Search

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> If just one state of Australia, New South Wales, scrapped its stamp duty on real-estate transactions, about 100,000 more Australians would move homes each year, according to our <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">best estimates</a>. Stamp duty is an unquestioned part of buying a home in Australia – you put your details in an online mortgage calculator, and stamp duty is automatically deducted from the amount you have to contribute. It’s easy to overlook how much more affordable a home would be without it. That means it’s also easy to overlook how much more Australians would buy and move if stamp duty wasn’t there. The 2010 Henry Tax Review found stamp duty was <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-10/afts_final_report_part_2_vol_1_consolidated.pdf">inequitable</a>. It taxes most the people who most need to or want to move. The review reported: "Ideally, there would be no role for any stamp duties, including conveyancing stamp duties, in a modern Australian tax system. Recognising the revenue needs of the States, the removal of stamp duty should be achieved through a switch to more efficient taxes, such as those levied on broad consumption or land bases." But does stamp duty actually stop anyone moving? It’s a claim more often made than assessed, which is what our team at the <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stamp-duty-effects-on-purchases-and-moves.pdf">e61 Institute</a> set out to do. We used real-estate transaction data and a natural experiment. <h2>What happened when Queensland hiked stamp duty</h2> In 2011, Queensland hiked stamp duty for most buyers by removing some concessions for owner-occupiers at short notice. For owner-occupiers it increased stamp duty by about one percentage point, lifting the average rate from 1.26% of the purchase price to 2.27%. What we found gives us the best estimate to date of what stamp duty does to home purchases. A one percentage point increase in stamp duty causes the number of home purchases to decline by 7.2%. The number of moves (changes of address) falls by about as much. The effect appears to be indiscriminate. Purchases of houses fell about as much as purchases of apartments, and purchases in cities fell about as much as purchases in regions. Moves between suburbs and moves interstate dropped by similar rates. With NSW stamp duty currently averaging about <a href="https://conveyancing.com.au/need-to-know/stamp-duty-nsw">3.5%</a> of the purchase price, our estimates suggest there would be about 25% more purchases and moves by home owners if it were scrapped completely. That’s 100,000 moves. Victoria’s higher rate of stamp duty, about <a href="https://www.sro.vic.gov.au/rates-taxes-duties-and-levies/general-land-transfer-duty-property-current-rates">4.2%</a>, means if it was scrapped there would be about 30% more purchases. That’s another 90,000 moves. <h2>Even low headline rates have big effects</h2> The big effect from small-looking headline rates ought not to be surprising. When someone buys a home, they typically front up much less cash than the purchase price. While stamp duty seems low as a percentage of the purchase price, it is high as a percentage of the cash the buyer needs to find. Here’s an example. If stamp duty is 4% of the purchase price, and a purchaser pays $800,000 for a property with a mortgage deposit of $160,000, the $32,000 stamp duty adds 20%, not 4%, to what’s needed. If the deposit takes five years to save, stamp duty makes it six. A similar thing happens when an owner-occupier changes address. If the buyer sells a fully owned home for $700,000 and buys a new home for $800,000, the upgrade ought to cost them $100,000. A 4% stamp duty lifts that to $132,000. Averaged across all Australian cities, stamp duty costs about <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">five months</a> of after-tax earnings. In Sydney and Melbourne, it’s six. <h2>Stamp duty has bracket creep</h2> This cost has steadily climbed from around <a href="https://e61.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Stepped-on-by-Stamp-Duty.pdf">six weeks</a> of total earnings in the 1990s. It has happened because home prices have climbed faster than incomes and because stamp duty has brackets, meaning more buyers have been pushed into higher ones. Replacing the stamp duty revenue that states have come to rely on would not be easy, but a switch would almost certainly help the economy function better. The more that people are able to move, the more they will move to jobs to which they are better suited, boosting productivity. The more that people downsize when they want to, the more housing will be made available for others. Our findings suggest the costs are far from trivial, making a switch away from stamp duty worthwhile, even if it is disruptive and takes time.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/225773/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-garvin-1453835">Nick Garvin</a>, Adjunct Fellow, Department of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stamp-duty-is-holding-us-back-from-moving-homes-weve-worked-out-how-much-225773">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"There's no way": Man receives $52 billion tax bill

An American man has been left confused after receiving a letter from the government claiming he owed $52 billion in unpaid taxes. Barry Tangert got two letters in the mail from the state of Pennsylvania, opening the first to find a refund check from the federal government for over $900. His joy was short-lived though as he opened the second letter to find the income billing notice from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue claiming that he owed a jaw-dropping $52,950,744,735.28 ($34,576,826,561.47 AUD). “I knew it was an obvious blunder. I don’t even make over $100,000 a year, so there’s no way I could owe anywhere near that,” Barry Tangert told local outlet News 8. The total sum was so large it didn’t even fit on a single line on the document. Tangert immediately knew it was a mistake, with the astonishing number being more than triple the $11 billion America’s richest man Elon Musk says he owed the government in 2022. How the error made it all the way to his doorstep is still a mystery to Tangert. “I don’t know if it was a computer glitch in the transmission or if it was an input error from my tax preparer,” Tangert said, noting that his tax preparer filed an amendment after noticing an error on his 2022 return. He reached out to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue’s customer service line, which also provided little help to the baffled man. “The first thing he said was, ‘You had a good year.’ And I said, ‘I wish,’” Tangert said. Fortunately, the state department has since resolved the issue, which it chalked up to wrong numbers simply being put into the system. Image credits: WGAL News 8

Money & Banking

What to expect from the federal budget

There's just three weeks left until Treasurer Jim Chalmers unveils the federal budget. With the cost of living crisis still a major issue across the country, we can expect to see some policies aimed at alleviating the pressure. Some policies, have already been announced and here are a few others that we can expect to hear from Chalmers on May 14. Stage 3 cuts announced in January, will form a key part of this year's budget, which will direct more benefit towards low- and middle-income earners – although Australians on high salaries will still receive a tax cut. The decision was made to alleviate the cost-of-living pressures and partly address the bracket creep. The cuts lower the threshold for the lowest two brackets (so they pay less tax on that income), and raise the threshold for the highest two brackets (so they need to earn more to be taxed at a higher rate). This means that someone with average income of around $73,000 will get $1504, but how much you actually receive will depend on your income. The new version of the stage 3 cuts will come into effect on July 1. Superannuation will be paid on government-funded parental leave, with the change due to kick in for parents with babies born after July 1, 2025. They will receive a 12 per cent superannuation on top of their government-funded parental leave, with around 180,000 families expected to benefit from it. The figures will be included in the May 14 budget. Although nothing has been officially announced, there will likely be HECS-HELP debt relief for current and former students. "I think there's a range of areas where we need to do much better with the younger generation, and HECS is one of them," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on radio on April 18. "We've received a review of that... and what that has said is that the system can be made simpler and be made fairer. "We're examining the recommendations and we'll be making announcements pretty soon on that. We, of course, have a budget coming up." There have also been some hints from the government that energy bill relief will continue in this year's budget. "Our government understands that for small business – as for Australian families – energy bills remain a source of financial pressure," Albanese said, citing the existing policy that gives eligible families up to $500 off their power bills and eligible small businesses up to $650. "Our government understands that for small business – as for Australian families – energy bills remain a source of financial pressure," he said. "That's why the energy bill relief package I negotiated with the states and territories delivered up to $650 in savings for around 1 million small businesses, along with 5 million families. "And as we put together next month's budget, small businesses and families will again be front and centre in our thinking." Energy bills are also set to go down, or remain stable for the most part from July 1. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Property tycoon sentenced to death over $27 billion fraud

A Vietnamese billionaire was sentenced to death on Thursday in one of the biggest corruption cases in history, an estimated $27 billion in damages - a figure equivalent to six percent of the country’s 2023 GDP. Truong My Lan, chair of major developer Van Thinh Phat, was found guilty of embezzlement, after looting from one of the country's biggest banks, Saigon Commercial Bank (SCB) for over a decade. “The defendant’s actions... eroded people’s trust in the leadership of the (Communist) Party and state,” the verdict read at the trial in Ho Chi Minh City. After a five-week trial, 85 others were also charged for their involvement in the fraud, with charges ranging from from bribery and abuse of power to appropriation and violations of banking law. Four were given life imprisonment, while others received jail terms ranging between 20 years and three years suspended. Lan's husband was Hong Kong billionaire Eric Chu Nap Kee, was sentenced to nine years in prison. Lan and the others were arrested as part of a national corruption crackdown. Lan was initially believed to have embezzled $12.5 billion, but on Thursday prosecutors have said that the total damages caused by the fraud now amounted to $27 billion. The property tycoon was convicted of taking out $44bn in loans from the bank, according to the BBC, with prosecutors saying that $27 billion of this may never be recovered. The court ordered Lan to to pay almost the entire damages sum in compensation. It is also <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68778636" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that she is one of very few women in Vietnam to be sentenced to death for a white collar crime. “In my desperation, I thought of death,” Lan said in her final remarks to the court, according to state media. “I am so angry that I was stupid enough to get involved in this very fierce business environment -- the banking sector -- which I have little knowledge of.” Police have identified around 42,000 victims of the scam, and many of them were unhappy with the verdict. One 67-year-old Hanoi resident told the AFP that she had hoped Lan would receive a life sentence so she could fully witness the devastating impact of her actions. “Many people worked hard to deposit money into the bank, but now she’s received the death sentence and that’s it for her,” they said. “She can’t see the suffering of the people.” The resident has so far been unable to retrieve the $120,000 she invested with SCB. Police have said that many of the victims are SCB bondholders, who cannot withdraw their money and have not received interest or principal payments since Lan’s arrest. Authorities have also reportedly seized over 1000 properties belonging to Lan. Image: Twitter

Legal

Sunrise rocked by allegation of "fraud"

Sunrise and the Seven Network have been rocked by an investigation by their biggest competitor, who exposed both allegations of "fraud", as well as threatening emails to a young journalist at Nine who was chasing the story. The scandal began when a reporter for the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/new-seven-expenses-affair-rocks-sunrise-top-network-executives-20240408-p5fi6w.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sydney Morning Herald</a> was alerted to an investigation being conducted by an independent law firm into the Sunrise program. According to reports by Nine, the law firm began an investigation, which was also conducted by a financial and corporate auditor, into reports that Sunrise staff members had grossly misused travel benefits. The allegations claimed that a small number of Sunrise staffers, as well as some of their friends and family, had taken flights and stayed in hotels on trips not related to their work duties, using benefits provided to the network by Qantas as part of a multimillion-dollar advertising and sponsorship deal. When business reporter for the Australian Financial Review Zoe Samios, a publication owned by Nine, reached out to Seven’s long-time commercial director Bruce McWilliam to chase the story, she was allegedly met with threatening emails saying her probes into the allegations had caused Seven’s star executive producer Michael Pell to self-harm. “This is what your unfounded reports have caused Michael to do,” Mr McWilliam wrote to Ms Samios in October last year. Attached to the email was a graphic image of him, bloodied and in a hospital gown, with a noticeable head wound. “Why don’t you keep it up so he kills himself. You are a complete disgrace. That law firm you name didn’t conduct any investigation. If you publish untrue allegations … and he tops himself. It’s on you. We are determined to protect him,” the email read. Speaking exclusively to <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/sunrise-rocked-by-fraud-investigations-that-top-tv-exec-tried-to-keep-secret/news-story/4b755d82167f825140c63b6e07107745" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a> on Thursday as the investigations were made public for the first time, Mr McWilliam defended the email and said he was defending a colleague and “friend” against “false allegations”. However, several months before the email, Mr Pell had stepped down as the boss of Sunrise and was appointed Seven's Senior Vice President of Entertainment Content in North America, and he moved to Los Angeles shortly after. On Thursday, Mr McWilliam told news.com.au that he became incensed when Mr Pell’s name was linked to the investigation, prompting his fiery email to Samios. “The accusations against Michael were exaggerated,” he told news.com.au. “I make no excuse for having acted to protect a colleague, against whom false allegations were being made. Michael Pell has been a friend of mine for many years.” The newspaper subsequently agreed to kill the story over concerns for Mr Pell’s mental health and wellbeing. While the findings of the alleged expenses investigation were delivered to Seven and described as "serious", a source close to the investigation insists that while the accusations are significant, they do not constitute "fraud" in the legal sense. Despite that, it’s understood that a small number of staff left the network following the findings being delivered to Seven, with the staffers signing nondisclosure agreements upon their departure. The scandal's reemergence comes 18 moths after the initial allegations, as Seven finds itself in another controversy over its flagship current affairs program Spotlight and its handling of an exclusive interview with Bruce Lehrmann. Image credits: Sunrise

Legal

Survey unveils Aussies thoughts on tourism tax

Earlier this year, Bali launched a controversial tourism tax, which meant that every traveller entering the island would have to pay a $15 fee, which the Indonesian province have said will be used for environmental and cultural projects. Now, Aussies have shared their thoughts on introducing a similar system here, and survey results have revealed that many are keen for the tourism tax to be introduced here. Travel provider InsureandGo conducted the survey and found that 60 per cent of Australians would support the government introducing a tax to combat the rising environmental toll of tourism. "Tourist taxes are a relatively new concept, but as travel demand swells, we are seeing more countries adopt the levy," InsureandGo Chief Commercial Officer Jonathan Etkind said. "What's heartening is that only a minority of 37 per cent of respondents don't support tourism taxes, demonstrating just how many Australians support the concept of sustainable travel." The response comes amid increased sustainability concerns on our flora and fauna, which are being threatened by over-tourism. The tax is particularly supported by younger Aussies aged between 18 to 30, with 73 per cent of them saying yes to tourism taxes. Etkind said that this may be because younger Aussies are typically more aware of the environmental impacts of travel compared to the older generation, who may be less accustomed to the tax. Along with Bali, other cities and countries have started introducing similar fees to combat overtourism, with Venice set to charge day-trippers a fee of 5 Euros ($8.20) per visit. Amsterdam, Netherlands has the highest tourism tax in Europe, with the former 7 per cent hotel tourist levy rising to 12.5 per cent this year. New Zealand also charges international visitors excluding Aussie citizens and permanent residents $25 levy ($32.64 AUD) to address the challenges created by tourism in its conservation areas. Image: Getty

International Travel

"How could he do it to me?": Grandmother broken over grandson's alleged fraud

In a courtroom in Perth, emotions ran high as a heartbroken grandmother awaited a reunion with her grandson, Jack Endersby. But this wasn't a typical family gathering. It was a courtroom confrontation, where Lyn Newby hoped her grandson would look her in the eye and confront the pain he allegedly caused by defrauding her of more than $320,000. Endersby, a 24-year-old <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/perth-news-grandmother-lost-320000-after-investing-in-grandson-business-alleged-ponzi-scheme/e3ea6396-750c-452c-8e87-c0ef53d65ede" target="_blank" rel="noopener">accused of orchestrating a Ponzi-style scheme</a> that allegedly swindled around $2 million from victims across Australia, faced the scrutiny of the law and the anguish of his own family. The accusations against him span from February 2021 to February 2024, a period during which he allegedly promised lucrative returns to investors, only to leave them empty-handed and disillusioned. For Newby, the betrayal cut deep. She had entrusted her grandson with a substantial sum, believing it to be an investment in his trading business, Codex Investments. His promises of monthly returns seemed enticing, but when the payments abruptly ceased, Newby's world shattered. "He has ruined our lives," she lamented. "How could he do it to me? I'm his grandmother." Endersby's arrest earlier this month marked a turning point in the unravelling of his alleged scheme. Facing 11 charges of fraud, he appeared in Perth Magistrates Court, where his family, including his mother, sought answers and reconciliation. However, Endersby remained aloof, ignoring their attempts at communication. In the lead-up to his court appearance, Newby expressed her desire for her grandson to acknowledge the pain he caused. "He will feel terrible when he sees me, and I want him to look me in the eye and know how much he's hurt me," she said, her anguish palpable. The allegations against Endersby paint a stark contrast to his earlier life. Once a telesales consultant and labourer, he purportedly transformed into a "self-taught investor" with a multimillion-dollar portfolio and a lifestyle of luxury. Flashy holidays, upscale accommodations and a Maserati adorned his newfound prosperity, allegedly funded by the deceitful machinations of a Ponzi scheme. As the details of Endersby's alleged deception emerged, more victims came forward, each recounting their own stories of financial loss and shattered trust. Michael Dawson, who invested in Endersby's business 18 months prior, described initial returns followed by a troubling silence. Others spoke of referral schemes that seemingly built trust but ultimately ensnared unsuspecting investors in a web of deceit. Amid the courtroom drama and legal proceedings, questions linger about the true extent of Endersby's alleged scheme and the lives it impacted. As he awaits his next court appearance on April 19, the echoes of broken trust and shattered dreams serve as a stark reminder of the devastating consequences of financial fraud. Images: Nine News

Legal

Tax boost announced for 1.2 million people

Low-income earners will receive a tax boost with the Medicare levy threshold set to rise. The income threshold at which taxpayers will have to pay a two per cent Medicare levy will increase by 7.1 per cent, in line with inflation. Currently single people who earn below $24,276 do not have to pay the levy. Under the changes, the two per cent levy only has to be paid by anyone earning over $26,000 The Medicare levy threshold for seniors and pensioners will increase to $41,089, up from the initial benchmark of $38,365. For families, this threshold has increased to $43,486 up from the previous $40,939. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said that the increase was part of the broader measures taken to relieve the increase in cost-of-living. “This will ensure people on lower incomes continue to pay less or are exempt from the Medicare levy,” he said on Tuesday. “It means 1.2 million Australians get to keep a bit more of what they earn.” The boost in the Medicare levy threshold was announced alongside changes to income tax cuts, with those earning under $150,000 set to receive greater benefits. “This is about doing what we responsibly can to ease some of the pressure being felt by Australians right around the country, but especially for people on lower incomes, young people, seniors and women,” Chalmers said. This comes just days after Medicare celebrated it's 40th anniversary, with an exhibition launched at Parliament House. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Stage 3 stacks up: the rejigged tax cuts help fight bracket creep and boost middle and upper-middle households

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866">Ben Phillips</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> The winners and losers from the Albanese government’s <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-01/tax-cuts-government-fact-sheet.pdf">rejig</a> of this year’s Stage 3 tax cuts have already been well documented. From July 1 every taxpayer will get a tax cut. Most, the 11 million taxpayers earning up to A$146,486, will also pay less tax than they would have under the earlier version of Stage 3, some getting a tax cut <a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-tax-plan-will-give-average-earner-1500-tax-cut-more-than-double-morrisons-stage-3-221875">twice as big</a>. A much smaller number, 1.8 million, will get a smaller tax cut than they would have under the original scheme, although their cuts will still be big. The highest earners will get cuts of $4,529 instead of $9,075. But many of us live in households where income is shared and many households don’t pay tax because the people in them don’t earn enough or are on benefits. The Australian National University’s <a href="https://csrm.cass.anu.edu.au/research/policymod">PolicyMod</a> model is able to work out the impacts at the household level, including the impact on households in which members are on benefits or don’t earn enough to pay tax. <h2>More winners than losers in every broad income group</h2> We’ve divided Australian households into five equal-size groups ranked by income, from lowest to lower-middle to middle to upper-middle to high. Our modelling finds that, just as is the case for individuals, many more households will be better off with the changes to Stage 3 than would have been better off with Stage 3 as it was, although the difference isn’t as extreme. Overall, 58% of households will be better off with the reworked Stage 3 than they would have under the original and 11% will be worse off. Importantly, there remain 31% who will be neither better off nor worse off, because they don’t pay personal income tax. <hr /> <iframe id="0CWXE" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0CWXE/4/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> But it is different for different types of households. In the lowest-earning fifth of households, far more are better off (13.5%) than worse off (0.2%) with the overwhelming bulk neither better nor worse off (86.3%). <hr /> <iframe id="KC5zy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/KC5zy/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> In the highest-earning fifth of households, while more than half are better off (54.4%), a very substantial proportion are worse off (42.3%). Very few (only 3.1%) are neither better nor worse off. <hr /> <iframe id="WSkSL" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WSkSL/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>But high-earning households go backwards on average</h2> In dollar terms, the top-earning fifth of households loses money while every group gains. That’s because although there are more winners than losers among the highest-earning fifth of households, the losers lose more money. The biggest dollar gains go to middle and upper-middle income households with middle-income households ahead, on average, by $988 per year and upper-middle income households by $1,102. The highest-income households are worse off by an average of $837 per year. As a percentage of income, middle-income households gain the most with a 1% increase in disposable income. Lowest income households gain very little, while the highest-income households go backwards by 0.3%. <hr /> <iframe id="kAPmC" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/kAPmC/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> <h2>The rejig does a better job of fighting bracket creep</h2> And we’ve found something else. The original version of the Stage 3 tax cuts was advertised as a measure to overcome <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-2-main-arguments-against-redesigning-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-are-wrong-heres-why-221975">bracket creep</a>, which is what happens when a greater proportion of taxpayers’ income gets pushed into higher tax brackets as incomes climb. We have found it wouldn’t have done it for most of the income groups, leaving all but the highest-earning group paying more tax after the change in mid-2024 than it used to in 2018. The rejigged version of Stage 3 should compensate for bracket creep better, leaving the top two groups paying less than they did in 2018 and compensating the bottom three better than the original Stage 3. <hr /> <iframe id="YG0cT" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/YG0cT/1/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Not too much should be made of the increase in tax rates in the lowest income group between 2018 ad 2024 because some of it reflects stronger income growth. We find that overall, the redesigned Stage 3 does a better job of offsetting bracket creep than the original. It is also better targeted to middle and upper-middle income households. Having said that, the average benefit in dollar terms isn’t big. At about $1,000 per year for middle and upper-middle income households and costing the budget about what the original Stage 3 tax cuts would have cost, its inflationary impact compared to the original looks modest.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221851/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-phillips-98866">Ben Phillips</a>, Associate Professor, Centre for Social Research and Methods, Director, Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/stage-3-stacks-up-the-rejigged-tax-cuts-help-fight-bracket-creep-and-boost-middle-and-upper-middle-households-221851">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

"Proud to pay more": The billionaires who want to pay more tax

Over 250 millionaires and billionaires have issued an <a href="https://proudtopaymore.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">open letter</a> to global leaders encouraging them to implement wealth taxes to combat the cost-of-living crisis. This comes just as a report by the <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/money-banking/shocking-amount-australia-s-richest-people-earn-per-hour" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Oxfam Charity</a> revealed that the global wealth of billionaires have only grown in the last three years despite inflation. The open letter, signed by super-rich individuals from 17 countries, includes signatories like Abigail Disney, the grand-niece of Walt Disney, Succession actor Brian Cox, and American philanthropist and Rockefeller family heir Valerie Rockefeller. They said that they would be "proud to pay more taxes" in order to address the inequality. "Elected leaders must tax us, the super rich," the letter read. "This will not fundamentally alter our standard of living, nor deprive our children, nor harm our nations' economic growth. "But it will turn extreme and unproductive private wealth into an investment for our common democratic future." Austrian heir Marlene Engelhorn is also among the voices demanding that they pay more in taxes. "I've inherited a fortune and therefore power, without having done anything for it. And the state doesn't even want taxes on it," Engelhorn, who inherited millions from her family who founded chemical giant BASF, said. The letter was released just as global leaders gather in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. Abigail Disney, whose net-worth is measured at more than $100 million, said that lawmakers need to come together to make a meaningful economic and social change. "There's too much at stake for us all to wait for the ultra rich to grow a conscience and voluntarily change their ways," she said. "For that reason, lawmakers must step in and tax extreme wealth, along with the variety of environmentally destructive habits of the world's richest." A recent <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/63fe48c7e864f3729e4f9287/t/6596bfb943707b56d11f1296/1704378297933/G20+Survey+of+those+with+More+than+%241+million+on+Attitudes+to+Extreme+Wealth+and+Taxing+the+Super+Rich.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> of almost 2400 millionaires found that 74 per cent of them supported the introduction of a wealth tax to fund improved public services and deal with the cost-of-living crisis. The open letter also said that one-off donations and philanthropy "cannot redress the current colossal imbalance" of societal wealth. "We need our governments and our leaders to lead," the letter said. "The true measure of a society can be found, not just in how it treats its most vulnerable, but in what it asks of its wealthiest members." Images: Getty

Money & Banking

How risky is it to give card details over the phone and how do I reduce the chance of fraud?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-haskell-dowland-382903">Paul Haskell-Dowland</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/edith-cowan-university-720">Edith Cowan University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ismini-vasileiou-1031778">Ismini Vasileiou</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/de-montfort-university-1254">De Montfort University</a> Paying for things digitally is so common, most of us think nothing of swiping or tapping our card, or using mobile payments. While doing so is second nature, we may be more reluctant to provide card details over the phone. Merchants are allowed to ask us for credit card details over the phone – this is perfectly legal. But there are minimum standards they must comply with and safeguards to protect consumer data. So is giving your card details over the phone any more risky than other transactions and how can you minimise the risks? <h2>How is my card data protected?</h2> For a merchant to process card transactions, they are expected to comply with the <a href="https://docs-prv.pcisecuritystandards.org/PCI%20DSS/Standard/PCI-DSS-v4_0.pdf">Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard</a>. This is a set of security requirements designed to protect cardholder data and the trillions of dollars of transactions each year. Compliance involves various security measures (such as encryption and access controls) together with strong governance and regular security assessments. If the information stored by the merchant is accessed by an unauthorised party, encryption ensures it is not readable. That means stealing the data would not let the criminals use the card details. Meanwhile, access controls ensure only authorised individuals have access to cardholder data. Though all companies processing cards are expected to meet the compliance standards, only those processing large volumes are subject to mandatory regular audits. Should a subsequent data leak or misuse occur that can be attributed to a compliance failure, a <a href="https://www.csoonline.com/article/569591/pci-dss-explained-requirements-fines-and-steps-to-compliance.html">company can be penalised</a> at levels that can escalate into millions of dollars. These requirements apply to all card transactions, whether in person, online or over the phone. Phone transactions are likely to involve a human collecting the card details and either entering them into computer systems, or processing the payment through paper forms. The payment card Security Standards Council has <a href="https://docs-prv.pcisecuritystandards.org/Guidance%20Document/Telephone-Based%20Payments/Protecting_Telephone_Based_Payment_Card_Data_v3-0_nov_2018.pdf">detailed guides for best practice</a>: <blockquote> A policy should be in place to ensure that payment card data is protected against unauthorised viewing, copying, or scanning, in particular on desks. </blockquote> Although these measures can help to protect your card data, there are still risks in case the details are misplaced or the person on the phone aren’t who they say they are. <h2>Basic tips for safe credit card use over the phone</h2> If you provide card details over the phone, there are steps you can take to minimise the chance you’ll become the victim of fraud, or get your details leaked. 1. Verify the caller If you didn’t initiate the call, hang up and call the company directly using details you’ve verified yourself. Scammers will often masquerade as a well-known company (for example, an online retailer or a courier) and convince you a payment failed or payment is needed to release a delivery. Before you provide any information, confirm the caller is legitimate and the purpose of the call is genuine. 2. Be sceptical If you are being offered a deal that’s too good to be true, have concerns about the person you’re dealing with, or just feel something is not quite right, hang up. You can always call them back later if the caller turns out to be legitimate. 3. Use secure payment methods If you’ve previously paid the company with other (more secure) methods, ask to use that same method. 4. Keep records Make sure you record details of the company, the representative you are speaking to and the amount being charged. You should also ask for an order or transaction reference. Don’t forget to ask for the receipt to be sent to you. Check the transaction against your card matches the receipt – use your banking app, don’t wait for the statement to come through. <h2>Virtual credit cards</h2> In addition to the safeguards mentioned above, a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/virtual-credit-card-numbers-guide/">virtual credit card</a> can help reduce the risk of card fraud. You probably already have a form of virtual card if you’ve added a credit card to your phone for mobile payments. Depending on the financial institution, you can create a new credit card number linked to your physical card. Some banks extend this functionality to allow you to generate unique card numbers and/or CVV numbers (the three digits at the back of your card). With this approach you can easily separate transactions and cancel a virtual card/number if you have any concerns. <h2>What to do if you think your card details have been compromised or stolen?</h2> It’s important not to panic, but quick action is essential: <ul> <li> call your bank and get the card blocked so you won’t lose any more money. Depending on your situation, you can also block/cancel the card through your banking app or website </li> <li> report the issue to the police or other relevant body </li> <li> monitor your account(s) for any unusual transactions </li> <li> explore card settings in your banking app or website – many providers allow you to limit transactions based on value, restrict transaction types or enable alerts </li> <li> you may want to consider registering for <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-credit-report-is-a-key-part-of-your-privacy-heres-how-to-find-and-check-it-116999">credit monitoring services</a> and to enable fraud alerts. </li> </ul> <h2>So, should I give my card details over the phone?</h2> If you want to minimise risk, it’s best to avoid giving card details over the phone if you can. Providing your card details via a website still has risks, but at least it removes the human element. The best solution currently available is to use virtual cards – if anything goes wrong you can cancel just that unique card identity, rather than your entire card.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216833/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/paul-haskell-dowland-382903">Paul Haskell-Dowland</a>, Professor of Cyber Security Practice, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/edith-cowan-university-720">Edith Cowan University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ismini-vasileiou-1031778">Ismini Vasileiou</a>, Associate Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/de-montfort-university-1254">De Montfort University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a style="font-style: italic;" href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a style="font-style: italic;" href="https://theconversation.com/how-risky-is-it-to-give-card-details-over-the-phone-and-how-do-i-reduce-the-chance-of-fraud-216833">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

myTax is fast and free – so why do 2 in 3 Australians still pay to lodge a tax return?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jawad-harb-1441668">Jawad Harb</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-morton-1218408">Elizabeth Morton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Ten years ago, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) created the “myTax” portal, an easy way to lodge your tax return online. There was an “e-Tax” filing option before the 2015-16 tax year, but this was quite complicated and barely better than filling out a form online. In comparison, myTax <a href="https://resources.taxinstitute.com.au/tiausttaxforum/acceptance-of-mytax-in-australia">is simpler</a> and more automated. It’s available 24 hours a day, is free to use, and you will typically get your refund within <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Your-tax-return/How-to-lodge-your-tax-return/Lodge-your-tax-return-online-with-myTax/">two weeks</a>. But the chances are you won’t be using it. In fact, slightly less than <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Taxation-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2020-21/?anchor=IndividualsStatistics#IndividualsStatistics">36%</a> of Australia’s 15 million taxpayers used the myTax portal in 2020-21 – the most recent tax year for which the tax office has published data. About <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Taxation-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2020-21/?anchor=IndividualsStatistics#IndividualsStatistics">64% of tax returns</a> were lodged through tax agents. This is one of the highest rates among 38 <a href="https://www.oecd.org/about/">Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development</a> nations. Meanwhile, just 0.6% of Australians still used the paper-based form. <hr /> <iframe id="5Kdz0" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5Kdz0/3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> So why have Australians – who have quickly embraced the internet for everything from shopping to dating – been so slow to embrace myTax? For some, particularly older people, it’s about being intimidated by the technology. Others may be concerned with cybersecurity risk. But for most it’s about the perceived complexity of the tax system and the process, regardless of the technology. They see using a tax agent as easier and the way to maximise their tax refund. While in some cases this may be true, in many instances it’s simply a perception – but one the tax office will need to address if it wants to promote use of myTax. <h2>Reasons for the low uptake of myTax</h2> <a href="https://resources.taxinstitute.com.au/tiausttaxforum/acceptance-of-mytax-in-australia">Our research</a> suggests most people who have used the myTax portal think it is easy to use. We surveyed 193 taxpayers who have used the system. About three-quarters agreed the system was clear and understandable, and said they would keep using it. But of course these are people who have chosen to use the system, so their responses don’t shed much light on the reasons people don’t use myTax. Answers to that come from other published research, in particular from the <a href="https://www.igt.gov.au/">Inspector-General of Taxation</a> (the independent office investigating complaints about the tax system) as well as the House of Representatives’ Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue. Evidence submitted to these bodies indicate that Australians prefer tax agents to avoid errors in claiming deductions. The parliamentary committee’s <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportrep/024169/toc_pdf/TaxpayerEngagementwiththeTaxSystem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">2018 inquiry</a> into the tax system was told the use of tax agents ballooned from about 20% in the 1980s, peaking at about 74% of all taxpayers: "The Tax Commissioner considered that the size of the TaxPack had probably contributed to that rise, driving many people with simple tax affairs to a tax agent because it looked daunting." In short, habits are hard to break. Having come to rely on tax agents, most Australians keep using them, despite the system being vastly improved. For example, the myTax system now simplifies the process by <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Individuals/Your-tax-return/How-to-lodge-your-tax-return/Lodge-your-tax-return-online-with-myTax/Pre-fill-availability/?=redirected_myGov_prefill">pre-filling</a> data from government agencies, health funds, financial institutions and your own employer. About 80% of our survey respondents said this was helpful. <h2>Taking care of the digital divide</h2> This suggests the main barrier to increasing use of the myTax system is mostly habit and the perception the tax system is too complicated to navigate without an expert. There is also a small percentage of people who feel uncomfortable with computers. This is reflected in the minority of respondents in our study who said they were unlikely to use myTax again, as well as the tax office’s data showing some people continue to stick with paper lodgement. Those more likely to find the system daunting are the elderly, those with low English skills, people with disabilities and those with low educational attainment. These people’s needs should not be forgotten as the Australian <a href="https://www.dta.gov.au/digital-government-strategy">Digital Government Strategy</a> aims to making Australia a “world-leading” digital government by 2025, delivering “simple, secure and connected public services”. Even with the greatest online system in the world, it’s unlikely there will ever be a complete transition.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207305/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jawad-harb-1441668">Jawad Harb</a>, PhD Candidate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/elizabeth-morton-1218408">Elizabeth Morton</a>, Research Fellow of the RMIT Blockchain Innovation Hub, Lecturer Taxation, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/mytax-is-fast-and-free-so-why-do-2-in-3-australians-still-pay-to-lodge-a-tax-return-207305">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

The $500 million ATO fraud highlights flaws in the myGov ID system. Here’s how to keep your data safe

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rob-nicholls-91073">Rob Nicholls</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> The Australian Tax Office (ATO) paid out more than half a billion dollars to cyber criminals between July 2021 and February 2023, according to an <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-26/ato-reveals-cost-of-mygov-tax-identity-crime-fraud/102632572">ABC report</a>. Most of the payments were for small amounts (less than A$5,000) and were not flagged by the ATO’s own monitoring systems. The fraudsters exploited a weakness in the identification system used by the myGov online portal to redirect other people’s tax refunds to their own bank accounts. The good news is there’s plenty the federal government can do to crack down on this kind of fraud – and that you can do to keep your own payments secure. <h2>How these scams work</h2> Setting up a myGov account or a myGov ID requires proof of identity in the form of “<a href="https://www.afp.gov.au/sites/default/files/PDF/NPC-100PointChecklist-18042019.pdf">100 points of ID</a>”. It usually means either a passport and a driver’s licence or a driver’s licence, a Medicare card, and a bank statement. Once a myGov account is created, linking it to your tax records requires two of the following: an ATO assessment, bank account details, a payslip, a Centrelink payment, or a super account. These documents were precisely the ones targeted in three large data breaches in the past year: at <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-optus-data-breach-mean-for-you-and-how-can-you-protect-yourself-a-step-by-step-guide-191332">Optus</a>, at <a href="https://theconversation.com/medibank-hackers-are-now-releasing-stolen-data-on-the-dark-web-if-youre-affected-heres-what-you-need-to-know-194340">Medibank</a>, and at <a href="https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/news-items/guidance-for-consumers-impacted-by-the-latitude-financial-services-data-breach/">Latitude Financial</a>. In this scam, the cyber criminal creates a fake myGov account using the stolen documents. If they can also get enough information to link to the ATO or your Tax File Number, they can then change bank account details to have your tax rebate paid to their account. It is a sadly simple scam. <h2>How government can improve</h2> One of the issues here is quite astounding. The ATO knows where salaries are paid, via the “<a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/business/single-touch-payroll/what-is-stp-/">single touch</a>” payroll system. This ensures salaries, tax and superannuation contributions are all paid at once. Most people who have received a tax refund will have provided bank account details where that payment can be made. Indeed, many people use precisely those bank account details to identify themselves to myGov. At present, those bank details can be changed within myGov without any further ado. If the ATO simply checked with the individual via another channel when bank account details are changed, this fraud could be prevented. It might be sensible to check with the individual’s employer as well. Part of the problem is the ATO has not been very transparent about the risks. If these risks were clearly set out, then calls for changes to ATO procedures would have been loud and clear from the cyber security community. The ATO is usually good at identifying when a cyber security incident may lead to fraud. For example, when the recruitment software company <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-06/australian-data-may-be-compromised-in-pageup-security-breach/9840048?itm_campaign=newsapp">PageUp was hacked in 2018</a>, the ATO required people who may have been affected to reconfirm their identities. This was done without public commentary and represents sound practice. Sadly, the millions of records stolen in the Optus, Medibank and Latitude Financial breaches have not led to a similar level of vigilance. Another action the ATO could take would be to check when a single set of bank account details is associated with more than one myGov account. A national digital identity would also help. However, this system has been in development for years, is not universally popular, and may well be <a href="https://www.themandarin.com.au/226280-gallagher-warns-community-support-for-digital-identity-not-ubiquitous/">delayed</a> until after the federal election due in 2024. <h2>Protecting yourself</h2> The most important thing to do is make sure the ATO does not use a bank account number other than yours. As long as the ATO only has your bank account number to transfer your tax rebate, this scam does not work. It also helps to protect your Tax File Number. There are only four groups that ever need this number. The first is the ATO itself. The second is your employer. However, remember you do not need to give your TFN to a prospective employer, and your employer only needs your TFN after you have started work. Your super fund and your bank may ask for your TFN. However, providing your TFN to your super fund or bank is optional – it just makes things easier, as otherwise they will withhold tax which you will need to claim back later. Of course, all the usual data safety issues still apply. Don’t share your driver’s licence details without good reason. Take similar care with your passport. Your Medicare card is for health services and does not need to be shared widely. Don’t open emails from people you do not know. Never click links in messages unless you are sure they are safe. Most importantly, know your bank will not send you emails containing links, nor will the ATO.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210459/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rob-nicholls-91073">Rob Nicholls</a>, Associate professor of regulation and governance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-500-million-ato-fraud-highlights-flaws-in-the-mygov-id-system-heres-how-to-keep-your-data-safe-210459">original article</a>.

Technology

Can you lend a paw this tax time to help cats in need?

With a proud reputation of caring for cats for more than 60 years, the Cat Protection Society of NSW runs Sydney’s only no-kill shelter just for cats, as well as providing feline welfare programs to help cats and the people who love them. Cat Protection began in 1958 as a small group of people dedicated to reducing the number of street cats and while our organisation has grown over the years, our vision remains the same; that every cat deserves a loving and responsible home. Over the years, Cat Protection has helped literally hundreds of thousands of cats, kittens, and people. We’ve led the way in setting the standards for best-practice feline sheltering, and our health and welfare services extend far beyond our adoption centre. And while technology means we can offer a great range of free cat care resources online, we’ve never lost our human touch and we still help thousands of people every year with advice and tips on cat care by phone or in-person, at no cost. Our subsidised desexing, vaccination and microchipping programs promote cat health and welfare in the community and our newest program, Adopt-a-Stray, offers a complete and affordable package for those who wish to fully welcome a street cat into their heart and home. What sets us apart from many other animal shelters is our holistic approach to each individual cat or human client. Cats are not given a time limit, although most are adopted within days or weeks. Every cat is individually assessed and provided with a care plan to meet their unique needs. If they need complex surgery, allergy trials or behavioural interventions our highly qualified team will work with veterinarians and specialists to ensure the cat gets everything they need to set them on the path to living their best life. A kind person found Snake, a four-week-old sickly orphaned kitten. In addition to cat flu, our vets identified corneal scarring in his right eye, a blocked tear duct, and an adhesion on his eyelid restricting the normal movement of his third eyelid. Treatment resolved the flu and improved his eye, but Snake will live with limited vision in that eye. This has not dampened his playfulness or zest for life. As well as poor physical health, orphaned kittens miss out on the important lessons of being a cat from their mum and siblings, and this can lead to behavioural issues. Where we can, we will make sure such kittens get to join a stepfamily, but in cases such as Snake’s, illness means that isn’t always possible. It is then up to our human team to work with these little ones to help them learn to navigate the world with good manners! In contrast, Banjo had all the behavioural benefits of his brother but alas at seven weeks of age Banjo weighed only 560 grams while his brother Clancy weighed 900 grams! Banjo was diagnosed with a rare form of congenital hypothyroidism. Because his condition was diagnosed early, his prognosis is very good. He was started on a medication called Thyroxine and went back into foster care so that we could monitor his progress and adjust the dose of his medication as necessary with follow-up blood tests. After six weeks in foster care, Banjo graduated to the adoption centre. He will need to be on Thyroxine for the rest of his life, but that didn’t daunt his new family who’ve told us Banjo is now thriving in his loving forever home. From individualised TLC and veterinary care for every cat and kitten, to helping human clients resolve cat challenges (from furniture scratching to strata bans) and strategic research and advocacy on behalf of people and cats, Cat Protection’s impact is so much greater than our budget. As an independent registered charity for cats, we’re dependent on donations and bequests to do our work. We are compliant, open and transparent; on our website you can see our audited annual reports for details of what we do and what it costs. We have a strict “no harassment” fundraising policy which means under no circumstances will your information be sold on, and we do not employ pressure-tactics or door-to-door solicitations. We don’t spend money paying fundraising companies to ring you at dinner time asking for money or send you five-page long letters insisting you give more. And we never will. Donations are invested in helping our feline friends and nurturing the unique bond between cats and people. Your generosity will mean that we can continue to help thousands of cats and people each year. If you can lend a paw, please <a href="https://www.givenow.com.au/catprotectionsocietynsw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">make your tax-deductible donation here</a>! For general advice on cat care and everything feline, call the Cat Protection Society of NSW on 02 9557 4818 or visit <a href="https://catprotection.org.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">catprotection.org.au</a> Images: Supplied. This is a sponsored article produced in partnership with the Cat Protection Society of NSW.

Family & Pets

Melissa Caddick's parents at war with fraud victims

Melissa Caddick's parents are at war with the victims of the deceased conwoman's long-running scam, as they fight over who deserves the biggest cut of her estate. The two parties are locked in a bitter despite over Caddick's penthouse apartment in Sydney's affluent eastern suburbs, where Caddick's parents Ted and Barb Grimley currently reside. The Grimleys claim they deserve a larger share of the proceeds of the sale of the property, despite the penthouse being purchased by Caddick as part of her Ponzi scheme. However, the victims of Caddick's scam are adamant that the proceeds should be evenly divided by those who have suffered at the hands of the deceased conwoman. The apartment was purchased by Caddick seven years ago, when Mr and Mrs Grimley gave their daughter $1 million for a share of the eastern suburbs residence. Despite the hefty share sum, Melissa put the entire apartment in her own name and used her parents' money on new jewellery. The Grimleys have refused to vacate the property, telling the victims during a recent mediation that they would only move out if they were paid $950,000 – effectively getting most of their money back and leaving nearly 60 other investors divvying up the rest of the proceeds and getting back less than half of what they are owed. One of the victims of Caddick's scam, Sarah Steel, said she feels for the Grimleys and what they have been through, but they need to think of the other victims involved. "I feel really terrible for what they've been through," she said. "But it feels to me that they aren't feeling the same for the rest of us going through this same thing." "We're facing a situation where other people are putting themselves forward as a priority to the other investors who were duped." Lawyers for the majority of Caddick's victims are now considering suing the auditors that Caddick hired and who were tasked with casting a critical eye over her finances. Given Caddick ran one of the longest frauds in Australian history, not one auditor over the years ever flagged a problem with her financial accounts. Michael Chapman, the lawyer representing the majority of Caddick's victims, is at a complete loss as to how the auditors couldn't have noticed the fraudulent behaviour. "We feel like they've dropped the ball," he told 60 Minutes. "We feel as though there is a good claim that could be brought forward against the auditors." Lawyers will be seeking $15 million from the auditors in a potential court case, and if they succeed, the victims of Caddick's scamming would be close to getting back all of the money they lost. "I don't discount the pain and the suffering that these people have been through to this point," Chapman said. "It would be a silver lining." Image credits: 60 Minutes

Legal

Melissa Caddick mystery officially laid to rest

A corner has revealed missing fraudster Melissa Caddick is dead but it’s difficult to determine when and how she died. Deputy State Coroner Elizabeth Ryan released her findings after a lengthy coronial inquest examined the circumstances surrounding the 49-year-old’s mysterious disappearance. “I believe it’s appropriate at the outset to say I have concluded Melissa Caddick is deceased,” Ryan said as she handed down her findings at the NSW Coroner’s Court in Lidcombe. However, Ryan said it was tricky to make an accurate finding as to how, when and where she died. Caddick disappeared from Sydney’s eastern suburbs in November 2020, hours after her Dovers Heights mansion, which doubled as her place of business, was raided by the AFP and ASIC. The corporate watchdog had accused Caddick of operating a Ponzi scheme and misappropriating $24 million, including from her friends and family, to fund a lavish lifestyle including holidays, designer jewellery, clothing and shoes. The case has sparked a number of conspiracy theories and even inspired a television series. The inquest examined Caddick’s final hours, the actions of her husband Anthony Koletti, and the police investigation. The court heard that Caddick had taken her own life by jumping off the cliff at Rodney Reserve, approximately 500 metres from her home, on the morning of November 12, 2020. Caddick was heard walking out her front door at about 5:30am before disappearing and failing to turn up to a court appearance the following day. However, Koletti did not report his wife missing to the Rose Bay Police Station until 11:45am on November 13 - 30 hours since she was last seen. Amid his evidence, Koletti told the court he was under the mistaken belief he had to wait 24 hours to report someone missing. “Did you delay reporting her missing until that point in order to give her time to try to go somewhere?” Counsel assisting the coroner Jason Downing asked. “No,” Mr Koletti said. NSW Police Sergeant Trent Riley told the court during the inquest that he found it “extremely strange and unusual behaviour” that Koletti had initially told police he did not want them to come to his house or go to the station to make a statement. “I thought it was strange that a husband would ring the police station, report his wife missing from two days ago and wasn’t prepared to come to the police station and didn’t want police to go around and speak with him because he had too much work on that day,” Sergeant Riley told the court. Sergeant Riley also told the court that Koletti provided conflicting versions of when he had last seen his wife alive. He described Koletti as, “evasive, vague and inconsistent”. Colette has been consistently critical of the ASIC investigation. In an affidavit tendered to the court, he claimed he and Caddick were denied food, water and medical attention during the 12 hours when ASIC and AFP were present at their home. However, the court heard that during the raid, Caddick drank a protein shake, Koletti made her several coffees and they occasionally smoked cigarettes in their backyard. In a statement, he said, “I believe (Caddick) died as a direct result of ASIC’s negligence, cruelty and inhumanity.” Despite conceding Caddick was responsible for defrauding millions of investors and that they were allowed to be in their home on the day of the raid, he still maintained ASIC was responsible for her death. In February 2021, a foot washed up on Bourdna Beacon on the NSW south coast which was later identified as Caddick’s. The court had previously heard that Caddick’s shoe was covered in 250g of goose barnacles when it washed ashore. An expert's report stated the barnacle growth suggested the shoe would have been free floating on the surface of the water for three-seven days before washing up. The court heard that it’s possible the shoe drifted on the ocean floor for several months before floating to the surface and onto the beach. Oceanographer Dr David Griffin said that according to calculations using ocean currents, it’s plausible the show went into the water at Dover Heights and was found 400km south three months later. Pathologist Jennifer Pokorny told the inquest in a statement that it was not possible to determine the full extent of Caddick’’s injuries as there were no other remains aside from the decomposed foot. She added it was also not possible to determine a cause of death. Forensic psychiatrist Dr Kerri Eagle told the inquest that after reviewing Caddick’s medical record, along with witness statement, it appeared she had narcissistic personality disorder. She said that for people suffering from the disorder, their self-esteem and sense of well-worth latches onto external admiration and impressing others. Dr Eagle revealed to the court that as a result of being charged, Caddick would have also been in danger of losing her work and the “respect and admiration” of others. She told Ryan that when ASIC raided her home, it was possible it had a “very huge” impact on her self-esteem. “Ms Caddick appeared to experience problems with low mood, depression and anxiety and problems coping with extraordinary stress … the low mood symptoms persisted as long as the stress persisted,” Eagle said. She also noted that people with similar disorders have been known to take their own lives after a “major insult to their self-esteem”. Image credit: Instagram

Legal

ATO cracks down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns

The Australian Taxation Office (ATM) has plans to crack down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns after an interview found nine in 10 made mistakes and wrongfully claimed expenses. Those working at home, including those who run home-based businesses and people who earn via short-term rental sites like Airbnb or Stayz, will also be under the thumb this year to file returns correctly, in a new bid to eliminate tax fraud. The review comes in the wake of a major funding boost to the ATO, announced in the 2023 federal budget, which saw an $89.6 million injection. The ATO claims there was a tax gap of $9 billion in the 2019-2020 financial year. Taxpayers paid 94.4 per cent of the whole amount theoretically owed to the Commonwealth, with deductions for rental expenses, including those incorrectly claiming negative gearing deductions, contributing $1.4 billion to the gap. Australian Tax Commissioner Tim Loh said the ATO will be taking action in 2023. "We encourage rental property owners and their registered tax agents to take extra care this tax time and review their records before lodging their return," Loh reportedly told The Age. "You can only claim interest on a loan used to purchase a rental property to earn rental income – don't forget, if your loan also includes a private expense, such as for a new car or a trip to Bali, you can only claim an interest deduction for the portion relating to producing your rental income.” Loh warned Australians who work from home and advised against the “copy and paste" tax return method. He said, ” We know a lot of people are working back in the office more compared to last year”, and the method the ATO uses to calculate working from home expenses has now changed. Image credit: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Australians lost more than $3bn to scammers in 2022. Here are 5 emerging scams to look out for

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s latest <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Targeting%20scams%202022.pdf">Targeting Scams report</a> indicates Australians reported more than A$3 billion lost to fraud in 2022. This is about a $1 billion increase on <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-lost-2b-to-fraud-in-2021-this-figure-should-sound-alarm-bells-for-the-future-186459">reported losses from 2021</a>. Year upon year, we’re witnessing a rise in monetary losses to fraud. Behind these figures sit millions of Australians who experience a range of financial and non-financial <a href="https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-05/29-1314-FinalReport.pdf">harms</a>. Here’s what we’ve learned from the latest report – and some advice on what to look out for in the year ahead. <h2>2022 at a glance</h2> Of the reported $3 billion lost, about half was stolen as part of investment schemes – more than double the $701 million figure from 2021. A desire to invest in cryptocurrency has driven up these losses, with potential investors inadvertently transferring money to offenders advertising a range of falsehoods. Remote access schemes – in which a scammer convinces the victim to grant them access to their computer – jumped into second place, with $229 million in reported losses. This was followed by payment redirection scams (also known as business email compromise fraud). Those who reported directly to Scamwatch lost an average of $19,654 – an increase of 54% from the $12,742 reported in 2021. The report also shows not all victims are targeted equally; people aged 65 years and older reported the highest losses across all demographics. Indigenous Australians, people with a disability, and those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds were also overrepresented. For the first time in many years, text message was the most popular method for offenders to target victims. And while bank transfers were the most popular way to send funds to offenders, <a href="https://theconversation.com/crypto-theft-is-on-the-rise-heres-how-the-crimes-are-committed-and-how-you-can-protect-yourself-176027">cryptocurrency transfers</a> continue to increase in popularity – rising 162.4% in one year. There was, however, a reduction in fraudulent phone calls. This is likely attributable to the introduction of <a href="https://www.commsalliance.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/72150/C661_2022.pdf">regulatory action</a> to block known scam calls. It’s a bright spot in an otherwise dark report. <h2>Trends to look out for</h2> The Targeting Scams report demonstrates the many ways offenders seek to defraud victims. On one hand, people are becoming more aware of common scam tactics. On the other, criminals are adjusting their methods to gain the upper hand. Here are five types of relatively lesser-known frauds everyone should be aware of. 1. Romance baiting Also known as “<a href="https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2021/05/12/fake-android-and-ios-apps-disguise-as-trading-and-cryptocurrency-apps/">cryptorom</a>” or “<a href="https://krebsonsecurity.com/2022/07/massive-losses-define-epidemic-of-pig-butchering/">pig butchering</a>”, this scam is a convergence of investment fraud and traditional romance fraud approaches. The offender first initiates a relationship with the victim – through dating apps, websites or social media platforms. Once they’ve established trust, they encourage the victim to put their money into an “investment” opportunity, often cryptocurrency. The victim will then unknowingly transfer their money to the offender, who is under a different guise. This kind of romance baiting raises fewer red flags than directly asking for money, and is targeting a younger demographic compared to more traditional romance fraud. Such deceptions are coded under investment schemes. This is likely driving the surge in investment scheme losses reported in recent years, while also accounting for a lack of substantial increases in romance fraud. 2. Online shopping fraud Offenders are skilled at creating fake websites and product advertisements that look genuine. Often these fake sites will have only subtle differences from their real counterparts. Consumers may not be able to tell the difference. Criminals can directly access funds through victims’ credit card details obtained on these sites. Online shopping fraud targets a range of demographics. It’s happening on stand-alone websites, social media platforms and online marketplaces. 3. Jobs and employment fraud <a href="https://research.qut.edu.au/centre-for-justice/wp-content/uploads/sites/304/2022/02/Briefing-Paper-Series-Feb2022-Issue21-17022022.pdf">Research</a> has indicated that working from home and flexible working conditions are strong indicators of a fraudulent job listing. But in a post-COVID world, flexibility at work is often a key criterion for job seekers, if not a deal-breaker. Offenders have noticed this, and are responding by posting attractive job advertisements that offer flexibility and high incomes. Victims submit their CVs and personal credentials (setting themselves up for identity crime), or may be required to pay upfront for training or materials costs for a job that doesn’t exist. Employment scams are targeting younger people in particular, as they’re more likely to have <a href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/youth-unemployment-and-the-pandemic/">experienced job loss and insecurity</a> in the wake of the pandemic. 4. Recovery schemes Many fraud victims will want to take whatever action possible to recover lost funds. To exploit this, offenders will trade the details of victims with each other. They will then pose as authorities (often law enforcement, banks or private agencies) who are aware of the victim’s circumstances and promote their ability to regain the missing funds for a fee. In this way, victims who are desperate to recover losses are manipulated into paying even more money to offenders. 5. Remote access schemes Receiving a phone call from a computer technician advising of a problem with your computer and offering to fix it is a common experience for many. While this approach isn’t new, it made a strong resurgence in 2022 – particularly targeting older people. These scam calls often come through landlines and prey on people’s fear for the security of their bank details and other personal data. The fraudsters often invoke a sense of urgency about needing to rectify the “problem”, and victims are persuaded to give the offender remote access to their computer. The criminal can then access a wealth of personal information. They can gain direct entry to bank accounts to transfer funds, and can access identity credentials and other sensitive details to commit identity crime in the future. <h2>Change is needed to protect the public</h2> The threat of fraud will only increase alongside technological evolution. Experts are concerned about artificial intelligence tools such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/mar/08/darktrace-warns-of-rise-in-ai-enhanced-scams-since-chatgpt-release">ChatGPT</a> and image and video generators giving cybercriminals yet another tool to add to their arsenal. The latest Scamwatch report is further evidence banks and financial institutions need to implement measures to help reduce fraud losses; among these, the checking of account names against BSB numbers for all transactions. The UK has a <a href="https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/policy-and-guidance/guidance/confirmation-payee">confirmation-of-payee</a> policy that does this. The government is attempting to address the continued surge in fraud losses through the revision of its <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/cyber-security/strategy/2023-2030-australian-cyber-security-strategy">cybersecurity strategy</a> and the potential establishment of a <a href="https://consultation.accc.gov.au/accc/national-anti-scams-centre-survey/">National Anti-Scams Centre</a>. These are both positive steps but it’s clear there’s a need for more work to be done. Image: Getty This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-lost-more-than-3bn-to-scammers-in-2022-here-are-5-emerging-scams-to-look-out-for-204018" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Money & Banking

Check your rates: Couple's warning after being overcharged for more than a decade

A disgruntled couple from the NSW south coast town of Kiama have slammed their local council after discovering they have been overcharged by around $8,000 for a rubbish bin they weren’t even using. The couple, Kim and Geoff Oppert reached out to A Current Affair to warn other ratepayers to carefully check the fine print on their bills. The pair had made the decision to downsize their red-lid general waste bin after their daughter moved out of the family home, which ideally would have lowered their rates. Due to a mistake on their bills - clouded by legal jargon - the couple were paying twice as much for their red-lid garbage bin. This meant Kiama Council had been charging them for TWO bins for the past 12 years. "Look at your rates notice and check you're paying for just one bin," Mr Oppert told A Current Affair. "Over 12 years we paid $16,000 in garbage waste disposal and it really should have been half that," he said. "Our rate notice doesn't clearly say how many bins we have. It's bureaucratic speak no one could understand." When the couple finally realised the mistake they went straight to the council. "But they would only give us a refund for two years and quoted some tax act as the reason why," Mr Oppert explained. "It is so unfair and just not right," Mrs Oppert added. "It was their mistake not ours, and they admitted it.” Mr Oppert seeks to warn all Australians paying a council for a bin service, "Check your rates notice and make sure you're not getting ripped off.” Kiama Council were made aware of the situation and gave a partial refund to the couple. "When this matter was brought to our attention, Kiama Council acted quickly to rectify the situation, in accordance with the law, as outlined below.”, a Kiama Municipal Council spokesperson said in a statement. “We refunded the amounts of $805.72 for 2021-22 and $818.61 for 2022-23. The couple have not received a full refund due to tax laws. "The Office of Local Government has advised that, where charges go back more than 1 year, the Recovery of Imposts Tax Act 1963 applies as follows", the spokesperson continued. <img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2023/03/BINS-PIC.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="720" /> "In addition, Kiama Council is now working on an audit of all our urban and residential waste services to ensure our charges are correct. "Council reminds all ratepayers to check their bills and if anything is unclear, please get in touch with us to discuss, we are always happy to help." Image credit: A Current Affair/Kiama Municipal Council

Real Estate

Ping, your pizza is on its way. Ping, please rate the driver. Yes, constant notifications really do tax your brain

A ping from the pizza company. A couple of pings from your socials. Ping, ping, ping from your family WhatsApp group trying to organise a weekend barbecue. With all those smartphone notifications, it’s no wonder you lose focus on what you’re trying to do do. Your phone doesn’t even need to ping to distract you. There’s <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-28923-001">pretty good</a><a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/691462">evidence</a> the mere presence of your phone, silent or not, is enough to divert your attention. So what’s going on? More importantly, how can you reclaim your focus, without missing the important stuff? <h2>Is it really such a big deal?</h2> When you look at the big picture, those pings can really add up. Although estimates vary, the average person checks their phone <a href="https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/30085/1/PubSub7601_Andrews.PDF">around 85 times</a><a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/trapped-in-the-net-are-we-all-addicted-to-our-smartphones-20190531-p51t44.html">a day</a>, roughly once every 15 minutes. In other words, every 15 minutes or so, your attention is likely to wander from what you’re doing. The trouble is, it can take <a href="https://lifehacker.com/how-long-it-takes-to-get-back-on-track-after-a-distract-1720708353">several minutes</a> to regain your concentration fully after being <a href="https://www.ics.uci.edu/%7Egmark/chi08-mark.pdf">interrupted</a> by your phone. If you’re just watching TV, distractions (and refocusing) are no big deal. But if you’re driving a car, trying to study, at work, or spending time with your loved ones, it could lead to some fairly substantial problems. <h2>Two types of interference</h2> The pings from your phone are “exogenous interruptions”. In other words, something external, around you, has caused the interruption. We can <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-46276-9_21">become conditioned</a> to feeling excited when we hear our phones ping. This is the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00015.x">same pleasurable feeling</a> people who gamble can quickly become conditioned to at the sight or sound of a poker machine. What if your phone is on silent? Doesn’t that solve the ping problem? Well, no. That’s another type of interruption, an internal (or endogenous) interruption. Think of every time you were working on a task but your attention drifted to your phone. You may have fought the urge to pick it up and see what was happening online, but you probably checked anyway. In this situation, we can become so strongly conditioned to expect a reward each time we look at our phone we don’t need to wait for a ping to trigger the effect. These impulses are powerful. Just reading this article about checking your phone may make you feel like … checking your phone. <h2>Give your brain a break</h2> What do all these interruptions mean for cognition and wellbeing? There’s increasing evidence push notifications are associated with <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352853217300159">decreased productivity</a>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958820300051">poorer concentration</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537116300136">increased distraction</a> at work and school. But is there any evidence our brain is working harder to manage the frequent switches in attention? One study of people’s brain waves <a href="https://www.hindawi.com/journals/cin/2016/5718580/">found</a> those who describe themselves as heavy smartphone users were more sensitive to push notifications than ones who said they were light users. After hearing a push notification, heavy users were significantly worse at recovering their concentration on a task than lighter users. Although push notification interrupted concentration for both groups, the heavy users took much longer to regain focus. Frequent interruptions from your phone can also leave you <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563219302596">feeling stressed</a> by a need to respond. Frequent smartphone interruptions are also associated with <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131519301319">increased FOMO</a> (fear of missing out). If you get distracted by your phone after responding to a notification, any subsequent <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2050157921993896">procrastination</a> in returning to a task can also leave you feeling guilty or frustrated. There’s <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563219300883">certainly evidence</a> suggesting the longer you spend using your phone in unproductive ways, the lower you tend to rate your wellbeing. <h2>How can I stop?</h2> We know switching your phone to silent isn’t going to magically fix the problem, especially if you’re already a frequent checker. What’s needed is behaviour change, and that’s hard. It can take several attempts to see lasting change. If you have ever tried to quit smoking, lose weight, or start an exercise program you’ll know what I mean. Start by turning off all non-essential notifications. Then here are some things to try if you want to reduce the number of times you check your phone: <ul> <li> charge your phone overnight in a different room to your bedroom. Notifications can prevent you falling asleep and can repeatedly rouse you from essential sleep throughout the night </li> <li> interrupt the urge to check and actively decide if it’s going to benefit you, in that moment. For example, as you turn to reach for your phone, stop and ask yourself if this action serves a purpose other than distraction </li> <li> try the <a href="https://www.themuse.com/advice/take-it-from-someone-who-hates-productivity-hacksthe-pomodoro-technique-actually-works#:%7E:text=The%20Pomodoro%20Technique%20is%20a,are%20referred%20to%20as%20pomodoros">Pomodoro method</a> to stay focused on a task. This involves breaking your concentration time up into manageable chunks (for example, 25 minutes) then rewarding yourself with a short break (for instance, to check your phone) between chunks. Gradually increase the length of time between rewards. Gradually re-learning to sustain your attention on any task can take a while if you’re a high-volume checker. </li> </ul> Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/ping-your-pizza-is-on-its-way-ping-please-rate-the-driver-yes-constant-notifications-really-do-tax-your-brain-193952" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Technology

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Stamp duty is holding us back from moving homes – we’ve worked out how much