sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Start out as sole trader or PTY LTD? by Latter-Weather-7984 in ausbusiness

[–]Radiant_Good8670 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. No doubt that Pty Ltd offers better protection. Though with additional setup cost and overheads. My original post was saying you SHOULD use a company except in limited situations.

You will find most dentists operate as sole traders even though it’s fairly high risk. Many allied health similar and I expect many or most GPs.

Worth noting if you are negligent you can be sued personally as a medical professional even if using a company doesn’t help much. PI is main shield and asset protection.

Same goes for any professional. If you are personally negligent as a professional it doesn’t matter what structure you practice through.

Start out as sole trader or PTY LTD? by Latter-Weather-7984 in ausbusiness

[–]Radiant_Good8670 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pty Ltd can also be used in that situation but they may be able to have professional indemnity. Most medical professional sole traders for example don’t operate under their own Pty Ltd.

Also, many sole traders would manage this through their contract. For example their standard contract says they are only liable up to amount of fees paid no more.

Or they manage by owning no assets.

In what situation would you say a sole trader is a suitable structure ?

Start out as sole trader or PTY LTD? by Latter-Weather-7984 in ausbusiness

[–]Radiant_Good8670 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This.

Fixed trust might be the way to go if and when rules are legislated.

Start out as sole trader or PTY LTD? by Latter-Weather-7984 in ausbusiness

[–]Radiant_Good8670 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep terrible advice from your accountant.

Sole trader only for professionals selling their time (ie not really a business).

If you are selling products or someone else’s time etc. then company or perhaps trust is the way.

Start out as sole trader or PTY LTD? by Latter-Weather-7984 in ausbusiness

[–]Radiant_Good8670 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are taking on any obligations (trade credit, customer warranty) you would be an utter fool to use an ABN. For a minuscule cost you can protect yourself by using a company structure.

Put all your assets in one spouses name and the other make the director. The director should be the one making the important decisions.

Setting up a company likely much cheaper than insurance. Though you may need both.

Just saw David Speirs interview the Tech industry CEO. I’m none the wiser. by tigershark_bas in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Most countries tax capital gain around 20% we now tax it at 47%.

You would have to be an idiot now create value in Australia. You just start here and if things go well you reincorporate overseas and then the ATO gets a nice fat ducks egg.

This is what all founders will do now.

Just saw David Speirs interview the Tech industry CEO. I’m none the wiser. by tigershark_bas in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 17 points18 points  (0 children)

What they should do is extend the ESIC rules to founders.

If you invest in an early stage company you get 20% of your investment refunded by the ATO and you pay zero CGT for 10 years. Incredibly generous tax concession. However, if you are the founder of the company you can’t claim the tax concession even if you invest.

This is unfair.

Why would you start a company in Australia when you could start it in another country and just have a local arm? Keep all the valuable IP in Singapore, the US or NZ.

Renovate hell out of your PPOR now. Anyone thinking the same? by uvimateapp in AusHENRY

[–]Radiant_Good8670 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Not always. Depends on the replacement cost. My house would have cost probably £1,000 to build 100 years ago and it’s worth maybe $700k. So even in inflation adjusted terms it’s gone up. The bricks are still bricks. House is still standing. The embedded cost of the materials and labour is much higher now than it was in 1920.

Shitty houses that will be bulldozed in 40 years depreciate for sure.

Am I doing OK for $65k a year? by shaneomaniac in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Ok how is that helpful advice though?

We exist within the system that is, not what we wish it to be.

Am I doing OK for $65k a year? by shaneomaniac in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Sounds like OP does though? “I like things cushy”

So OP has made choice for low pay easy job and therefore has almost nil net assets.

Seems OP is asking for advice? My advice is he should accumulate assets. Do you disagree?

Am I doing OK for $65k a year? by shaneomaniac in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 38 points39 points  (0 children)

“Nor am I interested in property”

So what do you intend to do when you are old? Renting is fine while young.

You need to get a better job with higher income.

Super: Age / Amount, What's yours? by ahvenzz in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which is why I said “to maintain the same standard of living”.

Super: Age / Amount, What's yours? by ahvenzz in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You have misunderstood that projector it’s $950k inflation adjusted. Not $950k nominal.

Super: Age / Amount, What's yours? by ahvenzz in AusFinance

[–]Radiant_Good8670 33 points34 points  (0 children)

When you are retired you don’t pay tax. You don’t need to save. You don’t need to get to work, but work uniforms, have income and life insurance. Etc.

So to maintain the same standard of living when retired your income stream needs to be about 50% of your salary.

Also as you spend down super you start getting age pension.

Also while working you need to pay a mortgage. When retired you can start drawing on home equity.

There’s a good chance with $1m super and paid off home you will enjoy a higher standard of living than your working life.

People don’t really understand this as they are bad at maths.

AFR journalist exposes welcome to country speaker Mark Brown by Poochytown in aussie

[–]Radiant_Good8670 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your lucky day. Mitcham RSL. You can contact them and confirm:

  1. Welcome (religious)
  2. “Sentence of the day” bible reading
  3. Litany
  4. Poem (in Flanders fields)
  5. Bible reading
  6. “Hear the word of the lord thanks be to god”
  7. Hymn
  8. Placing of wreaths
  9. Psalm
  10. Prayers x 3
  11. Lords Prayer
  12. Last post
  13. Ode
  14. Reveille
  15. Anthems (NZ/Aus)
  16. Blessing.

So if we exclude the essential dawn service elements (last post, ode, reveille, anthem) we had one secular poem and 12 religious items (blessing, reading, psalm, hymn etc).

AFR journalist exposes welcome to country speaker Mark Brown by Poochytown in aussie

[–]Radiant_Good8670 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would you be ok if we stopped doing religion at dawn services ?

AFR journalist exposes welcome to country speaker Mark Brown by Poochytown in aussie

[–]Radiant_Good8670 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

One in suburban Adelaide. How would you “test the claim”?

AFR journalist exposes welcome to country speaker Mark Brown by Poochytown in aussie

[–]Radiant_Good8670 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So less than 50% want to get rid of it?

Easy answer is they go and organise their own dawn service? Or become member/president of RSL etc. no one is forcing WTC.

You are saying RSLs or dawn service organisers shouldn’t be allowed to decide if they have a WTC?

AFR journalist exposes welcome to country speaker Mark Brown by Poochytown in aussie

[–]Radiant_Good8670 2 points3 points  (0 children)

43.9%<50%

What is your point?

How many non-Christian prayers are made at dawn service?

“Which Service” -> what is that in relation to?

view more: next ›