345 replies to this topic

[Steve TPF]

Chaosweaver: I'm a factory worker earning about 50K/year (including many hours of overtime). I share my house with two boarders just to have spare cash. You still think I am "well off"?

 

 

A home (like the one I live in) is not a tax deduction. Rates, bills, mortgage - I pay through the nose. An INVESTMENT PROPERTY on the other hand is a different thing. If my investment takes a loss (which it does) then I should be entitled to a tax deduction - because you can bet your balls I would be paying tax on any profit. It's literally that simple. If a business ran at a loss over the financial year they would pay no tax. So why should I pay tax on an investment property that gains me nothing? The only "gains" are in capital value - and I don't get that unless I sell - at which point the Government will bend me over to get their "share".

 

Waleed Aly  wants you to believe that people like me are ripping you off -  it's not true. I don't pay tax on my investment because it's not making any money. If it does I will pay tax like everyone else.

[Ice]

^^^ muppet
Middle Australia is housing the less fortunate. The govt can't afford to provide housing so they encourage middle Australia to do so. Think of the big picture.

Chaosweaver: I'm a factory worker earning about 50K/year (including many hours of overtime). I share my house with two boarders just to have spare cash. You still think I am "well off"?
 
 
A home (like the one I live in) is not a tax deduction. Rates, bills, mortgage - I pay through the nose. An INVESTMENT PROPERTY on the other hand is a different thing. If my investment takes a loss (which it does) then I should be entitled to a tax deduction - because you can bet your balls I would be paying tax on any profit. It's literally that simple. If a business ran at a loss over the financial year they would pay no tax. So why should I pay tax on an investment property that gains me nothing? The only "gains" are in capital value - and I don't get that unless I sell - at which point the Government will bend me over to get their "share".
 
Waleed Aly  wants you to believe that people like me are ripping you off -  it's not true. I don't pay tax on my investment because it's not making any money. If it does I will pay tax like everyone else.

You both need to pull your heads out of the sand the reason they wont change negative gearing is because most politicians have investment property's
now we couldnt possibly have the rich Cunning Stunts not making more money could we now
many years ago Alan Bond turned over 400 million $$$ in one year he paid 1% tax now please explain to me how thats fair to the average Australian go on
investment properties push house prices up you numskulls if you think they dont you got no frOckin idea what your talking about
if you can afford to buy a second home you are doing ok in life most people cant afford to buy one let alone 2

Im a Liberal supporter have been all my life but its time i change this country needs to start to look after its people
not greedy pricks

[S pack]

The investors that are making it are the ones that have positively geared properties or they renovate and turn the property over when they can realise a worthwhile capital gain. So they pay tax on the investment income or the capital gain. Better off to make a profit than a loss.

If a business consistently made a loss year after year then it will not be long before that business is no more.

[Rockoz]

S pack.

 

Those who invest in a second property are usually on wages like the average person.

What they lose on the investment property goes against their wages income.

So just as an example they earn 75k in their full time job, and pay tax on that income, and lose say 10k on the investment property, they effectively are earning 65k but getting taxed on 75k. So they get a tax refund.

 

They arent generally making huge profits unless they buy wisely and sell well.

Most I know are sacrificing short term to be more comfortable in their retirement.

Good luck to them for doing that

[S pack]

S pack.

 

Those who invest in a second property are usually on wages like the average person.

What they lose on the investment property goes against their wages income.

So just as an example they earn 75k in their full time job, and pay tax on that income, and lose say 10k on the investment property, they effectively are earning 65k but getting taxed on 75k. So they get a tax refund.

 

They arent generally making huge profits unless they buy wisely and sell well.

Most I know are sacrificing short term to be more comfortable in their retirement.

Good luck to them for doing that

Just because a person is only on wages does not mean they have to negatively gear their investment property.

If possible I would rather purchase an investment property that I don't have to subsidise out of my own pocket.

Even if the property only makes a $100 profit for the year at least it wouldn't have made a dent on my families income or lifestyle.

[Rockoz]

If that is the way you choose to do it then that is your choice.

But others choose to do it differently.

And they arent making huge fortunes out of doing it.

But it reduces their overall tax burden.

Again its their choice.

A choice that some will regret to a point in the not to distant future if they have done it wrong

[Ice]

S pack.
 
Those who invest in a second property are usually on wages like the average person.
What they lose on the investment property goes against their wages income.
So just as an example they earn 75k in their full time job, and pay tax on that income, and lose say 10k on the investment property, they effectively are earning 65k but getting taxed on 75k. So they get a tax refund.
 
They arent generally making huge profits unless they buy wisely and sell well.
Most I know are sacrificing short term to be more comfortable in their retirement.
Good luck to them for doing that

Rob if you choose to buy an investment property and it doesnt make a profit thats tuff shit for you why should the other tax payers subsidise your loss
christ i have to work my arse off and pay more tax than i should no body gives me any hand outs
the whole tax system in this country needs a big shake up tax the frOckin rich
bring back Robin Hood i say

[Rockoz]

So Gene by your idea virtually every small business should stop operating?

Many of them run at a loss each year.

Many of them take advantage of tax advantages that no one on wages is entitled to.

Is that part of your solution too?

[S pack]

If that is the way you choose to do it then that is your choice.

But others choose to do it differently.

And they arent making huge fortunes out of doing it.

But it reduces their overall tax burden.

Again its their choice.

A choice that some will regret to a point in the not to distant future if they have done it wrong

Exactly, it is a choice. I know the cost to income ratio of some properties will never lend themselves to positive gearing.

People get hung up about the tax deduction side of it and spend years living on struggle street to pay off the investment property.

Fact is the more the investment pays for itself the faster you will be better off.

[Ice]

So Gene by your idea virtually every small business should stop operating?
Many of them run at a loss each year.
Many of them take advantage of tax advantages that no one on wages is entitled to.
Is that part of your solution too?

Rob if many business are running at a loss they shouldnt be in business simple as that
i have been self employed for 30 years i dont employ anybody i dont turn over a great deal of money but i never run at a loss
i dont know what the solution is Rob

[Rockoz]

Gene I know of a few people in business that run at a loss.

Its not ideal but it works for them.

They make money when they sell the business and pay tax on that.

Some started from scrath, others bought an existing business and built it up.

As all businesses do, they are likely to be doing better in reality than what is shown in the book keeping.

There are deductions that they can make that the average wage earner isnt able to do

[Bernie]

Gene 

Big business is the problem .Not the little guys .All companies individuals etc should have to pay a portion of GST .At the moment only the end user or really the little guy whom can't claim it back is the only one paying GST .Every person or company ,business etc should pay a flat rate as a payment to the Govt for being able to live in our country or do business here .Make it 5 % that is not claimable and the balance of 5% is for business etc and can be claimed back  .That way all the big companies whom have tax accountants etc to minimise their tax to zero and send their money O/S will at least pay something .

The negative gearing side of things has been put forward to take our minds off the real issue .

[S pack]

And Interest rates are at around 4%...  what happens when the rate goes up a few points...  you want me and every other tax payer to pay even more.. 

When interest rates go up then rents will go up when the lease is next due for renewal, unless of course rate induced rent increases are written into the lease agreement.

 

 

[FNQ]

apologies if this has been mentioned before

 

taken off numerous websites ( not mine)  for humour but also further thinking Cheers .... Darryl

 

AUSSIE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED USING BEER!! Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100... If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1, The sixth would pay $3, The seventh would pay $7, The eighth would pay $12, The ninth would pay $18, The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do!! The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80. Being good mates and Australians they still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. Now what about the other six men? They were after all the paying customers. How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each Man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the Principle of the Australian Tax System they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay. And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% Saving). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving), The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving), The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving), The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving), The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving). The six are better off than before and the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man and said "but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!" "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! So! Boys and Girls, journalists and government ministers, is how the Australian Taxation System. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the tax atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.!

[Bernie]

Daryl ,I like your analogy .Those first 4 who drink for free ,do they sign with an X ?

[Shiney005]

 Those that choose to spend more would then pay more for everything they choose

to own/purchase.

That was how they sold the GST.

[Ice]

I have no problem with investments, Housing or otherwise.  But the "Age of Entitlement" is over.   If your investment consists of buying a property,  whose costs outweigh  its income ...  Then don't expect me, Gene or every other Tax payer to subsidise you poor choice, or your chosen lifestyle.  
 
And Interest rates are at around 4%...  what happens when the rate goes up a few points...  you want me and every other tax payer to pay even more..   
 
You sound like the Dole Bludger that says "it costs me more to go to work than it does to stay home. So I'll just stay home, and let the Tax Payer subsidise my poor choice, or my chosen lifestyle...
 
Nothing will change for those entering the Negative Geared market before 2017 .......   But this shit has to stop.  The government spends more on Negative Gearing subsidies than it does on Education. ??..
 
Just my opinion...  CW  

Falls on deaf ears mate i will keep busting my arse to pay more tax than the rich
welcome to the lucky country what a joke and people justify it

[Ice]

 That's how we ended up with a half a$ed GST + other taxes.

Correct the GST is the worst thing that happened imho
life was easier before now all business have become is tax collecters for the government