Forestry Tax Breaks.....

According to the Herald this morning, it looks like parts of the Forestry Tax Breaks could be up for review.........

Forestry tax breaks a headache for cabinet - National - smh.com.au

 

And this

Forests tax scheme set to be reviewed - Breaking News - National - Breaking News

AFR.com - | Flash player detection
Can't seem to get that link to work , bneed to log into AFR.

Will be intersting to see if they quarantine existing schemes from the changes


See Change

 

I'd be surprised if any existing schemes are affected but I guess we'll wait and see.

If tax rulings were in place at the time and the guidelines were followed then I don't see why there should be any problem for existing setups.

The rules sometimes change and I guess all we can do is legally comply with what is available at a point in time.

There's often a push by certain Groups to get rid of things like negative gearing on property etc too. If it's legally available today, I'll take advantage of it. If the rules change tomorrow, I'll adjust as required.

 

I suppose with negative gearing , they've tried it before and it was a disaster in someways. I'll be suprised if they try it again given the number of people it affects.

Agri-investing has a more chequered past.

See Change

 

Chances are that if the rules do change then it will affect existing schemes. The ATO did the same thing with film investment where product rulings were issued, tax breaks confirmed yada, yada, yada...then a couple of years later the rules were changed and made retrospective. No longer could anyone claim the deductions they were previously entitled to claim.

Left thousands in the crap...

 

No further news though this article is interesting as it gives some more detailed info


Coalition MPs to debate plantation timber tax breaks. 12/09/2006. ABC News Online

But the Liberal whip, Stewart Macarthur, says the schemes should be changed.

He argues they distort investment by putting the focus on the tax advantage rather than the long-term future of the timber industry.

He says the investors get a tax break for paying up to $9,000 a hectare when the cost of planting the trees is only about $1,500.

"It seems to me this is a very big margin which provides tax relief to high income earners, but I'm concerned that the actual timber production is not enhanced by this approach," he said.

He says the schemes are not achieving the Government's main aim of boosting the plantation industries.

"I've been concerned that the managed investment schemes have a great discrepancy between the amount of money that the promoter charges the investor and the cost of actually putting blue-gums in the ground," he said.

"So my simple argument is that there is a very big margin to the promoter which is not attributed to the growing of trees which is the government's policy."

See Change

 

Totally agree Rolf.

While I personally don't have any Agri-investments, if people were to enter into an ATO approved scheme and the guidelines were followed, it's just plain wrong to change the rules half way through the game.

If the change is, 'from next year, any new schemes will not receive the same benefit' that is one thing, but to effectively make retrospective changes is another thing all together. Mind you, it doesn't appear clear yet if there will be any changes at all, or indeed, if there are changes, what they will be.

Speaking of the ATO, did anyone see the following Paul Hogan's letter:

OJ, me and my mate the taxman, by Paul Hogan - National - smh.com.au



You've still got it Hoges!