Social security is bought and paid for Big Al – such things as dividend imputation, negative gearing with concessional capital gains, childcare subsidies, paid maternity leave, and so forth are NOT bought and paid for – those are the areas where the ‘future debt’ is being built for the ‘following generations’ – not bought and paid for social security.

      I think many, including those in Parliament, need to start getting their minds right before the Downfall.

    • 0
      0

      The Labor government in Victoria was signed into that unworkable contract by the previous government – easy money to cop $1.1Bn to not build a road, and to me a blatant handover of public cash to a few old mates (again) on the LIBERAL side of the coin.

      Fair’s fair – I hold no brief for Labrador, either, but let’s stick to the facts.

    • 0
      0

      Easily fixed, ollie – I do not claim the refund and never have since I retired. Would be about $500. If you feel you do not deserve it don’t claim it, simple!

    • 0
      0

      Oh, right Trebor. Social Security is an ENTITLEMENT, bought and paid for. So why shouldn’t those who DON’T GET THAT ENTITLEMENT and have less to live on than those who do, get franking credits instead?

    • 0
      0

      ollie: I agree but let’s start by demanding our PM, other wealthy Australians and multinationals bring their money to Australia from their contrived and sanctioned offshore tax shelters AND PAY AUSTRALIAN TAX. If we do that I’m all with you.

      Rainey: I see you are bitter but consider that many retirees earn around the pension from their investments and do not have the hand out for a taxpayer funded pension. Your post above needs to be more reserved and you may want to go after those who truly abuse the dividend imputation system, not those who make the equivalent of the pension or marginally more out of it. There is a difference.

    • 0
      0

      That’s what we’re looking at OGR – franking credits is a tax refund from the ATO – not a determination of pension rights.

      You know by now my position on a universal pension etc.

    • 0
      0

      Minimum (Trump) tax or cash movement tax, Mick?

    • 0
      0

      A few idiotic comments …. followed by useful comments – YES, Trebor, Universal Pension without Asset or Income Tests, AND a MINIMUM TAX on both Individuals and Companies without allowing deductions. No need for Labor’s dopish thoughtless bubbles.

      Can’t see either Labor or Liberals getting enlightened soon – so Vote for anyone else who may support Retirees / above policies, and put the current seat-warming leeches last in preferences.

    • 0
      0

      Ollie, if someone is SAVING the government $40,000 a year by not drawing a pension, and then having 30% of their income taken before it’s given to them, leaving them an income LESS than the pension, how the HELL is refunding that OVERPAID 30% – THAT INCOME EARNERS DO NOT PAY – a ”handout”. Only an idiot would believe that rot.

      Under Shorten’s idiotic lying proposal, people earning less than the pension will be effectlvely paying 150% of their income in tax in many cases. But if they buy a bigger house or give money to their kids, they get an extra $40,000 a year (for a couple). Sounds good to me. Let’s make it impossible to survive as an SFR and crash the pension system. Then listen to the pensioners whinge!

  9. 0
    0

    Jim the concessions pensioners enjoy are given by State Governments, NOT Federal Government. I consider myself well informed and your assertion that Labor and Greens are making deals re immigration are completely untrue. Your right wing propaganda is shining through. The Greens are having enough trouble to remain relevant, without making any deals with LNP or Labor. Settle down Jim and go with the flow. LNP has done far more damage to pensions and pensioners than Labor could ever contemplate.

    • 0
      0

      The Sallow Peril thing about ‘open borders’ always was a nonsense – there are not and never have been open borders here and all immigrants and refugees, no matter how they arrive, have been vetted before being allowed in. The only difference is onshore or offshore vetting, and then the dire move by the LNP of refusing entry ever to any who seek to arrive here by boat. They can arrive here by plane and request asylum at Mascot, or on a ship, or they can walk up to an Embassy door and request asylum, but they can’t arrive by boat.

    • 0
      0

      I don’t need to settle down, Penny Wong has stated that she and the greens would increase refugee intakes when they win the next election. So far as the concession are concerned you are correct, the state government recieve funding from the federal government which goes towards paying the concessions, Shorten has already stated that he would be looking at the funding arrangement. I really don’t care if you think I am a right winger, the truth is I am not and never have been, I was a member of the Union for more than 50 years and have always voted according to the candidates that stand in my area, but I had many dealings with Shorten when he was the head of our union, the man’s a grub that did nothing for the membership that didn’t benifit himself, if he is removed from the Labor party I would reassess who I would support in the upcoming election.

    • 0
      0

      In 2002, a contract was signed to supply 3 million tonnes of LPG a year from the North West Shelf Venture to China. The contract was worth $25 billion: between $700 million and $1 billion a year for 25 years. The price was guaranteed not to increase until 2031, and, as international LPG prices were increasing, by 2015 China was paying one-third as were Australian consumers.
      Another great deal from the LNP.

    • 0
      0

      Brilliant business style stewardship of The Good Ship Australia.

      Sell-outs the lot of them, and should be hung as traitors or shot at dawn.

      Read “How to Kill A Nation” by Linda Weiss, Elizabeth Thurbon and John Mathews, about Howard’s 2002 FTA withthe US – countless parallels will arise from page one.

      We here in Oz are paying ‘global economy price’ for gas procured here while Asians are literally getting it dirt cheap.

      No wonder these turkeys had to go into politics – they couldn’t run a corner store (as an FBI guy said once about the Mafia)

    • 0
      0

      Very good post mareela.

      Jim: I understand your anger but you do need to look at what the Abbott and Turnbull governments have inflicted on pensioners and consider that if they get in again they will likely come after family homes with a Death Duty. Always better the devil you know than the one you has a track record of destituting average citizens ad retirees.

    • 0
      0

      Sorry Mick. I have no time for the disgusting LNP, but they have never proposed anything as harmful as this disgusting crap Labor is peddling, supported by blatant lies about it targeting the wealthy. It will hit pensioners hardest when the longer term consequences are felt, but given the selfishness I’m seeing here, I might struggle to sympathize.

  10. 0
    0

    I will believe this is fair when I see politicians’ pensions and benefits also reduced in the interest of “budget repair.” So what happens where a pensioner is entitled to a mix of tax rebates including a small amount of dividend imputation, is this still all capped at $1000? Who can trust this slimy guy who slides all over the place for a vote.
    The big issue of all of this however, has not be mentioned by anyone; that is imputation credits are available only from shares in Australian companies employing in Australia. The result of this crazy policy will be to discourage Australians from investing in Australian companies. So share prices go down due to lower demand making it easier for foreign companies to take over yet more Aussie companies and more difficult for companies to raise capital for investment and to employ more people. Yes Bill I am sure its part of your policy too, to get more Chinese investing in Australia!

    • 0
      0

      Been reading up on the 2002 FTA of Howard’s Way, with the US.. one direct result was US companies taking over Australian ones and then slipping offshore with the taxes etc… scary when you see the history of such things and then Looney Tony leaps up and says ‘Australia is open for business!’

    • 0
      0

      TREBOR Beggars can’t be choosers-ey ??

    • 0
      0

      TREBOR: the whole blind eye BS from this current government is sickening. Companies making profits IN AUSTRALIA should have no option to ‘export’ their profits to cheaper tax havens. That is fraudulent but the current government with a PM who has his money in an offshore tax haven will not change the arrangements. Would you expect him to? So the only way to rid ourselves of the fraud is to get rid of the problem at the next election. Then you have to hope that the incoming leader has the spine not to renege.

    • 0
      0

      There are no beggars amongst the Australian population who employ politicians and public servants in the stewardship role for this nation.

    • 0
      0

      The only reason we are becoming beggars and serfs is because of piss poor stewardship of this nation by a government of two parties pandering to special interest groups and refusing to have the balls to stand up and start saying NO to blatant rip-offs and even social stupidities.

Load More Comments

FACEBOOK COMMENTS



SPONSORED LINKS

continue reading

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,...

Entertainment

Sir Bob Geldof on grief, fame and getting through it all

I've hardly started questioning Sir Bob Geldof before he is off on a long, sweary rant about everything he thinks...

Australia

Abandon Australia Day and choose the history we want to celebrate?

Australia Day is the anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet in Australia. On 26 January 1788, 11 convict...

Community

Speaking up for the disappearing art of listening

Columnist Peter Leith is 91 and describes himself as "half-deaf and half-blind". But he sees and hears a lot and...

Beauty

Hyperpigmentation: How to tackle those tricky dark patches on your ski

There are plenty of great things about summer - sunshine, picnics and fruity cocktails immediately spring to mind - but...

Australia

Enthralling, dystopian, sublime: NGV Triennial has a huge 'wow' factor

Refik Anadol: Quantum memories 2020 (render) custom software, quantum computing, generative algorithm with artificial intelligence (AI), real time digital animation...

Australia

Where to eat, drink and play on Kangaroo Island

Australia's third largest island is an oasis of pristine wilderness, premium produce and hidden secrets ripe for discovery. Easily accessible...

COVID-19

Will you need a vaccination to visit Australian venues?

State premiers have suggested that once vaccinations begin in Australia, those without vaccinations may be banned from visiting some venues...

LOADING MORE ARTICLE...