$900 handout
- Thread starter damien275x
- Start date
***** Major apology*****on all posts this subject....totally wrong
I did calc's based on full tax offsets against the tax payble resulting in no tax paid....therefore there was no bonus...that part is correct
but look at this....
just did a dummy test with tax payable of 547....and tax offset of 546 = 1.00 tax payable....but they get 900 bonus
??????? I did not believe it was designed to be that way....if you only paid 1.00 then get 1.00 back
I did calc's based on full tax offsets against the tax payble resulting in no tax paid....therefore there was no bonus...that part is correct
but look at this....
just did a dummy test with tax payable of 547....and tax offset of 546 = 1.00 tax payable....but they get 900 bonus
??????? I did not believe it was designed to be that way....if you only paid 1.00 then get 1.00 back
might be a lot of angry little vegemites out there....you pay 1.00 in tax ..get back 900
you did not pay 1.00 or .50, get nothing....
this has to be a major stuff up....
some people may like to amend their tax returns and show some extra income..pay 1.00 more in tax ..get 900
you did not pay 1.00 or .50, get nothing....
this has to be a major stuff up....
some people may like to amend their tax returns and show some extra income..pay 1.00 more in tax ..get 900
Prospector
Not a scaredy cat anymore
- Joined
- 18 January 2006
- Posts
- 2,594
- Reactions
- 2
Umm, I always thought it was the case. 
- Joined
- 14 November 2005
- Posts
- 1,319
- Reactions
- 12
With all due respect Kincella - Prospectors right. I always thought that was the way. I didn't think it could be taken any other way until I read your interpretation. Remember it is part of a Stimulus Package. They are hardly going to go to the trouble of designing a system that hands out a stack of Stimulus Bonuses of $1!
I don't think too many people will be angry over that. Although there has been much discussion about the phrase "Working Australians". It has been clearly misleading.
Duckman
Duckman...
how do you explain the identical situation...both taxpayers exactly the same...but one pays 1.00 in tax..and entitled to the bonus of 900...the other identical taxpayer does not pay 1.00 and receives no bonus....
might be a few taxpayers amend their returns to show 1.00 difference..and then entitled to 900
sounds grossly unfair...doubt it was intended to be that way at all
how do you explain the identical situation...both taxpayers exactly the same...but one pays 1.00 in tax..and entitled to the bonus of 900...the other identical taxpayer does not pay 1.00 and receives no bonus....
might be a few taxpayers amend their returns to show 1.00 difference..and then entitled to 900
sounds grossly unfair...doubt it was intended to be that way at all
have a couple of friends whom have told to do the exact same thing , as long as you have paid some tax doesnt matter how much you will get the $$
seems unfair i know, especially the people who need it the most those on low income miss out
Prospector
Not a scaredy cat anymore
- Joined
- 18 January 2006
- Posts
- 2,594
- Reactions
- 2
So lets look at this from a different position. It is a stimulus package, meaning that the money will do the most good if it gets spent. People who already have their major bills covered might therefore go out and spend it because they dont need feel the need to save as much; whereas people with less discretionary money might just put it in the bank or spend it on paying for things they have already bought. Which wont do anyone any good at all.
The $1 issue is a bit of a red herring, although perhaps now some might make some adjustments to their tax return if it hasnt already been submitted.
Fairness, unfortunately for some, has nothing to do with it.
The $1 issue is a bit of a red herring, although perhaps now some might make some adjustments to their tax return if it hasnt already been submitted.
Fairness, unfortunately for some, has nothing to do with it.
- Joined
- 20 March 2005
- Posts
- 1,200
- Reactions
- 1
oh what fun to read the masses discussions on important issues - "do i get it?"
ok try this one - if you get nothing from centrelink, but taxable income over $11000 from wages/self employed/bank interest/dividends/foreign income/capital gains, you have then paid 'some tax', and will get the $900, as long as that taxable income is below $100k (it does reduce over $80k)
now if you received some taxable pension from centrelink (parenting/youth/newstart/aged/disability) and thats your only income, you dont pay tax, and so wont get it.
if you received a centrelink pension AND other income, and as a result paid 'some' tax, then youll get it.
and yeah, if you BS your return to get it, theres a fair chance it wont be detected - but thats another issue.
ok try this one - if you get nothing from centrelink, but taxable income over $11000 from wages/self employed/bank interest/dividends/foreign income/capital gains, you have then paid 'some tax', and will get the $900, as long as that taxable income is below $100k (it does reduce over $80k)
now if you received some taxable pension from centrelink (parenting/youth/newstart/aged/disability) and thats your only income, you dont pay tax, and so wont get it.
if you received a centrelink pension AND other income, and as a result paid 'some' tax, then youll get it.
and yeah, if you BS your return to get it, theres a fair chance it wont be detected - but thats another issue.
Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
Not quite true my friend because if the taxable income remains above the tax free threshold of $6k after deductions AND you have paid income tax on those earnings then you are entitled to it.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Thank you, beerwm, for beating me to it as far as Damien is concerned.why exactly do u deserve this money?
how much tax have u paid in your lifetime... like $1000?.. probably less.
I have no problem in giving money to those in NEED, disability, pensioners, but do u need it?
get real
Damien, get off the grass!! How much have you contributed to the tax system? Why do you think you deserve $900???
Now, ain't that the truth.
I have paid a heap of tax via my SMSF which holds all my assets.
Therefore as an individual I have not paid any tax.
Therefore I don't get any $900.
Fair? I don't think so.
- Joined
- 20 March 2005
- Posts
- 1,200
- Reactions
- 1
low income tax offset means any resident individual with taxable income effectively $11000 or less pays no tax, and therefore not eligible.
julia - at the end of the day you have made a decision to remove your assets from the individual tax system and apply the super rules - good decision.
is your superfund about to go out and spend $900 on something - doubt it.
the needy & non-tax payers (pensioners etc) got their bonuses back in december, and this one is for those low & middle earners who have missed out so far. and sure, there will be plenty who missed out somehow on anything, cos the rules (which applied to the clear majority) simply didnt cater to those few individuals. BUT how many out there would be crying blue murder if the slow lazy incompetent public service were asked to go and ensure each possible individual would receive the payment. the searching would take years and only serve to employ more public servants. at least canberra retailers could enjoy their wages being spent.
- Joined
- 22 February 2009
- Posts
- 117
- Reactions
- 0
In damien's defense I understand where he is coming from. I am a full time uni student and I work 15 hours a week and didn't manage to make it to the required 11k. I just think it's wrong for someone that earns 95k a year will recieve a payment but someone that earns 8-10k won't, I understand most people will say "what tax have you paid" but my answer to that is I am doing everything that is expected of an 18 yr old. A good idea would of been to give uni students the money to pay for 2 units or to pay off some of their HECS debt , that way the money isn't getting spent on irrelevant plasma screens.The retail sector is the only sector that will significantly gain from this payment. The worst thing about this whole thing is that K Rudd is just gaining younger peoples votes , unfortunately people of my age group don't know much about politics or economics. I heard a student at uni say " John Howard never gave us any money" K rudd has lured in young voters for the next election. I miss you John and Pete!
Just my thoughts
King
Just my thoughts
King
- Joined
- 20 March 2005
- Posts
- 1,200
- Reactions
- 1
king - remember the purpose of this payment - for people to SPEND IT.
reducing the hecs balance of uni students aint gonna do that.
and as for the retail sector - the biggest employer of part time and casual workers - who then earn a wage that they then go and spend, putting money thru the economy - again the purpose.
numbercruncher
Beware of Dropbears
- Joined
- 12 October 2006
- Posts
- 3,136
- Reactions
- 1
Now, ain't that the truth.
I have paid a heap of tax via my SMSF which holds all my assets.
Therefore as an individual I have not paid any tax.
Therefore I don't get any $900.
Fair? I don't think so.
Hiya Julia,
But your SMSF pays heaps less tax as a % than individuals so you are miles ahead .....
Your right, not fair, an individual should be able to enjoy the same low tax rate ! superfunds should/will be in the Goverments cross hairs when the time comes to repay this ridiculous gigantic debt.
Cheers.
Are people aware here that if they paid their tax by way of franking credits they are not entitled to the $900. I work part time, but with mature workers offset and other offsets and franking credits on top, I will not be eligible, mainly because my savings are in shares whereas people who save in bank accounts will be eligible. They have not been hit in this downturn but my share portfolio has taken a major haircut in the last two years.
- Joined
- 14 November 2005
- Posts
- 1,319
- Reactions
- 12
It is just a line in the sand. They wanted to get money out into the economy quickly. Those that pay tax get it those that don't pay tax don't get it. I am not agreeing with it but those are the rules that have been set.
I guess the other way is to have a shaded-out period, but that creates a lot more complexity for very little gain to the economy. Remember this isn't supposed to be about the individual but rather the economy.
Regardless of wherever you put the fence, there will always be disappointed people on the other side.
Duckman
Wysiwyg
Everyone wants money
- Joined
- 8 August 2006
- Posts
- 8,428
- Reactions
- 284
You don't have to earn 11k. If your taxable income (amount after claims/deductions) is above the $6k tax free threshold AND you paid income tax (anything above zero), then you are entitled to it.
Is that so freakin' difficult to understand you clowns.
Where does the $11k amount come from.
- Joined
- 14 November 2005
- Posts
- 1,319
- Reactions
- 12
You don't have to earn 11k. If your taxable income (amount after claims/deductions) is above the $6k tax free threshold AND you paid income tax (anything above zero), then you are entitled to it.
Is that so freakin' difficult to understand you clowns.
Where does the $11k amount come from.
Be careful WYSWYG.
Do you play cards? If you are going to go "all in" you need to be pretty sure of your hand......and that of your opponents. I'm going to watch the next move. (I'm betting on your opponent).
Duckman
You don't have to earn 11k. If your taxable income (amount after claims/deductions) is above the $6k tax free threshold AND you paid income tax (anything above zero), then you are entitled to it.
Is that so freakin' difficult to understand you clowns.
Where does the $11k amount come from.
Its your tax minus offsets and minus franking credits that it is calculated on. I earned over $30,000 but because i had several thousand dollars worth of franking credits i'm not eligible.
