Beoz

Hang on ..... people choose to have families ... people choose not to. Why should that make a difference? As far as immigration is concerned it is no different in any other part of the world. Temporary is temporary .... it's pretty loud and clear

cubeonly

Well I guess, but I think the effects are being underestimated. My thing at the negotiation stages before coming out here was that I did not like having this LAFHA thing sprinkled throughout my employment contract - I asked them to remove it and uplift the day rate accordingly - the response of course was "this is how we do things in Australia" - so the LAFHA changes have caught my cheapskate company out. I don't know, may be come 1 July they will uplift my day rate to compensate so that I don't lose the 12 grand per year from my pocket, however I'll be surprised if I do because I'm expendable.

For me personally, it's no big deal but simply annoying, particularly because I didn't want the LAFHA thing in my employment agreement in the first place. I will test the water as regard a possible uplift to my day rate, and if it's not looking positive then i will spreadsheet it out and if I can find a better job with better pay elsewhere (pretty much 100% confident this will be the case) I will resign and side off. Simple.

Beoz

So the question is, would they have employed you in the first place had LAHFA not been available then? Will they continue to offer 457's when previously they could offer LAHFA to reduce their outgoings.

I wonder if you have a case for an employment lawyer.

cubeonly

Jesus H Christ - I simply said I feel for those here with families because compared to me (here on my own) it's difficult for them to repatriate to UK. For me, i can leave a cheque with the landlord and jump on a plane tonight with all my worldly belongings in my two suitcases and laptop bag, never to return, if I really wanted. I don't give a rats ass if I'm here as a temporary resident, PR, 457 visa, 777 visa, 12345 visa or whatever, I came here to work and when the project's finished I depart this sodding country for the next project in another country. Is that Ok? I feel for those who have come here to live, families etc. I haven't.

cubeonly

Good question Beoz. Looking at what they offered me I would say yes and also I would say I still would have taken the job on the same offered day rate without LAFHA mainly for other reasons like wanting to get as far as possible from the recently divorced wife!

In the end it's supply-and-demand re. worldwide employment opportunities. For me though currently, I can do better elsewhere and still maintaining a reasonable distance from the ex wife! So it's probably curtains for Aus for me, another reason being things are too damn complicated here!

rld1177

Does anyone know of an satistics on LAFHA - how many of us are on it, average and mid point salaries, that kind of thing? I'd guess it would impact somewhere like Melbourne CBD a bit more - most of the 457's I know at my bank are staying in high res CBD paying fairly high rents under the justification that it is (soon to be was!) pre tax salary. One interesting side effect might be that 457's that can get out of leases etc will be shifting to mid-priced housing - my heart goes out to the Aussie landlords that won't be finding to many foreigners paying 800 a week anymore as they will now be moving in to 400 or 500 a week pads Speaking of, when I was looking when I arrive here I found viewings in the 400 ranges packed with foreigners in the CBD but the 600+ range was a lot less crazy (I am in a place at 625 a week now having expected LAFHA to go, was in a place at 820 temporary just while I got settled in). I'd guess this will be even more of the case once this clears - landlords in CBD areas might find they don't have many renters left, more empty apartments, more mortgages that can't be covered, etc etc - unintended consequences are always good fun but this is what happens when you have something like LAFHA in the first place.

Hopefully now since this government is really concerned about fairness they will extend things like school fees to 457's also - treat all taxpayers the same now since they clearly are using that as an excuse for this one.

Beoz

Your personal rants won't change a thing and if you put it in front of the majority of taxpayers then they wouldn't give a flying f888 about your personal situation. The legal avenue has nothing to do with you. It has to do with the company using an individuals tax break in paying salaries. If it is written all through your contact and LAHFA component is included in the total salary, then the company may be doing something that is not legal. It's your tax break, the company support it by stating you are in Australia and working in the job temporarily. I suspect they cannot include it in the money part of the salary.

Beoz

I suspect it's very small. I saw the figure a few months back on the LAHFA savings the government expects to make and it was very small compared to other tax changes. Can't remember what it was. At the end of the day LAHFA needs to be addressed. It's an unfair tax break. I suspect the landlords will just have to deal with it should it become an issue. If it does become an issue, rents will just come down. So be it.

Tramps_mate

All for lower rents..

cubeonly

Yes I agree with you!

The LAFHA payment even appears on my fortnightly payslip!

It's been fun ranting. See you in Indonesia - anyway the chicks are cheaper.

bingobob777

And for anyone thinking of leaving, make sure your employer pays for your flights and your transport to the airport.

It is vital to note that all sponsor companies (including those with 457 visa holders sponsored prior to 14/9/09) are now liable to pay for the return airfares of their 457 visa holders and accompanying family members upon written request from either the visa holder or DIAC. These return travel costs can be an economy airfare to the person’s home (passport) country and may also include the costs of transport from their residence to the airport – but not relocation of their furniture or goods. Evidence of payment should be provided to DIAC also.

paddyo

Its not a reliance, its part of a calculation you make when you make that decision to come over. Its part of the sums that a family makes when they look at how they will live temporarily for 3 or 4 years. In any normal persons salary, a $2000 dollar a month loss take home is a lot of money.
NOW look at it, NOW judge peoples personal circumstances and NOW TRY and understand how they may be affected.
I'm not talking the highly paid 150k plus singles who are living in plush apartments in the city, I am talking normal families who rent in smaller out of town suburbs and have family, school fees, travel committments.
Seriously guys, forget the rights and wrongs of LAFHA and try and look at those who are affected by it through NO fault of their own.

Bermudashorts

Well I am definitely not missing that and not sure why you think anyone else is either. And at the risk of sounding repetitive, it is not up to the government to provide tax breaks to support industry, the industry should be paying the salaries it requires to attract staff. After a short period of potential disruption, they will be forced to.

There is something a little illogical in saying these industries keeping Australia out of recession because they are propped up with government funding of salaries through tax breaks...

Pollyana

Wonder how many other families are going to be seriously impacted?

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=758036

kmthor - mackay

errr if it wasnt up to the government then who exactly was it up to?..This change to LAFHA is just part of Wayne Swans which hunt on the wealthy. it is reported to save $683.3 million over four years thats 170 million a year. Whats the cost going to be to get this back ???