The old rules were if you held an investment for over 12 months, when you sold it you only had to pay tax on 50% of the gains. So if you bought $1k of shares and they went up in value after 12 months to $2k, you would only have to pay tax on $500.

Now, you will have to pay a minimum of 30% tax on the whole $1000 gain. That means you have to pay a minimum of $300 in tax on that $1000 gain, whereas before you might have had to pay 30% of $500, which is $150, so you’re basically 50% worse off now.

This affects everyone, not just the rich. It makes investing in anything in Australia much riskier and less enticing. Taking a lot of risk only for the government to potentially take half of your reward is disgusting. They don’t refund you 50% if your investment goes to $0.

Tl;dr - the issue is that the government is now going to steal even more of your hard earned money, so it will be even harder for anyone to get ahead.

Rich people are throwing all their money into trusts to dodge taxes.

They all think they earned the money. They work think they’re doing us a favor by profiting from houses

The rich none working asset grifters were gifted a dream tax bonus by the cruel and deformed grifter dwarf(aka John Howard) now the White Knight Sir Albo has wounded the nasty tax dragon who defended the rich grifters, the rich grifters are wailing and moaning and want the red headed witch Poorline to revenge them!

Story to be continued …

Many of the wealthy seem to dislike it, for reasons of unwealthiness.

the issue ? reading the endless complaining of self entitled whiney cunts.

I’m not educated on the matter but I see the media (which is owned by billionaires) complaining while I’m still fairly broke so I reckon it’s fine.

in-depth discussions from a tax/investor/small biz perspective (most of it is not applicable to me or 80% of the population so i just watched at 1.5x speed to get a gist of issues)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMV0PA2jkrk

edit: some of the ‘problems’ like the negative gearing impacting borrowing power… i’m like good… that’s the point!

problems like restructuring costs and stamp duty… yeah that’s kinda a legit issue.

What’s this 47% equity thing doing the rounds that just sounds incorrect?

There was an ABC News Daily episode on this recently. It sounds incorrect because it is, the 47% figure applies to a tiny minority and basically no one that is complaining about it.

Here’s an excerpt from an SBS News article that also debunks it:

Independent economist Saul Eslake said the suggestion that reforms would somehow make the government or the prime minister a 47 per cent shareholder in every business is “completely fictitious”.

“What you pay capital gains tax on is the increase in the value of assets which you own when you sell them,” he explained to SBS News.

"Under the changes the government is proposing, Australians will get relief from the impact of inflation on the cost base of those assets.

“And in fact, for many assets, including shares and units, the system of capital gains taxation which the government will be bringing into effect from one July next year is actually more concessional than the 50 per cent discount that’s applied to capital gains since 1999 when it was changed by John Howard and Peter Costello,” he said.

“That system has primarily benefited investors in houses whose prices have risen on average over the period since then by about 7.5 per cent a year, which is more than double the inflation rate, which has averaged just under 3 per cent per annum over that period.”

This doesn’t affect anyone truly wealthy. They allegedly don’t ‘own’ anything or pay tax in their own name. In this country. Generally.

It will affect some people who don’t have accountants or financial.advisors, or allegedly, maybe, bad ones.

I’d recommend you post your questions to an AI to get a good understanding.