I pay tax on principal and tax on interest.
Are you saying people are paying tax on interest twice here?
I pay tax on principal and tax on interest.
You don’t pay tax on the principal invested, you only pay tax on the interest.
You paid tax on your wage when it came to you, which is a separate source of incone, you then invested the savings you made somewhere else.
No, I’m saying the same source shouldn’t be taxed twice. The original intent of the policy was just that. The company is just there (partly) as a vehicle to help people invest, otherwise imagine trying to deal with the thousands of owners directly.
Remove the company and the dividend is no different to your interest.
KJ I’m two years in arrears - help?
I had a mate try to tell me that the refunds should stay because the company is just the aggregate of discrete shareholders and therefore company tax should be based on each shareholder ‘s individual tax position.
I was struggling to agree with that.
Company tax should be 30% of company profits.
If a shareholder pays 37% tax, then the taxpayer gets a refund. If less than 30%, you get nothing back.
I think this is Labor’s fundamental position.
I wouldn’t object if a refund was made if your gross income is less than a specified amount.
The only change then that needs to be made then is that your tax return includes your gross income from all sources. At present, you never report that income from super (if over 60). I think that solves the issue for everyone who is going to be disadvantaged genuinely, not those who are pulling in $100K an then getting the refunds.
The Libs are always trying to make any Welfare payments as hard to obtain as possible.
Greg Jericho is calling the Libs’ policy to protect those poor millionaires “Wealthfare”.
I’m confused. Is KJ 11 saying someone who pays ZERO Tax, should somehow be entitled to a Cash Tax refund, … or not?
It’s amazing to think this ever became a thing in the 1st place for mine.
It would be great wouldn’t it.
However in reality it’s just going to be 5 months of two parties going “no u”
free speech only applies if you want to say something racist
I’d say they’ve been doing that for the best part of 2 years now, and Blinky did it again on Insiders this morning, … multiple times, … to nearly every question. They brought out all the policies earlier than anyone in Aus political history, and have been prosecuting the case ever since.
They could try to get it simpler, as these things are rather complex to the average punter, … and I think Bill kicked off the New Year, (and let’s face it “Election Campaign”) today by doing just that too.
There are examples of numerous things that get double, heck even triple taxed. Imputation, the way it is run in Australia is a scam and has needed amendment for a long time. It is extremely regressive as the benefits of this scheme favour by far, the top percentiles of wealthy tax payers.
Totally agree, in that fashion he was very good, it was refreshing to see a poly talk about future plans to address issues.
I have posted the Labor Policy document twice here already.
Suggest you read it, as it is full of a positive vision for all Australians.
I also suggest you read the vision that the ACTU is presenting around Changing the Rules.
A sad and quite disgraceful part of our society is that it is proven that negative electioneering gets results.
Except in Victoria
Liberals still got over one million primary votes in State Election.
I surprised some Liberal candidates even voted for themselves!
Will be most interesting to see what the Government does with the royal commission recommendations.
I suggest they will look tough and say they will implement the recommendations and then not legislate any changes at all, I mean how can they? They won’t even sit in parliament.
For those interested (or can’t sleep) here’s the link for the reports.
Terrible things happened, vulnerable people abused and taken advantage of, unscrupulous conduct and illegal conduct.
Anyone going to jail?
Doubt it, no one will be held accountable in the long run, they never are.
ASIC has never really punished anyone so not sure how they can continue with only an “adjustment” made in how they do it?
They’ll politely ask them do do a bit better, get a nice donation and do nothing at all after that.
Consumers will bear the brunt of the ‘adjustment’ cost. It’s brilliant.
One of the issues facing ASIC is the cost of litigation for an underfunded body. Additionally, ASIC - like a number of statutory bodies- has been forced to hire private sector lawyers, irrespective of its in-house legal specialists and which is demoralising for them. The Victorian Justice Dept stemmed the outsourcing rort a few years ago because of the drain on the budget.