In an interview with Sky News Business, Mr Henderson said the opposition had taken a “harsh stance” on the issue of refundable excess dividend imputation credits, echoing sentiments made by fellow adviser and accountant Michael Pinn.
“SMSF trustees might be ‘millionaires’ but they’re not wealthy … it’s a bit of a tragedy, Bill Shorten’s been a bit of a goose on this,” Mr Henderson said.
“[The policy would] take away between $5,000 and $10,000 from a group that have already had their incomes cut. So they’re going to be very angry and very frustrated and they’re not going to be voting Labor at the next election.”
Take a listen to Mr Henderson’s comments below:
Whose the goose now Sam.
Royal Commission today – so who is the goose now Sam?
The inability of either party to look past the next election and actually develop intelligent and equitable long-term policy for the community as a whole is the greatest advertisement for a hereditary monarchy I’ve ever seen.
A pox on both their houses…
“SMSF trustees might be ‘millionaires’ but they’re not wealthy” – does this guy live on the same planet as everyone else! That is pretty wealthy where I come from.
Leaving aside the argument of over where the line between rich and not so rich is drawn, My question is at what point does the Labor party give up on this class warfare?
This should be about more than trying to find a policy that helps the budget but doesn’t hurt your election chances.
Like changing the rules in a game of footy at half time . Retirees , pensioners and Mr & Mrs average have used strategies available to retire and to be less burden on the government after paying high taxes for up to 50 years only to have rules changed because they are easy targets to an opposition that can not come up with anything new.
Who advises these fools. Calling BS a Goose is an insult to this bird although what is coming out of his mouth is pure BS.
80%+ of the value of franking credits are going to those with more than $1m in their SMSF’s. Hardly Mr and Mrs Average so lets actually look at the numbers and have a rational debate. It’s not like these rules have been enshrined in our tax system since the dawn of time. We all have to sacrifice for the greater good sometimes where changes need to be made. If that means only 6% dividend instead of 7.5% I am sure you won’t be on the street…
Please do advise. For what greater good am I being asked to sacrifice part of my income?
All Shorten is doing is winding back the policy to what Keating had intended which was to use imputation to avoid double taxation before Howard extended it to include refunds of franking for low tax payers. Is it not enough that retirees pay 0% tax on income on assets up to $1.6m?? When you invest in a company they pay tax on the income they produce before it gets to you. That seems fairly normal to me. It’s a bit like negative gearing where taxpayers are subsidising investors to the tune of $5bn as a reward for putting money in assets that don’t generate enough cash flow to cover interest costs.
The silver lining in all this is that it might encourage SMSF’s to look beyond blue-chip shares and sensibly diversify into some other asset classes. This cohort’s structural overweight to ASX has been to their detriment since post GFC where offshore has significantly outperformed. If they had picked up some of these gains perhaps we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Anything that distorts a market should be looked at but certainly no easy solution..
Gen Y – you will retire one day and hello, forget sitting back and waiting for any inheritance! You talk about vested interest and retirees yet you have no idea what it is like to be a retiree and live off the money you have made on these low interest rates. Some of the comments above really show a lot of ignorance. PS: I am not retired but I do have 25 years dealing with retirees trying to not live off the government. With such low interest rates it is not easy. Australians love their franking credits – this will hurt Shorten big time no matter what your opinion is!
Haven’t the Union backed industry pension funds realised it will affect their fund returns as well. Unless of course it is ONLY smsf tax Returns that take the hit which should be construed via the constitution as discrimination against a certain component of the community.
Next step get rid of SATO. Another ridiculous rort boosting the incomes of the property windfall generation.
Excess credits received in super funds would be gone also and reduce everyone’s retirement nest egg.
This group of people have had to deal with margin tax rates up to 60%. Company tax rates for their business’s much higher than today eg in 1986 they were 49%. Don’t forget wholesale sales tax which was much higher than GST and if in business could not claim back the tax. Oh don’t forget they also endured housing loan interest rates of 12% plus in the 80s and 90s.
This policy is just insulting to people who have saved and taken investment risks in starting business’s etc to save some funds for retirement
How unusual that someone with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo would not support proposed changes to it…
Unlikely as a group to be voting Labor in the first case. I’m pretty sure that Shorten has written this group off
Bill Shorten’s a goose alright. But not because of this issue. For once he’s got it right.
Okay, but I guess you still expect higher tax bracket earners to cough up the difference if their marginal tax rate is higher than the corporate rate…yes?
They do.