So, my fellow Australians, who else is left shaking their heads over this one?

A letter to the Sun Herald this morning quotes the following, from a question to George Cochrane "Your Question", June 1st. The questioner "has $50,000 in the bank, an investment property with a net worth of $262,000, $450,000 of bullion and a self-managed super fund worth at least $600,000. She is on Newstart Allowance. She has now inherited property worth almost $2 million, but apparently is still able to manipulate assets so that both she and her partner still remain eligible for Centrelink benefits."

Is this part of our problem? That people who are, to my mind, so affluent, still able to obtain benefits? What's going on here?

And I thought negative gearing was something we could do away with and instantly raise billions!!!!

Shazzbot2014-06-07T21:45:10Z

Favorite Answer

She might be able to get around Newstart asset tests, until she is able to receive what has been left to her in the estate, for up to 12 months. If she's calling the investment property her main residence and the bullion asset is not technically owned in her name, quite possibly she can claim Newstart.

The $50,000 cash in the bank sounds tricky, though. I think the cash asset limit is quite low, so maybe she has the account in someone else's name or offshore.

It is extremely unethical of her to claim Newstart, that's for sure.

C.M. C2014-06-08T06:58:23Z

Hey OzNana, I still maintain that Australia has dug a hole for itself where it comes to welfare benefits. Your situation has not just emerged, but has been growing out of hand for years.

What you picture in your question is unacceptable.

?2014-06-07T23:46:39Z

It wouldnt hurt to look into the legality of many who claim benefits.

Anonymous2014-06-07T21:39:10Z

The very wealthy expect there to be loopholes, and they're usually not disappointed.

?2014-06-07T21:27:20Z

The Abbott/Hockey government allows loopholes for the rich to get richer, while the poor get poorer

Show more answers (1)