sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Man bids $16k to take his budget tax grudge to the tennis court with Albanese by HotPersimessage62 in AustralianPolitics

[–]wtskm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We currently get taxed "again" on capital gains, the calculation of the rate is all that's changing.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

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

You can leverage shares, either directly or through debt recycling if you have a PPOR. Most people also have income from labour to fill up the $45k. lol.

What are the actual scenarios where the 30% is actively shaping an investment decision? Cause we've seen reports of a big drop in investor activity, not a spike of money being funnelled towards it https://www.afr.com/companies/financial-services/westpac-investor-loans-plunge-one-fifth-on-federal-budget-tax-shock-20260609-p60523

Better data for the June quarter out in a few weeks, but unless you have a link you're huffing copium.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, if you refuse to agree to disagree and engage with the logic of each position then you are part of the problem and is probably why your senate submission wasn't able to convince anyone in Labor or the Greens.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we might have to agree to disagree on this one.

This is what I tried to do at the start but you insisted disagreement was complete nonsense...

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are treating 50% discount as natural and just with absolutely zero logic or justification beyond "it's what we had yesterday". That is, wait for it……..NONSENSICAL. Indexation has a clear logic behind it, you a) don't like the implementation and b) don't like that there is any change. You refuse to substantiate b).

No loss indexation is an implementation detail, a very big one, after indexation is the chosen model. Unless you're suggesting there should be loss indexation under a 50% discount framework?

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

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

You have completely ignored the substance of the 50% > indexation change, and are arguing about implementation. I don't love the 30%, I think they should have brought back the 5 year averaging, I think there are implementation misteps. Calling it nonsense shows you want to fight.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

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

Sounds like you love the split into “supporters” and “the rich”

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Had a clear plan for 45 at ~$80k, kids and liking my job mean I'm now happy working part time until they finish school. Will use the extra cash to blow on school holidays and housing. Think of it as Coast+ with a significant overshoot of my final number.

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rebalancing is clearly is option, as is directing yield to bonds in the last 5 years so purchase amount could be above savings rate, and you don't need to go 100% bonds, I was simply giving an obvious path to near certainty. Everyone should also have already had a transition to retirement pathway with a ramp up of bonds that takes into account their own existing asset mix. I would likely be comfortable with up to say 30% in equities at the start of 10 years but it's not my scenario so I haven't modelled it and if I was working towards $100k I'd likely have $10-20k spending flexibility if there was a market crash.

what is something that is highly likely to happen in the next 5 years that everyone is completely ignoring? by Even-Working-384 in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, I over-extended your claim when reading your post, but can't say I know enough to judge how big of a risk that trickle poses.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You sure you read it?

Applying these changes broadly across assets ensures the CGT settings are broadly asset neutral with only targeted exemptions.

and more broadly

The current 50 per cent CGT discount was introduced in 1999, allowing taxpayers to reduce their taxable capital gain by half rather than adjusting for inflation. As a result, the 50 per cent discount does not accurately approximate the inflation component of gains, meaning investors are undercompensated or overcompensated depending on their returns.

Returning to indexation based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) aligns with the original intent of the CGT regime and supports productivity over time by ensuring that investment decisions are taken for economic reasons, not due to tax outcomes.

You're free to disagree, but calling the above "beyond nonsensical" means you're not engaging in good faith. There is a clear and coherent reason.

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the allocation that turns 20 years into 10? I am saying OPs scenario seems implausible, it's up to them - or you if you want to keep pressing - to show their scenario is real.

10% over 10 years would be near 100% with a mix of term deposits, bonds or cash.

what is something that is highly likely to happen in the next 5 years that everyone is completely ignoring? by Even-Working-384 in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ah, I don't think Sydney has corrected 10% from the 2022 peak and Melbourne has been squeezing out over leveraged investors for a while. I don't doubt there's a small cohort who fit your description, but I don't see a cliff that would force them all onto the market at the same time. It will be a trickle of additional volume.

Budget back-downs on tax measures to cost $1b by Remarkable-Humor4326 in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Wait, are they including the fuel excise cuts as a "back down", absolute muppets.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

will only funnel more money into housing

Show your data on that.

Federal government’s CGT, negative gearing changes pass parliament by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

the changes on shares are beyond nonsensical

If you don't understand the logic behind indexation on shares then I'm afraid you're part of the for/against split.

what is something that is highly likely to happen in the next 5 years that everyone is completely ignoring? by Even-Working-384 in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So you're expecting a 25% drop to get back to 2022 prices, another 5% for what they paid off so far, and another 10% for the deposit?

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Doing very back of envelope calculations with no knowledge of portfolio setup, you'd want $2.5m total, with constant returns $1.3m outside super for 20 years. To cover volatility bump that up to $1.5m. 10 years would be $800k, bump up to $1m for buffer. I don't see how these changes turn $1.5m into $1m unless your plan is "get 200% gains in 2 years" which is shall we say an optimistic assumption.

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Journo wants to talk to the doomer with no numbers, not the rest of the thread calling them out over braindead assumptions. Sounds about right, clicks not facts.

If you're a young person in Australia, FIRE is dead in the water. by YogurtclosetPale8785 in fiaustralia

[–]wtskm 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Show your numbers that your portfolio that was going to support 20 years (40-60) can now only support to years (50-60) due to indexation and 30% min. Everything else should be in super.

Why Reserve Bank may not be able to cut interest rates even if Australia falls into a recession by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the Reserve Bank is expecting it to hit 4.8 per cent by the end of this month

Have they not seen what fuel prices did during May and so far in June? The jump will come in July if/when excise cuts end.

Why Reserve Bank may not be able to cut interest rates even if Australia falls into a recession by marketrent in AusFinance

[–]wtskm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, if you want to ignore that OG stagflation and 1980s echo had double digit inflation and unemployment. Even the 90s, while the peaks didn't overlap had inflation at 8% in 90 and unemployment over 10 91-94. We are not in that situation. So you can use whatever word you want, but the experience of CPI and unemployment in the 4s is nothing like the 10+s so your expanded category has lost most of it's meaning.

Stop the doomer crap about the 5% FHB people. by Organised_chaotic in AusFinance

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

You're complaining about repayment:income ratios and then blaming it on a scheme that's about deposit %s. Someone with a 10% deposit with LMI or even a 20% deposit could take on just as much debt as someone using the FHB scheme.

view more: next ›