Maintain the current dividend imputation system

[Humid]

it is the logic i struggle with ......

some are adamant that the correct tax to be paid on company profits is 30c in the dollar and this must stay with the tax office.

so what is the reason for then asking some dividend receivers to then pay more tax than the 30c already paid?

Because it’s income when you get it

It is ideologically driven, anyone who has money shouldn't have, those who haven't should have.
It's Australia's new vision, the criminals are just a result of the system, the poor are poor because of things outside their control, those with money found it under a tree so really it isn't theirs.

Let’s put you theory to test
Penalty rates
Funny how loud you scream when something effects you
These refunds are contrived

 

[sptrawler]

Because it’s income when you get it


Let’s put you theory to test
Penalty rates
Funny how loud you scream when something effects you
These refunds are contrived

The same could be said for penalty rates.

 

[HelloU]

Because it’s income when you get it


Let’s put you theory to test
Penalty rates
Funny how loud you scream when something effects you
These refunds are contrived

humid said "Because it’s income when you get it"

but the whole point of the labor policy is that people WILL NOT get it ........ does franking credit $$ still count as income when you DO NOT get it?

 

[sptrawler]

humid said "Because it’s income when you get it"

but the whole point of the labor policy is that people WILL NOT get it ........ does franking credit $$ still count as income when you DO NOT get it?

That is the whole problem, those on welfare get it, those in Industry Funds get it, the rich get it, the only ones who don't get it are those who bought shares to get income when they aren't working.
This is why 'normal' Australians struggle to get ahead, it is the "I'm all right Jack stuff you" mentality.
What epitomises it, is Humid's constant referral to penalty rates, it obviously effects him so his annoyance is understandable.
But if you apply the same logics to weekend penalty rates, as is being applied to the franking credits, it is just the same.
Why should someone who works on a Saturday and Sunday, get the same amount of money, as someone who does a lot more hours Mon to Fri doing the same job?
It could be argued the person who works Sat/Sun, is doing so because their partner works Mon-Fri. Whereas a single mum with children can only work Mon-Fri, because they don't have a partner to look after the kids on the weekend.
So in reality it is a perk for the wealthy two income family.
Wouldn't it be much fairer, to have an Industry annualised salary, where the weekend penalty rates are factored in to the hourly pay rate, and all the employees get it?
The same with the franking credits, those on welfare get the credits, those who don't qualify for welfare lose it.
Wouldn't it be "fairer" to say, well those couples on welfare get a tax payer pension of $35,500+ perks+franking credits, which would add up to $50,000 equivalent.
So those who are on a self funded pension, get the franking credits up to $50k and those on $50k- $100K pay 15% on the franking credits, those above $100k pay 30% on the franking credits. Or some other formula, but the ridiculous situation labor are proposing, is ludicrous. Every working person will aim for a part pension, it is a no brainer.
But who said anything is about fairness, if it was about fairness, the politicians would pull their noses out of the trough.
The only up side I can see with all Labors proposals, is they will only get one term. IMO

 

[Smurf1976]

That is the whole problem, those on welfare get it, those in Industry Funds get it, the rich get it, the only ones who don't get it are those who bought shares to get income when they aren't working.
This is why 'normal' Australians struggle to get ahead, it is the "I'm all right Jack stuff you" mentality.

It certainly does seem to be one hell of a kick to those in the middle who have chosen to not be on welfare by means of self-funding their own protection against unemployment etc and their eventual retirement.

The trouble is we have devolved into a very divided society with various groups picked off one at a time to avoid any serious resistance. That's the oldest trick in the book, somewhat perversely given this is a Labor proposal it's the tactic the unions fear most, and the outcome is always bad for the workers.

The grey hair brigade ought to have stood firmly behind the hospitality workers and others affected by the penalty rates issue. Likewise the overwhelmingly young people working in hospitality would, if they saw the bigger picture, be standing firmly behind the mostly older people concerned about imputation credits. United we stand, divided we fall. Touch one touch all.

Not too long ago there was far less division in Australian society than we have today. The CEO of the company you worked for was paid ~ 3 times what you were paid, bank managers were held in high regard and nobody looked down on anyone doing legitimate work (roadworks crews etc cop heaps of abuse these days for those not aware).

The way we're going is not good.

 

[PZ99]

The grey hair brigade ought to have stood firmly behind the hospitality workers and others affected by the penalty rates issue.

To be fair, they probably did and still do. Most people don't agree with penalty rate cuts because it affects a hell of a lot of low paid workers. The only people who agree with cutting them are people who don't get them or don't need them.

However it's good to see the empathy for vulnerable people affected by the loss of franking credits. If the same empathy could be demonstrated for weekend workers that would be even better. It might even convince the ScoMo Govt to reinstate the penalty rates. I'd vote for them if they did.

As it stands now weekend workers will lose money if the Libs win.
And self funded retirees will lose money if Labor win.

I'm not affected by either but I still take the view the franking credits will remain because most of the parliament will support them after the election. Penalty rates however are still being cut.

 

[Humid]

People on here bleating about Labor’s policy driving more onto the pension if we keep going withe the current mobs casualization and flat rates of pay along with automation the future is grim

 

[Humid]

humid said "Because it’s income when you get it"

but the whole point of the labor policy is that people WILL NOT get it ........ does franking credit $$ still count as income when you DO NOT get it?

Why can’t foreign investors get a cash refund do you think?

 

[Smurf1976]

if we keep going withe the current mobs casualization and flat rates of pay along with automation the future is grim

No disagreement from me there.

That I see unfair aspects in one of Labor’s key policies shouldn’t be taken as meaning I agree with the Coalition’s various ideas.

That both major parties are attacking at least one group in society is a huge part of the problem.

 

[sptrawler]

The ridiculous outcome is, you will be able to earn more on welfare, than you can ever generate by saving while working, which is ok by me.
But you want to talk about unsustainable?

 

[HelloU]

so are peeps uncertain if franking credit $$ should count as income when you DO NOT get it?


speaking of foreigners, (which i wasn't)
sounds like commy russia

"OK everyone, line up to get your pay envelope. Each envelope has your weekly 10 rubles pay in it"

Worker takes envelope from government official, and worker says "something is wrong, this envelope is empty"

Government peep says "Once you have taken the envelope then the government is no longer responsible for it. Back to work now, and come back next week to get your next pay".

best country in the world cos at years end each worker got paid 520 rubles .....or did they?

 

[sptrawler]

Just did a back of the napkin, if you have assets less than $850k not including your own home, and earn less than $79k you get part pension.
Well it is a no brainer really.
30,000 NAB + franking credit = bingo. lol

 

[Humid]

so are peeps uncertain if franking credit $$ should count as income when you DO NOT get it?


speaking of foreigners, (which i wasn't)
sounds like commy russia

"OK everyone, line up to get your pay envelope. Each envelope has your weekly 10 rubles pay in it"

Worker takes envelope from government official, and worker says "something is wrong, this envelope is empty"

Government peep says "Once you have taken the envelope then the government is no longer responsible for it. Back to work now, and come back next week to get your next pay".

best country in the world cos at years end each worker got paid 520 rubles .....or did they?

Yeah foreigners......they don’t pay income tax either

 

[Humid]

Just did a back of the napkin, if you have assets less than $850k not including your own home, and earn less than $79k you get part pension.
Well it is a no brainer really.
30,000 NAB + franking credit = bingo. lol

Napkin
At least you can afford to eat out.......paper or linen?

 

[Kremmen]

If you end up getting this franking credit back as cash you are in effect getting back the company tax that as paid on the original enterprise.

And this is exactly the same whether you get it as cash or as a credit against other tax!

 

[HelloU]

And this is exactly the same whether you get it as cash or as a credit against other tax!

correct,
that is the thing that the peeps who support the labor idea cannot explain with finance logic ..........
how come the government wants more than 30c tax if they are not prepared to refund some of that 30c............

i mean the 30c either falls under the company tax system, or it falls under the individual tax system.

 

[willy1111]

Just did a back of the napkin, if you have assets less than $850k not including your own home, and earn less than $79k you get part pension.
Well it is a no brainer really.
30,000 NAB + franking credit = bingo. lol

Is the franking credit included as income though?

30,000 NAB Shares - NAB last year paid $1.98 per share fully franked, therefore 30,000 * 1.98 = $59,400, this represents 70% and is paid into your bank account - the franking credit is $25,457 (59,400 / 7 *3) thus total taxable income is $84,857 = over the $79K income and no pension = lose the franking credit refund.

About 27,500 NAB shares should get it under the $79K - but then what if NAB increases their Dividend?

One would have to carefully monitor it, selling down shares and going on overseas trips to stay under

 

[rogue1]

Is the franking credit included as income though?

30,000 NAB Shares - NAB last year paid $1.98 per share fully franked, therefore 30,000 * 1.98 = $59,400, this represents 70% and is paid into your bank account - the franking credit is $25,457 (59,400 / 7 *3) thus total taxable income is $84,857 = over the $79K income and no pension = lose the franking credit refund.

About 27,500 NAB shares should get it under the $79K - but then what if NAB increases their Dividend?

One would have to carefully monitor it, selling down shares and going on overseas trips to stay under

Decrease is more likely, I hear...

 

[kahuna1]

NAB dividend likely to go to $1.88 if not 1.85 then possibly $1.70 in a year or two.
Hence the discount of yield on paper at least v share price.

 

[sptrawler]

The Banks, will go down and will go up, the population won't get smaller. IMO