I don't understand what people's problem is with this.
They're wanting to tax businesses that have a presence in Australia and do business in Australia.
The online part is irrelevant.
The hate against negative gearing is also kinda silly. Most countries have negative gearing, they just don't have a special word for it.
Getting rid of it won't change house prices, because people will still "positive gear".
If there is no effect on the market by getting rid of negative gearing, why don't they get rid of it then?
Maybe they should tax the mega-churches that offer "wealth and prosperity" if the followers "plant a seed" (Give 100-1000$)
Some mega-churches are very dodgy. In the US, many of the big name televangelists or faith healers who preach the prosperity religion behind them are modern day charlatans, gouging money out of poor people to feed their lavish lifestyles. If churches won't disclose their auditable finances to members, it is a cause for alarm. Simply put: Disclosing finances publicly should be a requirement to classed as tax exempt by the government.
However the vast majority of church ministers are good, faithful and honest people. They work long hours on effectively a low hourly rate and pay their taxes like anyone else. Most parishioners work hard too for the communities they serve, without financial reward or recognition. Many of the churches are struggling financially for one reason or another. It would be unjust to tax churches in general and on the whole, society would suffer for it. Another point is that if churches were taxed, then those placing money as donations in the offering plate could claim the money as tax deductions and the net benefit to the government could be negligible and it would be an administrative nightmare.
Even the Roman Catholic Church should not be taxed. Instead, governments around the world should fine the Church some serious money and give that money to the victims and their families whose lives have been destroyed by the paedophiles, rapists and those who conspired to cover it up. If the Church has to sell just a small percentage of their real estate, funding would be plentiful. But it is quite unfair that the offering plate is used to pay compensation, because the parishioners and most of the clergy are clearly not to blame and are decent people.
Back on the subject... tonight the government announced the "digital download tax"in the Australian Budget. It won't work! They are fools to believe it will.
I totally agree. I have served in many smaller churches and found exactly what you said to be the case. Its unfortunate that some very big organizations have spoiled the reputation of so many smaller churches in many peoples eyes!
I totally agree. I have served in many smaller churches and found exactly what you said to be the case. Its unfortunate that some very big organizations have spoiled the reputation of so many smaller churches in many peoples eyes!
I can't think of a single religious organisation that has a good reputation...
If there is no effect on the market by getting rid of negative gearing, why don't they get rid of it then?
What makes property so different that it should be treated differently to any other asset class?
All it is is offsetting your losses against your gains. In the case of property it is interest and operating expenses versus rental income.
What's the difference between residential property, commercial property, shares, bonds, or a business?
Remember if you're "negative gearing" you're losing money. The ATO is just being nice in not taxing you on your loss.
Apparently Australia will be the first country in the world to try this tax, and other governments will be looking on its outcome with keen interest.
This is what I think might happen:
1. People will see a way around it, either legally or illegally. The government will lose, and like the mining tax, be turned into a laughing stock.
2. In this country, we pay a premium on software and music by price gouging by companies like Apple and Microsoft. The tax will just make piracy more attractive.
3. The cost of enforcing it will be excessive, both in dollar terms and politically. Our government's CB radio licensing scheme in the late 70's and early 80's was canned only because the knew they were not profiting from the scheme. This may well happen with their tax on software.
4. The system will leak like a sieve, allowing plenty of creative tax dodging opportunities to spring up. Third party providers in zero software tax countries will act as intermediaries.
5. Software will be offered on line through eBay, and the vendor won't have to pay the tax. They buy the legal software, music or video, and resell it - tax free.
6. Very few, in any, politicians would have even heard of proxy servers, let alone know what they do. Proxy servers are used by 200,000 Aussies already to get the US Netflix rather than the second-class offerings from Australia. Smart people will just use proxies more to dodgy the tax. Maybe even proxy bank accounts.
7. The government might try to circumvent people avoiding the tax by hacking into bank accounts or getting transaction details on software from transaction houses like eBay. If you think this is crazy, consider this... http://www.smh.com.au/national/canberra-reaps-360m-from-inactive-bank-accounts-20140609-39t8p.html. It is true. The government can steal money from your bank account and leave you to fight to get it back.
What the government should be doing to forgetting the end-user's tax on software, but instead forcing bad corporate citizens like like Microsoft, Apple and Google to pay their fair share of COMPANY TAX, rather than openly ripping us all off by funnelling money through Ireland, Singapore or Bermuda. The tax on "digital downloads" will be only 10%, but they will reap a lot more by forcing these these rogue companies to pay their 30% company tax rate like every other law abiding and decent company does.
If you want property near the middle of a city, it will be expensive. Both to buy or to rent.
I'm really not sure what you're suggesting. Your example is of someone who has no concept of living within their means, nor realistic expectations of what they can afford, nor a sense of personal responsibility for their own situation.
And why shouldn't the wife be working? This isn't the '50s.
A better idea would be to close the immigration doors, cancel negative gearing and ban foreigners
Too bad it isn't the 50's and 60's. People were a lot happier, less stressed, less greedy and there were no foreigners to contend with. Jobs for everyone. And a single income family could survive quite well. As loyal servants to the god of stuff, we have brought this mess of having to have dual incomes just to survive on ourselves.
Member of One Nation? How many immigrants do we get a year, and how much is their average salary? How much of that actually affects housing prices? And in which direction? Think a bit instead of just watching ACA.
Too bad it isn't the 50's and 60's. People were a lot happier, less stressed, less greedy and there were no foreigners to contend with. Jobs for everyone. And a single income family could survive quite well. As loyal servants to the god of stuff, we have brought this mess of having to have dual incomes just to survive on ourselves.
That's a whole optometrist shop's worth of rose coloured glasses right there, and in no way in touch with reality at all. We've got it better now than anyone else in any point in history. People were always greedy, it's just human nature.
And really? Are you saying women shouldn't be allowed to work? The reason houses cost two people's worth of wages is because on average, when buying a house you have two people's worth of wages. To bring the prices down, you need to bring down the money available. Which, in context, means kicking women back out of the workforce.
Member of One Nation? How many immigrants do we get a year, and how much is their average salary? How much of that actually affects housing prices? And in which direction? Think a bit instead of just watching ACA.
190,000 per annum, the highest number on record and growing.
Member of One Nation?
Member of One Nation?
Is this an Australian code name for something evil?