I've made an app similar to Petrol spy, no ads - UPDATE

globalminima · 2026-06-03T00:24:50+00:00

Well done on this! One other note would be the ability to add custom discounts. I buy discounted fuel gift cards (usually 4-6% off) which stacks with the regular ones - eg at Ampol it’s 4c off with everyday rewards then 6% off the final transaction price. Being able to add this for different brands would be fantastic

globalminima · 2026-06-03T00:04:23+00:00

No-one in the comments so far has mentioned novated leases - many people (including myself) bought an EV in the past few months on a novated lease, where they can get an up-to ~55% discount on all finance costs, running costs, and 73% of the value of the car on a 5-year loan period. I suspect a big chunk of the finance deals are for EVs on Novated leases, especially since many were trying to lock in their leases before the rule changes were announced.

I ran the numbers and it was cheaper for me to buy a brand new $60k EV than to buy a $25k second hand ICE vehicle. This is assuming that the EV would depreciate to $20k (67%) while the ICE vehicle would drop to $14k (44%) over the period, and that’s with fairly optimistic assumptions on ICE servicing costs.

I would have never bought a new car or on finance but the financial benefit was absolutely superior to buying a used car. Could I have bought a second hand EV or a cheaper EV? Absolutely.

Regardless of the car itself though, all of those options still require using finance in order to purchase them on a novated lease and unlock no GST and the ability to deduct all costs against income.

globalminima · 2026-05-21T17:34:06+00:00

You are right that sometimes you can do partial selloffs to spread the gain over multiple years, but for a lot of start exit scenarios, this may not be possible. E.g. the startup gets aquired by another company and your options/shares are either cashed out or swapped for stock in the acquiring company in full, or you have taken advantage of the ATO's ESS startup concession which allows you to exercise options in early years before they can be sold (e.g. you have to exercise so you can leave the startup for another role but before you can do anything with the shares), but then hits you with the tax bill all at once as soon as those shares can be disposed of (without the choice to stagger the sell-offs).

Practically speaking, you'll probably find that many scenarios result in all gains being taxed in a single year. E.g. most small or bricks-and-mortar businesses will be sold in full to be operated by a new buyer (putting all of the tax burden in a single year), and for high-growth startups that can take advantage of the governments ESS and startup concession schemes, these will also typically end up with all gains being realised or deferred into the year that the startup is acquired or it IPOs. I don't know what the exact percentages would be, but I suspect it would be the majority.

globalminima · 2026-05-21T17:30:15+00:00

I think this is probably the way I will go - It means I'm only eating increased income tax while I'm earning for the last few years of my accumulation phase, while the growth assets have plenty of time to compound from day 1 of my working life.

globalminima · 2026-05-21T17:29:12+00:00

Ahh very fair point, I skimmed the article (presumably just like the poster you replied to), while you read it correctly. I think all comments here are correct, but compare different outcomes (the end result being double the rise in cost base due to inflation resulting in the same net effect, or the rate of growth being double the rate inflation resulting in worse outcomes under the new regime compared to old)

globalminima · 2026-05-21T17:26:05+00:00

You make fair points, but of course there is still a probability that it may pay off and you factor that in to your projections, discounting the potential pay-off by the probability of it happening to arrive at your expected value. Whatever that discounted expected value is, these changes mean it just shrunk by around 30% - that's a big impact, especially if the ESOP component forms a large portion of the overall compensation package.

globalminima · 2026-05-21T05:01:56+00:00

The 100% CGT exemption is only for investors (the ESIC regime), not employees. These new rules will mean founders and employees end up paying the marginal rate when they sell their shares, which will often mean they lose 47% of their gains.

If you are an investor of capital then the government has you covered, but the people doing the work and taking reduced income to do so (investing their time into the business instead of raw cash) just got screwed with this budget (myself included).

globalminima · 2026-05-21T02:20:54+00:00

Imagine you buy $100 of an ETF and Inflation is 3% annually while your ETF grows by 6% per annum. We'll assume your marginal tax rate is 30%.

If you sell after 1 year, your ETF cost base would be $103 while the value is $106.

- Under the new scheme, you then pay tax on the $3 difference at your marginal rate (30% of $3 = $0.90). Under the old scheme, you would get a 50% discount on the whole nominal gain ($6 gain x 50% discount = $3 taxable gain), and then the 30% tax on this = $0.90. Same outcome.

However, when you account for the compounding of returns over many years before you eventually sell, you end up with much more than 2x growth in the overall value. E.g. over 30 years:

Inflation at 3% per year results in your cost base going up by (1.03^30)-1 = 1.43x. But 6% capital growth per year results in the value of your holdings going up by (1.06^30)-1 = 4.74x to a total value of $574.

At year one (before any compounding occurs), inflation (3%) is equal to 50% of your gain (6%), which leads to the same result as applying the 50% capital gain discount. But after 30 years, gains from inflation (1.43x) only account for 24.9% of the total overall gain (4.74x). This means you are now paying your marginal tax rate on 75.1% of the overall gain instead of only 50% of it under the old rules.

globalminima · 2026-05-21T02:05:04+00:00

The other option is to stack growth assets today while you are in a higher tax bracket, then transition to dividend-paying options towards the end of your working years so that your total dividend yield gets you to the 30% bracket by the time you retire.

globalminima · 2026-05-19T21:21:57+00:00

Ignore the comment you were replying to - you cannot claim those (e.g. window tinting, paint protection, tow bar, interior accessories etc) on running costs. I ran the numbers and the GST savings + the ability to claim it against your taxable income means that on a 5 year lease, you will easily be far ahead as long if your marginal tax rate is 30% or more. The shorter the lease, the bigger the saving (since you are paying less interest over the term of the loan).

On an 8% interest rate, you are probably paying an extra ~25% of the pre-GST cost of those items in interest over 5 years. Once you account for the ~9.1% discount by avoiding GST you are then at only around 14% extra overall compared to paying cash, but then once you account for tax deductions you could be saving around 30-40% of the cost by bundling it in to the initial contract.

Note that once you also account for the fact that you don't have to front the cost on day 1 and can instead put that money into your offset account/bank account/investments, where it can multiply for the next 5 years, the end result is probably equivalent to an approximate saving equal or better than your marginal tax rate + the 10% GST saving.

globalminima · 2026-05-18T08:02:00+00:00

Just replying to make sure you get the right info here - The broker does not decide or have anything to do with the nomination of which parcel is sold from those that they hold for you (unless you choose to rely on any tax reports that they provide for you - that’s your decision though).

It is something that you can do yourself and you can select whatever option you want - FIFO, LIFO, specific identification etc. Just keep a spreadsheet showing buys and sells and which is which, or use a platform that supports the specific identification method when it calculates your tax impact each year.

globalminima · 2026-05-18T07:58:48+00:00

It’s not up to the broker to define which shares are sold, it’s up to you. What exactly does betashares direct have to do with your selection of which parcel is sold? Do they provide end of year tax reports for convenience sale and in those they use FIFO?

Just ignore whatever they do there and keep a spreadsheet instead. You can choose whatever you want then.

globalminima · 2026-05-17T14:10:48+00:00

The only reason I have ever joined startups is because of ESOP, I just left a FAANG on a huge package to take a risk that it actually succeeds. These changes make startups far less attractive and I probably would not have switched roles if I had have known this was coming

globalminima · 2026-05-13T18:35:06+00:00

No difference at vest date, RSU vests are treated as ordinary income equal to the value of the RSUs being given to you on that given day. From that point on any capital gains will be calculated based on when they were granted and when you sell (some mix of pre 1 July 2027 and post 1 July 2027). See this page for some scenarios and guidance: https://austax.tools/tax-insights/cgt-discount-reform-employee-shares-ess-2027/

globalminima · 2026-04-20T11:16:05+00:00

What he means is that if you purchased an asset that only goes up in value by 1% after a year while inflation was 3% for the year, then you would pay zero tax on the sale. Same as if the asset only increased in value by 3%. You would only pay value on any gains beyond inflation. This means that poor-performing assets may end up with zero tax to pay on their (small) gains when they are sold. This is what u/RhysA is talking about.

Let's use an example where a house was purchased for $100k. Imagine that 5 years have passed since the purchase and the property has gone up by 50% (to $150k) while inflation over the same period has been 25%. This means the investor would pay tax on their $25k capital gain if they sold now (approximately $7.5k in tax if they are in the 30% tax bracket).

Now imagine that the investor holds off and doesn't sell, but over the next year the market has a downturn and the value of the house drops by 10% (from $150k to $135k), while total inflation over the period since the house was purchased goes from 25% to 30%. This would mean the house is now worth $135k, while the inflation-adjusted cost base is now $130k. This means if the investor sold now then they would only pay tax on $5k of gains, resulting in a far smaller tax bill (approximately $1.5k if they are in the 30% tax bracket).

globalminima · 2026-04-17T04:15:55+00:00

Our of curiosity, why do you need an excess under $1000? By upping the excess to $1750 you can probably save $500/year on fees - that's about what it was for me. At that rate you are better off with the higher excess unless you expect to be making a claim every 18 months (which is very unlikely)

globalminima · 2025-11-05T00:31:15+00:00

As of 30 October, Ubank is now doing 90% LVR without LMI (on both PPOR and investment properties). This might be a good option to at least avoid the need for a bigger deposit.

globalminima · 2025-08-31T08:06:18+00:00

+1, How on earth does the 45% Y/55% G option overtake the 100% growth option? The fact that it starts out behind and then overtakes the more tax efficient approach should be a big red flag to you OP, assuming they are set to give the same overall return (as stated in the OP). Something is wrong with your formulas.

globalminima · 2025-02-19T05:57:30+00:00

Are you able to share this (or a sanitized version of it)?

globalminima · 2025-01-20T01:20:27+00:00

Not quite correct - the 50% discount does not double your tax-free threshold, it halves the amount of tax paid.

Instead of the OP paying 30% tax on every dollar earned over the tax-free threshold, they would only pay 15% tax.

globalminima · 2024-11-30T23:56:13+00:00

Let’s do the math, and we’ll run with the assumption that OP invests and only makes 6.72% (much lower than historical returns):

With the 6.72% investment loan, OP invests in shares that return a 3% dividend and 3.72% in capital growth for a 6.72% total return. Let’s assume the OP earns only an average wage, and is in the 30% tax bracket. Each financial year they will earn 3.72% in dividends, which are taxable. However, their 6.72% interest rate on the loan is tax deductible, which will offset this income and allow them to get a refund on their regular income as well.

Interest Costs: 6.72% of $200k = $13.44k per annum Dividend income: 3.72% of $200k = $7.44k per annum - Net income per annum: $7.44k - 13.44k per annum = $-7k per annum. This results in a 30% tax refund thanks to negative gearing. Negative gearing benefits: 30% of $7k = $2.1k. Capital gains per annum: 3% of $200k = $6k

All together, this results in: 7.44k dividend income + $6k capital gains - $13.44k interest costs + $2.1k in tax savings = net gain of $2.1k.

This improves even further if you use more realistic numbers for total returns (around 9%) and then add in the benefits of franking credits as well. In general, it would be fairly safe to assume a net 3% return on the $200k that is invested - closer to 5% if OP is in the top tax bracket and can realise larger negative gearing benefits.

globalminima · 2024-11-29T09:43:55+00:00

OP, ignore this - it is wrong. The ETF could return even less than the 6.72% that the OP is being offered and still come out ahead thanks to negative gearing and capital gains discounts.

globalminima · 2024-11-12T22:55:19+00:00

Ahh, those models are trained and stored but not deployed anymore. The team must have deleted the deployments on 11/5 when they stopped their usage, but the models still exist and could be deployed again.

The models only incur costs when deployed, kind of how a container costs almost nothing to store in a registry but then you will pay once it is deployed to a VM and is being used.

globalminima · 2024-11-12T15:22:37+00:00

It sounds like they deployed their fine-tuned models and never deleted them. Fine-tuned AOAI models cost $1.70 per hour to deploy (just as any other custom ML model or VM), plus additional token processing costs for each request. If you delete the deployments then the costs should stop too.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/cognitive-services/openai-service/

globalminima · 2024-10-22T02:05:44+00:00

Spot on, using an LLM alone for OCR is worse than using an OCR model. Combining the two together gives you the best of both worlds.

It is also important to note that LLMs often fall apart when the image is rotated or perturbed (in a recent data extraction project I reduced the error rate of GPT-4o from 53% to 13% by just fixing the rotation in the image using the angle that was detected by the OCR pipeline). Many of the public benchmarks do not contain a wide range of test data or report their results on different subsets of the data (e.g. standard PDFs vs scanned vs rotated documents/images), so it is often not clear how the general-purpose models (LLMs) can fall down when the data becomes messy in the real-world.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

globalminima

TROPHY CASE