scottylou Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Hi there Looks like our house has finally sold and we are heading back. Thanks so much to all contributors on Pomsinoz - I have learned heaps about shipping back goods, getting insurance and loans back in the UK, currency exchange, pensions, etc - This site is invaluable!:biggrin: Only thing I am still kind of uncertain of is tax. I have finished up my job (govt sector) and they do not issue end of year pay summaries until the end of year - no exceptions. So will be out of the country by then. So, presumably just do it online (as have done every other year), But, I guess I need to keep Aus bank account open until then. When do we stop being Aus for tax purposes - at the time we leave? Are we still entitled to tax free threshold for the time we were working in Aus and also family tax benefit (we usually claimed that for the year at tax time? We are leaving permanently (Aus citizens now, but British by birth). I will need to keep my Aus bank account open for long enough after house settlement, so that proceeds have somewhere to go. Would love to hear from others who have made the move (or planning too and are in the know). Cheers Lou x:biggrin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Hi Lou, I'm leaving on 2 weeks and just going to use my last payslip to do my tax return, the end of year summary will just say taxable income and tax deducted. Which you can get from your year to date figures. Yes your tax residency status will be unchanged for all that income. With luck you'll get a bit of a refund if you haven't worked the full financial year as you will have been taxed as though you have. Definitely keep the bank account open as they use it to ID you for the tax return and also much easier for them to refund you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottylou Posted May 10, 2014 Author Share Posted May 10, 2014 Cheers Tom, have you made a special arrangement with the tax office to do a tax return early? Good luck with your move back, I am very excited to be going back home :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 No I haven't, to be honest it's only another month and I'm only due a few hundred dollars back. I can wait. It's the super I'm more keen on clawing off them :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottylou Posted May 10, 2014 Author Share Posted May 10, 2014 Would love to get back super, but have to give up citizen ship to get it back. Not sure if kids will want to come back here to live when they grow up, so don't want to burn our bridges should we ever want to follow them back. Seems like our super is stuck in Australia, getting diminished annually by charges and fees : ( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I've only got PR, don't think I can get my super back unless I relinquish it (or it expires, as PR here isn't permanent...) plus they hammer you for tax on it, but still I would rather have it and use it while I'm young enough to do something with it. Yeah no point burning bridges in your situation, dual citizenship the world's your oyster. Well at least aus, nz, Europe! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Would love to get back super, but have to give up citizen ship to get it back. Not sure if kids will want to come back here to live when they grow up, so don't want to burn our bridges should we ever want to follow them back. Seems like our super is stuck in Australia, getting diminished annually by charges and fees : ( My OH had to keep her Super fund when she returned to the UK in 1999 following a relationship break down. She had citizenship but did not really expect to return but here she is, 15 years later, with new family and planning to move back. She has had a statement every year and with one or two exceptions it has grown well and certainly has performed far better than UK pension funds over the same period. Certainly isn't diminished by charges and fees. She has often said that if she had had spare cash she was tempted to invest it in the Super because of the returns. My point is that so many Brits seem to slag off Super. Perhaps they think the state will simply provide all in old age as hardly anybody in the UK is making provision for themselves. Australia is decades ahead of the UK in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Don't really agree with that. Yes the returns are very competitive when compared to most traditional investments but at the end of the day it's mandatory, people should have the right to choose what to do with their money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Don't really agree with that. Yes the returns are very competitive when compared to most traditional investments but at the end of the day it's mandatory, people should have the right to choose what to do with their money Of course it is not mandatory to go and work in Australia so Super is therefore optional for Brits. They can stay at home, work, and make little or no provision for retirement as always. For people working in Australia it is mandatory of course but if it wasn't then most Oz workers would do the same as the Brits. Also most of the contribution comes from your employer. I was minded to respond because I see so many threads on PIO slating Super but from the outside looking in I personally think it was a fantastic far sighted policy that is and will continue to benefit people when they are older and the country as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Your first point is a given, I mean if we're even discussing it we can assume the person is already in aus and therefore it is mandatory. Also the full 9.25 percent comes from the EMPLOYEE the employer contributes diddly squat. It does benefit people who are rubbish with money though and ensures at least some sort of war chest for them to retire on. Just irks me because I'm not crap with money and I could have made better use of it now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Your first point is a given, I mean if we're even discussing it we can assume the person is already in aus and therefore it is mandatory. Also the full 9.25 percent comes from the EMPLOYEE the employer contributes diddly squat. It does benefit people who are rubbish with money though and ensures at least some sort of war chest for them to retire on. Just irks me because I'm not crap with money and I could have made better use of it now My understanding is that the 9.25% contribution is the employer contribution. I do not believe anyone could state with certainty that if Super did not exist they would have been paid 9.25% more net of tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinob Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Your first point is a given, I mean if we're even discussing it we can assume the person is already in aus and therefore it is mandatory. Also the full 9.25 percent comes from the EMPLOYEE the employer contributes diddly squat. It does benefit people who are rubbish with money though and ensures at least some sort of war chest for them to retire on. Just irks me because I'm not crap with money and I could have made better use of it now Actually Super Guarantee (9.25% as mandated by govt) is an EMPLOYER expense. It appears on your payslip as your employer must let you know how much they are paying into your fund. On the 21st of each month your employer must pay the various superfunds the money owed for each employee for the previous month. (If you choose to contribute to your Superfund yourself, you can do so by salary sacrifice (depending on your employer) or a pay deduction, or completely separately to your pay). I suggest you check your payslips to ensure your employer is not deducting the super guarantee from your pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 It is not a cost to the business, the employer is merely withholding part of the employee's pay and paying it over. If there was no super guarantee all our staff would be taking home more money, and that's precisely why I am a consultant, as I prefer not to be arbitrarily forced to hand over part of my earnings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinob Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 It is not a cost to the business, the employer is merely withholding part of the employee's pay and paying it over. If there was no super guarantee all our staff would be taking home more money, and that's precisely why I am a consultant, as I prefer not to be arbitrarily forced to hand over part of my earnings Tom, the employer is not allowed to withhold any amount of the employees pay for super. It is a cost to the business of hiring an employee. If you would like to look at this link it may help you: https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Super/Compulsory-employer-contributions/ It is completely different to what we all are used to in the UK. If you at all suspect that an employer is withholding someone's pay to make super guarantee contributions, you must inform the ATO. It is illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispysince70 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Your first point is a given, I mean if we're even discussing it we can assume the person is already in aus and therefore it is mandatory. Also the full 9.25 percent comes from the EMPLOYEE the employer contributes diddly squat. It does benefit people who are rubbish with money though and ensures at least some sort of war chest for them to retire on. Just irks me because I'm not crap with money and I could have made better use of it now Obviously you've never employed anyone, as the super most definatley does NOT come from the employee, it comes directly from the employer, as i know to my weekly cost. chris x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernbird Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 It is not a cost to the business, the employer is merely withholding part of the employee's pay and paying it over. If there was no super guarantee all our staff would be taking home more money, and that's precisely why I am a consultant, as I prefer not to be arbitrarily forced to hand over part of my earnings you think employers would pay their employees 9% more per year if they weren't paying out super?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 I employ 100 people but never mind that. What I'm talking about is a question of perspective. When we offer people jobs We offer them a package based on market rate primarily which comes from supply and demand, adjusted up or down for experience. From this package we deduct the super element and pay it over to their chosen fund. So the way I look at it the cost to the business is the same whether super exists or not. If/when super guarantee changes to 12 percent we would adjust the proportion of that package we wouldn't pay them any more hence we do not view it as a cost. On the other hand as an employee I certainly felt it was a cost to me as I was seeing part of my package withheld and paid over to a super fund rather than the full package being paid to me now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispysince70 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 I employ 100 people but never mind that. What I'm talking about is a question of perspective. When we offer people jobs We offer them a package based on market rate primarily which comes from supply and demand, adjusted up or down for experience. From this package we deduct the super element and pay it over to their chosen fund. So the way I look at it the cost to the business is the same whether super exists or not. If/when super guarantee changes to 12 percent we would adjust the proportion of that package we wouldn't pay them any more hence we do not view it as a cost. On the other hand as an employee I certainly felt it was a cost to me as I was seeing part of my package withheld and paid over to a super fund rather than the full package being paid to me now. The cost of my employees super comes out of MY pocket. As an extra. On top of any wage i HAVE to pay. NOT taken out of THEIR wages. It is a cost to MY business for employing someone. I certainly am NOT taking it out of their wages. Chris x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinob Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Tom you're waffling. There's no harm in admitting you were mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Ha I am not mistaken, you are looking at it from a different view to me and you can't see it that's all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispysince70 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 I'm sure you employee 100 employees out of you're own pocket. Not. If you did you wouldn't spout such nonsense. Chris x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Ok Chris. So what are you going to do when super increases to 12 percent mandatory? Are you going to increase all your staffs packages or are you going to just contribute more from the same pot, that pot being their existing package, to their super fund. We as a business will not see additional cost as a result of an increase in the super guarantee it is the employee who will lose out in the short term but gain more super. Can you not understand what I am saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gbye grey sky Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Interesting though this discussion about perception is you should be aware that the majority of UK employees (more than 50%) make no provision for retirement whatsoever. Of those that do the average pot they have accumulated at the time of retirement is £30,000. Australia should be commended for doing something to alleviate such dire levels of poverty in old age IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispysince70 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 What hapoens is, i increase the prices to my customers. Which in turn, increases the profits of my business, which then enables me to pay the extra super that i am required to pay. Alongside this extra cost, the award rate for my employees will also increase, so that will also come from the increased profits. i have to accept that the same as i have to accept paying public holidays. It's just a part of employing someone. Chris x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom28 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 What hapoens is, i increase the prices to my customers. Which in turn, increases the profits of my business, which then enables me to pay the extra super that i am required to pay. Alongside this extra cost, the award rate for my employees will also increase, so that will also come from the increased profits. i have to accept that the same as i have to accept paying public holidays. It's just a part of employing someone. Chris x Ah I see why we are seeing this differently I think. So all our staff contracts have their pay rates stated inclusive of super. So if super guarantee changes we would not see an increase in staffing costs, we would be merely adjusting the percentages of that number as to what went to super and what went to employee as taxable gross. The award rises I think we can definitely agree is a cost.... I'm just looking forward to the day when all the states have the same pay rates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.