Centrelink Changes 1-7-09

[TrevorW]

Note effective 1/7 voluntary contributions into super (ie: salary sacrificing) will be considered as income as far as Centrelink are concerned and will affect your income when calculating payments for

Family tax benefits and other government payments such as disability pension.

I reduced my income p/f by SS into super so my wife who has MS and cannot work but who had done so for nearly 30 years on and off would be entitled to a health care card and she receives a measly $12 p/fn from the Govt. The $12 by the way is irrelevant, when you consider she recently had to have an MRI which would have cost us over $700 if not for her health care card.

The funny thing is if she didn't live we me she would be entitled to $570 per f/n plus utility allowances and possible rent assistance of up to $250 p/f and to top that off she could earn another $130 p/f before affecting her entitlement ie: in total $850 p/fn

The Govt screws us again, I think I by SS I can help out myself and my wife as we really couldn't afford all the extra health costs and by just reducing my salary by a measly $70 p/f to fall below the threshold this also in someway would reduce the burden on social security when I come to retire and they up and do this.

Now they can go and get stuffed I'm thinking of purchasing extra leave this way I believe my actual taxable salary is reduced to compensate.

Feedback welcome

[astronut (John)]

Trevor,
I feel your pain!! My wife and I are under the same sort of circumstances and I must say that the decision STINKS!!
Without getting into a political debate, that will bore people.
Our pollies have an living away from home allowance.
It's tax free, unlike the matter that you raised (that will cost you)
And it's still given, even though a pollie may own a dwelling in the A.C.T that they could use.
The loop hole is that it's not marked as their principle place of residence!!!
And...........guess what? They don't want to change the rules regarding all this!!!
What a surprise!!! Again it's the little person, that cops it in the neck!!!

[Jen]

Awwwww sorry to hear that Trevor

[TrevorW]

Thanks Jen but this will affect a lot of people out there not just me

Cheers

[marki]

This really sucks. Can you sort out some salary sacrifice scheme at work which will drop you into the correct zone whilst not impacting too much on your life style? I was going to suggest buying a new car through the many schemes the ed dept have but the weekly cost would probably shoot you in the foot. Are you eligable to get the 4 on one off deal the teachers get? you lose 20% of your pay but do get a whole year off with pay.

Mark

[dpastern (Dave Pastern)]

Trevor - I feel for you. The government introduces legislation like this, quietly, that will affect many people. It's sly. Instead of cutting their own bloody pensions, closing loopholes like the have your own house in Canberra with a mortgage but still be able to claim travel allowance etc, cutting down on travel overseas (yes, you Krudd), they're telling us to tighten our belts whilst they live like kings. It's bloody rotten and it bloody well stinks.

It's long overdue that a people's party is established, which cares about people (and not business, it makes enough money without the government being nice to it with "enticements"), and people's rights. Changes need to be made to the way our governments work, and those changes need to be done pretty quickly imho.

Dave

[ngcles]

Hi All,

Originally Posted by astronut

Our pollies have an living away from home allowance. It's tax free, unlike the matter that you raised (that will cost you) And it's still given, even though a pollie may own a dwelling in the A.C.T that they could use. The loop hole is that it's not marked as their principle place of residence!!! And...........guess what? They don't want to change the rules regarding all this!!! What a surprise!!! Again it's the little person, that cops it in the neck!!!

I think someone wrote somewhere ...

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

This is not to condemn one side or t'other of politics, but when you vote, whoever you vote for, you'll always be voting for a politician.

Originally Posted by astronut

"What a surprise !!!"

-- Sounds like a Pink Floyd lyric to me!

Time to whip out Animals -- Pink Floyd, "Pigs" and "Sheep" and let it rip at full volume.


Best,

Les D

[Robh (Rob)]

Trevor,

Legislative changes often blindly affect those it shouldn't.
Write to your local MP and, maybe, the newspapers. Sometimes one voice can have an influence and, if you don't change anything, at least you've logged your discontent.


Regards, Rob.

[TrevorW]

Alas SS into super was the only option to reduce taxable income prior to now everything else including SS for a car was not.

Surprising isn't it that the Taxation office deems this to be non taxable.

I think the Govt took it the wrong by trying to stop big earners living in mansions, salary sacrificing into $million super funds and still be eligible for social security payments they affect a lot of others indiscriminately.

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

Legislative changes often blindly affect those it shouldn't.

No this is not true the labour government in particular and traditionally look after the middle income person.

My wife is on a permanant disability and I have been trying to support her by running a business.It allows me to assist her on some occasions as she is not eligable for care. That doesn't really bother me though.

I have seen legislation past by only labour governments relating to pensions trying to find way to get them back to work. My wife would love to work but due to her disabilty no one will have her. She did have a job as a kitchen hand but had an accident over 2 years ago and has not been able to go back.
One of the legislation passed call Private Comany/Family Trust was mean't to weed out cheats. Once the legislation came through I employed 2 staff member and doing quite well. When the legislation was passed all had to go. I made the complaint the governemnt rejected it for the very reason mention directly under.

Unfortunately the typical reaction from the labour goverment was to dig up the whole lawn instead of removing the weed.
It is highly likely the government found a small loop hole with Super and decided it would be too hard to weed out the individuals so they destroyed to park to get out the weeds. What the Super issue will lead to is many more peole upon retirement claiming senior pension.

The most stupid thing about the legislations is that there seems to always be a way around it. It took me probably 5 years though before finding a way to settle down the situation but it cost the job for 5 people over the 5 years. I wonder how Centrelink felt when they encorouaged 5 more people on the dole. (They don't care)

Issues Centrelink really tuggs at the heart strings and got so bad one time I almost felt seperation was the only way to reduce the stress. I love my wife too much for that. We seem to be in a settled period at the moment but we were looking at the possiblity of restarting some super contribution. Now that idea will need to be shelved.

[dpastern (Dave Pastern)]

Yes, just because you're employable (i.e. light duties), doesn't mean an employer will touch you. This again, is why I firmly believe that EVERY single job in the country should be placed by a government agency, getting rid of private employment agencies (which usually screw employees I might add, boy can I tell you a story there), stopping employers from discriminating, and forcing employers to pay you what you are worth. Furthermore, it'll stop the current scenario, where employers put you on for X amount of $ and a certain job description, and once you're employed they keep adding duties to your role without any monetary recompense.

Sorry, but I care little for private business, history has shown that it is little more than slavery still. I fail to see why 99% of the world's wealth should be held by a measly 1%. I don't care who you are, or how "hard" you work. Please note, lots of hours doesn't equate to either a good job, or actually working. Fact: MOST CEOS do bugger all, all they do is delegate. Any idiot can delegate. Let's look at the current US financial crisis - Q.E.D.

Dave

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

It is a shame that you think all business operate like that. My business is now solely run by myself. ever had any more than 2 extra people working for me at any one time and at this situation I now operate by myself. Currently getting over skin cancer issues. My business helps people with disabilities like my wife. The comany structure was a result early in my business before I met my wife.

Don't be too critical about smaller business as they employ 80% of Australia's population. I am still trying to acheive sole dependency for my wife an I and I believe that once i can do that I will be able employ more people. Obviously people like yourself may not be able to get a job with a company like mine if that is how you feel.

The issue with Centrelink was that any profits that I made which I am legally not allowed to use would be classed as an income. The profits were used as cashflow for the business the next financial year to help with staff as well the business in general. So here is an income that that reduced my wifes pension but according the Company law was not allowed to touch. It took 5 years to find a settling point and unable to employ any one else until I can get my wife off the pension.

Fortunatley I can contract a person now to handle work while I being treated for my health.

[marki]

Originally Posted by dpastern

This again, is why I firmly believe that EVERY single job in the country should be placed by a government agency, getting rid of private employment agencies (which usually screw employees I might add, boy can I tell you a story there), stopping employers from discriminating, and forcing employers to pay you what you are worth.
Dave

Dave I am a little confused here. In your first post you lambasted the Gov't for their actions yet in this one you are advocating handing total control to them by making them the sole employer of everyone (am I reading correctly?). I can tell you that not all small business's are run by ruthless greedy tyrants. I used to run my own small business and during lean times payed my employee's out of my own savings to make sure they still had a job. When times were good I always payed higher rates than I was required to by awards etc and did my best to keep us all in work. I know I am not alone in this.

Mark

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

I used to run my own small business and during lean times payed my employee's out of my own savings to make sure they still had a job

I understand what you mean, I too did the same. Unfortunately there are some people out there that think all business's are Tyrant and unfortunately they will rarely be swayed until they feel the experience of running a small business.

I can be confused though as the media love to report on bad business's big and small but raely here anything on the contrary leading to false impressions. To some people maybe they don't want to buy there astronomy gear.

[TrevorW]

Agreed not all business people are out to screw their employees as in all situations the actions of a minority should not be construed to represent the majority.

My point here is they ie: the Govt don't see the forest because of the trees

not all situations are the same and where do you draw the line they become ardently inflexible and unreasonable because the are hindered by stringent policy

someone should draw the curtains

I'm not out to rip off the system all I'm trying to do ids look for a fair go why change policy in such a way as to affect all when a small portion are the rorters

eg: if you contribute more than $200 p/fn into super as SS and you pre taxable income exceeds $60000 per annum then if your taxable income is between $60000-80000 pa 50% of this amount will be deemed as taxable income and between $80000-100000 75% as so forth

lateral thinking

[Robh (Rob)]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

lateral thinking

Sadly, I have trouble associating the concept with party politics!

Rob

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

Yes everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But you seem inherently unhappy in your current position. Why not leave and find something more suitable?

When I was an employee I was always changing from one job to another when my employee started to muck about. A couple of jobs I stuck with for quite a while because they were really good to me. I still remember those days very well and I treat my employees with the repect that I wanted when I was a staffer. If you are good enough worker and well experienced it is not hard to find technical positions.

Better still, why not bite the bullet and start your own small business.

He already has the working of a small business.
http://www.macro-images.com/buy.html

[BerrieK]

Was going to avoid getting into this conversation but let me assure you that it is not only in the private sector that you face do more for less, or do the job of more than one person for the same money.

Let me just say that the public health system is stuffed (in my humble opinion) and that staff shortages, staff freezes, and the expectation that the level and availability of health care remains the same or improves, with less money to sustain it, is having a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of its (public) employees.

Problems such as these are universal at present, both private and public (government) employees are suffering. Not to mention the employers who are hurting somewhat simultaneously.


Kerrie

ps. I agree that it is unjust that in order to stop the wealthy from rorting the system the people who need the system to work are the ones who ultimately suffer in some political decision making processes.

[TrevorW]

I think guys we are getting a bit off track

My gripes with Centrelink

Cheers

[BerrieK]

Sorry

Kerrie