logo
New details emerge about Anthony Albanese's super tax and the bold move to win over supporters

New details emerge about Anthony Albanese's super tax and the bold move to win over supporters

Daily Mail​3 hours ago

Labor's new plan to tax superannuation balances above $3million will reportedly allow people to pay the charge from their super funds, rather than having to sell assets to cover the costs.
The federal government wants to impose an extra 15 per cent tax on earnings for super balances above $3 million, bringing the total tax rate to 30 per cent for those in that bracket.
The proposal has sparked criticism for including unrealised capital gains, meaning that assets that have increased in value, such as property or shares, could also be taxed even before they're accessed.
There were fears this could force self-managed super funds to sell assets like properties and shares to avoid being slugged.
But Sky News Australia reports that individuals in that tax bracket could pay the levy out of their super balances, rather than being forced to sell assets.
This mirrors existing arrangements for people who are already taxed more on earnings above $250,000.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers reportedly believes the fact that people can pay the tax out of their super should quieten critics who claim people will be forced to offload assets to pay for it.
The Coalition confirmed last week it would consider voting in favour of Labor's policy to raise taxes if it scrapped the unrealised gains element and indexed the $3million threshold.
But Treasurer Jim Chalmers dropped a major hint that he will not negotiate with the Opposition as the government does not need the Opposition's approval as it has the numbers to get any bill through the Senate with the help of the Greens.
Dr Chalmers told 7.30 host Sarah Ferguson the government would prefer to deal with the Greens than the Coalition.
'I'm not convinced that they're fair dinkum when it comes to making superannuation tax concessions a little bit fairer, and I think my opposite number has made that clear that they're not interested in that,' he said.
'We'll obviously have discussions with other parties in the Senate to do what we can to pass that legislation.'
This refusal to negotiate with the Opposition was made despite Prime Minister Anthony Albanese last week saying the government would negotiate with the Coalition over super policy.
'We do not have a majority in the Senate; we obviously work with different parties,' the Albanese said.
While Labor has a landslide majority in the House of Representatives, it needs the support of 10 other senators to get any legislation passed through the upper house.
The Greens are enthusiastic about the proposed tax, and in fact want it to kick it on balances of $2million and above, not $3million.
Crossbencher senators David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie last year refused to support Labor's plan to tax unrealised gains, meaning the government could only rely on the Greens in the Senate.
Shadow treasurer Ted O'Brien this week said the Coalition would be open to negotiating with the government on super provided it dropped plans to tax unrealised gains and indexed the $3million threshold.
'When it comes to all policies, including this one, the Coalition will always be open however that doesn't mean a blank cheque,' he told Sky News.
'If indeed, Jim Chalmers wants to come and have a discussion with the Coalition about his super tax, he would have to firstly walk away from the unrealised capital gains component, at least.
'He should be compromising on indexation. Now, if he caves in on all of those things and wants to talk about super reform, let's have a chat about super reform.'
Accountants argue taxing unrealised gains would stop self-managed super funds from investing in assets that can quickly appreciate in value, such as technology start-ups; starving that sector of funds.
Concerns have also been raised about Labor's decision no to index the proposed $3 million tax threshold to inflation.
This means that far more people will be pushed into that tax bracket in future.
, even if compulsory employer super contributions stayed constant.
They are rising to 12 per cent on July 1, up from 11.5 per cent.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘My children could pay up to 90pc on their inheritance. What can we do?'
‘My children could pay up to 90pc on their inheritance. What can we do?'

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

‘My children could pay up to 90pc on their inheritance. What can we do?'

Write to Pensions Doctor with your pension problem: pensionsdoctor@ Columns are published weekly. Dear Charlene, I'm worried that with the upcoming changes to pensions, my children are going to potentially face 'double taxes' on what I leave to them. I've read about tax rates of 50pc, 60pc and even 90pc in some cases. I'm 75 next month (my wife is already 75) and my two children are nominated to get one third each of my fund, with my share of the house and Isas to pass to my wife (and vice versa). I've already taken the tax-free cash from my pensions which now stand at £800,000. Our Isas and cash savings are worth £400,000 between us and the house could potentially be worth £1m. I'm weighing up taking more money out of my pensions even though we can comfortably live off our current income. Will this do anything to help or am I wrong about the high tax rates? Kind regards, – Roger Dear Roger, The proposals to bring pensions into inheritance tax (IHT) have led to this policy being described as a 'double whammy'. The current income tax rules on inherited pensions revolve around the age of the pension holder. This is not due to change under the proposals. Currently, if a pension holder dies before age 75, with a defined contribution scheme like a Sipp, no income tax will normally be paid by their beneficiaries on money they take from the pension. If the pension holder was over 75 when they died, their beneficiaries pay income tax on any withdrawals. This is why many people have described the new plans as being 'double tax', because some beneficiaries could see the pot reduced due to inheritance tax, and then income tax when they withdraw cash if the pension holder died age 75 or over. A spousal exemption for IHT will still apply to any unused pension funds left to spouses or civil partners but anything left could form part of their estate on second death. The combination of IHT, then income tax, means that anything that passes to your children could face a tax charge of up to 52pc if they are basic-rate taxpayers when they withdraw any inherited funds, 64pc if they are subject to higher tax rate and 67pc if they pay the additional rate of income tax. Estates worth more than £2m The 90pc rate is an extreme example – but relates to how 'nil-rate bands' for IHT are reduced in certain circumstances. Every estate gets a nil-rate band of £325,000 on which no IHT is payable. If passing property to a direct descendant, then an additional 'residence nil-rate band' of up to £175,000 each is also available. Both of these allowances can be transferred between spouses, so it's common to hear that a married couple can leave up to £1m tax free between them before IHT applies. Where an estate exceeds £2m the residence nil-rate band starts to be reduced at a rate of £1 for every £2 over the threshold, until it disappears for estates over £2,350,000. The cumulative effect of the lost residence nil-rate band, plus the higher rates of income tax, could lead to an effective tax rate of 90pc for some large estates if unused pensions are also included for deaths after April 2027. As I've mentioned before, it is difficult to weigh up options until we have more details on exactly how the rules will work. People who are in their late 70s or 80s already understandably feel frustrated by the lack of detail, as they might feel they have less time to act compared to those in the early years of retirement. Lots of people have considered simply spending more in retirement as a way of avoiding the tax man taking a share of their pensions under the new rules. For you, that will mean paying income tax on the extra money you draw from your Sipp. What rate of tax you'll pay depends on your other taxable income. Others who feel they really don't need the money, or already have more than enough to last them through retirement and potential care costs, are considering making use of gifting rules and available exemptions in their lifetimes. I've covered how making gifts from income can end up funding pension contributions for younger family members – and even get them tax relief in this previous article. What action is best for you will of course depend on your personal situation and is an area where advice could help you and your beneficiaries save money. My suggestion would be to wait until we've got more information on the rules and then consider getting some professional advice about your estate planning, especially when it comes to reviewing your wills and considering gifts. This could help avoid any costly mistakes and make a huge difference to the amount your loved ones can inherit. With best wishes, –Charlene Charlene Young is a pensions and savings expert at online investment platform AJ Bell. Her columns should not be taken as advice or as a personal recommendation, but as a starting point for readers to undertake their own further research.

California governor accuses Trump of 'acts of a dictator'
California governor accuses Trump of 'acts of a dictator'

The Herald Scotland

time2 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

California governor accuses Trump of 'acts of a dictator'

Gavin accused Trump of "inciting and provoking violence," "creating mass chaos" and "militarizing cities." "These are the acts of a dictator, not a President," Newsom said. The two men have long been at odds. Trump said on social media June 7 that federal authorities needed to step in because of the inaction of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Newsom, who Trump has nicknamed. "If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!" Trump said in the post. The two have repeatedly clashed, most recently in late May, when Trump threatened to cut California's federal funding after a transgender high school athlete qualified for the state championship. "Large scale Federal Funding will be held back, maybe permanently," Trump said at the time, if California fails to follow an executive order he signed Feb. 5 seeking to bar transgender student athletes from playing women's sports. Newsom, a Democrat with presidential aspirations, has also sparred with Trump over tariffs, fighting fires and the management of water and environmental resources, though he has also criticized his own party.

Alleged money laundering scheme is busted as cops uncover complex network in Australia
Alleged money laundering scheme is busted as cops uncover complex network in Australia

Daily Mail​

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Alleged money laundering scheme is busted as cops uncover complex network in Australia

A security company allegedly used an armoured transport service to smuggle cash around the nation as it laundered millions of dollars of criminal proceeds. Three men - aged 32, 48 and 58 - and a 35-year-old woman have been charged with multiple money laundering offences, Australian Federal Police say. Investigations continue into the scheme that allegedly transferred $190million into cryptocurrency between October 2022 and May 2024. Authorities have restrained 17 properties, bank accounts and luxury cars in NSW and Queensland worth more than $21million, allegedly purchased with tainted money. 'This investigation has unravelled a sophisticated operation that allegedly moved illicit cash around the country,' AFP Detective Superintendent Adrian Telfer told reporters on Monday. 'It was truly a national operation, laundering the profits of criminal ventures across the country, (and) these cash profits were being flown into Queensland to be washed and returned to individuals.' Investigators allege the Gold Coast-based security company used a complex network of bank accounts, businesses, couriers and cryptocurrency accounts to launder millions of dollars of illicit funds over 18 months. 'The results we are announcing today will deliver a significant blow to alleged individuals, whoever relied on this operation to turn their ill-got profits into property portfolios, luxury cars and cryptocurrency,' Mr Telfer said. AFP Detective Superintendent Adrian Telfer claimed the alleged operation was a 'sophisticated operation that allegedly moved illicit cash around the country' (pictured, a Nissan GT-R seized by police) The 48-year-old man and the woman, who were the director and general manager respectively of the security business, were each charged with a money laundering offence. The couple was granted bail to face Southport Magistrates Court on July 21. The 58-year-old man is accused of funnelling laundered money through a business account to a separate business account controlled by the 32-year-old man. He was also charged with two money laundering offences and was granted bail to face Brisbane Magistrates Court on August 1. The 32-year-old man is accused of laundering $9.5 million through the operation over 15 months. He has been charged with money laundering and failing to provide the password to a mobile phone. He has been remanded in custody and is scheduled to face Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store