He might also have a trust structure within the family and be diverting taxable income to other family members.Our tax system is broken - those who earn a salary / wage and don't run a business probably have no idea what goes on, but the amount of legal tax reduction schemes open to those with business structures would be alarming to them if they did.
Who also don't work in the business.He might also have a trust structure within the family and be diverting taxable income to other family members.
Our tax system is broken - those who earn a salary / wage and don't run a business probably have no idea what goes on, but the amount of legal tax reduction schemes open to those with business structures would be alarming to them if they did.
Surely, it would not be too hard to make the personal services income (PSI) rules a lot stricter?I mean realistically, should a plumber, builder, accountant, lawyer be able to distribute his taxable income through a trust to his wife and retired parents?
I'm wondering when the first state Govt is going to renegotiate PPL with the unions should Abbott move into the Lodge.
Since Abbott expects the States to handover any money they currently payout on their schemes, seems ripe for them to shift the full cost onto the federal Govt.
I'm sure the unions wont mind helping to cause a cost blowout with little downside to themselves.
You needn't worry Syd. If Abbott wind the election, the PPL will quietly go on the back burner. If Rudd wins, the PNG "solution" will wither away.
It's easier that way than breaking promises before the election.
No. Neither should anyone be able to make up a job that doesn't exist and charge the taxpayer and business for it for their own personal benefit.Yes, I agree. Our company tax rate is too high, but the ease with which income which is really just derived from the labour output of an individual can be corporatised or split across families is an area that is ripe for reform.
I mean realistically, should a plumber, builder, accountant, lawyer be able to distribute his taxable income through a trust to his wife and retired parents?
Surely, it would not be too hard to make the personal services income (PSI) rules a lot stricter?
That makeup artist yesterday must have baulked at Kev's request to polish his a***.But then that seems to kill off the Abbott is a value leaders rhetoric ASF members like to polish the Abbott halo with.
Seems you believe he's no more honest than any other politician that wants their butt on the treasury benches.
Are you with Mr Burns on the ends justifies the means?
But perhaps no surprise in a country which holds up an outlaw as a national hero.
Electoral gold, no question on that. Labor must be seething - outdone on their own turf, and a fair bit of hypocrisy exposed.
But the Coalition will raid imputation credits on shares to help pay for it.
But he highlighted the benefits for well educated women in top executive roles under his proposed payments.
Mr Abbott today said these women were "in the prime of life and they should be able not just to have kids, but to have careers".
"We do not educate women to higher degree level to deny them a career," he said.
"If we want women of that calibre to have families, and we should, well we have to give them a fair dinkum chance to do so. That is what this scheme of paid parental leave is all about."
The Coalition has already leaked the costings,The Coalition are saying this morning they'll release costings to prove the Coalition scheme is overall cheaper than Labor's. So that makes me feel better about it.
The paid parental leave costings to be released by Mr Hockey today will show the gross cost of the scheme in the first two years will be $9.8bn. But this is reduced to $6.1bn by abolishing the existing scheme offering new mothers 18 weeks at the minimum wage, which Labor legislated in 2010.
The PBO calculates that a further $1.2bn will be saved by replacing the existing generous commonwealth and state PPL schemes. Another $1.6bn will be saved from reduced payments of family and other benefits and the income tax collected on PPL payments. The levy of 1.5 per cent on company taxable income above $5 million will raise $4.4bn in the first two years. The levy is not eligible for franking credits and cannot be claimed by business as a tax deduction. The Coalition sought to neutralise the business backlash against the levy by offering a matching 1.5 per cent company tax. This will cost more than $5bn in the first two years.
Savings:
$1.2bn from existing state and federal public sector schemes.
$1.6bn in tax transfer savings (increased income tax and reduced entitlement to other benefits).
$4.4bn from the 1.5% corporate levy on companies earning over $5m.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?