$2m Home Tax - What's next?

[trainspotter]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

I'm with you on this one WayneL. Sink 10 million Aussie pesos into your principle place of residence to get the FULL pension? If you have this kind of coin why would you need the pension? LMFAO. I fail to see the logic in these statements? Why the heck would drain your bank accounts and liquidate all your asset base and buy a 10m house for tax benefits and get a pension? I am losing it.

Gooner:- All credit to you brother if you are not taking the easy "handout" mentality in your approach. Righteous dude ... just plain righteous. Keep on fighting the good fight and I am sure something will come along that is in your sphere of knowledge soon enough. All glory to you and yours.

 

[Julia]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

[

Ummmmm ... being a self funded retiree then you would fully well know that IT IS MEANS TESTED. If you have enough to purchase a 10 million $ property it is UNLIKELY you will get the pension. (where did this figure come from by the way?) The sum of 2 million was bandied around by the boffins who want more tax.

The system that we have in place for the principle place of residence is ADEQUATE. No need to threshold tax it because you can afford to live in a house that is larger than the rest. More than likely the b@stard who can afford this kind of home has been paying taxes through the nose for bloody years. I say he deserves the damn thing. JEEEEEEEEEZUZ !!

Trainspotter, you are quite wrong. The family home is not included in means testing.

It's far more common than you might realise for people to buy a more expensive home just so they can obtain a full government pension.

As Wayne says, too funny.
I can't think of anything sillier but it happens.

I wouldn't be in favour of taxing a home over $2 (not $10 million, gg, where did you get that idea?), but I would be in favour of including that part of the value of the family home which is over $1 million in the means test for the government pension.

No reason why tax payers should be funding a full pension for people who are hiding their wealth in non-assessable asset.

 

[Trevor_S]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Well, I am going to go out on my own and say I agree with it. I actually a agree with a CGT on your PPOR. Only paying it when it is sold.

Unlike the OP I know qite a few people who rort, by moving in, doing up, selling and moving on, pay no income tax (live of the CG) etc etc

I also know quite a few older people who rort it the same way. Multi million dollar houses (they could sell and move someone where very nice, become self funded and save the public purse, they don't want to do that voluntarily, so time for the Government to man up and force them), getting the pension, they feel entitled, as if the pension is a quasi super scheme.

I am also for death duties
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10024733

The thing is the Government has to generate much more income, the welfare budget is expanding, there is now a massive debt that needs repaying etc If they want to stay in power they need to keep the populist vote

I never put these bunch of idiots in power, but nor did I put the last bunch of idiots their either.

 

[stocksontheblock]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Yet another ALP/Rudd bashing thread bring on the double dissolution i say.

If i had a 2 million dollar house i wouldn't be complaining about any new taxes, and genuinely struggle to understand how anyone potentially suffering from this new proposed tax could or would have a problem with it.

Have money = pay tax

Ohhh no the bleeding heart liberal's have been ordered by Dudd and Co. to come out in defence of the indefensible.

You have got to be seriously kidding me when you think that this is a good idea. God forbid that anyone would want to better themselves and try to aim high, or be in a position to get something that might be a little better than others.

It's obvious that such an ill-thought out statement has come from someone who doesn’t have any money and welcomes anything that will give them a foot-up on the apparent 'rich', when all it will do is take you a step lower.

If those who are fortunate to own or have a property worth more than $2million should be taxed more - obviously to fund the big spending pork barrelling of people like the likes of you, then how about a thank you when more of my taxes are taken to fund your baby bonus', $900 jollies to going shopping with etc, child care rebates, and your weekly ‘training’ money, aka the dole! As my first posting said, I don’t have nor could I afford a $2million home – unlike many of your ALP mates, however I do happen to earn a little more than $100k and I find it pretty bloody offensive to say I am ‘rich’.

How about you and your mates in the ALP stop trying to screw everyone for a few $’s and implement and encourage people to better themselves and aim to own a $2million home instead of having them feel like they are owed for others success and enforcing the idea they are losers or that they have been left out.

There are many examples where people will own a $2miliion home, and these have come from hard work – work which has already been taxed at every level.

 

[trainspotter]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Julia ... the pension is means tested. PPOR not included granted BUT if you can afford to throw that kind of lolly around it is unlikely you would be able to obtain the FULL PENSION. I digress.

The great majority of retirees are home owners and the adequacy of pensions has been determined on this basis (with renters receiving separate assistance). Savings invested in owner-occupied housing generally do not generate cash-flow incomes. For these reasons, the Panel supports the continued exemption of owner-occupied housing from the pension means test. However, the provision of an uncapped exemption provides an opportunity for very high levels of wealth to be sheltered from means tests. To increase the fairness of the pension system, the Panel proposes in the development of the new means test to give consideration to setting a limit on the value of the exemption of owner-occupied housing.

http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/co...t_Income_Strategic_Issues_Paper/Chapter_6.htm

It seems we are too late. The train has left the station so to speak.

 

[gooner]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

If those who are fortunate to own or have a property worth more than $2million should be taxed more - obviously to fund the big spending pork barrelling of people like the likes of you, then how about a thank you when more of my taxes are taken to fund your baby bonus', $900 jollies to going shopping with etc, child care rebates, and your weekly ‘training’ money, aka the dole! As my first posting said, I don’t have nor could I afford a $2million home – unlike many of your ALP mates, however I do happen to earn a little more than $100k and I find it pretty bloody offensive to say I am ‘rich’.

Stocks, if you earn a little more than $100k as you say, then you too are entitled to baby bonus, child care rebates and family tax benefit. Although you need children to do that. Which means meeting a women (assuming you are male). Which might be difficult given your rabid right wing views.

 

[stocksontheblock]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

... but I would be in favour of including that part of the value of the family home which is over $1 million in the means test for the government pension.

No reason why tax payers should be funding a full pension for people who are hiding their wealth in non-assessable asset.

Sorry Julie, I have cut some of what you said, yet I do happen agree with the pension part, although not part of my org. post, I do happen to agree with peoples comments on the value of a home being included.

I would love to know the real figures for people who are buying such an asset to then claim - I agree with trainspotter et al that I couldnt see the worth in doing something like this. A dead asset, which you couldnt use as cash then claim a pension to, I guess, buy the PAL to have on toast each night, seems like an odd-ball thing to do.

However, that said, the home should be included in the pension, yet where does this end - in real terms. It is not included in unemployment benefit - as far as I know, so if I own a $1million+ home should I have to sell that because I am asset rich and money poor and exhaust that money before claiming the dole?

 

[stocksontheblock]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Stocks, if you earn a little more than $100k as you say, then you too are entitled to baby bonus, child care rebates and family tax benefit. Although you need children to do that. Which means meeting a women (assuming you are male). Which might be difficult given your rabid right wing views.

No. As I said, which if you had read and possibly of understood, a little more than $100k.

As for the right wing views, sure, if thats what you call wanting to keep what I have worked hard for and earned, ohhh and paying more than my fair share along the way.

If your left wing ideals give you the warm fuzzy feeling by being taxed more, taking what you have earnt, or being given in the fortnightly government hand-out, then go for it, yet dont expect others to do it.

As for the rest of your comment ... grow up.

 

[gooner]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Sorry Julie, I have cut some of what you said, yet I do happen agree with the pension part, although not part of my org. post, I do happen to agree with peoples comments on the value of a home being included.

I would love to know the real figures for people who are buying such an asset to then claim - I agree with trainspotter et al that I couldnt see the worth in doing something like this. A dead asset, which you couldnt use as cash then claim a pension to, I guess, buy the PAL to have on toast each night, seems like an odd-ball thing to do.

However, that said, the home should be included in the pension, yet where does this end - in real terms. It is not included in unemployment benefit - as far as I know, so if I own a $1million+ home should I have to sell that because I am asset rich and money poor and exhaust that money before claiming the dole?

Stocks

Fair comment on unemployment benefit. It does seem a bit harsh to get people to sell up their house to get unemployment benefits. For the old age pension though, reverse mortgages provide a means to access some of the wealth (younger unemployed do not have this ability), so it is not necessary to sell up. If PPOR is included in the pension means test, the government could also consider a scheme whereby it takes a % stake in the house in return for a pension.

 

[stocksontheblock]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Stocks

Fair comment on unemployment benefit. It does seem a bit harsh to get people to sell up their house to get unemployment benefits. For the old age pension though, reverse mortgages provide a means to access some of the wealth (younger unemployed do not have this ability), so it is not necessary to sell up. If PPOR is included in the pension means test, the government could also consider a scheme whereby it takes a % stake in the house in return for a pension.

A % stake? How does this work? As someone right at the start of this thread said, what happens if it all goes backwards? My home goes up 10% a yr for 5 yrs, then down 40% and up 10 % and so on and so on. We keep hearing that people in the top end are losing more - as a % of the total value - when times are bad, so how do you apply an share you have in a home? Whether taking a % stake or applying a regressive, and what would end up being a market crashing/glut when people refuse to sell, or dump the home?

What if a place is valued at $2m, yet sells for under that? How do you apply a yearly CGT%?

The one point I made in another posting is that if this is a serious tax - which I happen to think will never be done, yet if it happened, how does this not allow people to have an even great means of reducing their share of tax?

In summary: I said, if you have the money to buy this sort of high valued property, then you will keep the cash, borrow more, higher rate of interest repayments, write them off against your income, use repairs as a further tax reduction, all the while not moving, or selling the home and just reducing your tax.

Yet, in the end, I have been tax on my income, on the savings I had to save up for my home loan, taxed on the loan itself, taxed on the painter to paint the house - GST, paid money out of my own pocket, and somewhere in all this my home - which I brought to live in, maybe have my family and have some security over the years has hit a magic mark and now I am getting penalised for that?

Why not raise the GST by 5%? or 2% would that not raise the same if not more? Or would this simply hurt the people Dudd and Co. want to keep pork barrelling?

 

[Buckeroo]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

The thing is the Government has to generate much more income, the welfare budget is expanding, there is now a massive debt that needs repaying etc If they want to stay in power they need to keep the populist vote

This is how it goes:

The more income the government sucks from the economy , the less cash there is for consumers to spend.

The less cash for spending in the economy, the tougher it is for companies to make profits

As company profits disappear, unemployment rises

The government then needs to increase taxes to cover further welfare spending.

The circle is complete

This is the reason why labor will never pay back its debts - its impossible under a socialist banner! The only way to get out of debt & have a strong economy is to cut government spending & improve business productivity - not increase taxes!

And I'd start with the bloated State budgets!

Cheers

 

[pursuitute]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Swan denies planning tax on wealthy homes:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25932638-29277,00.html

FEDERAL Treasurer Wayne Swan has denied reports saying the Government is considering slapping a tax on some of the country's most expensive homes.

The Weekend Australian newspaper says the Government has asked Treasury to model various capital gains tax scenarios on homes valued at $2 million or more.

However, a statement released by Mr Swan this morning said any claims the Government was considering such moves was “factually incorrect”.

“There has been no request from the Government to the Australia's Future Tax System review to model such proposals,” the statement said.

“We are advised that no such modelling is being carried out by the review, and therefore no recommendation of this sort will be made to us by the panel.”

The Government is not considering and “will not” consider the policy outlined in the report.

“There will be thousands of stories between now and when the final report is released and unfortunately, like this one today, many of them will be incorrect.”

The Government's tax review is expected to be concluded by the end of the year.

 

[cuttlefish]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

I'm completely opposed to this sort of tax. $2 million does not necessarily translate into a 'big home' in many Sydney suburbs. This sort of tax just restricts the flexibility for people that get caught up by them - if someone is in a $2 million home but wants to move to a new location or upgrade to a nicer house they suddenly get slugged for what will be in the majority of cases a significant portion of their wealth.

Also what happens if I have a $2 million home and subdivide it into two $1 million residences and then sell each of those? I can see that becoming common - well I sold my two apartments to the same buyer ... ;-).

So then they'll have to come up with all sorts of stupid clauses to prevent this sort of thing which will then make it more difficult for people to do bonafide subdivisions or developments etc.

Its just an unfair tax on people that have had the commonsense to buy their own home and will just restrict the freedom of those people to sell and move for whatever reason.

If they introduced this I could see all sorts off bizarre sales/rental practices occuring to try to circumvent the tax as well.

 

[drsmith]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

If they introduced this I could see all sorts off bizarre sales/rental practices occuring to try to circumvent the tax as well.

Daylight robbery comes to mind as an 18th century equivalent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_tax

 

[lianeisme]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Trainspotter was more accurate than you think there are 100s of thousands of people in the position he mentioned above and will continue to be in the future these people were hard working average people.
Now with the “so called rich”??????????
Keep in mind the people that have bought the large 2 mill plus houses in resent times; have also paid massive stamp duty.
The rich would have been in the highest tax bracket in regards to income, are they really happy for the rich! To negative gear their own home wow lets buy bigger and more fantastic homes lets do that no need to go the investment property way. Why bother with tenants they are painful anyway, history repeats lack of housing government will have to start building housing again cost to the tax payer billions
What about luxury tax for their car they have bought
What about the very high rates to councils.
What about the taxes on insurances
Massive school fees for their children and they get no benefits.
They pay high taxes, when they retire they get bugger all from the government. That right is reserved for the useless.
How many times do you want them to bend over and take it? Why do we insist on punishing people for being successful and giving the useless gold medals?
The labour governments came up with superannuation, because the stupid didn’t know how to save for their retirement rather than means testing that, we all got hit with it.
If they want to bring this new tax in it should be right across the board hey why put a 2mil value on let everyone be equal isn’t that what communism is, what’s good for one is good for all. Let’s all eat spuds and wear brown jackets.
Be careful you don’t scare even wealthier people offshore we are already taking most of our industry offshore because of unions and bulling tactics and very high taxes.
Be careful what you wish for
Just having my say in this wonderful free and democratic sociality

 

[gooner]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Trainspotter was more accurate than you think there are 100s of thousands of people in the position he mentioned above and will continue to be in the future these people were hard working average people.
Now with the “so called rich”??????????
Keep in mind the people that have bought the large 2 mill plus houses in resent times; have also paid massive stamp duty.
The rich would have been in the highest tax bracket in regards to income, are they really happy for the rich! To negative gear their own home wow lets buy bigger and more fantastic homes lets do that no need to go the investment property way. Why bother with tenants they are painful anyway, history repeats lack of housing government will have to start building housing again cost to the tax payer billions
What about luxury tax for their car they have bought
What about the very high rates to councils.
What about the taxes on insurances
Massive school fees for their children and they get no benefits.
They pay high taxes, when they retire they get bugger all from the government. That right is reserved for the useless.
How many times do you want them to bend over and take it? Why do we insist on punishing people for being successful and giving the useless gold medals?
The labour governments came up with superannuation, because the stupid didn’t know how to save for their retirement rather than means testing that, we all got hit with it.
If they want to bring this new tax in it should be right across the board hey why put a 2mil value on let everyone be equal isn’t that what communism is, what’s good for one is good for all. Let’s all eat spuds and wear brown jackets.
Be careful you don’t scare even wealthier people offshore we are already taking most of our industry offshore because of unions and bulling tactics and very high taxes.
Be careful what you wish for
Just having my say in this wonderful free and democratic sociality

Oh this is so funny on so many levels.

Stamp duty on expensive home, insurance tax, private school fees. These are all choices. Cheaper home - less stamp duty, insurance taxes - don't buy insurance, school fees - use the government system. Oh and the federal government provide massive subsidies to private schools. About time this rort stopped, next you will be wanting a subsidy for buying books instead of using the library or installing a swimming pool instead of using the council pool. As for whingeing about luxury car tax, as I recall this kicks in around $55k. It may surprise you, but you can buy cars below $55k, even some BMW's and Mercedes.

As for people being too stupid to save for retirement. Well you are sort of right to a certain extent. The reality of a society is that not all of us are smart enough to go to university and become doctors, lawyers and accountants. Some people are destined to collect your garbage, deliver your letters, clean your toilets. And you may not have noticed from your ivory tower, but these jobs do not pay very well and these people, through the genetic outcome of not being intelligent , will not earn enough to pay for their retirement. If we want to ensure these people are not thrown on the scrapheap at age 65, then the money needs to come from somewhere. And taxes on multi-million dollar houses and reducing rich people's welfare such as non-means testing PPOR and government subsidies of private schools and health insurance seem fair ways of doing it.

And before you accuse of me of putting my hand in your pocket, I have paid loads of tax over the years and my income tax bill for the last six or seven years would have been at least $100k a year. And I pay private health insurance and private pre-school fees. I just happen to believe in an equitable society. I have been to the United States and it was not pretty.

 

[robots]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

hello,

yes lets have equality, quite simple everyone pays the same tax each year

maybe 30%, easy

thankyou
professor robots

 

[trainspotter]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Oh this is so funny on so many levels.

Stamp duty on expensive home, insurance tax, private school fees. These are all choices. Cheaper home - less stamp duty, insurance taxes - don't buy insurance, school fees - use the government system. yadda yadda yadda

As for people being too stupid to save for retirement. Well you are sort of right to a certain extent. The reality of a society is that not all of us are smart enough to go to university and become doctors, lawyers and accountants. blah blah blah

And before you accuse of me of putting my hand in your pocket, I have paid loads of tax over the years and my income tax bill for the last six or seven years would have been at least $100k a year. And I pay private health insurance and private pre-school fees. I just happen to believe in an equitable society. I have been to the United States and it was not pretty.

So because I am successfull and I am able to afford the nicer things in life that I have worked so damn hard for and paid ALL my taxes inclusive of state taxes and council taxes disguised as rates and so on and so forth in YOUR Utopian society I should not purchase myself a bit of luxury and ENJOY the fruits of my labour. Like you say it is all about choice. I think they have tried this previously under the guise of a country called CUBA. The cracker in your statement was "Don't buy insurance" PMSL. Are you for real Gooner?

As the Guvmnt legislated for employers to contribute to SGC for the workers it is unlikely that the "unintelligentia" will have NO retirement funds upon reaching 65. I find it deplorable that to use the basis of intelligence as an indicator of wealth a very low brow position to be in. Many primary industry people would fall away under your totalitarian society comrade. There are plenty of farmers and crayfishermen who could not find their backside in three grabs but need a step ladder to jump into bed becasue their mattress is STUFFED full of $100 notes. Filthy capitalists !

Now you claim to be from the banking fraternity and having a leftist lien. You also claim that you have paid approx $100,000 per annum in tax for 6 or 7 years. OMFG !! Get a better accountant you goose. If you have given this amount of coin to the ATO you should be on the welfare gravy train getting some of your hard earned $$$ back from the ACT olygopoly. JEEEZUZ !! Or do they qualify you as being too rich? You write that you believe in an equitable society but you have private insurance and private schooling. Hmmmmm

Tax Rate from the ATO.
$180,000+ income = $58,000 + 45% for each dollar over $180,000 tax

In your previous job you would have been on approx 225k per anum. Nice package for a brown shirt. Good work if you can get it. Pffffffffftttt !!

 

[Uncle Barry]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Looks like there are some Commies out there

 

[stocksontheblock]

Re: $2m Home Tax - Whats next?

Oh this is so funny on so many levels.

Stamp duty on expensive home, insurance tax, private school fees. These are all choices. Cheaper home - less stamp duty, insurance taxes - don't buy insurance, school fees - use the government system. Oh and the federal government provide massive subsidies to private schools. About time this rort stopped, next you will be wanting a subsidy for buying books instead of using the library or installing a swimming pool instead of using the council pool. As for whingeing about luxury car tax, as I recall this kicks in around $55k. It may surprise you, but you can buy cars below $55k, even some BMW's and Mercedes.

As for people being too stupid to save for retirement. Well you are sort of right to a certain extent. The reality of a society is that not all of us are smart enough to go to university and become doctors, lawyers and accountants. Some people are destined to collect your garbage, deliver your letters, clean your toilets. And you may not have noticed from your ivory tower, but these jobs do not pay very well and these people, through the genetic outcome of not being intelligent , will not earn enough to pay for their retirement. If we want to ensure these people are not thrown on the scrapheap at age 65, then the money needs to come from somewhere. And taxes on multi-million dollar houses and reducing rich people's welfare such as non-means testing PPOR and government subsidies of private schools and health insurance seem fair ways of doing it.

And before you accuse of me of putting my hand in your pocket, I have paid loads of tax over the years and my income tax bill for the last six or seven years would have been at least $100k a year. And I pay private health insurance and private pre-school fees. I just happen to believe in an equitable society. I have been to the United States and it was not pretty.

I have got to jump in on this one Gooner, you have made the point I have tried to make so many times and always seem to be shot-down on.

Its a choice, yes. So if you apply your idea of it being a choice, then having a child is a choice - in 99% of cases, so why should there be a baby bonus? Why should childcare be subsidised? Why should there be tax breaks for people with kids? Is the child not a choice, is a child not usually - or it should be - the result of 2 responsible people saying we would like a child, we can afford it regardless of handouts, and so lets have one.

I am happy for private schools to have the money taken away from the public purse if a family sends a child to a private school and claim the cost against their tax, or have a deduction - seems to me like paying twice. Same with health care.

Why should I pay for increasing private health care, and at the same time increasing medicare levy, last tax bill was will into the $4000 mark, for something I dont use - as I have private health insurance.

This is not an equal society and nor will it ever be if the society wants to demonise the apparent 'rich' to give to the apparent poor.

If you want to tax my house because it is worth more than $2million (which I dont have) then make the rest of it a level playing field. We have been propping up a failing car industry for the last 40yrs so that we can sustain jobs which could be shifted elsewhere, and hence we tax better cars to get here, then tax them to buy them and so a car which we class as a luxury is more expensive to move people towards buying a *****y Holden or Ford.

As for the intelligence factor, well what a load of fu**ing bul**hit. Those who get my bins on a weekly basis make very good money, the tradie who paints my house, fixes my car, does my plumbing does very nicely. The Uni factor makes no difference to income. Many accountants and lawyers dont earn more than a Council or Government employee - to which there doesnt seem to have been much education at all (insert sarcasm!).

I have no problem with paying tax, yet there has to be a cut-off at some point. You tax me more, then why should I better myself, I should work less, use less, and buy less quality products, so I earn just what I need to get by - which is a sad way to live, then collect all the goodies from the government. Now, what happens if all those who are not 'rich' apply this sort of idea - where will the money come from to give to these poor unforunates?

Choice - what a joke! I want a choice, yet I dont have one! I have a gun to my head because you want to call me rich, and so I either comply or well, get shot, thats not a choice.

How about everyone get off the world owes me a living mentality and get on with their lot.

There is no reason for unemployment, no one should be, so its a choice - a choice to be unemployed, or employed - whether its something you want to do or not. So remove the dole. Having a child is a choice, and so, if you have one you pay for it, no one else. School is a choice, so pay for the full economic cost of it, or agree to have a public and private system and give incentives to those who can afford it.

Remove regressive taxes aimed at only small groups of the population - your so called rich people. Make the 'poor' earn their fair share and give back.

You cant have it both ways. You might like the idea of working your ass off to be taxed more to have less so the person next to you who does nothing can have something, yet I have some real problems with that! I worked for what I have, and work dam hard. I have earnt every $, so where is my choice.

Ohhh, and I have been on all sides of this. I have worked for the ALP, the Unions, private enterprise, been very very poor, and lived/live comfortably, so my 'right wing' views are not at the expense of screw the 'poor', its because I dont feel like I am owed anything, or that I am envious of others, its because I want better for myself.