paddyo

I see what you did there!!

knockoff nige

I think that means you don't have to pay medicare levy. It doesn't actually talk about tax benefits, just tax itself.

Or maybe I'm reading it wrong.

monkeyalan

you'd lose that bet then cos that's exactly what were doing.
We came on a 4 year 457 and will go home at the end of it.
We don't make anything from our flat in the UK and LAFHA was helping cover our rent here while we're still paying the mortgage at home.

gadgetguy

The point is the Aussie nationals are being treated differently (in the transitional arrangements for LAFHA) from non-residents, which goes against this treaty. Not sure where you picked up the Medicare bit from?

knockoff nige

I think you're trying to see something thats not there.

I picked up the medicare levy as british citizens on temporary visas get reciprocal medicare. Which is actually better than what I get as a resident of Australia. I believe you don't have to pay the medicare levy, which is in keeping with the above 'law'.

Tax benefits are not tax.

gadgetguy

I think you are totally missing the point but I don't see any mileage in continuing.

Beoz

You brought it up???? The way I read it and I could be wrong and we'd all admit that, is that Aussies on temp visas in the UK are treated the same as Brits in Oz. I can't think of any situation where there is uneven treatment.

Beoz

I'm quite surprise that someone who articulated their argument so well has had to retort to name calling. Anyhow .... you do rent your place in the UK out, whether it be for profit or not is not abiding by the LAHFA guidelines. I'm quite surprised that you don't get close to breaking even between mortgage repayments and rent but that's your choice ..... your choice is not the responsibility of all of us, including you, the taxpayer.

paddyo

What name calling???? Enlighten me.

AS for close to rent vs mortgage, we bought when prices were sky high and due to personal circumstances at the time had to go for a high percentage of mortgage and we picked a small house but in good location. Since then, although we still have positive equity, prices have dropped and the rental market in UK is not as strong as Oz. Due to the size of the house there is a limit to the rent you can bring in, irrespective of location. When we bought we did not envisage moving so quickly so its a combination of circumstances.
As for responsibility, thats not an issue is it. The issue is an understanding that something was there to be provided fairly within the rules which guided our decision making. There was never any inkling that it may not be a permanent facility, it could change on a whim (8 months whether you like it or not is not enough notice when it is 'in a consultation period' even when you do START to make preparations) or that IF things changed that the company would 'see you alright'.
You could use that responsibility argument to say that servicemen and woman are not entitled to payouts for disabilities from 'us' taxpayers because it was their choice to join up and they knew the risks.....if you said that you would be accused of non patriotism.....so...think on laddie!!

elice_in_oz

I think comparing 457 visa holders to servicemen is going a bit far.
AFAIK, you have not chosen/been asked to give up limb or life so that others (like you and yours) could actually come to the other side of the world freely and ask a foreign nation to support your unwise financial choices. Paddy, I like you, but you are fast losing all of the sympathy I had for you...

paddyo

I think as an ex serviceman on a war pension that I am able to argue both points!!

paddyo

23 yrs in RN, Falklands, Gulf and Bosnia wars/conflicts and retired injured in 2003..........but you didn't know that!

elice_in_oz

Indeed, I didn't know
I still think your comparison is far-fetched though
The sympathy factor has gone back up, but not necessarily on the LAFHA front although I do agree with the outrage about the lack of notice and the way it is being handled.

I am also completely in favour of giving 457 visa holders the same/similar rights/benefits on an everyday basis (that would exclude one-off things like baby bonus) as PRs, since both pay taxes and neither vote.

paddyo

No worries. I wasn't comparing servicemen and women to 457 holders....I was trying to articulate about allowances, which they both have, and how they are treated.
I did say that the patriotism factor would kick in if the government tried to reduce/take away sevicemen allowances, also they have the right to vote against the government..457 peeps don't!

cubeonly

Agreed.