2015-2016 Budget

fyi another interesting one to watch from the budget ... GST now imposed on companies providing services / software/gaming sales like netflix

however the government hasnt worked out how the hell they are going to collect this lolll ...
 
fyi another interesting one to watch from the budget ... GST now imposed on companies providing services / software/gaming sales like netflix

however the government hasnt worked out how the hell they are going to collect this lolll ...

I think it is a good idea, makes it easier for local based people to compete.

I agree that the mutinationals have been avoiding tax throughout the world with clever avoidance schemes but a concerted effort between countries is at last, trying to force these cheats to pay their fair share of tax.

At present some overseas companies will refuse to ship or download certain products to Australia, the new cooperative approach between government tax agencies may make it easier to enforce.

Failing that, we may find the metadata trawled for purchases from certain suppliers like Netflix and others
 
Simple question about the $20k deduction-

If I have a sole trader business that made $2k and I purchased a computer for business purposes that cost $2k, under the $20k deduction my taxable income is now $0? Which means I get whatever tax I paid on the $2k income back? I.e. 28% of $2k = $560 back :confused::confused::eek:
 
What were you expecting?

Everyone in this Country needs to get real, and the Gubbs need to get honest and deliver the necessary bad news to our society;

i was expecting you to start protecting the government.
and you delivered :)

totally support govt getting honest. but i think it should happen before the elections, not after.

if the government promises one thing before the election and then finds excuses to break virtually every promise - they deserve the boot.
 
Better than using $100 and getting $63 I guess, conservative approach, don't spend it until you have actually got it :)

they are still spending it. that's what deficit means. the only difference is that they are telling you upfront that they will be borrowing money, rather then half a year later when they discover that things didn't turn out as they hoped, and the purse is empty.
 
Let me explain.

Firstly, an aged pensioner that has worked all their life, scrimped and saved to make something of themselves and to support themselves in their old age SHOULD have a much better income than those that have been dependant on welfare their whole lives.

That $823k is all assets. Take away the furnishings, cars, jewellery and all the other 'things' that people have in their homes, and that figure is much less. Once you remove all other assets, it could be around $500k, in shares, property, super etc. That really isn't a lot, and when it's gone, they are in the same position as someone who had the same income over the years, but chose to spend it all, or someone who sat around and never did anything.

I like the measure as it is a step in the right direction on cracking down on middle class welfare. That 823k figure doesn?t include the PPOR. As for super that was the whole design of it. You are supposed to use super so you don?t end up on the pension the day after you retire. Not every aged pensioner who is dependent upon the full pension was ?dependant on welfare their whole lives? either. Nobody is stopping them from going out and spending all their income and ending up on the pension either. You can?t spend money once you?re dead after all. The only losers in that scenario would be their kids as they get less inheritance.

As for the 823k assets it says it includes all assets but just as people minimise the amount of tax they pay, they also minimise the actual amount of assets they own. People are not going to list their jewellery, cars, furniture, possessions etc. because it?s all based on honesty and if there are records of it (like a brand new car) they are obviously going to claim the most depreciation possible on the items. People with 823k in assets are also probably smart enough to realise they can simply transfer the assets to other family members and they will still be eligible for their benefits.

Either way it?s hardly a harsh measure to propose especially when you had the same Government proposing to cut people under 30 off all income support for a period of 6 months if they happened to be unemployed.
 
"People from overseas coming to Australia on a working holiday will no longer be eligible for the $18,000 tax free threshold, and instead have to pay tax at 32.5 per cent on every dollar they earn up to $80,000."

Thats a bit rough.

It's rough because these taxpayers are generally young and generally don't use or qualify for the expensive parts of the feds expenditure - childcare, welfare, education, health and aged care.


I agree. It is tough and I think it's a bad move. I'll predict the extra money it generates will be outweighed by the loss of economic activity generated by backpackers when they decide to go elsewhere.


See ya's.
 
"People from overseas coming to Australia on a working holiday will no longer be eligible for the $18,000 tax free threshold, and instead have to pay tax at 32.5 per cent on every dollar they earn up to $80,000."

Thats a bit rough.

It's rough because these taxpayers are generally young and generally don't use or qualify for the expensive parts of the feds expenditure - childcare, welfare, education, health and aged care.

How much money will this really add? Coming from an area that is backpacker central, most work cash in hand jobs anyway.
 
"People from overseas coming to Australia on a working holiday will no longer be eligible for the $18,000 tax free threshold, and instead have to pay tax at 32.5 per cent on every dollar they earn up to $80,000."

Thats a bit rough.

It's rough because these taxpayers are generally young and generally don't use or qualify for the expensive parts of the feds expenditure - childcare, welfare, education, health and aged care.

This is going to directly affect local farmers here in the Bundaberg region who rely on recruiting and retaining properly paid foreign workers to get their crops harvested. The effects will flow on to the local businesses and the wider community.

If the local member puts the whims of his party before those in his electorate (a very safe one addmitedly), then I can only hope he gets judged harshly by his constituents at the next election.
 
i was expecting you to start protecting the government.
and you delivered :)

totally support govt getting honest. but i think it should happen before the elections, not after.

if the government promises one thing before the election and then finds excuses to break virtually every promise - they deserve the boot.
I may be a Lib voter, but I'm not a one-eyed voter.

I have been an employee and an employer a number of times over my life, so I can see both sides of each Parties agendas and philosophies.

ALL Politicians need to lift their game. As a group; I rank them about the same as r/e agents and used car sales people.

In fairness to all Parties, they have to make ambitious promises to get elected. And of course; situations can change economically, and adjustments have to be made. I get that, and all for that.

I also want to see a Gubb make a hard decision that this Country needs, that everyone will hate because it doesn't help their hip pocket directly, then sell it to the folks correctly with the clear no-BS, warts and all truths.
 
i was expecting you to start protecting the government.
and you delivered :)

totally support govt getting honest. but i think it should happen before the elections, not after.

if the government promises one thing before the election and then finds excuses to break virtually every promise - they deserve the boot.

Then you would never have a Govt.

That's it. lets have no Govt because they ALL lie after the election.

Can anyone name a Govt that didn't "lie" at some stage?

Has anyone changed their mind in their private life because circumstances have changed?
Would it be considered a lie?
 
Then you would never have a Govt.

That's it. lets have no Govt because they ALL lie after the election.

Can anyone name a Govt that didn't "lie" at some stage?

Has anyone changed their mind in their private life because circumstances have changed?
Would it be considered a lie?

some lie more than others
in this particular case Tony even lied about his government being the government that will not backflip on promises. how pathetic.

circumstances always change. no govt could be better than a govt that cannot even plan for a year.
 
some lie more than others
in this particular case Tony even lied about his government being the government that will not backflip on promises. how pathetic.

circumstances always change. no govt could be better than a govt that cannot even plan for a year.
I don't want to turn this into a Lib/Lab slug fest,

But let's simply reflect back on the previous 6 years....

3 x Leaders
Mining Boom
Biggest deficit in history (despite boom)
Carbon Tax lie.
Craig Thompson and others.
1400 deaths at sea from illegal boats

Dude; they are all the same in many respects, and we donkeys keep on having short memories.

After 18 months, Tony's mob hasn't done anywhere near as bad as your mob did; do you really want them back?

Tony's mob are making progress; it's merely slower than anticipated.
 
Last edited:
After 18 months, Tony's mob hasn't done anywhere near as bad as your mob did; do you really want them back?

Tony's mob are making progress; it's merely slower than anticipated.

are you for real? they are doing the opposite of what they promised. how's that progress?

the end of mining boom has been talked about for as long as i can remember. even on this forum. it's a pretty poor excuse to use for covering the incompetence.

if you wanna compare first 18months of Rudd's mob vs first 18 months of Tony's mob, you'll probably find that Tony will lose out.

Tony even managed to get his own party against him much quicker than Rudd did :D
 
are you for real? they are doing the opposite of what they promised. how's that progress?

the end of mining boom has been talked about for as long as i can remember. even on this forum. it's a pretty poor excuse to use for covering the incompetence.

if you wanna compare first 18months of Rudd's mob vs first 18 months of Tony's mob, you'll probably find that Tony will lose out.

Tony even managed to get his own party against him much quicker than Rudd did :D

You wouldn't trust the current mob of Labor pollies to run a School canteen. They'd probably want to put pink batts in the ceiling!
 
are you for real? they are doing the opposite of what they promised. how's that progress?
Easily settled with facts. Now, we know the ABC isn't pro the Abbott government ;)

Promise Tracker: The Abbott Government's 2013 election commitments

Overview: 16 delivered, 14 broken, 41 in progress.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/promisetracker/

The fact is that they have delivered on more election promises than broken promises.

Can you say the same about Rudd? I don't think so.
 
Back
Top