o sung wu,

Don't be deceived by Malcolm's alleged largesse.
He claims to donate "every cent" of his PM salary to charity but what he doesn't say is that charity is The Turnbull Foundation.

The Foundation is what is called a Personal Ancillary Fund and is used to channel donations to other charities. These funds were set up by Howard as a way to get the wealthy to become philanthopists but the Tax Office regards them as a Tax Avoidance mechanism.

For some reason, the wealthy are unable to reach into their pockets and hand over a tax-paid donation like the rest of us. There has to be something in it for them too.

To maintain the Fund charity status, it has to donate at least 5% of it's total (or $11,000 - whatever is the greater) per annum. The rest can be used for "other purposes" - such as paying yourself Director's Fees and whatever expenses you choose. Because it's a private fund he doesn't have to tell the public - or even the tax office - what he does with the non-donation component, just pay at least 5% to recognised charities.

The average donation from all the private Funds nationally is only around 8% so it's unlikely all of the Funds are being used entirely for charitable purposes but to minimise tax.

I don't know if the Fund payouts are tax deductable but his salary going into it certainly is.

Therefore he's avoiding paying any tax on his PM salary but converting it all into a tax deduction against other income and controlling the payout to be a possible minimum of 5%. His other investments are also avoiding tax in Australia by using the Cayman Islands tax haven.

That's not a good example for someone who talks a lot about the importance of taxation for the country.

And who leaked this information about his donations and alleged generosity?

Malcolm Turnbull himself.

Kerry Packer once said to "never get between Turnbull and a sack of gold" and considering his other ventures, he was probably correct.

Right now things are tough, many can not buy a home many cannot even rent one in our city's,current Liberal policy includes negative gearing and tax cuts for the banks, cuts to penalty rates, working age raised to 70,very tight control, sometimes unfairly, to welfare cards imposed on some welfare receivers in what increasingly seems a war on those in need, most of us are old enough to know the party's founder Sir Robert Menzies, clearly, bought blue collar workers to his brand of Liberalism,only Howard from that side of politics understood his voters, and too bought them to his tent, can any , any one truly tell me this current surge to the right Liberal party care even a little about other than its well off base? thinks ordinary hard workers are other than a target? them and us, still has meaning when talking about this government

Hi there RACHE...

It shows how much I know about things doesn't it, being the proverbial mushroom. I make no bones about it; how much I dislike Malcolm TURNBULL and everything the bastard stands for. Treachery is something that very few can abide by, most assuredly the Australian People.

Being a 'far right' devotee all my life, I cannot in good conscience ever vote for TURNBULL, even for the position of Assistant Dog Catcher in the Great Stoney Desert somewhere. It's really terrible RACHE, we've really got so little choice from whom to vote, for a genuine Conservative? Thank you for explaining the tax dodge, our PM employs, to reduce his taxation obligations.

I imagine that many wealthy and successful businessmen
and women get legal advice on their taxes - and what
they can or can't do. I doubt if Malcolm Turnbull is
the only one taking advantage of the loop-holes
available to him. I think that's par for the course.

I watched "Q&A" last night (30/07/2018) and what did
bother me was the replies that came from the Members
of Parliament on the panel to the questions asked.

Mitch Fifield was asked some relevant policy questions
that he was unable to answer. He went on and on that
the young school=-boy who asked the questions began to
nod off and looked like he was going to fall asleep -
while Fifield continued with the usual party spin.
In all it really showed a vast disconnect between some
of our politicions and the general public. Which makes
one wonder - how did these people ever get elected?

Shouldn't we demand more from our representatives?

Another things that became obvious - was that the current
policies of the Liberal Party - need a major overhaul.
They certainly don't look like they've got much of a chance
of getting in at the next election - ion their current policies.
And a change in leadership is not going to fix that.

A change in policies might help.

IF if I was the leader of this government, and if I wanted it re-elected, policy would be the tool used not leadership and not needless insulting attacks on the other side, first? negotiate the Malaysian solution,close every offshore detention center ,but increase refugee intake, kill tax breaks for a few years until we know what direction the world economy is heading, replace the retiring age of 70 to 62, but insist every collector of superannuation in the hundreds of thousands range live off it until 65, hence more jobs,add to current super rules both more tax cuts for contributors and a law stating some self funding rather than all welfare be part of it,stop! the war on wages, over time is the extra cash that gets some from poverty to living a bit better truly see wage earners as other than the enemies of capitalism

Dear Belly,

What you're suggesting makes a great deal of sense.

Thank You.