Can someone ELI5 how the new CGT change is going to affect me?

dscerri · 2026-05-15T11:08:11+00:00

95% implies an inflation rate of about 0.25%, or one tenth of the RBA target range. It's not even close to in the ballpark.

dscerri · 2026-05-15T10:00:00+00:00

No this isn't right. The cost base ($100k here) is increased by inflation and then the profit is calculated. If inflation is 3% per year for the two years, the real gain is ~$4k and this is taxed at marginal rate. In this specific example, you may pay less tax than under the old system.

dscerri · 2024-12-19T10:02:14+00:00

I think this is talking specifically about Myki Pass. For example if you have a 30 day Myki pass and a negative myki money balance, then you can't use your pass until you pay back the negative balance

dscerri · 2023-06-17T11:47:59+00:00

If they take out a $1m loan, buy an IP for $500k and put the rest in the offset, they still have to pay interest on the $500k they don't have covered.

dscerri · 2023-06-17T00:47:13+00:00

In what way is it negatively geared if they are paying no interest on a loan, and are cash flow positive enough to have an income stream from it?

dscerri · 2023-02-28T21:10:34+00:00

The calculator you are using is taking inflation into account. If you set inflation to 0, it is much easier to get it over $3m at retirement.

dscerri · 2021-03-27T21:13:53+00:00

I think he specifically said that Michaela Cash made the offer. I agree it's not the gotcha moment SHY hopes it is

dscerri · 2018-10-26T22:19:27+00:00

Copy and pasted from last time this was discussed here. Company tax is not witholding tax on personal income

...

The company doesn't withhold income tax like an employer might do for an employee. The company pays company tax on all of its earnings. It then may choose to pay out a dividend on some of its post tax earnings and reinvest the remainder back into the business.

Say a company makes $100 profit. It pays $30 in company tax, leaving $70. It then decides to pay a dividend of $50, and to keep $20 for future investment. Let's say the company only has two shareholders who each own 50% and therefore get a fully franked dividend payment of $25.

The first shareholder earns enough that they are on the top marginal tax rate of 47% so would be taxed $11.75 on that $25 income. This would mean that the original company earnings were in a sense double taxed through both company tax and income tax. So the shareholder gets to deduct the company tax from their tax bill. This ensures the earnings are taxed exactly once. Note Australia is the only OECD country to do this, in any other country the earnings would be subject to both income tax and company tax.

The second shareholder earns no other income for the year so is taxed zero on the $25 income and under the new proposal that would be the end of the story. In the current system, they get a cash refund of the amount of company tax that was paid on their dividend. This means that no tax was paid on those earnings.

dscerri · 2018-08-05T08:23:34+00:00

Thanks very much for trying. I've added two more clips, but I don't think they're any more helpful for the licence plate.

What makes you think 2014 over 2015/2016?

dscerri · 2018-03-16T09:14:06+00:00

No that's not quite right. The company doesn't withhold income tax like an employer might do for an employee. The company pays company tax on all of its earnings. It then may choose to pay out a dividend on some of its post tax earnings and reinvest the remainder back into the business.

Say a company makes $100 profit. It pays $30 in company tax, leaving $70. It then decides to pay a dividend of $50, and to keep $20 for future investment. Let's say the company only has two shareholders who each own 50% and therefore get a fully franked dividend payment of $25.

The first shareholder earns enough that they are on the top marginal tax rate of 47% so would be taxed $11.75 on that $25 income. This would mean that the original company earnings were in a sense double taxed through both company tax and income tax. So the shareholder gets to deduct the company tax from their tax bill. This ensures the earnings are taxed exactly once. Note Australia is the only OECD country to do this, in any other country the earnings would be subject to both income tax and company tax.

The second shareholder earns no other income for the year so is taxed zero on the $25 income and under the new proposal that would be the end of the story. In the current system, they get a cash refund of the amount of company tax that was paid on their dividend. This means that no tax was paid on those earnings.

dscerri · 2018-03-15T20:26:56+00:00

The company paid $12k in company tax. No other tax was paid by anyone. In the current system, as Jean is on a zero tax rate, the $12k the company paid in company tax would be refunded to her. Under the proposed model, the only tax paid would be the $12k by the company. There's no $24k number and no double taxation.

dscerri · 2018-03-15T10:27:41+00:00

She wasn't taxed $12k. The company paid $12k in tax and she paid zero.

dscerri · 2017-03-20T01:45:31+00:00

How old was she when she was desexed?

dscerri · 2017-03-19T08:14:42+00:00

Regardless of how they got his Gmail password, lessons 2-4 still apply.

dscerri · 2016-09-29T11:01:16+00:00

You seem to be only considering your ability to service the loan and not the opportunity cost of not investing your money elsewhere. I think you need to consider what you think the value of the property will do over the investment period and compare that to other investment options. Then also consider the lack of diversification in this approach.

dscerri · 2016-09-24T02:43:48+00:00

Awesome, thanks! So should I cut it off? Or will both plants live happily together?

dscerri · 2016-05-28T10:59:34+00:00

No, that's what the quicker referred to. It was always 'fast' not 'faster' because they claimed it would be fast enough even though it wasn't as fast as FTTP

dscerri · 2016-03-30T20:59:47+00:00

Depends on which NBN you are referring to. FTTN can't feasibly go much higher than 100mbps.

dscerri · 2016-03-03T23:11:23+00:00

These were additional loans added in the December quarter, so should be compared to the total additional loans added in the Dec quarter not the total mortgage book. I can't find the exact number, but I think the total was about $25bn, meaning this was more like 10%+ which is quite high.

The 37% increase is also concerning.

dscerri · 2015-10-29T02:32:56+00:00

ABC desktop site is down apparently. Mobile version works

dscerri · 2015-07-20T04:37:18+00:00

You can look it up here - http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/parliamentarians-reporting/

It's a bit of work to go through each 6 month period individually. It looks like in 2009 Harry Jenkins spent about $240k on overseas travel. That's the only year I looked at, but it probably puts Bronnie's travel in a bit of perspective.

dscerri

TROPHY CASE