The New Changes / Laws Taking Effect in 2019 (That might affect you)

scrimshaw on 01/01/2019 - 23:32
Last edited 02/01/2019 - 17:55

Happy New Year, fellow pennypinchers. Let's take a look at some of the new changes in Australian legislation to see what's going to impact you (financially) this year. Here are the most relevant things you'll want to know:

Education

  • FEE-HELP Student loans have been increased. For 2019, the FEE-HELP limit will be $104,440 (previous, $102,392). If you plan to study medicine, dentistry or veterinary science, the FEE-HELP limit will be $150,000 (previously, $127,992). Visit the FEE-HELP page for more info

  • From 1 July 2019, the new minimum HELP repayment threshold will be $45,881 with a one per cent repayment rate, with a further 17 thresholds and repayment rates, up to a top threshold of $134,573 at which ten per cent of income is repayable. Link to Education.gov.au Kudos to cathyrrn

  • Preschool Subsidies now available for 3 Year old Kids — they will receive access to 2 days a week of subsidised preschool education.
    Link to Education.gov.au

  • Fairer access to selective school options. These include changes to the school entry test and improving the psychometric design of questions, increasing avenues to apply for disability provisions and introducing a better balance of exam questions across subjects. Link to related article on Edu.gov.au

  • The $100 Creative Kids Rebate which was posted as a deal. The NSW Government are introducing a $100 rebate valid for students aged 4.5 to 18 enrolled in school, as a voucher that can be redeemed on selected Creative activities.

  • Some changes to ABSTUDY and Youth Allowance. Increased payment rates to students and more allowances given to travel, & the parental income limit for parents of students has increased to $160,000. The full details are on the Human Services site

  • Free TAFE Classes (Kudos to jjjaar), in 30 'high priority' fields of study and disciplines.. Applies to Aussie and New Zealand citizens living in VIC.

Financial

Credit card reforms

  • Ban on credit card limit increase invitations (In Plain English: Credit card issuers can not contact customers to offer credit limit increase invitations.) This ban was actually placed in July last year.

  • Credit card limit assessments — ASIC has set a three-year period to be used by banks when assessing applications for credit cards or increased limits. This may make it more difficult for some people (with credit card debt) to apply for a credit card. link to SBS which explains this in more detail. Link to ASIC.

ATM Fees

  • Targeted to NAB Customers. ATM fees ($2) are payable on rediATM machines. Statement on NAB website NAB customers can continue to withdraw their money fee-free at more than 7,000 NAB, ANZ, Commonwealth and Westpac ATMs across Australia that do not charge fees.

Public Transport and Utilities

  • For Melbourne and NSW (Opal), public transport fees will increase by an average of 2.2%.

  • 1.8% increase for Brisbane

  • Links ACT fares, PTV (Victoria) fares and NSW Opal Fares

  • Road tolls will rise by up to 10 cents per trip, for Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. (Source: The Guardian)

Goods and Services Tax

  • Australian women will no longer have to pay GST on tampons and sanitary pads, after the states and territories finally agreed to abolish the tax.

Parents

  • Free Baby Bundle for new parents in NSW. Parents of babies born after January 1st can get a bundle of items to help take care of their newborn.. This includes $300 worth of baby care products and an entry to an online first aid training program. đź‘Ť for Freebie!?

  • No Jab, No Play now enforced by the Western Australian government. It was initially introduced in 2016, but the law did not ban unvaccinated children from being enrolled into childcare centres and schools. To enrol now, your child must be vaccinated (Correction: Not yet, this is to be implemented later mid-year in Phase 2) , and schools must also collect immunisation records. It brings WA's laws in line with VIC, NSW and QLD. Read more on Mediastatements.gov.au

General Discussion

Comments

    • Lastchancetosee on 02/01/2019 - 10:06
      +2

      The ONE study which claimed that vaccinations for the common infant diseases caused autism, was refuted by numerous subsequent studies, so no grounds for an 'informed' discussion there. In every country where the key childhood vaccinations have dropped, the diseases have returned (if it had been eliminated). Studies of Gardasil, on the other hand, have shown it can produce reactions in a small number of people, but as it only protects against one virus, which causes approx 10% of cervical cancers, it is less problematic if people choose not to have their children vaccinated.

    • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 10:29

      No! Unvaccinated children will be excluded DURING AN OUTBREAK. They can attend school at all other times.

      • EightImmortals on 02/01/2019 - 10:39
        -5

        Really? That would be good if it were true, can you post a link to any information in that regard?

        • fertiliser on 02/01/2019 - 11:44
          +8

          turns out you aren't so versed after all

        • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 12:36
          +2

          Didn't you imply were very skilled at finding information on the internet? It says so in pretty much every article about the subject if you read the article and not just the headline.

          • EightImmortals on 02/01/2019 - 12:43
            -2

            @[Deactivated]: So where is the link to the information?

            Or is it much more fun to simply troll on without contributing anything? If there is such an exemption as you claim then I would be grateful to know that.

            • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 12:57
              +2

              @EightImmortals: Did you look for it or do you expect me to do it for you?

              Here it is, but you will probably dismiss it as being propaganda by big pharma.

              https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa/anti-vaxers-retailers-an…

              • EightImmortals on 02/01/2019 - 13:16

                @[Deactivated]: Thanks for the link:

                "Phase one of the State Government’s no jab, no play policy comes into effect in the new year, with unvaccinated children banned from attending school and child care centres during disease outbreaks."

                That's good news, it prompted me to look up the same thing for other states to see what the state of play is there.

                NSW https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/immunisation/Pages/immunisatio…

                Seems the same is true for the other states as well.

                https://avn.org.au/information/vaccine-laws/no-jab-no-school…
                (though that article is from last year)

                So thanks for that info, it brings me some sense of relief (and a sinking feeling that I have scammed by the main stream media and their 'compulsory vaccination' headlines). It doesn't change my concerns about the dangers of vaccines themselves of course but it does allow me to operate in the best health interests of my family without fear of state persecution (we don't claim government money so we aren't being discriminated against on that point).

                Thanks again. :)

                • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 13:23

                  @EightImmortals: I kinda think it keeps everyone happy, most people think what you did, unvaccinated children are completely banned from attending school at anytime which makes a lot of people happy.

                  It says the principle gets fined $1000 for allowing a child to attend during an outbreak. What defines an outbreak. I know there was a so called outbreak in Perth couple of years ago that involved just 1 case and that child was not kept at home sick. Is the outbreak something formally declared? What happens if the outbreak is happens during the school day - do the unvaccinated have to be removed from the grounds immediately - I'm guessing not all parents will be able to pick up their kids immediately.

                  • EightImmortals on 02/01/2019 - 13:41
                    -2

                    @[Deactivated]: No worries, I'm happy to keep kids home for a few days. It raises an interesting question though in that if all the unvaccinated kids are kept away from school then it is the vaccinated kids who are getting sick. But it is the vaccinated kids who are supposed to be protected from these diseases? If what we're bing sold about vaccines is true then shouldn't be the other way around?

                    Anyway, thanks again for the info.

                    • Jolakot on 04/01/2019 - 19:32

                      @EightImmortals: Vaccines aren't 100% effective, vaccinated children can still get sick, they just get sick less and recover quickly.

                      The basic principle of herd immunity is that it stops an infection from becoming an outbreak.

                      If 1 sick child infects 3 others on average, then those 3 infect 9, then 27, then 81, then 243, then 729 etc.

                      With herd immunity, the original child only infects 1 child, who can only infect 1 other child, and so on until it fizzles out, perhaps due to a weekend or something.

                      Unvaccinated children still threaten vaccinated kids.

    • A Driver on 02/01/2019 - 10:33
      +4

      You'd bring an unvaccinated child into a hospital environment??? In your "informed" state you think that's not an ALARMING decision???

      • pegaxs on 02/01/2019 - 11:40
        +5

        And added to that, they mentioned travel. Airlines are cesspools of diseases. Who in their right mind would subject an unvaccinated child to airline travel?

        Taking an unvaccinated child into a hospital to visit. I am literally gobsmacked. It just shows the level of entitlement when their child’s family time is more important than patient safety.

        Doesn’t seem very informed to me.

    • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 13:28
      +5

      Vaccinations fall under the umbrella of proven greater good. This isn't a social experiment that anti-vaxxers like to compare to the facists the like of Stalin and Hitler.

      The mere fact that you have to trawl the depths of the internet to find "proof" that vaccinations may have side effects goes to show how absurd it is. Any search result is going to give you any combination of answers. It is a search engine, not an answer machine.

      You're discarding increased life expectancy, lower incidence of childhood mortality, elimination of diseases like Polio and drastically reduced outbreaks of infectious diseases, all whilst considering increased mobility (travel) and increased population density. You're also ignoring the far more prevalent scenario of non-vaxxers dying or spreading diseases.

      Remember our measles outbreak? Pepperidge Farm not required.

      If anti-vaxxers don't want to vaccinate, that's fine, just don't endanger the other children. There are places you can live with other people that are all but vaccine free. Think Botswana.

      Alas, I cannot change anti-vaxxer minds with facts because their decisions aren't based on them.

      • Lv80 on 02/01/2019 - 18:37
        -3

        It's not a case of arguing if they are good or not. No doubt they are…but forcing a population to do something to get an education?

        And what about all the adults, parents and teachers that aren't vaccinated? No word about them not being allowed to enter or teach while any epidemic is going on is there?

        When was the last time most of us had a vaccine shot? Unless we are going overseas probably when we were in school. Tetanus shot? Probably only when we got bitten by a dog or a rusty bit of steel drew blood.

        If this was a serious issue..then we should all be forced to have vaccine booster injections every 3-5 years…at the cost of not being able to enter our workplace, schools, shopping centres or the public in general….surely?

        • Jolakot on 04/01/2019 - 19:37

          Because adults have refined immune systems that can handle those illnesses, not to mention that they were vaccinated when they were young, which never goes away.

          • Lv80 on 04/01/2019 - 19:46

            @Jolakot: Yeah no.

            So again…why aren't we demanding compelled vaccinations of adults in society?

            Pertussis(whooping cough) - 4-6 years
            Diphtheria - Around 10 years
            Tetanus - 96% protected 13-14 years, 72% >25 years
            Polio - >99% protected for at least 18 years
            Haemophilus influenzae type B - >9 years to date
            Hepatitis B - >20 years to date
            Measles - Life-long in >96% vaccines
            Mumps - >10 years in 90%, waning slowly over time
            Rubella - Most vaccinees (>90%) protected >15-20 years
            Pneumococcal - >4-5 years so far for conjugate vaccines
            Human papillomavirus - >5-8 years to date

            • Jolakot on 04/01/2019 - 23:06

              @Lv80: Worded that poorly, some vaccines like measles last forever, and many provide lower levels of immunity as you age.

              Regardless, children stuffed into a classroom are more at risk than adults in their daily lives.

              If an adult accepts the risks of getting sick, then fine, but children do not make their own choices.

              • Lv80 on 05/01/2019 - 10:41

                @Jolakot: No worries re wording. Do that myself sometimes. Appreciate the clarification.

                Completely understand the issues of vaccinating children. Really I do. I would vaccinate my children if I had any. I feel for those that cant be vaccinated and then are at greater risk.

                But I also feel for parents that have genuine concerns about the effects a vaccine may have on their child,…and how they would feel if they were compelled to vaccinate them just so they can access the same education as every other child….only to have their child effected severely by a vaccine.

                I feel there is a significant difference between doing all you can to protect your child within your power and them being hurt or getting sick…verses making a decision to do something that is the directly related and the cause of them being sick.

                So we feel for those parents that cant immunise their children…but do we feel for the other extreme of this issue? A parent that has a genuine concern, or one dealing with a child afflicted with illness caused by a vaccine?

                I think as a parent of an unvaccinated child you are likely to keep your child at hope in the event of an outbreak. Realistically sending them to school or lots of exposure in public knowing they arent vaccinated would be the neglectful thing to do. Similar to those that can't be vaccinated.

                But compelling a parent to do something…especially where it is very much to access a basic right and need…education…seems for me to be a nasty thing to do.

                Of course this rule only comes into play when there is an outbreak…so my concerns about this are fairly limited…but I guess it would depend on how long an outbreak goes for and how they manage this. An outbreak anywhere in the world, Australia, the local area? How long after an outbreak do they wait before allowing non vaccinated kids back.

                And also…this rule also then affects those children that can't be vaccinated doesnt it?

                So even if every single child is vaccinated that can be…those that cant, in the event of an outbreak, according to this legislation, wouldn't be allowed to go to school due to not being immunised…regardless that there is no way they can be.

                So you might have a vaccinated carrier that isn't affected but can pass this on to an unvaccinated child.

    • secondstory on 02/01/2019 - 14:29
      -1

      we will not be able to work, drive, travel or visit loved ones in hospitals?

      That sounds quite good (except for the driving thing, I quite don't get that unless it's specifically for taxi/bus/etc.), I actually hadn't thought about it that much before but I would really hate the idea of newborns or my loved ones in hospital in a vulnerable state or with compromised immune systems to be risked with the exposure of someone who has not been immunised and may be infected with something.. I equate un-vaccinated persons to people indefinitely walking around with the flu, only I can't tell.

      Your point is how society is moving towards being more strict around immunisations. It is your own choice whether or not you accept vaccinations, and that is fine, but such a decision impacts others within that society and can put other people at risk. A blanket with a few holes can still keep the cold air our unless there are too many or they are all in one spot. I think it as home-schooling would kind of also be like keeping the society blanket holes apart - since during an epidemic the ones who are both most high risk and most at risk would be the un-vaccinated children, who would in turn bring it home to their likely un-vaccinated families.

      Since you say you've done your research, you cannot completely dismiss that there is also an overwhelming abundance of information based on facts to support vaccinations; to me at least, the benefits far out-weight the alternative possibilities. To completely abolish vaccinations would be a step towards the dark ages. Rather than demonising vaccinations, advocating for support of increased research into the potential side-affects/dangers is better than trying to flip over the mountains of people who prefer the benefits. At the very least, I think it would be better received instead of fueling the smack against anti-vaxxers which might sway people away from caring about existing research.

    • idonotknowwhy on 02/01/2019 - 14:58

      Which internet comment, YouTube video, documentary, news article, face-to-face conversation convinced you that children are better off without being immunized?

      Do you believe it's a conspiracy / deliberate act of malice pushing this harm on children? Or do you believe it's a side effect which only affects a small enough percentage of children that is being ignored?

      • Lv80 on 04/01/2019 - 19:49

        So on one side we have a small amount that are affected by vaccinations…and the other those that can't.

        But yet we are demanding that one group MUST put their children at risk.

        That makes absolutely no sense. Sorry. One is nature doing what nature does (unable to being vaccinated and being at risk) the other is retrospectively (where they are affected) endangering a child by injecting them with a vaccine.

        Sorry. Who gives you or the government the right to decide which group should be put at risk..and not just put at risk…but forcing parents to make the decision and deal with the consequences where they wouldn't normally vaccinate their child?

    • cameldownunder on 02/01/2019 - 15:16

      though you might have to dig a bit

      Conspiracy theory sites are hard to Google up. Because Google was mandated by the government not to put those links on the first page of the search result.

    • brendanm on 02/01/2019 - 19:16
      +3

      Lol antivaxxers are funny, your child had autism all along, it just happens to start showing symptoms around the same age as they give a round of injections.

      Correlation does not equal causation.

      • PAZMAT on 04/01/2019 - 01:27

        Huh… Thats actually something I've never thought about before. I'm 110% in support of vaccinations, so I'm surprised I haven't come across this earlier tbh

    • Cluster on 02/01/2019 - 22:46
      +1

      Show me one country (as you claim) where it's illegal to drive unless you have a vaccination. Go on, I'll wait.

    • stealthpaw on 03/01/2019 - 01:41
      -1

      Your entitled, uneducated, ignorant & objectively wrong opinion will cause the death of innocent people. I guess some people were just born murderers.

    • Windows98 on 03/01/2019 - 02:14

      Anti vaxers should be kicked out of the country along with the terrorists

    • khell on 03/01/2019 - 04:28

      You should be jailed for child abuse and attempted murder.

    • Tyrx on 03/01/2019 - 20:43

      based on what happened to our son

      It's not the fault of the vaccine that your son has Autism. It's genetics and/or environmental factors that are responsible for its emergence. I feel bad for your son though - you shouldn't be breeding due to flawed genetics, and even if genetics wasn't at play, then you're a complete failure of a parent for not socialising him properly. I suppose you need something blame to make yourself feel better though…

    • [Deactivated] on 06/01/2019 - 10:33

      https://dd.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/acvzx2/2_boys_both_exp…

      2 boys both exposed to the same source of smallpox. One was vaccinated, the other was not.

  • swapsey on 02/01/2019 - 09:54

    I keep hearing about another big change to negative gearing laws once we have Bill Shorten as PM. How are people planning for this? Will have grandfather clauses - but does anyone know how they will work?

    • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 10:30

      I think they are planning on grandfathering it and negative gearing will still be available on new builds. But of course they aren't even in government yet and things could change.

    • davidg444 on 02/01/2019 - 10:34

      Tax deductions for interest on borrowing to buy real estate etc. will only be reduced to disallow negative gearing (where these deductions exceed the rental income) in cases of new (that's the grandfathering) investments in rental properties of existing, viz. not newly built, dwellings. Where a new dwelling is constructed, and otherwise, negative gearing will continue to be allowed.

      Probabilities are that ALP will win and will control the H of R but passage of the change of the tax law might be rocky through the Senate. Expect affected vested interests viz. active new investors/speculators and the industries in real estate that hang off them, who get the financial advantage of the negative gearing tax subsidy from everybody else when they buy, to continue to lobby new senators and to cry blue murder until the changes are bedded down and economists looking at the bigger picture to continue to support the ALP policy.

      Existing investors and home owners have the risk that prices may come down some way with the heat/demand the policy takes out of the residential real estate market. Many who are unconvinced by the lobbying see that as a good thing. The lobbyists also claim that residential rents will go up relying on equivocal evidence from the mid 80s when negative gearing was last restricted by tax law. I would be surprised if that happens where large numbers of residential properties are concurrently coming on to the market.

    • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 13:49

      They can remove negative gearing.

      The government that removes negative gearing may sway some single policy voters. Not a bad crowd but who knows how many voters are actually single policy and will be swayed from the opposition.

      However, they'll lose their influential supporters, ie. the political donors, industry leaders… people with money because they have investments. Negatively geared investments. Unless they make a trade for industrial loopholes to offset the financial damage. This would trigger other events that may see other key members switch sides. Canned worms.

      Lose enough supporters and all the changes made and to be made becomes irrelevant.

  • blitz on 02/01/2019 - 10:05

    Thanks very much Scrimshaw!

  • garddn on 02/01/2019 - 10:13
    +1

    big daddy government.
    a bundle of goods. joke

  • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 11:16
    +4

    Fairer access to selective school options

    That one didn't really make much sense to me, and the link doesn't help much either. The kids who perform best on the test get in. The only way to make it "fairer" would be for the test to be ignored and let anyone in, defeating the whole point of selective schools.

    • TerryJustTerry on 03/01/2019 - 08:38
      +1

      i got you bro

      https://education.nsw.gov.au/about-us/strategies-and-reports…

      This one seems odd….

      "ACTION 10: Close the gender
      gap in the selection system"

      "ACTION 1: Encourage more
      gifted students from underrepresented groups to apply"

      If you are a white male don't bother trying to educate yourself there is no room for you here.

      • [Deactivated] on 03/01/2019 - 13:19
        +1

        Close the gender gap

        that is a bit weird considering most selective schools I know of are single gender

        If you are a white male don't bother trying to educate yourself

        i went to a selective school 20 years ago and there were hardly any white guys there then. probably 50% asian, 25% indian.

      • Jolakot on 04/01/2019 - 19:42
        +1

        That should be good for white males, given that males are underrepresented in education, and white people are underrepresented in top tier education.

        • TerryJustTerry on 07/01/2019 - 08:31

          hahaha, yeah if you thought logically, but sadly these days "under represented groups" = non whites as opposed to under represented groups…

  • [Deactivated] on 02/01/2019 - 11:56
    -2

    Good to see a change to selective entry tests.
    The exams were not designed to be coachable.

    • TerryJustTerry on 03/01/2019 - 08:39

      ahhh mate I'm pretty sure they are trying to make it more uncoachable.

      "ACTION 8: Reduce
      predictability and
      coachability, and
      support schools
      in preparing their
      students to sit the
      selection tests "

      • [Deactivated] on 03/01/2019 - 12:19
        +1

        Sorry if my comment was mis-interpreted. But this was the point I was trying to make.
        The exam was, and should never be designed to for people to memorize patterns. That's just plain robotic material.
        This is coming from someone who went to a selective school too, and was surrounded by students who had multiple tutors outside school for every subject and teaching how to "beat the system."

        • TerryJustTerry on 03/01/2019 - 13:56

          Ahhh fair enough, so more coachable in the sense of teaching as opposed to what you saw tutors doing which was more skirting the system?

          • [Deactivated] on 03/01/2019 - 14:09

            @TerryJustTerry: Yes, I support people who need coaching on things they need/want to improve. skirting the system will set you up for a surprise in the real world when you are in board room meetings and you cannot come up with real time ideas for critical issues. " Oh let me google it for a week and i will get back to you".

  • djprima on 02/01/2019 - 13:05
    +5

    Passport fee is increasing

    • Windows98 on 03/01/2019 - 02:15

      FFS we pay so much already

      • Tyrx on 04/01/2019 - 17:44

        Really? $29 per year…

        • Windows98 on 04/01/2019 - 17:48

          Yes when you put it that way. It's sounds like nothing.

          When you put it into practice, I paid over $1k to get my families passports ready for our trip last year.

  • Carmen Sandiego on 02/01/2019 - 15:13

    HECS Debt repayment has been lowered (effective as of tax time last year but still - from $55,874 to $51,957).

    Even more fun is July this year when it goes to $45,881

    • idonotknowwhy on 02/01/2019 - 15:22

      I thought wages were supposed to be rising (or at least keeping up with inflation).
      Doe this change imply that graduates are now having a harder time reaching the median wage?

      • scrimshaw on 02/01/2019 - 16:06
        +2

        I think it's more likely that more students are choosing to take on HECS debts (because it is effectively an interest free loan) and therefore the government is trying to recover more of their student loans at a faster and higher rate.

        • Carmen Sandiego on 03/01/2019 - 09:52
          +1

          It's a situation of " little of column A, a little of column B"

          There are more students with a HECS debt but, because of the stagnating wage rise, it's getting more difficult to even reach the repayment threshold. Added to that, people sometimes deliberately (why?) take jobs that pay less than the threshold and another group who just leave (deliberately or their degrees are more beneficial elsewhere) after completing their degree.

          Fun fact: For that group that do leave, there have been stories of the people who have been chased by the New Zealand government for education bills 20 years after. I wouldn't be surprised if the Australian Government start that.

  • JudasX on 02/01/2019 - 15:44

    Thanks for this!

  • pennypincher98 on 02/01/2019 - 18:17
    +1

    Happy New Year, fellow pennypinchers

    You mean there's more than one me?

    Thanks for the list though. If I could upvote this I would.

  • Kinko82 on 02/01/2019 - 23:01

    Awesome post and summary. Appreciate your time and effort!

  • idonotknowwhy on 03/01/2019 - 07:57
    +1

    Thanks for the information. Please do another one next year :)

  • [Deactivated] on 03/01/2019 - 08:35

    Might want add PBS prescriptions. Went to collect script and was told it has gone up 10 cents.
    Also, don't forget to ask, if your chemist doesn't do it automatically, ask for the $1 off that other chemist offer for pensioner's scripts (and maybe for any concession card holders?). My chemist 100metres away said no at first, when I politely informed them I would just get scripts elsewhere if they couldn't do that price match $1 off, they quickly changed their mind and put a note on my file for the $1 discount (on scrips that they probably get >$20 for anyway).

  • MrBillions on 03/01/2019 - 13:06

    Well.done

  • [Deactivated] on 03/01/2019 - 17:29

    Anyway I could study a free course externally, if from interstate? I have plenty of mates who live in Melbourne, could I use their address?

    I've already studied construction estimation, interested in the other construction courses but from SA

  • stewy on 04/01/2019 - 00:37

    Credit card limit assessments — ASIC has set a three-year period to be used by banks when assessing applications for credit cards or increased limits. This may make it more difficult for some people (with credit card debt) to apply for a credit card.

    This one will also likely affect some of us Ozbargainers who churn credit cards, especially if you want to high a couple high minimum credit limit cards at the same time.

    Personally I usually have 3 at any one time, my Bankwest card for international transactions, the one I get from my loan package and Frequent Flyer Rewards card to get the sign up bonus.

    Despite nearly $40k in limits, I always pay off in full and am not drowning in debt. Understand rthe new rules I may struggle to maintain limits this high though!

    Such nanny state nonsense that punishes people who are financially responsible.

  • pressPlay on 04/01/2019 - 01:51
    +1

    May want to add under credit card reforms, the requirement that you can now cancel a credit card online. Sounds really simple but not surprising most credit card companies did not provide this, so you had the chore of talking to someone whose job it was to talk you out of it. Just don't expect the link to that service to be too prominent..

    • Carmen Sandiego on 04/01/2019 - 15:40

      That's really good to know :)

      I just wish that was the same for the Telstra bill I want to cancel :/

    • SBOB on 12/01/2019 - 09:52

      yep
      Did this today and being able to just login, click a button and have it cancelled was great
      Beat having to call up or go into a branch like I have had to previously

      Was very easy to find on both westpac and amex sites.

  • Johnny L on 04/01/2019 - 14:40

    Might be the best post I have seen in a while. Thanks OP!

  • drfuzzy on 04/01/2019 - 19:03

    Whilst I agree with the intent of this, the problem with making exceptions in the GST legislation is that it brings out the worst in companies seeking the exploit the exception.
    A better approach might have been to leave the GST in, but give women a cash offset when they lodge a tax return.
    Some types of bread are GST exempt, but that didn't stop enormous amounts of the Courts time being wasted on a legal dispute that delved into the difference between GST exempt bread and a certain type of cracker whose manufacturer considered it to be bread….

  • thunderx on 04/01/2019 - 19:20

    great post.

  • noshopping on 04/01/2019 - 20:50

    Toilet paper attracts GST. Every single person in Australia uses this. I turned all my house bidets to water system but still require paper for drying. Why are tampons GST free but not toilet paper???

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/26/the-ta…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join