Albanese Labor Govt Watch

[Jimmy_041]

*fat finger

[Booney]

"Please explain"

[Jimmy_041]

Just needs one large f. up by Labor and it changes overnight. If they get tax on unrealised gains through, that might do it.

People have some bad / selective memories
The last government was a monumental f.up
They got lucky that the Coalition **** up this year
If the unrealised capital gains tax gets in, there will be a massive reaction
This is not [b]JUST a tax on the rich[/b] - it will be a tax on everyone

Initially it will be (min. $3m in super before taxed i believe) but once it is in, it will never go away and the boundaries will change.

If $3m in super doesn't fall under "rich" I'm f*cked if I know what does.

Here; I'll put a JUST in there as that is not the point
The point is, as MW says, there is nothing stopping them expanding the tax on unrealised gains elsewhere

[mighty_tiger_79]

It's been the talk at the golf club.
And despite Labor saying its only a tax on that $3mill threshold the consensus is it will be lowered. Some of these guys were in the financial game and understand it far better than I and have started the shuffle to minimise any impact.

[Booney]

It's been the talk at the golf club.
And despite Labor saying its only a tax on that $3mill threshold the consensus is it will be lowered. Some of these guys were in the financial game and understand it far better than I and have started the shuffle to minimise any impact.

Golf clubs and $3m thresholds....the pain, the pain.

[Brodlach]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

[Booney]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

I mean good luck to anyone who pulls the pin on work with $3m sitting waiting for them in a super fund but some quick calculations on the back on an envelope suggest anyone with $3m in super has a) earnt a fair whack in their time and b) invested very cleverly. Either way I don't think the world would be a worse place if people holding that sort of investment portfolio stumped up some coin to go back into the system. Sure as hell know big business needs to do more.

The argument would be from those that, like the excellent Mr Packer once said, “I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimising my tax and if anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax, they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.” have the ways and means to do so.

[Jimmy_041]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

I mean good luck to anyone who pulls the pin on work with $3m sitting waiting for them in a super fund but some quick calculations on the back on an envelope suggest anyone with $3m in super has a) earnt a fair whack in their time and b) invested very cleverly. Either way I don't think the world would be a worse place if people holding that sort of investment portfolio stumped up some coin to go back into the system. Sure as hell know big business needs to do more.

The argument would be from those that, like the excellent Mr Packer once said, “I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimising my tax and if anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax, they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.” have the ways and means to do so.

That's the thing: like the Medicare levy surcharge; it is what it is
But taxing any non-realised gain is a step too far and opens the door for these useless thieves to go for more
Unfortunately, the superannuation pool is as attractive to politicians as 72 houris in paradise.
Also; a SMSF may include the small business capital gain initative which could be up to $2m (I think)

Also, just note: There are still some people who won’t be subject to Division 296 because they’re protected by the constitution (primarily State Parliamentarians, senior State Public Servants, State judges etc). But other members of defined benefit schemes will be subject to Division 296 just like everyone else.

BUT People who have a particular type of super entitlement called a “defined benefit” will be able to defer paying any Division 296 tax that relates to their defined benefit until they start drawing on their defined benefit super (eg they start receiving a pension or are paid a lump sum) (ie) when they start realising the benefit. Guess who that includes????????? Commonwealth politicians

[Trader]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

I guess it depends on your retirement strategy.
If you've got most of your 'savings' outside of super, then yes, $3m in super will be plenty.

However, if you are one who has elected to salary sacrifice and put most of your savings into super, then $3m, while still healthy and better than the majority of Australian's, isn't exactly a mountain.

Using the 4% withdrawal rule, a $3m nest egg gets you $120,000 per annum throughout retirement.
It's nice, but it's hardly semi-annual trips to the French Riveira.

Anyone with $3m saved for retirement will be comfortable, but let's not paint them to be on super yachts watching the Monaco grand prix.

[Trader]

Another way of looking at it.

Lets say you've been lucky enough to grow your super balance to $3m, how did you get there?

Assumptions
Current Age: 67
Started working: 20 years old
Contribution rate: 12.5% (granted historically it was lower, but that's what it is now), assuming no salary sacrifice or extra employer contributions.
Wage was consistent throughout your career, simply moving with a 3% inflation rate (ie: no career progression).
Superannuation returns matched the ASX including dividends reinvested, ie: 13% (124 year historical average).

Based on the above conditions, to have a super balance now of $3m, it means you had a starting salary of $76,828.87 at 20 years old, and that grew to $299,251.80 today, not bad at all, and certainly not on struggle street.

Now a salary in todays dollars of $299,251 pays an effective tax rate of 35.5% (including medicare levy).
Over your career you earned $7.7m
Assuming the effective tax was reasonably consistent over your 47 year career, you would have already paid $2,736,019 in income tax.

And now you've got the dope smoking hippies coming after you saying you haven't paid your fair share of tax and you need to pay more...

[Brodlach]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

I guess it depends on your retirement strategy.
If you've got most of your 'savings' outside of super, then yes, $3m in super will be plenty.

However, if you are one who has elected to salary sacrifice and put most of your savings into super, then $3m, while still healthy and better than the majority of Australian's, isn't exactly a mountain.

Using the 4% withdrawal rule, a $3m nest egg gets you $120,000 per annum throughout retirement.
It's nice, but it's hardly semi-annual trips to the French Riveira.

Anyone with $3m saved for retirement will be comfortable, but let's not paint them to be on super yachts watching the Monaco grand prix.

Whilst I agree with most of what you’ve stated, if you have $3 million in Super you’d also own your own home and the $120k a year will be sent just on living. Food, bills etc. I think they’ll survive and afford to travel overseas on a bi yearly occurrence if not yearly

Also with that balance you’d almost earn as much if not more than you take out yearly.

Only need a 4-5% return

[wenchbarwer]

$300K per year would put you in the top 3% of the population

https://povertyandinequality.acoss.org. ... alculator/

[Trader]

Yup, and puts you in the top 3% when ranked by how much tax you've paid.

[Booney]

....and that grew to $299,251.80 today, not bad at all, and certainly not on struggle street.

Ya think?

Reality is > way

[Trader]

....and that grew to $299,251.80 today, not bad at all, and certainly not on struggle street.

Ya think?

Reality is > way

It's a difference in mindset isn't it.

Some people look at someone successful and say why didn't they do more for me.
Others look at them and are thankful for what they've already done.

When someone's paid over $2.7m in income tax already, I'm not looking at their $3m super balance and thinking I'm entitled to some of it.

[Jimmy_041]

....and that grew to $299,251.80 today, not bad at all, and certainly not on struggle street.

Ya think?

Reality is > way

It's a difference in mindset isn't it.

Some people look at someone successful and say why didn't they do more for me.
Others look at them and are thankful for what they've already done.

When someone's paid over $2.7m in income tax already, I'm not looking at their $3m super balance and thinking I'm entitled to some of it.

But you dont suffer from the politics of envy
I look at someone with a fortune and go well done I'm not entitled to any of it

People still dont get; if the Government wants capital gains tax, then it should pick up their share of the costs as well.
Governments are not entitled to tax - they take it.
CGT concessions were brought in to encourage long term investment

As well as saying companies aren't paying their fair share of tax on such n such revenue.
We dont pay tax on revenue - its paid on profit
Maybe the government should fix the various lurks (created by government legislation) that allows OS companies to reduce their profits

It goes back to that story about the rich bloke paying for half the group lunch..........

[MW]

They'd get more support pulling back negative gearing - imagine the properties released to the market if that happens.

[Jim05]

They'd get more support pulling back negative gearing - imagine the properties released to the market if that happens.

I reckon bugger all.
Don’t forget many out in the street are smarter than the clowns that make these rules and will always find loopholes

[Jimmy_041]

I’m actually struggling to work out why you’d need $3 million in Super.

If I was at that level it would be making sure those around me are doing ok

Not so much to "need"
To get the tax concession on investment earnings
I don't have much argument about the additional tax - its the unrealised income that is wrong
Even more so because it doesn't apply to politicians

[RB]

I don't have a view on the proposed changes to the taxation of super, but I'd suggest that most people accept that the country has to pay for itself, and it's the desire for a progressive tax system, rather than 'the politics of envy' that motivates these kinds of tax reform proposals.