A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 19th 04, 11:15 AM
hippy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

Originally posted by Peter Signorini
Unky posted this stuff: Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow
yesterday granted the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in prizes and
grants were tax-exempt because, unlike sponsorships, they were not
considered "carrying on a business". ... etc etc


I have to agree wholeheartedly. My wife working part time to earn $25k
will have tax taken out of her salary, so why the f#&k shouldn't some
high flying athlete on a 6 figure payroll have to pay a damn sight
more tax too!


Well, as far as I am aware, Joanna Stone is a police officer. She would
be being taxed on that income just like your wife. If your wife took up
a sport, won lots and received sponsorship and prize money - would you
be so willing to have her pay tax on that?

I'd like to see taxes on 4wd's brought into line before worrying about
the winnings of a sports star..

hippy



--


Ads
  #12  
Old June 19th 04, 11:30 AM
hippy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

Unky posted this stuff: Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow
yesterday granted the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in prizes and
grants were tax-exempt because, unlike sponsorships, they were not
considered "carrying on a business". ... etc etc


Furthermore... (can you tell I'm up for a whinge/argument? )

This explains the reasoning behind the decision:
http://www.gf.com.au/articles_222.htm

A point to note: If you were skilled at darts or something and travelled
around country fairs earning money on similar games of skill.. would you
declare that income? Is it only because she earned $100k+ that it's an
issue for you? Where's the cutoff? Is it okay to earn $20k prize money
and not pay tax on it? $50k?

Just out of curiosity - how much tax does Tiger Woods or Michael
Jordan pay?

hippy



--


  #13  
Old June 19th 04, 12:42 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

In article ,
Unkey Munkey wrote:

Like Pat Rafter being a citizen of Bermuda when he was awarded
Australian of the Year?


For the record: resident, not citizen.

--
Shane Stanley
  #14  
Old June 19th 04, 12:42 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

In article ,
hippy wrote:

You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on their
winnings or none.


Not necessarily. For example, a professional farmer pays tax and clainms
deductions, but a small hobby farmer does neither. Same goes for
professional punters, as opposed to the mug in the street. There's
plenty of precedent.

--
Shane Stanley
  #15  
Old June 19th 04, 12:42 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

In article ,
hippy wrote:

Is it still cheating if everyone is doing it?


Yes.

--
Shane Stanley
  #16  
Old June 19th 04, 11:20 PM
Jack Russell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling



Marty Wallace wrote:

"hippy" wrote in message
news

Originally posted by Unkey Munkey This ****s me. Why the hell shouldn't
they pay tax? In this case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings
is not carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I can
understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not wanting to declare
it as income, but come on.


You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on their
winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit wins will now be $9..




Hmm...
So does that mean you can claim depreciation and maintainance costs of your
bike?
Or laundry costs of your cycling knicks?
And travel costs for that last event you went to?
And what about those Carboshotz? Are they to help you earn your income or
did you eat them in your own time?

Time to add another volume to the taxation rules.

Marty "Tax Free" Wallace




At the risk of being serious the tax office already have this sorted.
"Hobbies" are not deductible and you do not pay tax on the money
received. See a boring accountant for the definition of a hobby!

--
Remove norubbish to reply direct

Jack Russell



  #17  
Old June 19th 04, 11:21 PM
Unkey Munkey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

hippy wrote:
Unky posted this stuff: Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow
yesterday granted the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in prizes and
grants were tax-exempt because, unlike sponsorships, they were not
considered "carrying on a business". ... etc etc



Furthermore... (can you tell I'm up for a whinge/argument? )


... okay .. you, me , carpark - now!

This explains the reasoning behind the decision:
http://www.gf.com.au/articles_222.htm


yes, the descision found *against* her in respect of money earned from
appearance fees, sponsorships and endorsements. She didn't want to pay
tax on this money, I think she should, and the court agreed with me.


A point to note: If you were skilled at darts or something and travelled
around country fairs earning money on similar games of skill.. would you
declare that income? Is it only because she earned $100k+ that it's an
issue for you? Where's the cutoff? Is it okay to earn $20k prize money
and not pay tax on it? $50k?


I can't see why not. Musicians, poets and artists are assessed on all
their income, I can't see what makes sportspeople a special case.


Just out of curiosity - how much tax does Tiger Woods or Michael
Jordan pay?


No idea, but probably more than me.


- Munk3y
... proving that you can't avoid death, taxes, and hearing my opinion.
  #18  
Old June 20th 04, 12:52 AM
Marty Wallace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling


"Jack Russell" wrote in message
...


Marty Wallace wrote:

"hippy" wrote in message
news

Originally posted by Unkey Munkey This ****s me. Why the hell shouldn't
they pay tax? In this case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings
is not carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I can
understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not wanting to declare
it as income, but come on.


You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on their
winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit wins will now be $9..




Hmm...
So does that mean you can claim depreciation and maintainance costs of

your
bike?
Or laundry costs of your cycling knicks?
And travel costs for that last event you went to?
And what about those Carboshotz? Are they to help you earn your income or
did you eat them in your own time?

Time to add another volume to the taxation rules.

Marty "Tax Free" Wallace




At the risk of being serious the tax office already have this sorted.
"Hobbies" are not deductible and you do not pay tax on the money
received. See a boring accountant for the definition of a hobby!

--
Remove norubbish to reply direct

Jack Russell


You obviously missed the earlier postings. We were trying to establish what
defined a taxable income. At what point does a sport become a job?

Also, a sport isn't the same as a hobby.

Marty


  #19  
Old June 20th 04, 01:51 AM
Jack Russell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling



Marty Wallace wrote:

"Jack Russell" wrote in message
...


Marty Wallace wrote:



"hippy" wrote in message
news



Originally posted by Unkey Munkey This ****s me. Why the hell shouldn't
they pay tax? In this case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings
is not carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I can
understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not wanting to declare
it as income, but come on.




You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on their
winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit wins will now be $9..





Hmm...
So does that mean you can claim depreciation and maintainance costs of


your


bike?
Or laundry costs of your cycling knicks?
And travel costs for that last event you went to?
And what about those Carboshotz? Are they to help you earn your income or
did you eat them in your own time?

Time to add another volume to the taxation rules.

Marty "Tax Free" Wallace






At the risk of being serious the tax office already have this sorted.
"Hobbies" are not deductible and you do not pay tax on the money
received. See a boring accountant for the definition of a hobby!

--
Remove norubbish to reply direct

Jack Russell




You obviously missed the earlier postings. We were trying to establish what
defined a taxable income. At what point does a sport become a job?

Also, a sport isn't the same as a hobby.

Marty




No I saw the earlier postings. I think the tax office would regard a
sport as a hobby for this purpose. Much the same rules apply to so
called hobby farms. To be cynical I think they become a "profession" as
soon as the income is greater than the expenses i.e. the ATO can get
something out of you, but I am sure they do have a definition. I just
consulted "she who knows everything" and she said there are pages on it
but my cynical definition is a good summary.

On a different subject the reason I prefer to top post is that my
spelling checker picks up errors from earlier postings which is a pain!

--
Remove norubbish to reply direct

Jack Russell



  #20  
Old June 20th 04, 01:55 AM
Plodder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling


"hippy" wrote in message
news snip
You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on their
winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit wins will now be $9..


What's wrong with that? It's easily administered: Just put in a cut-off for
declaring winnings or sponsorship as income at a level where it's not worth
the admin costs to pursue the tax - say, (example only) $5K/annum. If you
win less than that, it's notionally taxable but not pursued. You can (and
should, under law) declare it, but if you don't it's too trivial for the ATO
to bother with. There are precedents, like being able to claim certian
expenses below a threshold without supplying receipts. It's known to be
rorted but it's not worth the expense to audit. I know it's dishonest,
costing us honest taxpayers a fortune, (as WE all are - declaring every
cent! :-P ) etc., but it's the real world.


Never thought about this. I thought it was all down to these guys having
to give up everything in order to pursue a sport for the glory of the
country..? or something like that

Maybe they pay with their health by volunteering their bodies for all
the testing, drugs, supplements, etc. they have to endure?


Tosh. Sportspeople are simply entertainers like any actor, musician, etc. I
see no reason to treat sportspeople differently from any other entertainer.
A muso who doesn't earn much still pays tax.

Check the paragraphs in the article posted earlier that say, "The taxpayer
also submitted that none of the amounts were a reward for services and were
not relied on by her to meet her daily expenditure such that they had a
character of income." and"...However, that of itself is insufficient. Ms
Stone has not performed a service by throwing her javelin. She has not
charged a fee for entertainment"
Of course they are rewards for services. They area part-time entertainers.
Again, no different from a bunch of young mechanics putting together a
garage band and playing paying gigs at the local pub where people pay for
admittance. The band will get a portion of the money made by the pub
(whatever the arrangement - includes fees 'in kind' like free beer for the
night).

There's no disputing that some people are passionate about their 'chosen art
form' but entertinment is entertainment; sport is no different, unless you
exclude spectators and other non-participants, in which case, who's going to
sponsor anyone? Sponsorship relies on somone else seeing and being
influenced by the adverts carried by the entertainer (athlete, actor,
whatever) and being influenced to buy the advertised product. No observer =
no gain for the sponsor = no point sponsoring the entertainer. Simply by
accepting sponsorship an entertainer is providing a service.

I'm surprised you missed putting in the tongue-in-cheek indicator in your
comments!


Remember that people going to uni/school on scholarships aren't paying
for their education - same thing here?


Hmmm... what do I pay to the Uni every semester? Scotch mist? Certainly
feels like money...

Cheers,

Frank (who's a bad spectator because he hates the idea of watching someone
else having a good time while all I'm doing is watching!)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
published helmet research - not troll Frank Krygowski General 1927 October 24th 04 06:39 AM
More Paris Cycling - Along Southern Rim Elisa Francesca Roselli General 3 May 26th 04 02:01 AM
Age doesn't stop 70-somethings who are cycling devotees Garrison Hilliard General 5 March 22nd 04 05:56 AM
Reports from Sweden Garry Jones General 17 October 14th 03 05:23 PM
Doping or not? Read this: never_doped Racing 0 August 4th 03 01:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.