JoeBloggs80

Good question. And another problem with the system. I know several low-level recuiters on a 457 who get LAHFA. Its not a tremendously difficult job imo. They are almost all single, with no responsibilities or financial commitments back home but get massive tax breaks. Its people like that I get a bit arsey about. Of course they are gonna accept it, but it doesnt seem right.

Not buying into government hype at all. Just personal (albiet limited) experiences.

To compensate for family/child benefits seems fair enough. The school fees thing for temp residents is patently ridiculous.

At the end of the day all tax systems can be fiddled somehow and most people will do their best to pay as little as possible.

Bermudashorts

None of the benefits? What about public services that you use whilst you are living here, infrastructure costs. So you don't get childcare rebate but then again you don't pay tax on overseas income. (And before you argue that you don't have overseas income well note that not all Austrlaian citizens or PR have children).

Why should it compensate you? You should have negotiated with your employer to pay for your child care costs or pay you a salary that would cover it. I have always worked in multinationals and with many expats in UK and I have never heard of any of them expecting government handouts in a country they are living in temporarily, they get a remuneration package that is acceptable to them or they don't come.

Why do you think it should be the tax payer and not your employer making up the gap in your living costs considering it is the employer that wants you here and is sponsoring you?

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Interesting line... but nearly all the Australian companies who employ skilled 457 staff push LAFHA as part of your 'package'. The companies use it as an incentive. Will they increase the pay to compensate for its loss? Who knows? My guess would be, for those who are already here, that they won't.

School fees imposed in NSW on 457's are a straightforward tax grab and have nothing to do with recouping education costs, as they may claim.

paddyo

sorry Bermuda Shorts, but you are being a little bit simplistic here...."you should have negotiated with your employer to pay for your child care costs or pay you a salary that would cover it" is ridiculous, the whole point of an employer offering LAFHA is to compensate for things like that and a new employee coming over to Oz takes that at face value. SOME employees do not have the background or previous knowledge like yourself to think of things like which MAY be common in global renumeration packages or are dissuaded from doing so because the company uses LAFHA as that sweetener. As someone over here as a non parent do you really think you are looking at this objectively?
Obviously, if I knew then what I know now I might of pursued that line, but I didn';t and you should not be so presumptious to think that everyone does.
For SOME people, coming out here on a 457 is their first experience of a global transfer, such as me, so we do not have the benefit of your experience.
Your indignant post shows no sign of understanding of a families situation on 457, hence to us 'family persons'' and not the 'high paid foreign executives' that Wayne Swann refers to, this could mean a massive problem for us.

paddyo

Actually Bermuda Shorts, some of that sounded a bit rude to you personnally, it wasn't mean to be. Sorry if it sounded a bit terse!

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Even if you HAD known all the swings and roundabouts of LAFHA in advance, and calculated everything accordingly, they are now, it seems, about to change all the rules around it and possibly impact you enormously. You can't allow for that in advance.

paddyo

Thats exactly the situation I am in, we had to check all our figures, work out budgets etc. Its not the company's fault either. Will need to see timescales of implementation and the exact application of it. I still think its a bit bizarre the way Wayne Swann explained it so I need to read the official LAFHA rules when they come out.

bingobob777

Takes effect from 1st July 2012

bingobob777

I didn't expect anything, I was given a contract which LAFHA was explicitly a part of. The contract including LAFHA was acceptable, hence I came.

I don't think it should be the taxpayer making up any gap, however why do you expect I should pay the same amount of tax when I'm not entitled to the same services for it?

And I fully expect my employer to make up the difference.

Bermudashorts

I believe my point is that the employer should be stumping up, not expecting tax payer (LAFHA) to cover the gap.

Yes I do think I am looking at it objectively. Employer should pay proper salaries not use tax breaks so that they do not have to pay proper rates.

LAFHA is nothing to do with having children. One does not have to have children to get LAFHA.


It is not presumptious to assume that people are able to judge whether a remuneration package provides for them appropriately. This is a fact of life.

I have no personal experience of a global transfer.

My thoughts on LAFHA are nothing to do with the family situation, LAFHA is not a tax break for families. My points are about whether an employer should pay the appropriate salary or whether the employer can pay a reduced salary because they know the tax payer will top it up.

Oh and I am and have always been part of a family, I did not beam down from planet Zog.

Gibbo

Perhaps you are all getting worked up about nothing. Is it not possible that the new rules on LAFHA will only apply to contracts negotiated from the start date? This was how the increase residency for citizenship was implemented. I should think that it would cause too many hassles, for the government, if it was done differently.

stevenglish

I have every sympathy for those that may be affected, I was there myself a couple of years ago and the LAFHA was a very big part of the reason we came. I think the in fighting between migrants on this site is attrocious, good luck to anyone who gets more money or better conditions than I did/do.

At the end of the day it's worth considering who needs who more, Aus or migrants. I know which I think

paddyo

Where did you see that Bob?

paddyo

You are still not getting the point Bermuda Shorts, you are still plainly defending your comments when you have not really looked at mine.
If LAFHA is a valid form of tax concession, if that is in place when your contract is offered and if the company choose to use that concession then why would they offer any more renumeration when they do not have to?
Irregardless of whether you think it is ethically, financially or even morally wrong, its there to be used and has been done so in the past.
These things were done in the past and so thats how they were done, when rules in place allowed them to. Now that those rules may change then of course other avenues of renumeration wioll have to be sought.
You obviously do NOT agree with LAFHA in any way shape of form, you also obviously have not had the option of LAFHA. If you were in my circumstances then you would see this completely differently and understand that, when the job offer was made, that it was a legitimate and sound basis for a global move.

Beoz

I have to admit, naturally I would like to receive LAHFA and I'm probably as entitled to as most, but I hold an Aussie passport care of time spent here in my youth. A bunch of us at work were transferred here early this year, and I was the only one who didn't receive LAHFA because I hold a passport. Mrs B and I have our families are back in the UK and we intend to return in a couple of years, but we have no proof of our intention to return - we are not on temporary visa's.

Many of my work collegues who receive LAHFA have rented out their houses in the UK which is paying the mortgage so in actual fact they are not out of pocket.

All of us negotiated, agreed terms and came to Australia without the knowledge of LAHFA. It was only when one of the group discovered it on a forum like this that everyone jumped on the bandwagon. I will admit, at the time I thought WOW - this is a rort - and a big bonus and not really necassary but I will take it anyway. In the end I couldn't but good luck to those who do.

Now that I am an Aussie tax payer and I see others receiving LAHFA when it's not really necessary (obviously there are certain cases where it is) of course I'm going to want my tax dollars spent elsewhere.

There will be no winners in the argument. Someone's loss is always someone elses gain.