Taxpayers giving the rich a cheap ride: survey

Date
    January 19, 2010


Most Australians believe high-income earners do not pay enough tax, and nearly all think low- and middle-income earners pay too much, according to a survey by the progressive think tank Per Capita.     :-?

As the Federal Government considers the recommendations of a comprehensive review of the tax system by the Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry, the survey findings suggest a clampdown on tax lurks for high-income earners and or tax cuts at the lower end would be popular with voters.

Support for a more progressive tax system was found to hold across all age groups, income brackets, education levels and political groups. Even high-income earners said their peers paid too little tax, although hardly any would admit that they personally paid too little tax.

''The unequivocal finding is that respondents believe the tax system favours wealthy taxpayers at the expense of lower-income ones. In short, Australians want a more progressive tax system,'' the survey's authors conclude.


An overwhelming majority of the 1000 people surveyed also wanted the tax system to be made simpler. Given a choice of only one reform, people's preferred option would be to centralise federal, state and local taxes (34 per cent agree). This was followed by reducing the number of taxes (24 per cent), a simplification of deductions, rebates and exemptions (20 per cent) and a streamlining of personal tax returns (13 per cent).

The Federal Government's strategy of running a budget deficit to stimulate the economy out of recession was also found to have strong support, with 61 per cent agreeing. Only 22 per cent supported debt reduction over debt-funded stimulus.

But while respondents wanted this debt paid off over the economic cycle, 90 per cent said they wanted more money spent on health and 82 per cent wanted more for education, highlighting the difficult political task for the Government in reining in spending in an election year.

The co-author of the survey and executive director of Per Capita, David Hetherington, said high-income earners had access to a range of deductions and concessions that reduced the amount of tax they paid. Obvious targets for reform were superannuation salary sacrificing - where a flat rate of only 15 per cent is paid on voluntary contributions - golden handshakes for executives and fringe benefit tax.

''These things tend not to be available to lower-income earners,'' Mr Hetherington said.

The ideal approach would be to abolish such deductions to broaden the base on which taxes could be collected and then reduce the overall rates of tax paid, particularly at the low income end. While also benefiting those up the income scale, this would deliver the biggest proportional cuts to lower-income earners.

Of those surveyed, 53 per cent said high-income earners paid too little tax, while 95 per cent said low- and middle-income earners paid too much tax.     ;)



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/taxpayers-giving-the-rich-a-cheap-ride-survey-20100117-meeb.html#ixzz2GTnDCvQy

Well it would seem that most Australians, think that high income earners don't pay enough tax.     :-?   

To get back to surpluses we need to reinstate Howards record taxation and transfer govt debt back to record household debt..I know the Libbos wont mind  ;D

Using even a smidgen of the critical thinking that MOTR waves around can be used to debunk this 'study'.

when it comes to the question of how much tax is paid everyone has an opinion on their own circumstances. 'they' of course pay too much tax and those they envy (higher income earners) pay too little. the largest tax paying group are middle-income earners ergo the 'majority' think the minority pay too little tax.

It is an idiotic study that will always get the same answer.

wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 7:48am:

Taxpayers giving the rich a cheap ride: survey Date     January 19, 2010 Most Australians believe high-income earners do not pay enough tax, and nearly all think low- and middle-income earners pay too much, according to a survey by the progressive think tank Per Capita.     :-? As the Federal Government considers the recommendations of a comprehensive review of the tax system by the Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry, the survey findings suggest a clampdown on tax lurks for high-income earners and or tax cuts at the lower end would be popular with voters. Support for a more progressive tax system was found to hold across all age groups, income brackets, education levels and political groups. Even high-income earners said their peers paid too little tax, although hardly any would admit that they personally paid too little tax. ''The unequivocal finding is that respondents believe the tax system favours wealthy taxpayers at the expense of lower-income ones. In short, Australians want a more progressive tax system,'' the survey's authors conclude. An overwhelming majority of the 1000 people surveyed also wanted the tax system to be made simpler. Given a choice of only one reform, people's preferred option would be to centralise federal, state and local taxes (34 per cent agree). This was followed by reducing the number of taxes (24 per cent), a simplification of deductions, rebates and exemptions (20 per cent) and a streamlining of personal tax returns (13 per cent). The Federal Government's strategy of running a budget deficit to stimulate the economy out of recession was also found to have strong support, with 61 per cent agreeing. Only 22 per cent supported debt reduction over debt-funded stimulus. But while respondents wanted this debt paid off over the economic cycle, 90 per cent said they wanted more money spent on health and 82 per cent wanted more for education, highlighting the difficult political task for the Government in reining in spending in an election year. The co-author of the survey and executive director of Per Capita, David Hetherington, said high-income earners had access to a range of deductions and concessions that reduced the amount of tax they paid. Obvious targets for reform were superannuation salary sacrificing - where a flat rate of only 15 per cent is paid on voluntary contributions - golden handshakes for executives and fringe benefit tax. ''These things tend not to be available to lower-income earners,'' Mr Hetherington said. The ideal approach would be to abolish such deductions to broaden the base on which taxes could be collected and then reduce the overall rates of tax paid, particularly at the low income end. While also benefiting those up the income scale, this would deliver the biggest proportional cuts to lower-income earners. Of those surveyed, 53 per cent said high-income earners paid too little tax, while 95 per cent said low- and middle-income earners paid too much tax.     ;) Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/taxpayers-giving-the-rich-a-cheap-ride-survey-20100117-meeb.html#ixzz2GTnDCvQy

and the articl is THREE YEARS OLD... getting desperate, dole-bludger?

No they don't. Billionaires should pay 100% tax.

Do High Income Earners Pay Enough Tax,

I would think that many do.

However I think that we all know that many don't.

Some do but many dont..just look at Gina Bush Pig...she refused to give her kids their inheritance because they would have to start paying tax on the income produced from it...like normal people  :D

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 7:59am:

Using even a smidgen of the critical thinking that MOTR waves around can be used to debunk this 'study'. when it comes to the question of how much tax is paid everyone has an opinion on their own circumstances. 'they' of course pay too much tax and those they envy (higher income earners) pay too little. the largest tax paying group are middle-income earners ergo the 'majority' think the minority pay too little tax. It is an idiotic study that will always get the same answer.

GM if you had bothered to read the article you would find that high income earners believe the wealthy (excepting the self, of course) pay too little tax.

Does that mean you consider the rich envy the wealthy?

Peter Freedman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 9:40am:

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 7:59am: Using even a smidgen of the critical thinking that MOTR waves around can be used to debunk this 'study'. when it comes to the question of how much tax is paid everyone has an opinion on their own circumstances. 'they' of course pay too much tax and those they envy (higher income earners) pay too little. the largest tax paying group are middle-income earners ergo the 'majority' think the minority pay too little tax. It is an idiotic study that will always get the same answer. GM if you had bothered to read the article you would find that high income earners believe the wealthy (excepting the self, of course) pay too little tax. Does that mean you consider the rich envy the wealthy?

Longys one of those Libbos on here that thinks by praising and defending the wealthy at every turn that it makes him one of them.
The simple fact is the wealthy in this country dont all vote Liberal and they dont all dodge tax and they dont all think the taxpayers should subsidise their lifestyles by taking money from the poor despite the Libbo wanna bes claiming its class war fare to even discuss it.
The wanna bes on here only know of the wealthy through 30 second media sound bites but it would surprise them to know the vast majority of this countries wealthy go about their business without ever going near a news camera or radio microphone.

Well, no, they don't pay enough tax!

However, they will not be alone there, as a great deal more, will be required of much fewer, in the years to come.

And, it certainly should not come down to just Tax Rates, the whole system needs to be revamped, to get rid of many tax loopholes, thru which Mack trucks are regularly driven!

AND, it's not just about Revenue, it's also about Expenditure & how we intend to drive Productivity, to allow for the "new norms" in Demographics & Energy! 

I drove through Hunters Hill Sydney yesterday ( one of the most exclusive places in Australia) and I couldn't help feel ripped off. The beautiful houses with harbour views, the amenities, the everything. A healthy amount of their money comes from the taxpayer  too. 25 minutes away and it's  spray paint and decay. The rich are self servers. Just like in medieval times, the castle takes from the people living around it . Hopefully things will change one day.

Enough tax for what? 

What good is it increasing taxation, when it's used ridiculously inefficiently and haphazardly anyway?  You could increase the tax take 1000% and it still wouldn't be "enough".

adelcrow wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 7:51am:

To get back to surpluses we need to reinstate Howards record taxation and transfer govt debt back to record household debt..I know the Libbos wont mind  ;D

Then you won't mind giving us the exact policies under Howard that increased tax but Rudd/Gillard abolished

I earn around $800 gross a week and pay $200 tax. I doubt the rich are paying 20% tax on their net income.

It's interesting to note:

(1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich

(2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays

The answer is simple:

reduce all public servant pay by between 10 & 25% - whatever is required -
to have enough money to pay back all Labor debts & pay proper social security.

No need for more taxes.


No politician has the guts to do the obvious.

Great fortunes have gone into the accounts of people who frankly do not have the intellectual weight to use it productively.  These people have the western world in the grip of a global financial crises which has been the result of their greed and corruption.  Taxation is our only road out of this as well as getting people back into secure, stable safe employment.  They have talked about education as a cure all for decades, but an educated Bogun is still a Bogan.  Juluia Gillard, and Tony Abbott lack the character and intelligence for power and using it with vision and discernment for the good of all and for the future generations...They should be doing menial clerical work in the public service.

The rich are non productive...end of story, taxation is more than justified...

Growing concentration of wealth is a clear mismanagement of resource, with power, wealth and influence comes great responsibility...

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 12:12pm:

It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays

Did you know that tax was first introduced to tax the rich only ?

I read that in one of those wealth creation books.

Somehow greed incorporated turned it around to aim it at the poor and the rest is history. Now the poor are trying to reclaim lost ground and again greed incorporated is resisting :(

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 12:12pm:

It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays

Just because you fall into that category doesn't mean anyone else does

SOB

Bobby. wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 12:19pm:

The answer is simple: reduce all public servant pay by between 10 & 25% - whatever is required - to have enough money to pay back all Labor debts & pay proper social security. No need for more taxes. No politician has the guts to do the obvious.

WTF? I replied to this an hour ago - wheres my post?

I said something about how only the working poor of the public servants would have their wages cut (road workers and gardeners etc) but the high paid ones up in the offices in newmans building would keep their pay.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 1:27pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Just because you fall into that category doesn't mean anyone else does SOB

WTF are you talking about SOB

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 1:11pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Did you know that tax was first introduced to tax the rich only ? I read that in one of those wealth creation books. Somehow greed incorporated turned it around to aim it at the poor and the rest is history. Now the poor are trying to reclaim lost ground and again greed incorporated is resisting :(

And now they want more

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 1:42pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 1:27pm: Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Just because you fall into that category doesn't mean anyone else does SOB WTF are you talking about SOB

I mean most ppl here do have an idea how much tax the rich pay, Just because you dont doesnt mean nobody else does.

SOB

I pay enough income tax per f/n to fund two welfare recipients.... add to that gst and other hidden taxes and I'm paying a sh!t loads... don't want to work out what percentage of my income goes in taxes and levies... that would upset me.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 1:47pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 1:42pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 1:27pm: Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Just because you fall into that category doesn't mean anyone else does SOB WTF are you talking about SOB I mean most ppl here do have an idea how much tax the rich pay, Just because you dont doesnt mean nobody else does. SOB

If you do - then provide evidence of it

It's interesting that the French supreme court has just thrown out the new socialist government's plan for a 75% tax on the wealthy.
You can put taxes up as much as you like but you will only get the upper middle income people, not the wealthy. Maybe that would satisfy the lefties.
The wealthy are always two steps ahead of the tax man.
Does anyone remember Kerry Packer sitting in front of a Senate committee and telling them that anyone who pays more tax than he has to is a mug.

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 12:06pm:

I earn around $800 gross a week and pay $200 tax. I doubt the rich are paying 20% tax on their net income.

you are more ignorant than I expected. Look up the ATO tax scales. that is what they pay which is a great deal more than you do both in dollar terms and in percentage terms.

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:18pm:

It's interesting that the French supreme court has just thrown out the new socialist government's plan for a 75% tax on the wealthy. You can put taxes up as much as you like but you will only get the upper middle income people, not the wealthy. Maybe that would satisfy the lefties. The wealthy are always two steps ahead of the tax man. Does anyone remember Kerry Packer sitting in front of a Senate committee and telling them that anyone who pays more tax than he has to is a mug.

Too right!

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 1:11pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Did you know that tax was first introduced to tax the rich only ? I read that in one of those wealth creation books. Somehow greed incorporated turned it around to aim it at the poor and the rest is history. Now the poor are trying to reclaim lost ground and again greed incorporated is resisting :(

except that todays poor would be classified as rich by those standards.  todays poor has housing food medical care education and govt help. back in those days the govt did none of that.

According to the ATO tax calculator, the tax to be withheld from a gross weekly of $800 is $109.

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:24pm:

According to the ATO tax calculator, the tax to be withheld from a gross weekly of $800 is $109.

That's not what the pay slip in front of me says. Dated 13th of sept 2012 I earnt $885.55 gross  (which is a big pay for me) I payed $215.00 tax.

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:20pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 1:11pm: Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Did you know that tax was first introduced to tax the rich only ? I read that in one of those wealth creation books. Somehow greed incorporated turned it around to aim it at the poor and the rest is history. Now the poor are trying to reclaim lost ground and again greed incorporated is resisting :( except that todays poor would be classified as rich by those standards.  todays poor has housing food medical care education and govt help. back in those days the govt did none of that.

Does it matter what yesterday's standards were?

Today, the poor still can't get dental treatment or good quality food to prolong health and wellbeing. They are homeless and cold in winter.


Many homeless people are homeless because they can't get mental health care and have been neglected by the government.

You live in dreamland longy.

Then you haven't quoted your TFN, you're being dunned for child support or your boss is a crook!

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:34pm:

Then you haven't quoted your TFN, you're being dunned for child support or your boss is a crook!

Or you are wrong. I work for startrack express who are owned by qantas.  I doubt people would be whinging if they were being taxed $100 and earning $800.

http://www.ato.gov.au/menulink.aspx?42587

Do the math!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:33pm:

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 2:20pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 1:11pm: Maqqa wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 12:12pm: It's interesting to note: (1) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough tax are the ones not earning enough to be classified as rich (2) The ones who thinks the rich are not paying enough taxes probably don't know how much tax the rich pays Did you know that tax was first introduced to tax the rich only ? I read that in one of those wealth creation books. Somehow greed incorporated turned it around to aim it at the poor and the rest is history. Now the poor are trying to reclaim lost ground and again greed incorporated is resisting :( except that todays poor would be classified as rich by those standards.  todays poor has housing food medical care education and govt help. back in those days the govt did none of that. Does it matter what yesterday's standards were? Today, the poor still can't get dental treatment or good quality food to prolong health and wellbeing. They are homeless and cold in winter. Many homeless people are homeless because they can't get mental health care and have been neglected by the government. You live in dreamland longy.

So aborigines aren't poor then?

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:38pm:

http://www.ato.gov.au/menulink.aspx?42587 Do the math!

How much tax do you pay?

Where do you get off? That's my business. But I sure as hell know what I should be paying . . .as little as possible!

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:45pm:

Where do you get off? That's my business. But I sure as hell know what I should be paying . . .as little as possible!

You getting a bit touchy because I proved you wrong?

You haven't even looked it up have you . . .too difficult?
No seriously, unless there is something you haven't already disclosed (and I can't imagine why you would want to disclose your private business), then there is something wrong with your figures.
For a start you said $800, then you said $885 wasit?

Mate you reckon that a person earning $800 gross is paying $109 tax. I told my missus is she just laughed. You are joking aren't you?

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:59pm:

Mate you reckon that a person earning $800 gross is paying $109 tax. I told my missus is she just laughed. You are joking aren't you?

The following rates for 2012-13 apply from 1 July 2012.
Taxable income
Tax on this income
0 - $18,200
Nil
$18,201 - $37,000
19c for each $1 over $18,200
$37,001 - $80,000
$3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000
$80,001 - $180,000
$17,547 plus 37c for each $1 over $80,000
$180,001 and over
$54,547 plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000
The above rates do not include the Medicare levy of 1.5% (see Guide to Med

Quote:

Do High Income Earners Pay Enough Tax,

The answer to this question is that they pay far more than a fair share.

25% of people pay 65% + of total tax.

No matter how you look at it that is a R A W deal. :(

The problem is that this 25% are generally silent.  They are resigned to being ripped off by both major parties.  All the bleating about taxation comes from the bottom 75%... ::)

This is the reality lefties.  Read it and stop your whinging.  You comrades are the slave masters, you comrades control the electorate........for the time being anyway. :(



http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:59pm:

Mate you reckon that a person earning $800 gross is paying $109 tax. I told my missus is she just laughed. You are joking aren't you?

for goodness sake... LOOK UP THE ATO SITE and work it out for yourself. if you are paying more than that then you are obviously not claiming something you either arent entitled to (like the $6000/$18000 threshold) or something else.

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:05pm:

Quote: Do High Income Earners Pay Enough Tax, The answer to this question is that they pay far more than a fair share. 25% of people pay 65% + of total tax. No matter how you look at it that is a R A W deal. :( The problem is that this 25% are generally silent.  They are resigned to being ripped off by both major parties.  All the bleating about taxation comes from the bottom 75%... ::) This is the reality lefties.  Read it and stop your whinging.  You comrades are the slave masters, you comrades control the electorate........for the time being anyway. :( http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2012/05/Lions-share-2009-10.jpg

a basic principle of 'fairness' is equality. in taxation matters that means
1) everyone pays the same dollar amount of tax
2) everyone pays the same percentage amount of tax

thats called fairness.

but no, to be GENEROUS (ie more than fair) we adopted progressive taxation rates where low earners pay very little either in dolar terms or percentage terms and higher earners pay more. The high earners get the same roads, the same schools and the same govt services as the poor and yet are asked to pay 8-100 times as much. it is an act of generosity. But the response from you lot is....

IT IS NOT ENOUGH

greedy buggers. work harder, study harder. take more risks.

$18,201 - $37,000
19c for each $1 over $18,200
 

So even the second lowest income earning bracket is paying nearly 20% of each dollar they earnt. Surely they are dire need of that 20%. So that's just under $100 tax for  a $500 pay.

The problem with the wealthy in Australia is not that they are rich, its that they are unproductively rich....its unearned prize money, bonuses and corporate welfare wealth....Taxation on the New Bogan Rich is entirely justifiable.... :) :)

Am just reading Who Wants to be a Billionaire by Paul Barry, a biography of James Packer.

It points out that James' father, the late, unlamented potty mouthed bully, Kerry Packer, paid a lower rate of tax than his gardener.

In NZ, mega wealthy property developer and dabbler in politics, Bob Jones, once proudly boasted the only tax he paid was GST.

I assume Swag and his fellow right wingers would applaud.

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

$18,201 - $37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200   So even the second lowest income earning bracket is paying nearly 20% of each dollar they earnt. Surely they are dire need of that 20%. So that's just under $100 tax for  a $500 pay.

805.00
111.00
231.00
806.00
111.00
231.00
807.00
111.00
232.00
808.00
112.00
232.00
809.00
112.00
232.00
810.00
112.00
233.00
811.00
113.00
233.00
812.00
113.00
233.00
813.00
114.00
234.00
814.00
114.00
234.00
815.00
114.00
234.00
816.00
115.00
235.00
817.00
115.00
235.00
818.00
115.00
235.00
819.00
116.00
236.00
820.00
116.00
236.00
821.00
116.00
236.00
822.00
117.00
237.00
823.00
117.00
237.00
824.00
117.00
238.00
825.00
118.00
238.00
826.00
118.00
238.00
827.00
118.00
239.00
828.00
119.00
239.00
829.00
119.00
239.00
830.00
119.00
240.00
831.00
120.00
240.00
832.00
120.00
240.00
833.00
120.00
241.00
834.00
121.00
241.00
835.00
121.00
241.00
836.00
121.00
242.00
837.00
122.00
242.00
838.00
122.00
242.00
839.00
122.00
243.00
840.00
123.00
243.00
841.00
123.00
243.00
842.00
123.00
244.00
843.00
124.00
244.00
844.00
124.00
244.00
845.00
124.00
245.00
846.00
125.00
245.00
847.00
125.00
245.00
848.00
126.00
246.00
849.00
126.00    TWO DIFFERENT RATES  TAX FEE AND TAX
246.00
850.00
126.00

Will anybody out there please help me. These people believe that people earning $800 gross get taxed $100. I've got my pay slip right here and you are $100 off. The figures you posted before fred  proved this BS download wrong. You richos just can't handle the truth that you earn  more money than you need and your tax doesn't affect you standard of living. Poorer people it affects their families tremendously.

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:26pm:

Will anybody out there please help me. These people believe that people earning $800 gross get taxed $100. I've got my pay slip right here and you are $100 off. The figures you posted before fred  proved this BS download wrong. You richos just can't handle the truth that you earn  more money than you need and your tax doesn't affect you standard of living. Poorer people it affects their families tremendously.

499.00
35.00
126.00
500.00
35.00
126.00
501.00
35.00
127.00
502.00
36.00                      TWO FIGURES
                                   ONE IS THE TAX FREE               THRESHOLD  AND THE OTHERS NOT
127.00
503.00
36.00
128.00

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

$18,201 - $37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200   So even the second lowest income earning bracket is paying nearly 20% of each dollar they earnt. Surely they are dire need of that 20%. So that's just under $100 tax for  a $500 pay.

The whol maths thing seems to have you greatly confused....

http://calculators.ato.gov.au/scripts/asp/simpletaxcalc/main.asp

go there and it will tell you your tax amount.

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:26pm:

Will anybody out there please help me. These people believe that people earning $800 gross get taxed $100. I've got my pay slip right here and you are $100 off. The figures you posted before fred  proved this BS download wrong. You richos just can't handle the truth that you earn  more money than you need and your tax doesn't affect you standard of living. Poorer people it affects their families tremendously.

DAVE  i have sent you a P MESSAGE

we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :)

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:42pm:

we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :)

like you 400kg rotund appearance that children run from in fear and small objects orbit?

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:42pm: we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :) like you 400kg rotund appearance that children run from in fear and small objects orbit?

careful...your Mullet is moving dumb 'rse... :)

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:48pm:

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:46pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:42pm: we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :) like you 400kg rotund appearance that children run from in fear and small objects orbit? careful...your Mullet is moving dumb 'rse... :)

so now that you have been released from your latest mandatory detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure your new belief is that world's ills are mullets and bogans? last time before that was Nazis and before that athiests and Celts and a million others.

You are insane and in this case you DO have the certificate to prove it.

Peter Freedman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:15pm:

Am just reading Who Wants to be a Billionaire by Paul Barry, a biography of James Packer. It points out that James' father, the late, unlamented potty mouthed bully, Kerry Packer, paid a lower rate of tax than his gardener. In NZ, mega wealthy property developer and dabbler in politics, Bob Jones, once proudly boasted the only tax he paid was GST. I assume Swag and his fellow right wingers would applaud.

I've heard that hearsay about K Packer before.  Even if it's fair dinkum you have to look at it laterally.

I have no idea how many shares K Packer owned in his corporate empire however every dollar of dividend paid to him (and others) would have attracted 30% company tax.

I'd hasten to bet that that would add up to a sizable chunk of tax revenue for the Govt pork barrel.... ;)

It's also interesting that you bring up the GST in such a context.  Your lefty comrades here believe (mistakenly) that the GST is not an effective tax and that it doesn't tax the black economy / tax avoiders? :)

I've looked at it laterally, even tried standing on my head. It didn't work.

Kerry Packer's business interests were controlled by trusts registered in the Bahamas. I doubt Bahamian trusts pay tax in Australia.

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 3:51pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:48pm: gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:46pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:42pm: we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :) like you 400kg rotund appearance that children run from in fear and small objects orbit? careful...your Mullet is moving dumb 'rse... :) so now that you have been released from your latest mandatory detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure your new belief is that world's ills are mullets and bogans? last time before that was Nazis and before that athiests and Celts and a million others. You are insane and in this case you DO have the certificate to prove it.

Its no exaggeration, you are an ignorant stupid Bogan and your Mullet is showing, you have all of the classic symptoms of the narrow minded Bogan species and whats more you are proud.... ;D

I have a great work ethic, I am a left wing pacifist and I am on welfare for life and I can tell you this nations economy is unproductive because it is run by and for dumb 'rse Bogans and they are all looking for the next spin on the Pokies to get rich quick.... :)

You cant have a productive economy without a stroing manufacturing base

You cant run an economy based on prize money for Bogans playing professional sport...

You cant run a productive economy with a defense budget... :)

Big Dave wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 2:32pm:

hadrian_now wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 2:24pm: According to the ATO tax calculator, the tax to be withheld from a gross weekly of $800 is $109. That's not what the pay slip in front of me says. Dated 13th of sept 2012 I earnt $885.55 gross  (which is a big pay for me) I payed $215.00 tax.

Dave,
I suggest you have a chat, with whoever makes up your pay.

If you pay $100 per week in tax for $800 income p/week, which is $41,600 PA, BUT pay $215 P/W for an income of $885 P/W, which is $46,020, that means you pay an additional $5,980 P/A on the extra income of $4,420 AND clearly that is incorrect! 

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 4:25pm:

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:51pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:48pm: gold_medal wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:46pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 3:42pm: we clearly have an unproductive distribution in wealth so while we have to rip right into the rich with taxation - we have to tackle how wealth is being channeled - no more prize money and professional sports for instance...., more of an emphasis on intelligence, insight and wisdom rather than physical appearance.... :) like you 400kg rotund appearance that children run from in fear and small objects orbit? careful...your Mullet is moving dumb 'rse... :) so now that you have been released from your latest mandatory detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure your new belief is that world's ills are mullets and bogans? last time before that was Nazis and before that athiests and Celts and a million others. You are insane and in this case you DO have the certificate to prove it. Its no exaggeration, you are an ignorant stupid Bogan and your Mullet is showing, you have all of the classic symptoms of the narrow minded Bogan species and whats more you are proud.... ;D

Did a bogan fart in your face or something whitey? It's always bogan bogan bogan. Has a bogan ever done anything to you except being poor, white and poorly educated.

Peter Freedman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 4:23pm:

I've looked at it laterally, even tried standing on my head. It didn't work. Kerry Packer's business interests were controlled by trusts registered in the Bahamas. I doubt Bahamian trusts pay tax in Australia.

I haven't seen his tax returns have you?

Swagman wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 5:43pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 4:23pm: I've looked at it laterally, even tried standing on my head. It didn't work. Kerry Packer's business interests were controlled by trusts registered in the Bahamas. I doubt Bahamian trusts pay tax in Australia. I haven't seen his tax returns have you?

Last time I heard he paid less tax than the lady cleaning his office.
But he did leave a son that hated his guts so even his own family thought very little of him.

The Government gives billions of dollars from productive sectors to non productive bogans  and all they have to do is be born with the ability to play football or be wags..nothing else....they also allow them to supplement that income with gambling revue...no value added production takes place in this transfer, no industries created, no jobs, its just a strait up unproductive parasitic wealth transference...

corporate_whitey wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 6:12pm:

The Government gives billions of dollars from productive sectors to non productive bogans  and all they have to do is be born with the ability to play football or be wags..nothing else....they also allow them to supplement that income with gambling revue...no value added production takes place in this transfer, no industries created, no jobs, its just a strait up unproductive parasitic wealth transference...

  Just like the aborigines.

The high income earners (the Rich) do pay little tax - this is the way of the world, they can move capital around and avoid tax. Nobody can really do anything about this.

The problem in Australia you have from my own personal experience is the higher middle incomes pay oppressive amounts of tax compared to the rest of the world.

All this talk I have seen in the past by Swan (and repeated on here by the Labor parrots who have near on zero understanding of economics and finance) that there has been tax cuts is simply mis-leading.

Taxes have actually been cut by just $3 for middle incomes.
Also the middle and upper tax bands have been RAISED for the next coming years and people will end up paying more tax than before on salaries of $180k.

Australia is high taxing. For the same job and salary in Australia compared to me in the USA, the Aussie worker will pay almost $10k more in tax than I do.

People may say they get additional services for that. Well you don't think you can get your own services for $10k per year!!!

Australia is not a good place for the middle income family - which I guess is why there is so much cost of living pressure.

You are taxed more and you pay more for everyday goods and services. Not ideal.

The Rich escape taxes they always do.
The middle incomes though get caught and its not right.

180k is not middle income.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 5:44am:

180k is not middle income. SOB

andrei is fairly correct.
most of the very rich pay very little.
$180 k is a level where many of the most productive people in the economy operate.
your best IT people, the cream of tradesmen, engineers, your best farmers, financial services workers, many small business owners will spend quite a lot of time in this bracket.

at 47 % tax, you are putting them on 1/2 wages and many just ease up . thi may be a good thing for them persoanlly. some will get into the very destructive and economy distorting games.....negative gearing :(, leverage in shares :(
investing off shore :(, private super(expensive and removing productive assets out of business investment and having them "mpth balled" :(.

so whilst no one is starving on $180 k, by exclusively attacking them, the public really shoot themselves in the foot.
many of our brightest science, medical, business people up root and head of to dubai, hong kong , singapore, where they are welcomed with open arms.

For information purposes -

http://memoricardo.wordpress.com/2012/02/23/69170-australias-average-wage/

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0/

I would suggest that something around $70,000 is closer to the average OR Mid range of annual earnings.

Of course someone on $180k is not in the middle.  If someone is on that, they are a HIGH income earner.   

wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 11:43am:

Of course someone on $180k is not in the middle.  If someone is on that, they are a HIGH income earner.

What if they have 25 kids?

aquascoot wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 6:06am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:44am: 180k is not middle income. SOB andrei is fairly correct. most of the very rich pay very little. $180 k is a level where many of the most productive people in the economy operate. your best IT people, the cream of tradesmen, engineers, your best farmers, financial services workers, many small business owners will spend quite a lot of time in this bracket. at 47 % tax, you are putting them on 1/2 wages and many just ease up . thi may be a good thing for them persoanlly. some will get into the very destructive and economy distorting games.....negative gearing :(, leverage in shares :( investing off shore :(, private super(expensive and removing productive assets out of business investment and having them "mpth balled" :(. so whilst no one is starving on $180 k, by exclusively attacking them, the public really shoot themselves in the foot. many of our brightest science, medical, business people up root and head of to dubai, hong kong , singapore, where they are welcomed with open arms.

I'd say you spend quite a bit of time dreaming ... I was a tradie for many yrs, didn't know a single one that made $180 000 .... sure, there were building companies that make that, but none of the tradies working for them ever did ... I think your figures are well off ...

John Smith wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 1:15pm:

aquascoot wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 6:06am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:44am: 180k is not middle income. SOB andrei is fairly correct. most of the very rich pay very little. $180 k is a level where many of the most productive people in the economy operate. your best IT people, the cream of tradesmen, engineers, your best farmers, financial services workers, many small business owners will spend quite a lot of time in this bracket. at 47 % tax, you are putting them on 1/2 wages and many just ease up . thi may be a good thing for them persoanlly. some will get into the very destructive and economy distorting games.....negative gearing :(, leverage in shares :( investing off shore :(, private super(expensive and removing productive assets out of business investment and having them "mpth balled" :(. so whilst no one is starving on $180 k, by exclusively attacking them, the public really shoot themselves in the foot. many of our brightest science, medical, business people up root and head of to dubai, hong kong , singapore, where they are welcomed with open arms. I'd say you spend quite a bit of time dreaming ... I was a tradie for many yrs, didn't know a single one that made $180 000 .... sure, there were building companies that make that, but none of the tradies working for them ever did ... I think your figures are well off ...

john , its a matter of skills (and increasingly this is where the  prosperity will have to come from.

sure, your right, the average light bulb changing sparkie or washer changing plumber is on $50k

but heres a few that may interest you.
these are just ones i know.

a welder who also got a scuba ticket and learnt how to do underwater welds showed me his tax return for working on mining projects.  $650 k.

now he could and may go anywhere in the world. mite lose him if he feels that the numpties in OZ resent him.

a seismic IT analyst on a seimic mapping ship can earn over $500 k.
again, plenty of work for these guys OS if we tell them they are selfish pricks for earning so much.

a mine management engineer on a coalfield in qld can easily earn 400 k.

which country produces the most coal,  not oz,  indonesia,  easy trip to go work there.

which country produces the most iron ore, not us sweden.
good lifestyle there.

btw, sweden recently moved or is moving a town of 30,000 people to mine the biggest iron ore mountian in the world.

no outrage, no green , red, black tape.  the people want to be prosperous.

our miners want to dig up some outback piece of crap land and need to negotiate with half the government agencies in oz.

we can continue to shoot ourselves in the foot.
we can continue to see the brain drain.

BTW a couple more for you.

australias barista of the year has moved his operation to seoul
1/2 the job vacancy ads, in medical mags, for surgeons and registered nurses are for tax free jobs in the emirates or saudi.

and people wonder about waiting lists.

the world job market is global. our best financial and business people will be head hunted.

sure the mine worker who holds up the stop go sign or puts out the slippery when wet signs in the dunny at bhp isnt going anywhere. but once you lose your best mining technical people, your best docs and nurse, your best medical researchers . all becuase you thought it was a good idea to kcik them in the guts for earning more (the definition of envy)
you will be left with an economy of pawnbrokers and tattoo parlours. 

;) ;) ;)

Swagman wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 12:00pm:

wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 11:43am: Of course someone on $180k is not in the middle.  If someone is on that, they are a HIGH income earner.    What if they have 25 kids?

Not many ppl have 25 kids and i bet you cant name 1 rich family with that many. Even if you could they wouldn't be in hardship @ 180k.

SOB

Who are timbo and samthecat?

SOB

aquascoot wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 7:19am:

John Smith wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:15pm: aquascoot wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 6:06am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:44am: 180k is not middle income. SOB andrei is fairly correct. most of the very rich pay very little. $180 k is a level where many of the most productive people in the economy operate. your best IT people, the cream of tradesmen, engineers, your best farmers, financial services workers, many small business owners will spend quite a lot of time in this bracket. at 47 % tax, you are putting them on 1/2 wages and many just ease up . thi may be a good thing for them persoanlly. some will get into the very destructive and economy distorting games.....negative gearing :(, leverage in shares :( investing off shore :(, private super(expensive and removing productive assets out of business investment and having them "mpth balled" :(. so whilst no one is starving on $180 k, by exclusively attacking them, the public really shoot themselves in the foot. many of our brightest science, medical, business people up root and head of to dubai, hong kong , singapore, where they are welcomed with open arms. I'd say you spend quite a bit of time dreaming ... I was a tradie for many yrs, didn't know a single one that made $180 000 .... sure, there were building companies that make that, but none of the tradies working for them ever did ... I think your figures are well off ... john , its a matter of skills (and increasingly this is where the  prosperity will have to come from. sure, your right, the average light bulb changing sparkie or washer changing plumber is on $50k but heres a few that may interest you. these are just ones i know. a welder who also got a scuba ticket and learnt how to do underwater welds showed me his tax return for working on mining projects.  $650 k. now he could and may go anywhere in the world. mite lose him if he feels that the numpties in OZ resent him. a seismic IT analyst on a seimic mapping ship can earn over $500 k. again, plenty of work for these guys OS if we tell them they are selfish pricks for earning so much. a mine management engineer on a coalfield in qld can easily earn 400 k. which country produces the most coal,  not oz,  indonesia,  easy trip to go work there. which country produces the most iron ore, not us sweden. good lifestyle there. btw, sweden recently moved or is moving a town of 30,000 people to mine the biggest iron ore mountian in the world. no outrage, no green , red, black tape.  the people want to be prosperous. our miners want to dig up some outback piece of crap land and need to negotiate with half the government agencies in oz. we can continue to shoot ourselves in the foot. we can continue to see the brain drain. BTW a couple more for you. australias barista of the year has moved his operation to seoul 1/2 the job vacancy ads, in medical mags, for surgeons and registered nurses are for tax free jobs in the emirates or saudi. and people wonder about waiting lists. the world job market is global. our best financial and business people will be head hunted. sure the mine worker who holds up the stop go sign or puts out the slippery when wet signs in the dunny at bhp isnt going anywhere. but once you lose your best mining technical people, your best docs and nurse, your best medical researchers . all becuase you thought it was a good idea to kcik them in the guts for earning more (the definition of envy) you will be left with an economy of pawnbrokers and tattoo parlours.  ;) ;) ;)

none of the examples you mentioned can be considered tradesmen except for the scuba diving welder, and yes that does happen to be a highly skilled and higly paid trade simply because there are not many who can or want to do it . If you are going to site tradesmen as example you should make sure you are talking about tradesmen .. why do you feel that you have to decieve others to make your point? Unless you of course doubt your own position.

settle down johnny. :D :D

i'm very confident of my position that we need to nurture our best and brightest.

we do this at the institute of sport.  no socialists there. its total individualism and competition to bring out the best.and then the best get every dollar the government can spare and the fatties and slow people get told to piss off

same with our smartest , the governmernt can get great outcomes in this area, but not by constantly giving the retards a leg up and trying to weigh down the achievers with more and more burdens to "level the playing field" :) :)