34533 views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline 98octane

So I was at a lunch the week before last with John Howard and the only question that I asked was;

Now that Australian car manufacturing is over will the Government remove LCT.

John Howard - "My personal belief is that they should, however I am not sure that they will"

I'd love that fuggin tax gone for good!!

I agree. But fat chance of removing the LCT. Imagine the lefty headlines "Tax breaks for the rich" etc.

I hope the next budget targets super tax concessions on high non-compulsory contributions - with an appropriate threshold. I understand the need to incentivise people to save for retirement - but there's a limit to the concessions needed to do that.

Plus focus on tax lurks like family trusts not used for what they're expressly intended for.



Offline TEZZA

  • Those Frenchies seek him everywhere

  • Joined: Oct 2011

  • Drives: No matter what it is I am still lusting after something better.
  • Location: In a sunny place
Yeah, and I'm now watching what you guys watched 5 years ago for free on OneHD and 7mate. :D

Seriously though, I would become real fat real quick as I believe there is a 24hr Motorsport channel.  I have family with Foxtel and the Ads drive me nuts.  I thought when it originally came out the reason you were paying for it was because there were no Ads.  So much self promotion now.  Might as well just watch free to air.

I like some of the shows on ABC, no Ads.


It's not just the friggin ads it's all the bogan promo shit they run over and over.

All full of brainless dickheads, assorted retards and moronic rednecks. 10 years ago it was OK to watch now I don't bother.

 :banghead:



Offline TEZZA

  • Those Frenchies seek him everywhere

  • Joined: Oct 2011

  • Drives: No matter what it is I am still lusting after something better.
  • Location: In a sunny place
I agree. But fat chance of removing the LCT. Imagine the lefty headlines "Tax breaks for the rich" etc.

I hope the next budget targets super tax concessions on high non-compulsory contributions - with an appropriate threshold. I understand the need to incentivise people to save for retirement - but there's a limit to the concessions needed to do that.

Plus focus on tax lurks like family trusts not used for what they're expressly intended for.



Super already has thresholds.
This applies this tax year.

Under 59 = $25,000 a year
Over 59 = $35,000 a year

That is total contributions from all sources including any superannuation guarantee that you ask a tax deduction (concession) for. So if you are on a basic $130,000 a year your employer contributes $12,025 (9.25%) which only leaves $22,975 left.

I don't see this as over generous, particularly for people playing super catch-up. A few years back we could put $100,000 into super and get a tax deduction. Which I did. Now that was too generous, but I don't see $35k as being a lot.

And exactly what was a Family Trust used for except to avoid paying excess tax and to protect assets? Pretty much what they are used for today.



Offline amgsl55

  • Tooth hurty

  • Joined: Feb 2011

  • Location: Adelaide


Super already has thresholds.
This applies this tax year.

Under 59 = $25,000 a year
Over 59 = $35,000 a year

That is total contributions from all sources including any superannuation guarantee that you ask a tax deduction (concession) for. So if you are on a basic $130,000 a year your employer contributes $12,025 (9.25%) which only leaves $22,975 left.

I don't see this as over generous, particularly for people playing super catch-up. A few years back we could put $100,000 into super and get a tax deduction. Which I did. Now that was too generous, but I don't see $35k as being a lot.

And exactly what was a Family Trust used for except to avoid paying excess tax and to protect assets? Pretty much what they are used for today.

Even many more years ago you could do a one off $1m contribution -  did that attract any tax deductions?

Unless, your investments do super well the minimum$25k/$35k contributions will never give you enough to retire on, it's just a tax deduction with some franking credit bonuses.



Offline TEZZA

  • Those Frenchies seek him everywhere

  • Joined: Oct 2011

  • Drives: No matter what it is I am still lusting after something better.
  • Location: In a sunny place
Even many more years ago you could do a one off $1m contribution -  did that attract any tax deductions?

Unless, your investments do super well the minimum$25k/$35k contributions will never give you enough to retire on, it's just a tax deduction with some franking credit bonuses.



No the one million was only for "non concessional" = not deductible.

You can still put $150,000 per annum into super per year to age 65 as non concessional. Under certain conditions you can apply the "bring forward" provisions and add $450,000 non concessional in one year.

The advantage is that the earnings are happening in a tax advantaged structure paying tax at a max of 15%. And yes put it in good shares and the imputation credits means you can get a tax refund instead of a tax bill.

I don't see any of this as generous. I view it as "advantaged" but far from generous.







Offline tdc911


  • Joined: Apr 2006

  • Location:
  • Drives:


You can still put $150,000 per annum into super per year to age 65 as non concessional. Under certain conditions you can apply the "bring forward" provisions and add $450,000 non concessional in one year.


..and the Government has proposed that individuals will have the option to withdraw contributions made from 1 July 2013 that exceed their non-concessional contributions cap.



Offline amgsl55

  • Tooth hurty

  • Joined: Feb 2011

  • Location: Adelaide



Offline tdc911


  • Joined: Apr 2006

  • Location:
  • Drives:
And yes put it in good shares and the imputation credits means you can get a tax refund instead of a tax bill.


Something that hasn't been discussed much:
Quote
With the reduction in the company tax rate, investors in companies earning less than $5 million may receive greater dividends but less franking credits, leaving them in the same net after tax position. However, for shareholders of companies with income of more than $5 million, the 1.5% reduction in tax will be offset by the 1.5% levy for the paid parental leave scheme. As a result, shareholders may receive the same level of dividends but less franking credits (assuming the levy is not franked), leaving them worse off.



Offline dodger

  • Tommy Gunna

  • Joined: Dec 2009

  • Location: Melbourne
Chris Pyne, how good is this man!

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4004718.htm

Yes I like Pyne he seems to love his job and he's very good at it.
Sarah Henderson is out of control lately.



Offline 98octane

Something that hasn't been discussed much:

I thought I read some commentary at the time suggesting this was deliberate and rather clever/sneaky.



Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1024 Views
Last post Wed, 09 May, 2012 - 08:31
by mhh
8 Replies
3264 Views
Last post Fri, 22 Mar, 2013 - 17:15
by anotherforumuser
11 Replies
3855 Views
Last post Wed, 17 Apr, 2013 - 21:10
by Ferrari Fissatore
Morrison's Budget

Started by mhh « 1 2 ... 10 11 » Off Topic

102 Replies
7184 Views
Last post Sat, 07 May, 2016 - 23:17
by mondi
58 Replies
6939 Views
Last post Wed, 18 May, 2016 - 16:46
by mondi


Latest Discussions

BOARD TOPIC MEMBER POSTED
[ Ferrari ] 812 Superfast mhh Today at 01:02
[ Lamborghini ] Huracan Performante amgsl55 Yesterday at 21:18
[ Lamborghini ] The cool Lamborghini photo thread andecorp Yesterday at 20:48
[ Gadgets and Technology ] Apple iPhone S4Simon Yesterday at 20:47
[ Cars ] Spotted thread TJB Yesterday at 13:53
[ Off Topic ] Real Estate Joey Yesterday at 13:02
[ McLaren ] McLaren 720S psw Tue, 27 Jun, 2017 - 21:52