Australian Politics Forum - In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #165 - Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:58pm

crocodile wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

lee wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 8:21pm:

This case study illustrates why the difference is important. $160,000 per year, paying no tax, and getting a tax subsidy of $12,000 a year.

Where is the tax subsidy? Perhaps you should include the case study and not the pretty graphics.

A case study should include the underlying assumptions.

Bam has his fist wrapped hard around his ol' fella. There is no subsidy. Super for retirees over 60 has no tax applicable in pension phase. The non pension earnings are under the tax free threshold. The tax payer is fully entitled to have the overpaid tax refunded. It doesn't get any simpler.

You've got your head firmly up your arse. Always bleating ... but but ... that's their legal entitlement. Get this. Laws can be changed, and excessively generous largesse should be first on the chopping block. Very low taxes on contributions, no tax in pension phase, and earning thousands of dollars a week while paying no tax. The country can't afford this. How much will it cost in 20 years? $20 billion a year? $40 billion?

Didn't you hear Hockey? The age of entitlement is OVER!

Except for the rich, apparently.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 10^th, 2019 at 10:04pm by Bam »

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Bam Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21905 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #166 - Feb 10^th, 2019 at 10:01pm Page flip
Back to top	You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument. IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #167 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 7:23am

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:58pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

lee wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 8:21pm:

This case study illustrates why the difference is important. $160,000 per year, paying no tax, and getting a tax subsidy of $12,000 a year.

Where is the tax subsidy? Perhaps you should include the case study and not the pretty graphics.

A case study should include the underlying assumptions.

Bam has his fist wrapped hard around his ol' fella. There is no subsidy. Super for retirees over 60 has no tax applicable in pension phase. The non pension earnings are under the tax free threshold. The tax payer is fully entitled to have the overpaid tax refunded. It doesn't get any simpler.

You've got your head firmly up your arse. Always bleating ... but but ... that's their legal entitlement. Get this. Laws can be changed, and excessively generous largesse should be first on the chopping block. Very low taxes on contributions, no tax in pension phase, and earning thousands of dollars a week while paying no tax. The country can't afford this. How much will it cost in 20 years? $20 billion a year? $40 billion?

Didn't you hear Hockey? The age of entitlement is OVER!

Except for the rich, apparently.

You're the one with your head up your arse. You can't seem to get it through your thick, stupid skull that they're taking their own money. It's not a government handout. Money that they've earned and saved.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #168 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:12am

crocodile wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 7:23am:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:58pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

lee wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 8:21pm:

This case study illustrates why the difference is important. $160,000 per year, paying no tax, and getting a tax subsidy of $12,000 a year.

Where is the tax subsidy? Perhaps you should include the case study and not the pretty graphics.

A case study should include the underlying assumptions.

Bam has his fist wrapped hard around his ol' fella. There is no subsidy. Super for retirees over 60 has no tax applicable in pension phase. The non pension earnings are under the tax free threshold. The tax payer is fully entitled to have the overpaid tax refunded. It doesn't get any simpler.

You've got your head firmly up your arse. Always bleating ... but but ... that's their legal entitlement. Get this. Laws can be changed, and excessively generous largesse should be first on the chopping block. Very low taxes on contributions, no tax in pension phase, and earning thousands of dollars a week while paying no tax. The country can't afford this. How much will it cost in 20 years? $20 billion a year? $40 billion?

Didn't you hear Hockey? The age of entitlement is OVER!

Except for the rich, apparently.

You're the one with your head up your arse. You can't seem to get it through your thick, stupid skull that they're taking their own money. It's not a government handout. Money that they've earned and saved.

It is a dividend and should be taxed as income like any other investment....Since when should money you have earned and saved not be taxed on any profit derived from these savings....A rort that no other country allows because it is stripping money from vital services and providing a tax haven for lazy investments....It is no wonder these parasites want to maintain there tax free money!!!

Huh

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19963
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #169 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:36am

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:12am:

It is a dividend and should be taxed as income like any other investment....

Income derived from share dividends is taxed, the problem with this idiocy from labor is those who don't meet the income tax thresholds will be taxed at a much hgher rate than any other income.

For some reason leftards think any income from franked dividends should be taxed at a much higher rate even if people don't meet the thresholds for that tax rate.

This idiocy from labor will have no effect on the wealthy it will only impact those in the lowest tax brackets.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #170 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:47am

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:36am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:12am:

It is a dividend and should be taxed as income like any other investment....

Income derived from share dividends is taxed, the problem with this idiocy from labor is those who don't meet the income tax thresholds will be taxed at a much hgher rate than any other income.

For some reason leftards think any income from franked dividends should be taxed at a much higher rate even if people don't meet the thresholds for that tax rate.

This idiocy from labor will have no effect on the wealthy it will only impact those in the lowest tax brackets.

Then people will have to find other investments and stop being lazy....Claiming this will only affect those on low tax brackets is bullshit!!!

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19963
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #171 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 9:38am

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:47am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:36am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:12am:

It is a dividend and should be taxed as income like any other investment....

Income derived from share dividends is taxed, the problem with this idiocy from labor is those who don't meet the income tax thresholds will be taxed at a much hgher rate than any other income.

For some reason leftards think any income from franked dividends should be taxed at a much higher rate even if people don't meet the thresholds for that tax rate.

This idiocy from labor will have no effect on the wealthy it will only impact those in the lowest tax brackets.

Then people will have to find other investments and stop being lazy....Claiming this will only affect those on low tax brackets is bullshit!!!

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

From your link-
Quote:

As can be seen, according to Treasury's analysis, 86 per cent of the individuals who received refunds had taxable incomes of $37,000 or less.

It is to some extent self-evident that the policy will mostly affect individuals on incomes below $37,000, because $37,000 is the threshold for the 32.5 per cent tax rate, higher than the corporate tax rate of 30 per cent that determines the franking credit.

As Treasury put it: "Providing refundability of franking credits allows taxpayers with a marginal tax rate below the company tax rate to receive a refund of tax paid by the company."

What about those who haven't retired should they pay more tax than required because they invested in shares?

Super is a separate issue many low income workers who own shares will be affected by this grubby tax grab from labor.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #172 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am

Quote:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Superannuation income (for fund balances of up to $1.6 million) is generally not subject to tax in the retirement phase, and is therefore excluded from taxable income.

Second, in a related sense, taxable income often has little to do with wealth.

For example, the Grattan Institute has estimated that, when superannuation withdrawals are pared out of income data for retirees, almost half of the "wealthiest" 10 per cent of people over 65 report incomes of less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold.

Third, Labor's policy applies to both individuals and superannuation funds. By focusing on individuals, Mr Robert is ignoring the impact that would flow through to members of superannuation funds, particularly self-managed superannuation funds, which account for almost half the refunds claimed.

Figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office show that almost a quarter of all refunds claimed in 2014-15 went to 33,761 self-managed superannuation funds with balances of over $2.4 million.

Something has to be done to stop this rort....It is no wonder almost no other country allows this graft???

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #173 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 11:38am

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 8:12am:

crocodile wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 7:23am:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:58pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

lee wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Bam wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 8:21pm:

This case study illustrates why the difference is important. $160,000 per year, paying no tax, and getting a tax subsidy of $12,000 a year.

Where is the tax subsidy? Perhaps you should include the case study and not the pretty graphics.

A case study should include the underlying assumptions.

Bam has his fist wrapped hard around his ol' fella. There is no subsidy. Super for retirees over 60 has no tax applicable in pension phase. The non pension earnings are under the tax free threshold. The tax payer is fully entitled to have the overpaid tax refunded. It doesn't get any simpler.

You've got your head firmly up your arse. Always bleating ... but but ... that's their legal entitlement. Get this. Laws can be changed, and excessively generous largesse should be first on the chopping block. Very low taxes on contributions, no tax in pension phase, and earning thousands of dollars a week while paying no tax. The country can't afford this. How much will it cost in 20 years? $20 billion a year? $40 billion?

Didn't you hear Hockey? The age of entitlement is OVER!

Except for the rich, apparently.

You're the one with your head up your arse. You can't seem to get it through your thick, stupid skull that they're taking their own money. It's not a government handout. Money that they've earned and saved.

It is a dividend and should be taxed as income like any other investment....Since when should money you have earned and saved not be taxed on any profit derived from these savings....A rort that no other country allows because it is stripping money from vital services and providing a tax haven for lazy investments....It is no wonder these parasites want to maintain there tax free money!!!

Huh

Fukk me dead there are some imbeciles on this board. Tax on investment earnings are always payable as long as the person's income is above the tax free threshold. What Shorty wants to do is keep their tax that has already been paid while under the TFF. But, it's all good if they are above the TFF.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #174 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 11:42am

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am:

Quote:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Superannuation income (for fund balances of up to $1.6 million) is generally not subject to tax in the retirement phase, and is therefore excluded from taxable income.

Second, in a related sense, taxable income often has little to do with wealth.

For example, the Grattan Institute has estimated that, when superannuation withdrawals are pared out of income data for retirees, almost half of the "wealthiest" 10 per cent of people over 65 report incomes of less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold.

Third, Labor's policy applies to both individuals and superannuation funds. By focusing on individuals, Mr Robert is ignoring the impact that would flow through to members of superannuation funds, particularly self-managed superannuation funds, which account for almost half the refunds claimed.

Figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office show that almost a quarter of all refunds claimed in 2014-15 went to 33,761 self-managed superannuation funds with balances of over $2.4 million.

Something has to be done to stop this rort....It is no wonder almost no other country allows this graft???

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

Another fukking clown.

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Somehow, superannuation withdrawals are income. Can somebody tell this drongo that they are only withdrawing their own money that has already been earned. Some people should be lobotomised at birth.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19663
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #175 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:04pm

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Oh dear. You want to pay tax on your super when you retire. You know the super that has paid tax on the contributions, the money earned in the super fund (income) and tax it again on retirement?

So that would be 15% going in, 15% on the superfund earnings and what; taxed at the marginal rate on retirement?

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #176 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 1:22pm

crocodile wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 11:42am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am:

Quote:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Superannuation income (for fund balances of up to $1.6 million) is generally not subject to tax in the retirement phase, and is therefore excluded from taxable income.

Second, in a related sense, taxable income often has little to do with wealth.

For example, the Grattan Institute has estimated that, when superannuation withdrawals are pared out of income data for retirees, almost half of the "wealthiest" 10 per cent of people over 65 report incomes of less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold.

Third, Labor's policy applies to both individuals and superannuation funds. By focusing on individuals, Mr Robert is ignoring the impact that would flow through to members of superannuation funds, particularly self-managed superannuation funds, which account for almost half the refunds claimed.

Figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office show that almost a quarter of all refunds claimed in 2014-15 went to 33,761 self-managed superannuation funds with balances of over $2.4 million.

Something has to be done to stop this rort....It is no wonder almost no other country allows this graft???

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

Another fukking clown.

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Somehow, superannuation withdrawals are income. Can somebody tell this drongo that they are only withdrawing their own money that has already been earned. Some people should be lobotomised at birth.

Loosing the plot hey dickhead....It is a rort almost no other country allows....Throwing insults does not make your argument any more valid....You can shove your tax rort up your ass once Bill Shorten is PM....Sook!!!

Cry

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #177 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 1:41pm

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 1:22pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 11:42am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am:

Quote:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Superannuation income (for fund balances of up to $1.6 million) is generally not subject to tax in the retirement phase, and is therefore excluded from taxable income.

Second, in a related sense, taxable income often has little to do with wealth.

For example, the Grattan Institute has estimated that, when superannuation withdrawals are pared out of income data for retirees, almost half of the "wealthiest" 10 per cent of people over 65 report incomes of less than the $18,200 tax-free threshold.

Third, Labor's policy applies to both individuals and superannuation funds. By focusing on individuals, Mr Robert is ignoring the impact that would flow through to members of superannuation funds, particularly self-managed superannuation funds, which account for almost half the refunds claimed.

Figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office show that almost a quarter of all refunds claimed in 2014-15 went to 33,761 self-managed superannuation funds with balances of over $2.4 million.

Something has to be done to stop this rort....It is no wonder almost no other country allows this graft???

Roll Eyes

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/fact-check-labors-dividend-imputation-pol...

Another fukking clown.

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Somehow, superannuation withdrawals are income. Can somebody tell this drongo that they are only withdrawing their own money that has already been earned. Some people should be lobotomised at birth.

Loosing the plot hey dickhead....It is a rort almost no other country allows....Throwing insults does not make your argument any more valid....You can shove your tax rort up your ass once Bill Shorten is PM....Sook!!!

Cry

Other countries behead poofters. Should we too.

Bill's tax grab will have zero effect on me. My poor ol' 87 year old Mum who has never received an aged pension but has a very modest return on her share potfolio will be affected. You can bet your sorry arse that I'll be reorganising he interests quick smart. Silly Billy will actually end up losing money since she will qualify for a part pension. The idiocy of it all.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

stunspore

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5097
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #178 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 5:13pm

lee wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:04pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:02am:

First, taxable income does not include the largest source of income for many retirees: superannuation.

Oh dear. You want to pay tax on your super when you retire. You know the super that has paid tax on the contributions, the money earned in the super fund (income) and tax it again on retirement?

So that would be 15% going in, 15% on the superfund earnings and what; taxed at the marginal rate on retirement?

Still be cheaper than doing it with after taxed income/savings.

Back to top

IP Logged

John Smith Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 78083 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #179 - Feb 11^th, 2019 at 5:18pm crocodile wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 1:41pm: You can bet your sorry arse that I'll be reorganising he interests quick smart. Silly Billy will actually end up losing money since she will qualify for a part pension. The idiocy of it all. then what are you whinging for?
Back to top	Our esteemed leader: I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus. IP Logged