Anticipated dividend Feb 19, page-51

so if bhp was owned in a trust, partnership or sole trader structure who would pay tax?

the whole point of our franking system is to avoid double taxation.

20 posts and using a hospital and schools funding example. What’s up getup? 

All retirees ownjng bhp? What spaceship world do you live in? 40% of bhp is listed in the UK, due to our double tax agreement that means 30% tax paid by bhp remains just that 30% as non resident companies cannot get a refund. Doubt you have any clue what I’m talking about. The remaining bhp is owned via an Aussie structure, however a significant amount is owned by international funds who are not Australian, thus again, 30% franking credit not refunded. Australian holding companies still same thing, taxed at 30% so no difference. Superfunds, they have a mixed tax rate due to pooled MITS/AMITs. So they’d pay less than 30% tax and get a refund and attribute it back to members so they can retire.

High income ewrners like myself still probably only own a few percent on bhp, we pay 46.5% so more tax in addition to the franking credit. Low income earners which probably represent 1% or less of BHP’s shareholder base would get the tax back. 

So what im saying is that most owners of bhp have a tax rate at 30% or higher, so no refund. Don’t bring the ‘school funding’ into this. Their are plenty of spend thrift programs labor or even libs can cut instead of taxing people who shouldn’t be taxed.