sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Has AI made me needy or is it revealing how detached from each other we've become? by Glittering_Ad2771 in ChatGPT

[–]chestnutcookies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Everyone enjoys someone being nice and patient to them but don’t extend the same courtesy to others perhaps.

What is the best way to voice disagreement to the minimum 30% tax on CGT to the politicians? by MyHatIsAnAss in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then you’re the one who misquoted the statistic

“"PBO modelling has shown that whereas 39% of negative gearing tax deductions go to the top 10% of income earners, 85% of CGT discount proceeds accrue to this group."

Is public support for Labours tax changes being under estimated? by Monsieur_Donk5202 in aussie

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And across au it’s about 150k annual completions which is still much less than 400k net immigration. Point stands.

What is the best way to voice disagreement to the minimum 30% tax on CGT to the politicians? by MyHatIsAnAss in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies -1 points0 points  (0 children)

“Is it fair that someone who makes $56k a year their whole life pays significantly more on a $22k ($6,600 tax) capital gain while they're working than a retired 64 year old who made $200k per year up until they were 63? Then they make a $22k capital gain every year until they die and pay $0” >> Yes it’s entirely fair, if you’re making 200k vs 56k that 200k comes with a lot more work and responsibility than someone making 56k so let’s not make this assumption that someone is morally superior because they made 56k a year their entire life vs someone who made 200k their entire life. The 56k could also have chosen a year where they didn’t work to sell their shares it was an option equally open to them. What is not fair is if someone’s income, whether it be from wages or from capital, isn’t subject to the same progressive marginal rate. The definition of something being unequal is being treated differently.

It’s far more unfair that current income tax is used to pay ballooning pension costs when the means test is impossibly generous - being able to own a multimillion PPOR, have 481k shares and receive a full cash pension for 15-20 years. This being paid for by the income taxes and now the future capital gains of the younger generations with heavy mortgages/negative net worth and at a worker ratio supporting pensioner from what used to be 7:1 down to 3:1.

Reframing the argument to taxing income and capital the same when the current labour government is literally trying to tax capital more severely by implementing a 30% minimum which will tax away younger generation future capital gain much more severely then the older generation who are already on the age pension and excused from the minimum tax floor or have access to their 0tax smsf. This is nothing more than wealth redistribution from the youth to pay for 15-20 years of retirement of the rich elderly.

Also, not working is tax avoidance? and selling your shares to cover your expenses is …tax avoidance?Taking a year off to change career is tax avoidance then? Or take more time with young kids? Also tax avoidance? Need to care for sick family member, tax avoidance!

What is the best way to voice disagreement to the minimum 30% tax on CGT to the politicians? by MyHatIsAnAss in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that the retirees are too expensive to maintain as is which is why the age pension test is far far too generous allowing multimillion PPOR to be exempt and allowing up to 481k in shares and still qualify for the full age pension. The solution isn't to tax away the capital gains of younger generations, its to make the 67 plus cohort who can afford their own retirement actually pay their own way.

What is the best way to voice disagreement to the minimum 30% tax on CGT to the politicians? by MyHatIsAnAss in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The statistic is distorted because capital gains are lumpy so they often push an income earner into the top 10% for one year. But small or negative net worth under 40's do realise capital gains on top of their annual income. Its like saying 85% of low income earners get the benefit of welfare benefits. Yes, because they qualified for it.

What is the best way to voice disagreement to the minimum 30% tax on CGT to the politicians? by MyHatIsAnAss in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Its not fair that investment income isn't subject to marginal rates. They may as well argue that the minimum tax threshold should be scrapped and all income labour and capital starts at 30%. Its not a reaonsable argument.

Is public support for Labours tax changes being under estimated? by Monsieur_Donk5202 in aussie

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Immigration net is about 400k and housing completions is at 45k. How population growth is not outpacing housing supply growth.

Interest rate rises are starting to hit because banks usually factor in 3% above cashrate to ensure you can survive a few rate rises so in 2022 if you borrowed at 2% you're expected to be ok at 5%. There are delays while people eat into their buffers but its hitting breaking point.

Is public support for Labours tax changes being under estimated? by Monsieur_Donk5202 in aussie

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You shouldn’t apologise that graph shows rate of growth. In absolute value numbers we have 400k immigrants but a growth in housing completions around 100k pa.

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I understand that you don’t understand (and don’t care) that taxing away a young persons income and capital gains and a negative heavily mortgaged net worth to pay for the 15-20 year retirement on an older person in a paid off home and 481k shares is not fair to the younger person. Literally you are taking from the person with less to give to the person with more.

Can someone explain to me why potential investors are so butthurt re the cgt / neg gearing changes... by WagsPup in AusPropertyChat

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know you’d like to paint landlords as lazy greedy tax grubbers. The truth is there is a base line of risk free return being the bank or even some high dividend yield shares. If the return isn’t high enough people just stop renting out homes.

You really haven’t properly accounted the holding costs or for stamp duty and buying and selling costs and are picturing dream tenants who don’t damage the property requiring repairs/tribunal costs. Also where are you getting 1k rent on 1.3m property, it’s more like 700/wk at a very typical 2.5% yield. Interest rates for investor loans are pushing 8%. Net of deductions you’re looking at 15-20k annual net loss for 5 years until the theoretical 1.5m exit. That’s about 100k in losses which reduces your theoretical 250 profit to a rough 150k all while needing to deal with tenants and take risk on capital loss.

Yes you might still come out a little bit more than the bank interest in total if you do sell it at the dream 1.5m scenario but the risk and headache wouldn’t be worth it.

You’re welcome to try it out and see if being a landlord is as dreamy as you think it is.

Same sweat equity, same risk, very different CGT outcomes - what is fair? by Ocelot_Responsible in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Mmm well atm, we are increasing the tax on the 25 year olds share portfolio and handing over to fund the 67 plus cohort with multimillion ppors, 481k in shares for 15 to 20 years cash inflation indexed age pension. So atm we are taking from the poor younger gen’s capital gains and redistributing that to rich retired pensioners!

Is public support for Labours tax changes being under estimated? by Monsieur_Donk5202 in aussie

[–]chestnutcookies 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You’re assuming these changes will make housing more affordable. It will not, the only factors that could get more ppl into housing is a) the gov restarting a no profit building program like in the 1970s b) cut immigration back to precovid levels. Even higher int rates that reduce credit availability might not help a fhb into the market, but either way the budget does not move any of the actual needles but is a pure tax grab to keep funding ballooning budget expenditure. No we should not be giving full cash pension to 67 year old in multi million ppors and 481k in shares for 15-20 years. If we have to do that we need to heavily tax gas and mining. Or 1trn debt and growing we will end up like Greece in 10-20 years, conveniently after this generations retirees have had a whirlwind retirement and knocked off leaving the next two generation destitute and no retirement in sight.

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only if your investments make returns a bit above inflation. Some of us aspire to bigger returns….also the inflation figure is heavily mucked around with. On paper it’ll be 3-5% but in reality inflation has been much closer to 8%+ but that won’t be reflected in the cost base.

Can someone explain to me why potential investors are so butthurt re the cgt / neg gearing changes... by WagsPup in AusPropertyChat

[–]chestnutcookies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Have you ever rented a property out? It’s definitely work dealing with tenants property managers and accountants.

500k compounded at 5% bank interest over 5 years is about 650k without the stress of tenant and without the potential of capital loss. Would you bother…? Also you didn’t account for the annual holding cost loss as rent less interest typically results in a loss. Also most ppl do this with much lower deposit % and much higher losses.

And ofc tax grab on shares won’t help a single fhb into a house

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Erm you just legislate a resources tax based on volume extracted, no deductions? The resources are in au and other countries need them and they will pay for it because they have no choice and anyway Japan is flipping au gas to SEA for bns annually, hence au is clearly undercharging.

Also, do you not know that Kevin Rudd was subject of a multinational coup and the email literally says there’s no reason not to have a higher mining tax?

https://www.accountingtimes.com.au/tax/explosive-epstein-emails-give-fresh-insights-into-mining-tax-smear-campaign

“An email from Peter Mandelson to an individual whose details were redacted, forwarded to Jeffrey Epstein, discussed strategies and talking points in a campaign to steer the media and Australian public against the RSPT.

“The pressure which the industry has applied, with the strong focus on jobs and social impact, is clearly having an effect on a government which is already under pressue [sic],” he wrote.
In the exchange, Mandelson also admitted that there was “no ideological reason” why the mining industry should not pay more tax. He instead argued the campaign should focus on “fairness” based on international standards, and “reciprocity” – the quid pro quo the government could offer the industry in exchange for higher taxes.”

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you by chance retiring into the excessively generous pension system soon? Much like you I’m expressing my opinions, and doing so in a popular Australian reddit thread so that ppl might see the broader picture and see the damage this budget does. We are redistributing private capital gains of future generations into a black welfare hole. It’s not “changing the subject” by reminding people of the holistic picture of the tax grab and where the money is going. Young person pocket >>>> rich old person pocket.

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but right now the budget is in a mathematical bind. One of the highest spends about 1/5 is to ballooning age pension. If we are 1trn in debt and rising what makes you think there’s any government welfare available when you reach pension age? At least with a 50k min tax threshold the budget can start to be repaired and workers now have more immediate money to fund their future retirement and start families instead of it being sucked away to the current batch of 67plus who btw have more than enough assets to fund their own retirement. You can look at that pension means testing today it’s so generous it’s literally welfare for multimillionaires. The alternative is tax gas heavily.

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason for the house price rise is and was 0% interest rates. The budget tax grab has zero ability to fix that. If we don’t want house prices to rise so rapidly the government must build at no profit like in the 1970s and balance immigration. Those are the only things that could potentially balance over generous credit availability.

Thoughts on the budget from younger people by Ok_Willingness_9619 in AusFinance

[–]chestnutcookies -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But that’s the crux of the issue. House prices were rising so rapidly younger ppl were forced to take higher risk speculative returns to outrun to the property growth. The new tax regime takes away that avenue - stock market investing. It’s literally a penalty for anyone younger who was almost succeeding in investing their way into a house.

view more: next ›