purpleal

38 minutes ago, Majhar said:

They currently has this condition on but if we are able to apply to remove no further stay condition and be able to apply on shore Contributory parent visa. 

You cannot apply to remove this condition.   

16 hours ago, Tulip1 said:

How on earth can you still be dependant on your parents at the age of 27? 

This loophole needs to be closed. An adult of 27 should be applying for a visa in their own right. 

1 minute ago, SusieRoo said:

Are you saying these 405 and 410 visa holders will go to the front of the parent visa queue?

I don't know the in's and out's of what has been proposed but from having a quick read at what was written, it seems that they are going to take away a certain number of 143/parent visa's issued in the financial year and hand them over to the 405/410's. So example of there are 7500 parent visa's (143 and other visa numbers) currently issued, they may instead offer only 6,000 and then give the other 1500 visa's to the 405/410's that are in the system.

I could be wrong though, may need to wait for Allan or another MA to give us their opinion.

From what I understood, a dependent child was a child up until the age of 23 that was in full time education and financially dependent on their parents. Looking at the immigration website, it does clearly state that a child can be included in the application over the age of 23 but only in an instance of a physical or emotional impairment which would quite possibly result in a failure of the medical.

Yes, culturally, things are different in India than in the UK for example however, would this would be  influential in the immigration department? For eg case officer has 2 cases - 1 parent visa 143 application from the UK, 1 dependent child age 24. The same parent visa application 143 dependent child age 24 but from India.

I doubt they would think oh well, in India they stay with their parents longer so will give them the visa but the UK has a benefits system so we will decline that visa.  

I have a friend (South African citizen) who has a tempestuous marriage to a British citizen. They relocated back to the UK about 2 years ago and have 2 children aged 14 and 16 - who can't get british passports as she (the wife) wasn't born in the UK herself  but has received the passport by descent. He has been told by the wife that as the kids are not British citizens they are not entitled to state education - he is there fore spending thousands and thousands of pounds in private school fees. I just wanted to check if this is indeed the case or is he being taken for a ride by the wife (who is an extremely pampered and spoilt princess - but that is a story for another day!). 

Many Thanks

51 minutes ago, SusieRoo said:

Just a thought. If only one parent applied for a 143 visa and they moved to Australia after visa was granted. Could the second parent then immediately apply for a partner visa (with bridging entitlement)? Significantly cheaper and no need for a second AoS, what could go wrong?

As Raul Senise - migration agent stated on another thread:

''This loophole was closed in 2009.

If you are granted a Contributory Parent visa you cannot sponsor your partner for five years from the date your Contributory Parent visa is granted.''

I am my mother's sponsor (143 visa) , my husband is the assurer. We have 3 children - the calculator says the income requirement is  $97,120.56

6 minutes ago, SIMHAR said:

If 2 Assurers havn't got any partners income required is $115,475 but if they have partners it will rise to $173,214....... $28,869 for per person 2 assurers + 2 partners + 2 asurees total 6 ... 6x28869= $173214

I have done a hypothetical calculation  on the centrelink website : 2 assurers , each with a partner, 3 children and 2 x adult assurees and I get a figure of $185,411.97. May I ask where you are getting your figures from please?

Thank you.  

18 minutes ago, SusieRoo said:

$117,721.88 combined income if your brother and sister are single or $176,582.82 if they both have partners (and more if they have children). You will also need to show proof of this income with tax receipts for the last two years.

May I ask where you got these numbers from as they are substantially higher than what the calculator on the centrelink page states? 

https://www.centrelink.gov.au/custsite_aoscalc/aoscalc/financialCalPage.jsf?prg_id=b153c092ae714b4ebb1e078c663ff115&wec-appid=aoscalc&page=1C0EADC1A5804952B374580CFFB9BDFD&wec-locale=en_US#stay

In AmmyS example, 2 adult assurers, (assuming no dependent children just for calculation sake), 2 adult assurees - income required is $117,721.88 - how did you calculate $176,582.82?

I am only asking as I have to calculate our income requirement for my mother's visa and want to make sure I have the right information.

Thanks

We are not affected by this change, as my husband as the assurer earns in excess of the income required - however I have signed as I find it grossly unfair that they have kept people waiting for several years and quite happily taken visa application fees. The least they could do is make only new applications from the 1st April 2018 bound by new legislation. 

1 hour ago, Alan Collett said:

There is a blog on my parent visa web site with a link to the calculator on the Centrelink website.

Best regards.

Many thanks Alan.

For me sponsoring my mother with husband as the assurer (myself as spouse and 3 children under 18) the income required is $97,120.56 

15 minutes ago, Alan Collett said:

http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/9/4/3/60

http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/9/4/3/30

http://guides.dss.gov.au/guide-social-security-law/9/4/3/80

I recommend you review these web pages.

If you are still in doubt, instruct a registered migration agent to review the situation.

Best regards.

Thanks Alan,

I read through the links - makes sense. Where do I find out minimum income requirements for an assurer who has a spouse and 3 children - just assurer for one adult? Is there a calculator I can use. The examples on the links do not provide a scenario that fits our circumstances. 

15 hours ago, Ferrets said:

Hi Peter,

Using the Centrelink calculator on an 864 visa I have the following (I find it odd that spouse and dependants are optional given they adjust the number so I am not clear if I have misunderstood the meaning of their inclusion);

Assurer (no spouse or kids)

Income requirement

$88,291.41 must be the combined income of all assurers for this financial year. The same income must be earned for the past two financial years. If you don't have enough income you can seek help of another assurer.

Bank Guarantee

$14,000.00 is the bank guarantee you need to arrange if your application is approved.

Assurer + Spouse

Income requirement

$117,721.88 must be the combined income of all assurers for this financial year. The same income must be earned for the past two financial years. If you don't have enough income you can seek help of another assurer.

Bank Guarantee

$14,000.00 is the bank guarantee you need to arrange if your application is approved.

Assurer with Spouse + 2 kids

Income requirement

$123,607.98 must be the combined income of all assurers for this financial year. The same income must be earned for the past two financial years. If you don't have enough income you can seek help of another assurer.

Bank Guarantee

$14,000.00 is the bank guarantee you need to arrange if your application is approved.

Thanks - is this for one or two applicants on the 143?

I am sponsoring my Mum - lodgement date 16 Sept 2016. My husband is to be the assurer. Currently, his earnings are well over the income threshold to be the assurer (even with a spouse and 3 kids). However in saying that, life is full of unexpected events. If something were to happen and he lost a substantial amount of his income - can there be another assurer as well to 'combine' the income amounts ? For eg, my brother in law is able to assist. If for eg, his parents wanted to also come out later from the UK, what would the implications of him being a co-assurer be? 

All of the following are very well regarded agents on the forum 

Alan Collette from from www.gomatilda.com

Westley Russell www.pinoyau.com

Raul Senise www.ozimmigration.com 

Hi - I have searched for this on the border website but cannot find any reference to it. Can you point me in the right direction? Many Thanks

No, I think you cop for the lot

 

https://www.ato.gov.au/Rates/Key-superannuation-rates-and-thresholds/?anchor=Concessionalcontributionscap#Concessionalcontributionscap

Oh well - looks like our mortgage will be getting paid off earlier!

I still can't see why the government wants to penalise those wanting to save extra for the future - I would have thought they would be encouraging us to save even more to prevent us from becoming a strain centrelink/pension wise later on when we are in retirement.

If you are earning above $250k, super contributions are going to be taxed at 30% - is this still not better than the income being taxed at the soon to be marginal rate of 45%?

Reduction in Concessional Contribution (SalarySacrifice/Pre-Tax Contributions) Cap

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2017

 

The concessional contribution (CC) cap will reduce to $25,000 pa for all individuals regardless of age. The cap will be indexed in line with AWOTE in $2,500 increments.

 

Individuals with sufficient surplus cash-flow could use the opportunity to maximise CCs for amounts made before 1July 2017 up to $35,000 for those who were 49 or over on 30 June 2016 and up to $30,000 for those under age 49.

 

SMSF trustees should be mindful from1 July 2017 of unallocated reserves if any which may, when allocated, get counted towards the CC cap.

 

 

Changes to Non Concessional Contribution (Post-tax Contributions) Cap

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2017

 

The non-concessional contribution (NCC) cap will reduce from $180,000 to $100,000 pa. Individuals cannot make NCCs if they have a total super balance of $1.6 million or more at 30 June of the previous financial year. Eligible individuals will be able to access a three year bring forward of up to $300,000. Transitional measures will apply to the bring-forward rule.

 

 

​Personal Deductible Contribution Changes

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2017

 

All individuals under the age of 75 will be eligible to make personal contributions for which they can claim a tax deduction up to the CC cap.

 

Currently, individuals need to meet the 10% test (maximum earnings as an employee condition) to be eligible.

This will enable people in a range of situations to make personal deduction contributions and potentially target the CC cap where that is currently not possible.

 

Key examples include people who:

 

 

• are employed and receive SG contributions that are within the CC cap, but their employer doesn’t offer salary sacrifice arrangements

• switch from being a self-employed contractor to an employee during the course of a year and fail the 10% test due to employment income, and

• are residents for tax purposes who are working overseas for a foreign employer and their employer can’t or won’t contribute to an Australian super fund.

 

 

 

Catch-up Concessional Contributions

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2018

 

Individuals with super balances less than $500,000 will be able to access a higher annual cap and contribute their remaining unused CC cap on a rolling basis for a period of five years. Only unused amounts accrued from 1 July 2018 can be carried forward.

 

This will enable individuals who take time out of work or work part-time to make catch-up contributions when they accumulate lumpy income or decide to go full-time.

 

An opportunity exists for those who intend to sell a CGT asset in the future where they can accumulate the amount of unused CCs.They can then make a lump sum unused CC to offset the CGT liability on the sale of an asset by making a personal deductible contribution.

 

 

Changes to TTR Income Streams

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2017

 

Earnings and gains from investments held in a Transition to Retirement (TTR) pension will no longer be exempt and will be taxed at 15%.

 

This change will apply to existing and new TTR income streams irrespective of the commencement date.

 

Individuals will also no longer be allowed to treat certain superannuation income stream payments as lump sums for tax purposes.

 

This change will have a significant impact on individuals running a TTR aged less than 60. This is because they will also pay tax on income payments, thereby negating the tax benefit for certain income earners.

 

However, the strategy may still be beneficial when used for its intended purpose (ie for individuals wishing to reduce employment hours while maintaining their cash-flow at current levels).

CGT relief is available for super funds for capital gains realised on the transfer of assets from pension phase before 1 July 2017.

 

 

Introducing transfer balance cap

Status: Passed

Effective: 1 July 2017

 

The total amount of super monies that can be transferred to pension phase will be capped at $1.6 million. The cap will be indexed in $100,000 increments in line with CPI.

 

An apportionment approach will be used to determine how much cap space is available. Individuals in excess of the transfer balance cap on 1 July will need to either:

 

 

• transfer the excess amount to the accumulation phase, or

• withdraw the excess amount from their super fund.

 

 

CGT relief will be provided to all complying super funds to adhere with the transfer balance cap rules. The CGT relief will enable funds to reset the cost base of assets reallocated from pension to accumulation phase before 1 July 2017 to comply with the transfer balance cap rules.

 

 

 

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

Please note that the above information is general information only and should not be taken as financial advice.

So, in simple terms - what will happen if you exceed the $25,000 per year Concessional Contribution (SalarySacrifice/Pre-Tax Contributions) Cap ? My spouse will exceed this - the normal employer contribution and then also salary sacrifices $550 a month into super. Will their be a higher rate of tax on anything above the $25K? Would this be done at their marginal rate of income tax?

thanks!

The first article is almost a year old and only states the results of a survey.

The rest all state that Australia wants the UK to relax Visa rules - not anything to do with Australia relaxing visa rules for Brits.

From what I have read - this be the common line : Britain will have to relax immigration rules for Australians if it wants to secure a free trade deal with the Commonwealth nation.

It seems that the Australians want the UK to relax visa regulations for Australians GOING to the UK. There has been no mention of Australia relaxing any visa rules/regulations. I cannot see Australia relaxing laws and allowing free movement with a country that has a population of 64 million - even more so with a country that has had open borders / immigration with the rest of Europe with lord knows how many people that aren't who they say they are.

My daughter was born 11 July 07 - she is going into year 4. There are some slightly older but most of her friends are younger by 4-6 months. She will be 10 this year, but has a few friends that are only turning 9 in Jan/Feb this year. We could have started her in school a year early but she would have been the youngest by up to 18 months so decided to keep her back and start her at 5 and a half.

Short answers: 1. No limitation on number of sponsorships can be made, or No of people can be sponsored, but there will be sponsorship obligation requirement test. 2. You can not sponsor in-laws.

Thanks for your reply. I will sponsor my mother and my husband would sponsor his mother so we would be ok in that regard. Can my husband act as financial assurer for both my mother AND his mother?

With thanks!

A reminder to forum members - this section is for people to ask migration agents a question. If you would like to discuss migration topics, please use the general migration section of the forum.

Thanks - I was hoping one of the agents could let me know if it was possible to sponsor more than one parent ie my mother AND my mother-in-law. I wasn't sure if there is a limit as to how many people you are able sponsor/offer to be financial assurer.

Hi,

Many thanks for your replies.

We definitely won't be abandoning the CPV application for my mother - she most definitely wants the security of a permanent visa. My question was more in relation to being able to sponsor more than one parent. IE, my mother get's granted the 143 with myself as the sponsor and my husband the financial assurer. If this new temporary visa goes ahead (let's assume with no BOF requirements) would my husband be able to sponsor his mother and be her financial assurer despite also being the financial assurer of my mother?

Is there a limit as to how many parents you can sponsor and be a financial assurer of?

Thanks,

Adrienne

We have lodged a CPV 143 visa for my mother, which has been acknowledged and first VAC paid for.

Now, having a look at that new temporary parent visa which has been announced, it seems that there will be no balance of family test applied to this. We have never been able to entertain the thought of sponsoring my husband's mother to come here as she fails the balance of family test - my husband here and two siblings in the UK and USA. However, if no BOF test is applied, we would happily sponsor her to come over - are we able to sponsor more than one parent on parent visa's? Financially looking after them both wouldn't be a problem and they would both live with us. (no In-law jokes please - we all get on really well!)

Thanks!