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

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #210 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm

lee wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits which they could not access until 70 if the Coalition had their way..

You have figures to back you up or a fact free zone again? Grin

First you prove "there is no record of how much each member had paid"....You first!!!

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

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19663
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #211 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:13pm

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:10pm:

If the ATO kept service peoples superannuation there would be outrage and some proof.

But guess what phil. The ATO do get the super data. It is entered on the BAS. Of course no BAS back then. And the DFRB recipients have been fighting this and other things for years.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:10pm:

Do you have anything apart from your word???

Oh poor phil. Cry

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 #212 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:18pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:42pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

So those who are still working and haven't retired who don't make more than $37K a year will be screwed by this labor policy.

Why is labor slugging these poor people with a new tax, why do leftards support these poor people being slugged with a new tax?

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits

So you think a 35 year old who is only working part time taking home less than $25K a year should not be entitled to a refund on paying more tax than they should if some of that income is derived from franked shares?

Why are you ignoring those on low incomes who have not retired and a long way from retiring who will be affected by this grubby tax grab from Labor?

Quote:

Dividend imputation

In 1987 in what he hailed as a world first, Labor treasurer Paul Keating introduced a rebate for each tax-paying dividend recipient.

Taken off their tax would be the company tax the company had paid on the part of the profit that had been handed to them as a dividend.

It would greatly reduce the existing bias in the tax system which taxed interest income once, but dividend income twice.

Here's how it would work at today's tax rates.

Jill owns 1,000 Telstra shares
Over the period of a year she gets dividends of $265
To provide them, Telstra made a profit of $379 on which it paid $114 tax
Jill pays tax on the full $379 but gets a credit of $114 that can be taken off any other tax she owes that year
As with other tax credits, it can be used to cut Jill's tax bill as far as zero, but not to turn it negative. It can't be handed to her in cash.
As Mr Keating put it, the tax paid at the company level would be imputed, or allocated to shareholders by means of imputation credits.

But not to all of them. Non-resident (overseas) shareholders couldn't get them, and nor could shareholders whose dividends hadn't been franked.

On one hand, it makes sense because it treats non-taxpayers the same as taxpayers by refunding them the same amount of company tax.

On the other hand, it does not make sense because it means that instead of being taxed once (at either the company or the personal level) as was the original intention, company profits can escape tax altogether.

Back to top

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

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #213 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:21pm

lee wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:13pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:10pm:

If the ATO kept service peoples superannuation there would be outrage and some proof.

But guess what phil. The ATO do get the super data. It is entered on the BAS. Of course no BAS back then. And the DFRB recipients have been fighting this and other things for years.

Bullshit....Prove it.... "there is no record of how much each member had paid"!!!

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

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 19663 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #214 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:33pm philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:21pm: Bullshit....Prove it.... Farq off phil. As I said you want me to prove a negative.
Back to top	IP Logged

philperth2010 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21097 Perth Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #215 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:35pm lee wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:33pm: philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:21pm: Bullshit....Prove it.... Farq off phil. You made the bullshit claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" and it is a lie....You are done dickhead!!!
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 #216 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:44pm

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:18pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:42pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

So those who are still working and haven't retired who don't make more than $37K a year will be screwed by this labor policy.

Why is labor slugging these poor people with a new tax, why do leftards support these poor people being slugged with a new tax?

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits

So you think a 35 year old who is only working part time taking home less than $25K a year should not be entitled to a refund on paying more tax than they should if some of that income is derived from franked shares?

Why are you ignoring those on low incomes who have not retired and a long way from retiring who will be affected by this grubby tax grab from Labor?

Quote:

Dividend imputation

Here's how it would work at today's tax rates.

Jill owns 1,000 Telstra shares
Over the period of a year she gets dividends of $265
To provide them, Telstra made a profit of $379 on which it paid $114 tax
Jill pays tax on the full $379 but gets a credit of $114 that can be taken off any other tax she owes that year
As with other tax credits, it can be used to cut Jill's tax bill as far as zero, but not to turn it negative. It can't be handed to her in cash.

So in that case Jill is below the threshold for paying income tax yet she is not entitlled to a refund on the tax she has already paid because it came from franked shares which idiots like you support.

If she earned that income from any other source she would be entitled to a refund for tax paid with her income tax return.

Why do you support taxing Jill because she made a paltry sum from Telstra shares?

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

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 19663 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #217 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:45pm philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:35pm: You made the bullshit claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" and it is a lie.. So therefore you can prove me wrong. You can show where it is recorded.
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 #218 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:17pm

lee wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:45pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:35pm:

You made the bullshit claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" and it is a lie..

So therefore you can prove me wrong. You can show where it is recorded. Grin

You made the claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" not me....Prove it!!!

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

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19663
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #219 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:23pm

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:17pm:

You made the claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" not me...

Exactly petal. And as I explained to you - you can't prove a negative.

You, however, have claimed it was a lie, that's a positive. You can prove a positive. Well YOU probably can't.

Just an assertion with no factual foundation.

Bye petal.

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 #220 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:28pm

lee wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:23pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:17pm:

You made the claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" not me...

Exactly petal. And as I explained to you - you can't prove a negative.

You, however, have claimed it was a lie, that's a positive. You can prove a positive. Well YOU probably can't.

Just an assertion with no factual foundation.

Bye petal.

You must have seen this claim "there is no record of how much each member had paid" somewhere and be able to support it....Otherwise we have nothing but your word it happened....This is not proving a negative it is supporting a verifiable claim if it is true....You added the claim to the text from the article I posted as it was not in the article....Were did you get this information from???

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

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21097
Perth
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #221 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:58pm

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

Here is an article that explains it perfectly!!!

Quote:

Labor's proposal, announced in mid-March 2018, was to return the divided imputation system to where it had been before Howard changed it in 2001, and to where it still is elsewhere. Tax credits could be used to eliminate a tax payment but not to turn it negative.

Labor allowed exceptions for tax-exempt bodies such as charities and universities who would continue to receive imputation cheques alongside dividends.

Pensioner guarantee

Two weeks later, in late March, Labor amended its policy by adding a "pensioner guarantee". Pension and allowance recipients, even part-pensioners, would be exempt from the changes and would continue to receive cash payments.

Also exempt would be self-managed super funds with at least one member who was receiving a pension or part-pension at the date of Labor's announcement, March 28, 2018.

The change cost relatively little (the budget saving over the next four years fell to $10.7 billion from $11.4 billion) because most of the imputation cheques go to Australians with too much wealth to get even a part pension.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

I take it the information was enlightening Grap....You surprise me sometimes???

Smiley

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Captain Nemo

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 13422
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #222 - Feb 12^th, 2019 at 11:13pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:18pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:42pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

So those who are still working and haven't retired who don't make more than $37K a year will be screwed by this labor policy.

Why is labor slugging these poor people with a new tax, why do leftards support these poor people being slugged with a new tax?

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits

So you think a 35 year old who is only working part time taking home less than $25K a year should not be entitled to a refund on paying more tax than they should if some of that income is derived from franked shares?

Why are you ignoring those on low incomes who have not retired and a long way from retiring who will be affected by this grubby tax grab from Labor?

Quote:

Dividend imputation

Here's how it would work at today's tax rates.

Jill owns 1,000 Telstra shares
Over the period of a year she gets dividends of $265
To provide them, Telstra made a profit of $379 on which it paid $114 tax
Jill pays tax on the full $379 but gets a credit of $114 that can be taken off any other tax she owes that year
As with other tax credits, it can be used to cut Jill's tax bill as far as zero, but not to turn it negative. It can't be handed to her in cash.

So in that case Jill is below the threshold for paying income tax yet she is not entitlled to a refund on the tax she has already paid because it came from franked shares which idiots like you support.

If she earned that income from any other source she would be entitled to a refund for tax paid with her income tax return.

Why do you support taxing Jill because she made a paltry sum from Telstra shares?

Very good point Baron.

Why the discrimination against share holders?

Why not scrap the tax free threshold for everyone?

Just listen to the screams if that was done. Wink

Back to top

The 2025 election WAS a shocker.

IP Logged

stunspore

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5097
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #223 - Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:27am

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:18pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:42pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

So those who are still working and haven't retired who don't make more than $37K a year will be screwed by this labor policy.

Why is labor slugging these poor people with a new tax, why do leftards support these poor people being slugged with a new tax?

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits

So you think a 35 year old who is only working part time taking home less than $25K a year should not be entitled to a refund on paying more tax than they should if some of that income is derived from franked shares?

Why are you ignoring those on low incomes who have not retired and a long way from retiring who will be affected by this grubby tax grab from Labor?

Quote:

Dividend imputation

Here's how it would work at today's tax rates.

Jill owns 1,000 Telstra shares
Over the period of a year she gets dividends of $265
To provide them, Telstra made a profit of $379 on which it paid $114 tax
Jill pays tax on the full $379 but gets a credit of $114 that can be taken off any other tax she owes that year
As with other tax credits, it can be used to cut Jill's tax bill as far as zero, but not to turn it negative. It can't be handed to her in cash.

So in that case Jill is below the threshold for paying income tax yet she is not entitlled to a refund on the tax she has already paid because it came from franked shares which idiots like you support.

If she earned that income from any other source she would be entitled to a refund for tax paid with her income tax return.

Why do you support taxing Jill because she made a paltry sum from Telstra shares?

Because it is as special as selling at a capital loss and cannot be used to reduce your income, only capital gains.

Back to top

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #224 - Feb 13^th, 2019 at 9:10am

stunspore wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:27am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:44pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:18pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:42pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/franking-credits-dividend-imputation-reti...

Bravo....

So those who are still working and haven't retired who don't make more than $37K a year will be screwed by this labor policy.

Why is labor slugging these poor people with a new tax, why do leftards support these poor people being slugged with a new tax?

Yeah because someone on $37K a year would have a massive self managed super fund and miss out on millions of $$$ from their franking credits

So you think a 35 year old who is only working part time taking home less than $25K a year should not be entitled to a refund on paying more tax than they should if some of that income is derived from franked shares?

Why are you ignoring those on low incomes who have not retired and a long way from retiring who will be affected by this grubby tax grab from Labor?

Quote:

Dividend imputation

Here's how it would work at today's tax rates.

Jill owns 1,000 Telstra shares
Over the period of a year she gets dividends of $265
To provide them, Telstra made a profit of $379 on which it paid $114 tax
Jill pays tax on the full $379 but gets a credit of $114 that can be taken off any other tax she owes that year
As with other tax credits, it can be used to cut Jill's tax bill as far as zero, but not to turn it negative. It can't be handed to her in cash.

So in that case Jill is below the threshold for paying income tax yet she is not entitlled to a refund on the tax she has already paid because it came from franked shares which idiots like you support.

If she earned that income from any other source she would be entitled to a refund for tax paid with her income tax return.

Why do you support taxing Jill because she made a paltry sum from Telstra shares?

Because it is as special as selling at a capital loss and cannot be used to reduce your income, only capital gains.

It isn't a capital gain and it has been taxed as well. Under Bullshit Bill's proposal, the credits are lost and not redeemable at some point in the future.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged