Thats if you are lucky enough to be seen by someone looking medical with 36 hours of having an accident!Originally Posted by Oakie
Forum whore
Thats if you are lucky enough to be seen by someone looking medical with 36 hours of having an accident!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Mormon Few Stunt Crew©
free?they work for nothing?
Revolution is in the air
Thats the funniest thing I have read here in a long time!
Ride, eat, sleep, repeat!
Born to be mild
Yep. Revenue is what you start with before you deduct expenses and pay tax. What's left at the end is profit (or loss).
Grow older but never grow up
needs to work harder
No. Now, I'm no bean counter but I believe the investment vehicle to which you are referring is an LAQC. A Loss Attributable Qualifying Company - or something. Basically what this means is that the losses the company makes can be offset against your own income tax.
Again. I am not an accountant. But I give money to one and sometimes even listens to what he says. Until he starts harping on about Imputation credits then I'm totally lost.
Dave
Signature needed. Apply within.
Forum whore
Yes maybe.
There are many ways to "legally" minimise your taxation but beware of taking advice off the interwebby as it is fraught with danger! Everyones circumstances are quite different and require different methods - so as to speak.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Weekend cruiser
Is it any less dangerious than taking advise from one trained by he who's job it is to take as much of your hard earned money as possiable regardless of the statues they are supose to administer, and who have taken an othe to lie so as to achive this objective if so necessary to do this job?
Easily wound up!!
The trouble is that there are people (so I'm told) who are so wealthy they can live off the interest returns of their savings. Should such people be able to live any more tax free than the rest of us?
Mind you, I do agree that inflation could be taken into account first. But then on the other hand my employer does not automatically adjust my income in line with inflation, perhaps that's just the other side of the same coin.
"There must be a one-to-one correspondence between left and right parentheses, with each left parenthesis to the left of its corresponding right parenthesis."
Forum whore
Shit - mine does!
Get another employer.
- He felt that his whole life was some kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.
Just faidin away!
Well said, sidecar bob!
Genuine beneficiaries are acceptable enough but Labour has raised the cost with freeloaders. (Their Labour voters)
Trouble is they (Labour) then chase all the real tax payers away overseas because the tax load is getting too bloody heavy here.John.
Easily wound up!!
Yeah? Maybe that's an Aussie thing. It don't seem to work that way here in NZ
"There must be a one-to-one correspondence between left and right parentheses, with each left parenthesis to the left of its corresponding right parenthesis."
Going for a ride
why not just invest where the goobermunt can't get their greedy mits on ya capital
It is what it is
Forum whore
Actually, its much worse than that. The biggest rip-off is still to bite you.
Its called Kiwi-saver.
Lets look at the BEST case.
Assuming your Kiwi-Saver provider doesnt go broke
Assuming your Kiwi-Saver tax subsidy is not reduced by a future government
Assuming your Kiwi-Saver provider doesnt charge fees that reduce your income to nil
Assuming your Kiwi-Saver eligibility date doesnt change
Assuming your Kiwi-Saver works exactly as planned !
Then you are rooted.
Thats because you arent the same age as your partner.
Right now, when the oldest of you reaches 65, you can BOTH go on the pension.
If you earn a bit of pocket money its OK, but once you income passes $80 a week, you lose 90% in the dollar to pension abatement.
Thats how kiwisaver will root you.
You turn 65.
The missus is a child bride, she's 55. You go on the pension, as a couple. But you don't get paid any money. As the child bride has invested in kiwisaver, she has an income. She can't get her hands on the money. She isn't even investing in it anymore. But the income she gets, (that she can't access until SHE is 65) abates the pension by 0.90 c in the dollar.
So, you are really rooted.
It effectively raises the age of retirement to 65 for the youngest partner, not the oldest.
David must play fair with the other kids, even the idiots.
L-Plate Rider
I agree with you Maki
I agree totally, Maki. I am possibly in the same position as you. The government says kiwis should save more but then puts out clear disincentives to saving. I have saved a reasonable chunk of cash and have it in the bank. It earns a good amount per month in interest of which the government used to take 39% tax off that. I am taxed 39% on the earnings before I save as well and can't claim any expenses in earning that money or bank fees. Friends of mine have rental properties and have bought them with the clear intention of making a loss through negative gearing which they claim back to reduce the government tax take and often get a tax reduction for doing so. They won't be taxed on any profits they make when they sell their rental properties and are now upset that interest rates are going up and house prices are going down. They are only just learning that negative gearing works well when prices are going up and not when going down. I have put my appreciating assests and cash in a trust which means I pay less tax. Rental property can make a profit if it is positively geared but then you run into the same problems as you do with money in the bank, you are taxed at your highest rate once again. The government won't change the rules in my opinion for a couple of reasons;
1.a lot of them own rental property, why would they ruin their profits?
2.a lot of the growth during their term has been through speculative rises in real estate prices and associated spending, if they kill that off they kill the golden goose which has propped up a big chunk of the economy.
I would like to be able to say vote out Cullen and his "let them eat cake" government but I think the next bu99ers will do the same thing too.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks