on 20-04-2014 10:21 PM
As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed. The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.
This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.
and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598
Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says
The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.
Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).
But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.
"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.
14-05-2015 06:18 PM - edited 14-05-2015 06:19 PM
Small business splurge could bring post-budget tax break blowout
"I'll sell you my tool and you'll sell me yours." "I'll pay you to buy me a ute."
"I'll buy a $19,999 Harley Davidson to round up my sheep."
These are just some ideas raised with accounting expert Paul Drum since the government announced small businesses could claim an unlimited number of tax deductions for equipment and other items valued at less than $20,000 each
Mr Drum, head of policy at accounting group CPA Australia, said with companies springing into action with opportunistic campaigns and Treasurer Joe Hockey spruiking the purchase of "cars and vans, kitchens or machinery", the change could cost taxpayers more than the forecast $1.8 billion over four years. "Budgeting is an imprecise science," he said.
But he urged small business owners to consider the merits and eligibility of their planned purchase, so they avoid 'please explain' letters, being denied a deduction, or receiving a general interest charge or penalties.
"A painting is verging on a wacky example," he said. "[And] It's not free money. It needs to make sense for you to make the investment.
"We haven't even seen the law for this, there's no guidance from the ATO [Australian Taxation Office]."
on 14-05-2015 06:22 PM
Federal budget 2015: Joe Hockey's growth message is spend, spend, spend
Why doesn't he give us a bonus of $900 each then?.
14-05-2015 06:24 PM - edited 14-05-2015 06:25 PM
@monman12 wrote:
Excerpt 1 yesterday
accelerated depreciation tax deduction for small business
But the newly ebullient Treasurer has conceded one of his budget's key stimulus measures, the accelerated depreciation tax deduction for small business, has had to be funded out of general revenue despite earlier stipulating that all new spending would be offset by new and equivalent savings.
Excerpt 2 today
Federal budget 2015: Joe Hockey's growth message is spend, spend, spend
But the newly ebullient Treasurer has conceded one of his budget's key stimulus measures, the accelerated depreciation tax deduction for small business, has had to be funded out of general revenue despite earlier stipulating that all new spending would be offset by new and equivalent savings.
Well worth repeating twice, or is that four times, or maybe six times now?
on 14-05-2015 06:26 PM
@debra9275 wrote:Cros, it could be something like that. have a look at this article from April
Thanks Deb, it's good to see the details. The comments following the article are pretty lively.
on 14-05-2015 06:27 PM
14-05-2015 06:33 PM - edited 14-05-2015 06:36 PM
The banana tax hidden in the budget
The Abbott government announced it had agreed to a request from the Australian Banana Growers' Council for a 0.75 cents a kilogram levy on the world's most popular fruit.
The council asked for the levy, which will apply from July and be paid by wholesalers, to repay costs incurred by the industry in its emergency response to eradicate the fungal disease banana freckle.
The new levy comes on top of an existing banana industry levy of 1.7 cents per kilogram, which was introduced in 2008 to fund research and development and marketing.
The Govt should not be allowing any fruit to become more expensive imo. It is dear enough now, if you have a family to buy for.
More important that families can afford to buy fruit for their children for the betterment of their health.
In another little-noticed impost, levies worth a total of 3¢ have been charged on each kilogram of honey since April 1. The levies were requested by the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council to help it meet its biosecurity obligations.
On the same date, levies on eggs and chicken meat came into force to cover the industry's costs for its efforts to eradicate avian influenza. The budget papers say the levy has been introduced at the request of the Australian Chicken Meat Federation and the Australian Egg Corporation.
The levy is worth 0.03 cents for every day-old chick for meat, and 1.4 cents per day-old chick for laying eggs.
The three levies are expected to raise $13.8 million over five years.
on 14-05-2015 06:39 PM
on 14-05-2015 07:23 PM
@debra9275 wrote:
Oh , sorry I mis understood. I see what you and Glee are saying, that. Hockey is trying to scare people into thinking if they earn $75,000.
Cannot trust this govt!
If they earn $75,000 from their super fund, yes.
on 14-05-2015 07:29 PM
@debra9275 wrote:
Thanks Cros, I didn't see the commentary underneath before and within the first few, there is one who thinks it applies to those on a salary of 75K
It's more complex than that too. People that earn enough can allocate more to their super and in doing so pay a much lower tax rate on it. If they are of a certain age they can draw on that super to use. So in effect they end up with the cash at a much lower tax rate than they would have paid had it been taken as salary.
14-05-2015 07:48 PM - edited 14-05-2015 07:49 PM
If the super fund generates income/interest of $75k per annum.
As far as those levies go; that way opens up an expensive-to-administer system which soon, every industry will want to jump into.
Noone forces people to go into business. Rather than thousands of piddling little levies, business only needs to consider their total production costs and then adjust their prices and profit margins accordingly.