as I go thru the download from Christopher, it gives totals for refunds for individuals , smsf's and small Apra funds. These are in tables C5,c6 and c7, comes to bit over 5 billion. Figures in all 3 tables seem to have some anomalies. Rather than go thru these in dribs and drabs, I will wait for some comments on my previous posts. It seems that the retail and industry funds don't get refunds, at least the few I have looked at. AustralianSuper about 1 billion in net tax on the 2017 financials? So I assume that is why there is no mention of them.Only just got back in , and the other down load is more interesting. The number didn't come from this lot, but from the ATO figures on total refunds of credits, I'll ferret it out. But look like ballpark compared with numbers in these figures.A quick read of that, the figures don't make sense to me.
Just a flavour[on a quick glance, lots more]: table c5 for individuals: over 109k taxable
now my numbers give about 32,700 fc for someone on 109 taxable, if it is ALL fully franked dividends.
tax on 109k about 28k
therefore refund 4700 dollars
tax on 180000 54 k
max fc for that person is 54k
refund 0
tax on 150k about 43000
fc max 45k
refund 2k
And of course it gets worse after 180k because the marginal rate is 47c in dollar[no one in this group gets a refund].
So how can the average claim for refund be 11800 dollars in the post 109k taxable income group?
I MUST be missing something, what have I got wrong?
Plus table C6 on smsf's, the [inconsequential ] large funds seem to be contributing greater than 50% of the claims for excess credits.
Any help pointing out the fallacy gratefully accepted, I must have got it wrong?
Going out now, printing it all out, if I don't drink too much, I'll read it in bed.
So, it seems there is approx 3 billion refunds going to SMSF, yet it would seem they have to capture all of this to get their savings target. So where is the allowance for behavioural change, especially as a large part of the refunds seems to be going to funds greater than 1.6 million. And it doesn't look like it would takes into account the effect of smaller funds moving to large industry funds, where the excess credits would be swallowed up by the large net tax bills paid by this fund. So, decrease in refunds, but decrease in superannuation tax offsetting this. All this suggests my scepticism about the 50 billion savings to revenue seem well founded.
So 15% long term estimate (guess). Hard to believe they expected (especially last May) to gather more revenue in 2021/22 than 2021/20 given the uncertainty about whether this vertical equity fail will get through the Senate. Super funds and everyone else will be far more reluctant to change before they know legislation is passed than after and it won't be passed until after a lot of franked dividends for 2019/20 are on their way (if ever).
