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

Fit of Absent Mindeness

Gold Member

Offline

We need more fits of absent
mindedness

Posts: 1622
Brisbane
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #60 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 8:43am

Captain Nemo wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 9:57am:

Does society believe in the $20,542 tax-free threshold or not?

Bear in mind, many of these retirees paid up to 60% marginal tax rates back in the day, and have been slugged with a 10% tax on goods and services ... now ... they are going to have those two nongs Shorty and Bowen rip away on average $5,000 from their annual income. Shocked

as we millennials are told- stop complaining - they are receiving money they haven't paid - it's time to stop wealth fare

Back to top

Putting the n in cuts

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #61 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:14am

Fit of Absent Mindeness wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 8:43am:

Captain Nemo wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 9:57am:

Does society believe in the $20,542 tax-free threshold or not?

Bear in mind, many of these retirees paid up to 60% marginal tax rates back in the day, and have been slugged with a 10% tax on goods and services ... now ... they are going to have those two nongs Shorty and Bowen rip away on average $5,000 from their annual income. Shocked

as we millennials are told- stop complaining - they are receiving money they haven't paid - it's time to stop wealth fare

That's the whole problem. Basic ignorance. They have in fact already paid. The company has already withheld the tax before passing on the remainder to the shareholder. If the withheld amount exceeds their tax obligation they are entitled to a refund. It doesn't get any simpler. In some cases, there is no tax obligation due to being under the tax free threshold etc.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Pedro Curevo

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 500
Nth Coast NSW
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #62 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:29am

Imputation credits are a nice earner for shareholders who are already getting a fair dividend payment especially if shares are in banks.

Those that have a high level of shares (the top wealth bracket) have the most to lose with the cash imputation credits, with Labors modelling of fine-tuning the policy to ensure pensioners and retirees with smaller parcels of shares are not affected...who gives a toss about the super wealthy maintaining a nice lazy earner...they should be paying their fair share of tax.

Howard's tax fiddle franking credit refund was designed for the wealthy self managed funds where now some of these rich are getting a $2million + cash refund and for non industry super funds to avoid paying tax.

So despite refundable imputation credits flowing only to those who don’t pay tax the main beneficiaries have significant financial wealth available for their retirement.

As more people retire reaping a franking credit bonus with companies paying less tax its clear tax changes need to be made....its unsustainable.

Ultimately the Labor policy will have positive effects as companies will have the opportunity to to build on higher yields which works well for the savvy investor who will invest in up and coming companies not paying franking credit but with investment the company grows with higher returns in share value....investing for the savvy not for the people who should be in a Industry super fund for a better return than relying on franking credits.

All in all only effects a small % of the population....like how many would have over $1.6mill in their super funds...??

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 #63 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:21pm

Pedro Curevo wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:29am:

A perfect example of the ignorance surrounding the policy and just how misinformation is dangerous

Imputation credits are a nice earner for shareholders who are already getting a fair dividend payment especially if shares are in banks.

Fair dividend payment or not. The tax has already been paid before distribution to the shareholder. The imputed credit is only to the value of the tax paid by the company. The shareholder must still make up the difference between their marginal rate and the imputed credit. There is no income at a favourable rate of tax.

Those that have a high level of shares (the top wealth bracket) have the most to lose with the cash imputation credits, with Labors modelling of fine-tuning the policy to ensure pensioners and retirees with smaller parcels of shares are not affected...who gives a toss about the super wealthy maintaining a nice lazy earner...they should be paying their fair share of tax.

The wealthiest have nothing to lose. If their income is above the tax free threshold they may offset their obligations with the imputed credit. The problem is for those whose income is under the tax free threshold and have no other income to make use of the imputed credit even though the company has paid their tax on their behalf.

Howard's tax fiddle franking credit refund was designed for the wealthy self managed funds where now some of these rich are getting a $2million + cash refund and for non industry super funds to avoid paying tax.

Only the withdrawals from super funds are untaxed for those over 60 and retired. Otherwise taxation still applies during accumulation and earning.

So despite refundable imputation credits flowing only to those who don’t pay tax the main beneficiaries have significant financial wealth available for their retirement.

It's only refundable when they do not meet the tax free threshold. Drawings from super after age 60 and post retirement has no withdrawal tax. All of the contributions were still taxed on the way in and the earnings taxed during accumulation. If no tax is due then why shouldn't they get a refund for tax that was paid when it need not have been. They also do not collect the pension above the earnings threshold

As more people retire reaping a franking credit bonus with companies paying less tax its clear tax changes need to be made....its unsustainable.

Ultimately the Labor policy will have positive effects as companies will have the opportunity to to build on higher yields which works well for the savvy investor who will invest in up and coming companies not paying franking credit but with investment the company grows with higher returns in share value....investing for the savvy not for the people who should be in a Industry super fund for a better return than relying on franking credits.

All in all only effects a small % of the population....like how many would have over $1.6mill in their super funds...??

It has a greater effect on smaller shareholders that have no other income in which to offset the credits against. The wealthy ones don't give a fukk

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 89127 Proud Old White Australian Man Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #64 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:23pm Let's not confuse the issue with 'who paid this, and who paid that' - tax paid to the ATO on your behalf in advance comprises part of your gross income. The company has indeed paid the tax on your behalf - but that does not extend to saying that the tax has been paid by you.
Back to top	“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” ― John Adams IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #65 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:34pm

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 12:23pm:

Let's not confuse the issue with 'who paid this, and who paid that' - tax paid to the ATO on your behalf in advance comprises part of your gross income. The company has indeed paid the tax on your behalf - but that does not extend to saying that the tax has been paid by you.

Roll Eyes

So when the company withholds the tax on your wages, you haven't paid it at all. Good. Glad you cleared that one up for me.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Captain Nemo

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 13421
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #66 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 2:50pm

crocodile wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:14am:

Fit of Absent Mindeness wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 8:43am:

Captain Nemo wrote on Feb 5^th, 2019 at 9:57am:

Does society believe in the $20,542 tax-free threshold or not?

Bear in mind, many of these retirees paid up to 60% marginal tax rates back in the day, and have been slugged with a 10% tax on goods and services ... now ... they are going to have those two nongs Shorty and Bowen rip away on average $5,000 from their annual income. Shocked

as we millennials are told- stop complaining - they are receiving money they haven't paid - it's time to stop wealth fare

That's the whole problem. Basic ignorance. They have in fact already paid. The company has already withheld the tax before passing on the remainder to the shareholder. If the withheld amount exceeds their tax obligation they are entitled to a refund. It doesn't get any simpler. In some cases, there is no tax obligation due to being under the tax free threshold etc.

Spot on Crocodile.

Back to top

The 2025 election WAS a shocker.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #67 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 3:21pm

crocodile wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 10:17pm:

stunspore wrote on Feb 6^th, 2019 at 5:18pm:

We shouldn't really on the wealthy donating money to help socially disadvantaged - especially when they do so through tax evasion/minimisation.

Any tax raised by the government goes back into the economy.

That's only true up to a point. Taxes have marginal excess burden otherwise known as deadweight losses. Unfortunately, corporate and payroll tax have one of the highest.

Basically, ever dollar taxed returns only 60c
http://i1.wp.com/www.prosper.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ScreenHunter_97-S...

I don't trust this chart only because it doesn't list some common taxes. Stamp duty, land tax, fuel excise, road tolls - these should be listed too. I wouldn't list all taxes, just those that raise over $1 billion in revenue in Australia annually or are likely to if implemented.

I agree that payroll tax is a bad tax. Why tax jobs?

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

stunspore

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5097
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #68 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:23pm

https://www.theage.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/labor-is-exploiting-misunder...

Interesting to read comments. Especially other ex-actuaries who counter this ex-actuary writer.

It seems like a company would never have to pay tax to the government at all, if all its shareholders can claim all the franking credits. Based on the writer's stance.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 19663 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #69 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:42pm stunspore wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:23pm: Especially other ex-actuaries who counter this ex-actuary writer. So doing a search there was the writer, a commenter who specifically said they were not an actuary, and one person who said they were. So where were the other ex-actuaries (plural)?
Back to top	IP Logged

Captain Nemo

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 13421
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #70 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:46pm

stunspore wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:23pm:

https://www.theage.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/labor-is-exploiting-misunder...

Interesting to read comments. Especially other ex-actuaries who counter this ex-actuary writer.

It seems like a company would never have to pay tax to the government at all, if all its shareholders can claim all the franking credits. Based on the writer's stance.

That's an excellent article which explains what is really going on with Shorty's tax grab.

Well done! Cool

https://www.theage.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/labor-is-exploiting-misunder...

Back to top

The 2025 election WAS a shocker.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 78083
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #71 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:54pm

crocodile wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:14am:

The company has already withheld the tax before passing on the remainder to the shareholder.

the company and the shareholder are two separate entities AND both need to pay tax on their income/profit. The imputed credit is an exemption to the share holder of his tax duties. Why should he be exempt?

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Captain Nemo

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 13421
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #72 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 5:06pm

John Smith wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:14am:

The company has already withheld the tax before passing on the remainder to the shareholder.

the company and the shareholder are two separate entities AND both need to pay tax on their income/profit. The imputed credit is an exemption to the share holder of his tax duties. Why should he be exempt?

She/ He should be exempt IF they come in under the tax free threshold.

That's the whole point.

This tax grab will hit those on low incomes.

Back to top

The 2025 election WAS a shocker.

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy
Reply #73 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 5:15pm

John Smith wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

crocodile wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 9:14am:

The company has already withheld the tax before passing on the remainder to the shareholder.

the company and the shareholder are two separate entities AND both need to pay tax on their income/profit. The imputed credit is an exemption to the share holder of his tax duties. Why should he be exempt?

The shareholders own the company. You're confusing limited liability with ownership of shares.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

John Smith Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 78083 Gender:	Re: In Many Cases, Its Welfare For The Wealthy Reply #74 - Feb 7^th, 2019 at 5:17pm Captain Nemo wrote on Feb 7^th, 2019 at 5:06pm: She/ He should be exempt IF they come in under the tax free threshold. the company has already claimed the tax free threshold bonce. If the retirees dividends exceed his tax free threshold, then s/he should pay tax
Back to top	Our esteemed leader: I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus. IP Logged