Marisawright

I don't know why anyone would blindly "have faith", but why go to the other extreme? Whatever happened to healthy scepticism as a position? In this case, I posted links to 5 different studies, and that was only a small sample of what I'd found. Simmo rejected the lot, I bet without even looking at them, because they come from the "scientific establishment", so by his definition, it must ALL be lies. Every single epidemiologist in the world is lying and only a few doctors, not specialists in that field, are brave enough to tell the truth. That doesn't make sense to me.

I have to admit, I had a similar experience as Nemesis with a financial adviser. It might be better now, because of the ban on financial advisers taking commissions from the funds they sell. However, that means they now charge a flat fee, which is a few thousand dollars, and some people baulk at that. I feel as though the OP's question -- will he be taxed on the lump sum if he withdraws it before he leaves - has been answered. It sounds like you're talking about a much bigger question, i.e., is it really a good idea to withdraw the lot? I think there's a lot of strong reasons why it's a bad idea to withdraw the whole lot if you're staying in Australia in your retirement. After all, the minute you take it out of super, you've got to put it in some kind of investment (even if it's just a bank account) and suddenly you're earning taxable interest. And there's all that decision-making about how and where to invest. Not to mention the temptation to treat yourself to something with some of that lump sum, which you may regret when the money runs out later. It gets a lot more complicated if you're thinking of moving overseas, due to exchange rate risks, tax differences between countries etc. For that reason, I think he'd need to consult someone like Andrew from Vista, who's got experience of how moving between countries affects things like tax and pensions. Ordinary financial advisers either here or in the UK wouldn't know the complexities.

You see, it depends which videos you look at. The way social media works, we all get presented with videos that are similar to the ones we watched before -- so the more you watch Biden fluffing his words, the more you'll see videos of him fluffling his words, and vice versa. If you want to get a fair picture, you have to go and seek out videos that present the other side. And of course, remember that a lot of these videos on both sides are deep fakes. I've watched both of them in several videos. Biden has had a stammer all his life which is one reason he "loses his words". The way he squints, I think he has trouble reading the teleprompter which is another reason he stumbles. Trump is good at reading a teleprompter. But watch him, or better still, read the transcripts, when he's not reading off a teleprompter. He can't finish sentences, he goes off on weird tangents, he changes the subject and loses his point, which are much more serious issues.

The UK insists on it too. The thing is, if you are entering any country as a permanent resident, you need to have a travel document that proves you are a permanent resident. A British passport without a current Australian visa doesn't prove you're a permanent resident of Australia.

It's impossible to argue with you, because you always have the perfect excuse. No organisation or government is trustworthy, so you can dismiss everything they say out of hand. Instead, only the mavericks who pop up with their theories are telling 'the truth'. I assume you never go near a hospital. I'm surprised you're stil using the internet since that was developed by mainstream scientists. As for the vaccine, remember a guy called Trump saying this? You can tell it's Trump speaking because only he would think something can skyrocket downward.

"Dual" just means you've got two separate citizenships which have nothing to do with each other. The passport is British so the Australians can't touch it. And the fact that you've chosen to be an Aussie citizen is irrelevant to the Brits. In fact, it's worth noting that when your UK passport runs out, you don't have to renew that if you don't want to. If you go on holiday to the UK, you'll be able to enter on your Aussie passport as a tourist and no one will be any the wiser. Not strictly what you should do but it works.

https://retractionwatch.com/category/by-journal/cureus/ That journal has had to retract several papers, suggesting their peer review process is suspect. Can you cite some articles from a more reputable source?

I assume that processing time is assuming you apply onshore. I wonder why it's so much longer than applying from the UK? And why do you have to stay an extra year after that?

Yes I do think he's of sound mind. Robert Hur made a big thing of him not remembering the exact year when things happened. I don't find that surprising. I couldn't tell you, off the top of my head, the year my mother died, even though the event (and the exact month and day) are vivid in my mind. Years blur into each other when you get old. It doesn't mean you're senile. Even if he is senile, I know he has a large team around him, so if he gets elected and he's not up to it, they'll step in. That worked perfectly well during Ronald Reagan's presidency (he had Alzheimers if you recall, but it was kept secret). My worry with Trump is that he's a one-man band. We saw how, during his presidency, he left a lot of staff positions vacant, and I'm sure he'll do the same this time. Even if he had a properly staffed West Wing, he doesn't like taking their advice. So his dementia, which I am convinced he already has, will pose a danger to the country because there won't be a team in place who can moderate his craziness. Neither of them should be running. I'm over 70 and even I think they're both too old.

As an Australian, you don't need a passport to enter Australia, because they're not allowed to refuse you entry. However as you discovered, if you don't have a passport, they will faff you around for hours and it's really not worth the hassle.

If you're talking about invermectin, there's still no evidence that it has any significant effect. It might reduce the duration of the infection by a day or two, that's it. Not worth risking the side effects for such a small benefit. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2801827 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2115869 https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2021/09/03/-thinking-of-trying-ivermectin-for-covid-heres-what-can-happen-w.html https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)32506-6/fulltext

I think the concern is that your super was an investment that made money, so there might be some liability for tax on the profits made within the fund before you cashed out. I'm surprised that's even a consideration, as I am 99% sure (and Ken has confirmed) that the UK taxman can't tax you on any profits earned before you were legally resident in the UK, even if you arrive in the middle of the tax year. I'm guessing the accountant who gave that advice, wasn't experienced in international tax and was erring on the safe side.

So are you saying that it won't be treated as savings, or are you thinking about the tax due on interest earned by the savings?

If you cash out your super, and it's sitting in an Australian bank account BEFORE you move to the UK, then it's just savings.

If you read the research, it was never claimed to be 100% effective. What the media might say is another matter altogether. They can't possibly be 100% effective, because the virus is mutating all the time. Same as the flu vaccine -- it's always a gamble, every year, whether the flu virus will mutate too much and render that year's batch of flu vaccine ineffective. Also of course, the efficacy of the vaccine declines over time, which is why you need to get vaccinated again after 6 months or so. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(23)00015-2/fulltext