Maintain the current dividend imputation system

[HelloAgain]

Low taxable incomes doesn't always mean low real income though does it ?

Those who derive a large non taxable income from super are doing very nicely without getting another refund on top of that.

Through their own efforts and no burden on taxpayers unlike others who haven’t made the same effort and receive an aged pension with considerable associated benefits - courtesy of taxpayers.

 

[HelloU]

strangely that, to me, is the biggest problem of all in the tax system.
when a change is being discussed you have to carefully clarify which of the half dozen sub-groups of individual taxpayers you are discussing ....instead of being able to just simply say how this change will effect australian taxpayers ....
'if, then, but' type tax changes of any sort are divisive as they discriminate.

and that does not even include the various COY tax rates now, and super tax rates, and trust tax rates etc

 

[SirRumpole]

Through their own efforts and no burden on taxpayers unlike others who haven’t made the same effort and receive an aged pension with considerable associated benefits - courtesy of taxpayers.

"no burden on taxpayers" ?

A retiree receiving $100k pa super pays no tax while someone earning that amount through personal exertion pays about $30k a year.

 

[HelloU]

same proof again .....it is divisive to have lots of sub-groups of taxpayers. (cos it is discriminatory)

 

[SirRumpole]

same proof again .....it is divisive to have lots of sub-groups of taxpayers. (cos it is discriminatory)

Well, that's multi taxpayeralism for you.

 

[HelloAgain]

"no burden on taxpayers" ?

A retiree receiving $100k pa super pays no tax while someone earning that amount through personal exertion pays about $30k a year.

Amazing isn’t it? One person can save enough through personal exertion to earn $100,000 pa in retirement while another can receive $25,000 plus in retirement as a government pension and pay no tax.

That irrelevant to the refund imputation credits as the tax has already been paid by the company. Perhaps the it would be fairer if companies paid no tax then all taxpayers could include their dividends in their tax returns.

 

[HelloU]

I just wanted to post here ...again.

 

[HelloU]

Perhaps the it would be fairer if companies paid no tax then all taxpayers could include their dividends in their tax returns.

quietly ...it IS the grossed up figure that is already used in ur tax return ........

(that strengthens ur argument btw)

 

[SirRumpole]

Amazing isn’t it? One person can save enough through personal exertion to earn $100,000 pa in retirement while another can receive $25,000 plus in retirement as a government pension and pay no tax.

That irrelevant to the refund imputation credits as the tax has already been paid by the company. Perhaps the it would be fairer if companies paid no tax then all taxpayers could include their dividends in their tax returns.

Or we could do what every other country (nearly) does and tax both profits and dividends.

 

[HelloU]

should have asked the tampon committee, they were recently making the big tax calls.

 

[SirRumpole]

Let us know what they say.

 

[HelloU]

just quietly ....we already tax both profits and dividends (2 different tax entities involved there of course)
It is the grossed up figure that is included in the tax returns for individuals ......that is the issue for many ....that one person can get to 'keep' all of the imp credits whilst another person may not get to 'keep' any of it.

On a broader level this is not the same as having 'too many' deductions compared with tax liabilities .....so deductions are lost. This is actually taxation payments made to the ATO that exceed liabilities accrued by the taxpayer based on taxable income (under current tax laws). If the ATO does not wish to hand back excess tax payments then DO NOT use a grossed up figure in returns to calculate taxable income.

I have never said if I agree with any of this or not, I just want equity in the taxation system.

 

[sptrawler]

Amazing isn’t it? One person can save enough through personal exertion to earn $100,000 pa in retirement while another can receive $25,000 plus in retirement as a government pension and pay no tax.

That irrelevant to the refund imputation credits as the tax has already been paid by the company. Perhaps the it would be fairer if companies paid no tax then all taxpayers could include their dividends in their tax returns.

I agree, it is funny how those who have paid very little tax, object to those who have paid a lot of tax getting anything.

 

[SirRumpole]

Amazing isn’t it? One person can save enough through personal exertion to earn $100,000 pa in retirement while another can receive $25,000 plus in retirement as a government pension and pay no tax.

Is the age pension exempt from tax ?

 

[Smurf1976]

Low taxable incomes doesn't always mean low real income though does it ?

Those who derive a large non taxable income from super are doing very nicely without getting another refund on top of that.

Agreed but surely in this era of massive data about everyone and everything it should be straightforward to sort out who is and who is not earning less than $x from all sources. Arguments based around administrative complexity don’t really cut it in 2018.

It’s not something that would directly affect me at the present time but I do take issue with yet another change to the rules regarding investing and in particular that it sends a message that an individual is either wealthy or on welfare with most being the latter.

 

[HelloU]

just for those who may not have been involved in the "normal" tax system lately (PAYG and the like) there is now 2 different figures used when you do a tax return (and welfare applications).
One is the 'taxable income' that is used to calculate payable income tax, and
second is ATI - Adjusted taxable Income.

ATI is the figure that prevents peeps earning a high income, then burning a lot of it in negative gearing and stuff, and then try to put their hand out for welfare.

Those days are now pretty much gone.

 

[HelloU]

Is the age pension exempt from tax ?

essentially correct.

more complicated but if no tax has been taken from the pension payments, and that is your total 'income' then a tax return is not required.

 

[Knobby22]

I think they should just set a cap on imputation limits rather than ban them for ordinary households, say $10,000.
It is crazy that a few wealthy people have managed through good advice (and loopholes that have since been closed) to park hundreds of millions of dollars in Super and then received massive imputation credits worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and yet pay no tax whatsoever.

 

[SirRumpole]

I agree, it is funny how those who have paid very little tax, object to those who have paid a lot of tax getting anything.

Contributions to a super fund only taxed at 15% and no tax on the payments is a lot more than "anything".

Anyway I'd be happy with super pensions over $100K being taxable, I don't want to hurt the little guy.

 

[willy1111]

Neither do I , but at the moment we have no idea how many such people there are and what sort of refund they usually get as to whether it would be a great loss to them.

Maybe Labor have done their sums on it I don't know. As we get closer to the election maybe people adversely affected by it will speak up.

Geoff Wilson is also polling people for this to help his ammunition against the proposal https://wilsonassetmanagement.com.a...-wrong-side-of-history-with-franking-changes/