# Forum More Stuff Debate & Technical Discussion  Comments??

## watson

Kevin Rudd stings pensioners for going green | News.com.au

----------


## Bloss

This is bloody disgrace. But this is not the ATO - it is Centrelink and the rules governing benefits which often result in effective taxation rates way way above actual tax rates. 
The problem here is that it is not the tax system - if it were the tax system and they decided to tax any feed-in tariff (whether gross or net) they would then have to allow you to deduct or depreciate the costs of solar system you installed as well as any maintenance etc as that was expenditure incurred in obtaining the income. Also interest on any loan used to purchase - and on it goes. 
This is rats and mice stuff really - the admin cost would be huge relative to the net gain in tax they might get - and they'd only get that way down the track after the system payback occurred. - after 6-10 years in gross FiT states and much longer if ever in net FiT states!  
Given that it is the policy of all jurisdictions to encourage adoption of renewable energy this would be a bizarre decision if they do not fix it. If the FiT is taxable then once again the public policy decisions screws over the renewables industry!

----------


## Bloss

> The sooner this guy and the Labour party are gone, the better.

  Wouldn't hold your breath for that .  .  . not this election anyway.

----------


## watson

:What he said: 
Just mortified by the thinking behind it.....don't care what "colour" or "tribe" the advisers are  *Edited Post.  My fault....just typing away and realised "colour & tribe" might be misunderstood. 
My meaning is....Labour .....LiberaL....GREEN*

----------


## Bedford

I agree with Bloss, It's some DH in centerlink, Rudd wouldn't be aware of it until it hit the press. 
The thing that annoys me is the the differences in what is available to certain recipients, retirees have paid for and are entitled to an old age pension, that from what I understand, is a  BASIC and minimal amount. I think this needs to be compared to and then equalised with what is provided to people that don't want to work, or single mothers with eight kids to five different blokes who are making more money (at the taxpayers expense) than a lot of wage earners that are working diligently. We also need a better deal for our service people. 
I sometimes wonder with governments, what happened when Howard increased the Medicare levy to pay for the gun buyback after Port Arthur, was this levy ever reduced to where it was, or did the public forget and we're still paying it? Where does it end? 
Ok I'll get off, the future is depressing , I'm going for a beer. :Smilie:

----------


## Rod Dyson

> The sooner this guy and the Labour party are gone, the better. 
> Has there been a worst performing P.M? possibly....................Keating and Hawke both spring to mind.

   :Yikes2: I agree with headpin :Yikes2:  :Yikes2:

----------


## watson

> Ok I'll get off, the future is depressing , I'm going for a beer.

  I'll have one too......Fuggem.

----------


## chrisp

Comment's? 
That's a hard one Noel. 
I one hand, I agree that we should be encouraging renewable energy and other sound environmental practices. 
On the other, hey, the fellow is making money - why should it be exempt from paying tax on it?  Did he get a rebate from the government (either directly or indirectly) to help cover the cost of the installation?   
[Out of interest, when I originally typed "*government*" it initially came out as "*givernment*" - Freudian slip  :Doh:  ] 
Personally, I'd like to see the whole tax system reviewed and all these offsets and rebates - that are only available to some - reduced in return for a reduced base rate of tax for everyone. 
I'm interested to see what the Henry Review has recommended.

----------


## Bedford

> it initially came out as "*givernment*" .

  giver*mint*.....Fixed! :Biggrin:  :Smilie:

----------


## watson

Minties are GO!!

----------


## Bedford

> Again, I repeat, the sooner this guy and the Labour part are gone.  The sooner the economy and country can try and recover.

  I agree, but unfortunately my grandkids will still be paying for it.

----------


## Bedford

> Fortunately they have a large inheritance coming from their Grandfather..

  I doubt it , they way things are going I'll have to rely on you for a feed once a week! :Wink:  
However, have a look through the first few pages of the phone book just to see the amount of government services that are available for the misfits and unemployable, there are acres of departments (at taxpayers expense) geared solely for the benefit of these people. :Mad:  
Bedtime for Bedford ....Catcha! :Smilie:

----------


## Dr Freud

Someone's gotta pay back the debt. 
About $200 billion estimated at last count. 
About 5% interest, $10 billion a year just in interest. 
Let's say add $10 billion a year paying off the principle. 
We're gonna need about $20 billion per year surplus' for nearly ten years straight (assuming Rudd stops borrowing eventually).  I can't see these surplus' on the horizon, so I guess it's gonna take a lot longer than 10 years. 
But it's a bit rough hitting those who have worked their whole lives and paid taxes their whole lives.  Cut them some slack Ruddy.  What about a vegan tax instead?  I've never trusted those vegans.  :Biggrin:

----------


## Rod Dyson

My god, there is hope for head pin yet he is actually making sense on this thread. GO headpin. 
3 cheers.

----------


## autogenous

There's something about this article that doesn't ring right..  If the electricity is considered income revenue for a pensioner, then the electric panel infrastructure is considered a business expense. 
Any loss Rudds going to be paying back.  The net pay back is quite a few years.  Only if income exceeds $5000 is it a business. 
Pensioners could potentially right off business expenses, because that's what this article is saying the solar panels are. Its a logistical nightmare.

----------


## autogenous

_We're gonna need about $20 billion per year surplus' for nearly ten years straight (assuming Rudd stops borrowing eventually). _ Why is it Labour seems to cop the recession periods impacted by outside influences_?  _

----------


## SilentButDeadly

Ahhh......News Limited.  Where would we be without them? 
Beat up, beat up, beat up.  Old Mate may well have been trying to claim a pensioner rebate on his power bill (which he is perfectly entitled to do) whilst at the same time also trying to claim the feed-in tariff.  This could be considered as double dipping (even discounting the other State & Federal solar energy rebates which Old Mate almost certainly took advantage of) - certainly a few bureaucrats obviously think so.   
The really amusing part about all this is that his system may not actually be big enough to generate significant net feed-in to the system anyway.....very very few are.

----------


## Bedford

Going on this info I found, it seems that a single pensioner can earn $132 per fortnight without a reduction in pension. This would mean that to have the pension reduced, they would have to sell enough electricity back to the grid to get their earnings over $132, but this may affect only some people as some may not have any other income. 
Personally I think it's BS. :Smilie:   Allowable Earning - Government Services for Seniors - About Seniors

----------


## watson

Yeah......basically true....but the deeming system takes into account anything you may have saved, the price of your house.......and any other assets you may have accrued. 
Fuggem

----------


## Bedford

> Fuggem

  Twice! :Biggrin:  :Smilie:

----------


## watson

Me three....and If we look at what can be achieved: http://www.renovateforum.com/f195/gr...tml#post796428 
They'd be in big doodoo.

----------


## Bedford

What's to stop them taxing anyone who supplies back to the grid? :Mad:  
There is something going on locally here where if you have installed a raintank, and claimed a rebate, there is a levy applied somehow to recover it, don't know any more as I didn't claim any rebate, but it has something to do with sewerage disposal charges that are calculated from the mains water metered consumption. In other words because your saving water and maybe using it for toilets, there is more water going out the sewer than they can charge by what the mains meter says. 
It must be costing a fortune to employ these people to dream up these tactics, fuggim. :Biggrin:

----------


## watson

> What's to stop them taxing anyone who supplies back to the grid?

  I suppose it is income  :Frown: 
In their little snuffling brains

----------

