Dear kirby483,

You write;

“If you normally pay zero or 19% tax rate and you pay 32.5% tax on one particular type of investment,that's almost double. So I apologise in not using the correct wording.”

I'm afraid if the apology is for incorrect wording then I don't accept it. I will accept you saying you were patently wrong in what you had earlier asserted something which is a LNP talking point but which bears little resemblance to the facts, and now you wish to correct it.

It isn't your father-in-law who is paying the company tax is it? It is the company and it went to the tax department to pay for things like hospitals and schools and pensioner benefits. Sure your father-in-law should be able to get a credit on the other tax he he might have paid for the year, but that isn't what he is asking for is it. He wants a cash payout because he hasn't paid any other tax with which to offset it. The Labour party is saying no, this is a loophole and we can't afford it, and I agree with them. We are one of the very few countries who are allowing people to do this.

The original provision was to prevent double dipping on tax payments by the tax office. That isn't happening here though is it? Tax is only getting paid once and it is going to the commonweal where it should.

Dear kirby483,

Perhaps this will assist.

http://www.facebook.com/abcqanda/videos/2446160858951703/

So, you think an unemployed person who has some shares, should pay 30% tax, compared to an unemployed person who owns an investment property pays zero or 19% tax.

It is not a loop hole, its NOT FAIR.

Even my economics students understand this, yet you blindly believe that somehow low income earners who have shares are ripping off the government with this loop hole.

People who have shares (unless inherited) have earnt income, paid income tax and with what is left over invested for the future, the labor party wants to tax what you earn, increase tax when you sell an asset (increase in CGT)tax the dividends and provide no relief for lower income earners.

Please tell me how an unemployed person earning $30000 in interest in the bank would pay 19% tax, an unemployed person owing an investment property earning $30k p.a. rent would pay less than 19% tax (due to depreciation and possible no tax)and an unemployed share holder pays 30% tax, how is this FAIR?

A 2018 national survey conducted by the Museum of Australian Democracy and the University of Canberra found satisfaction with Australia’s democracy HAS MORE THAN HALVED between 2007 and 2018.

And , at the 2016 federal election, NEARLY 40% OF VOTERS DID NOT VOTE FOR THE MAJORS: twenty-four per cent voted for minor parties and independents, five per cent voted informal and nine per cent didn’t even turn up to vote.

Times 'are a a-changeing', and there's not much time left for politicians to get the message that voters regard them as rubbish.

The government DARE NOT run on its record, so confusing some is their best tool
Franking credits can no longer be sustained in an economy not far from faltering
Been an interesting few days,both a Labor and smaller party, then the government, had to get rid of a candidate
One nation? well it is expected from them
Then the homophobic small war that saw another Lib resign
Highlighting BOTH partys must control some of their members
It is getting to be fun this election

kirby483 don't waste your time.

As my mother used to say, there are none so dumb as those who don't want to understand.

As you can see, we have more than a few dumb contributors here.