Unintended consequences of Labor's Cash Grab, page-2

First 2 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
JonnoH

16,319 Posts.

5

14/12/18

17:21

Post #: 36864393
Share

Originally posted by picastoc ↑

The Liberal government suggested in March that 97% of people who get the franking credit refunds already (1.17m people) have a taxable income below $87,000 and more than half of them have taxable income below the tax-free threshold.

Yet B.S. thinks he is targeting only the super rich. Not so.

The super wealthy (those with significantly more than $1.6 million in super assets), since the introduction of the $1.6 million transfer balance cap on super pay 15% tax on investment earnings and capital gains (if the asset was held less than 12 months or 10% if held more than 12 months) and as such will be able to utilise the benefit of franking credits to offset that tax.

In many cases, for the super wealthy, the introduction of the $1.6 million transfer balance cap and the removal of cash refunds of franking credits ends up being a nil sum game - no refund, but no tax payable, because the 30% company credits are offset by the 15% super tax. In other words, the franking credits negate tax on earnings above the $1.6 million. The wealthy still get the use of the imputation credits whereas those with less than $1.6 million in super, on the other hand, simply lose the tax refunds altogether.

PROBABLY WON'T EVEN GET UP AT ALL. TOO MANY PEOPLE SEE THAT THE POLICY IS POORLY TARGETED.

Expand

What is the unintended consequence?

The intended consequence is that no refunds will be given to anyone who doesn't pay any tax.

The 50+BILLION savings to the budget is AFTER factoring in the 1.6mill cap. It would have been an even bigger saving had the 1.6 mill cap not been factored in.

Nothing unintended about that at all.

unintended consequences - rofl
1 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply