Bumped Random Chat - I want BBQ

[LeverPuller]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

 

[Crimson Azure]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

Ist better than the free WWCC for volunteers, at least you get paid for use of it.

 

[TheCount]

Digging post holes in 30+ degrees can eat a big, over filled bag of them.

 

[LeverPuller]

Ist better than the free WWCC for volunteers, at least you get paid for use of it.

Even worse. The fee should be nominal at best. $90 to volunteer - often with parents volunteering for their kids.

 

[Proper Gander]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

I’m confused about how it’s not tax deductible? That’s s**t. Crazy stuff. Like someone would do an employment test for kicks? Should be at very least a deduction- world has gone batshit

 

[LeverPuller]

I’m confused about how it’s not tax deductible? That’s s**t. Crazy stuff. Like someone would do an employment test for kicks? Should be at very least a deduction- world has gone batshit

It's only tax-deductible if its a condition of maintaining employment, not if its taking up employment.

 

[Proper Gander]

It's only tax-deductible if its a condition of maintaining employment, not if its taking up employment.

Madness.

 

[CTHORANGE]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

That looks like it's gone up astronomically in recent years then. Regulation = government department multiplied by inefficiency and some kind of exponential time coefficient (expense increasingly outstrips the cost delivery over time) = ridiculous cost to the individual user.

On a tangent, anyone else think it's weird the TAC has no competition (it has a monopoly on compulsory liability insurance for registered vehicles in Victoria). While most every other government utility was sold off to increase competition and push "down" prices years ago? Or am I just way off the mark with that thought for some technical reason I haven't considered?

 

[LeverPuller]

That looks like it's gone up astronomically in recent years then. Regulation = government department multiplied by inefficiency and some kind of exponential time coefficient (expense increasingly outstrips the cost delivery over time) = ridiculous cost to the individual user.

On a tangent, anyone else think it's weird the TAC has no competition (it has a monopoly on compulsory liability insurance for registered vehicles in Victoria). While most every other government utility was sold off to increase competition and push "down" prices years ago? Or am I just way off the mark with that thought for some technical reason I haven't considered?

It's operated independently of Government and pumps all profits back into road safety IIRC.

 

[CTHORANGE]

It's operated independently of Government and pumps all profits back into road safety IIRC.

I believe you're right, the TAC isn't for profit. But it also has no market forces to ensure efficiency (which was one of the primary justifications the government used to sell off our public utilities in the 1990's).

 

[LeverPuller]

I believe you're right, the TAC isn't for profit. But it also has no market forces to ensure efficiency (which was one of the primary justifications the government used to sell off our public utilities in the 1990's).

I do wonder where TAC gets its money from. Does it come from rego or is it as part of your car insurance?

If it's the latter then the insurance companies are probably a check on it.

 

[CTHORANGE]

I do wonder where TAC gets its money from. Does it come from rego or is it as part of your car insurance?

If it's the latter then the insurance companies are probably a check on it.

Definitely not the latter, but this is the kind of idea I'm thinking of. Maybe it should be.

Part of your car registration renewal is the TAC premium (and on top of that an additional TAC tax if your a motorcycle rider). Next time have a look at the calculations on your renewal form, you'll see the vast vast majority of what you are paying is actually the TAC insurance premium, the actual vehicle registration is really quite cheap.

 

[RandB]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

An individual can only make work related deductions against the assessable income of the position/role in question unfortunately. This expense is incurred too soon. Sounds like unlike a standard criminal history check, the prospective employer won't cover the cost. They obviously treat it similar to accreditation rather than a specific requirement of the employer.

 

[LeverPuller]

An individual can only make work related deductions against the assessable income of the position/role in question unfortunately. This expense is incurred too soon. Sounds like unlike a standard criminal history check, the prospective employer won't cover the cost. They obviously treat it similar to accreditation rather than a specific requirement of the employer.

Clearly.

What's worse is the WWCC for volunteers is $90.

Once again, totally okay with the concept behind it for safety reasons, but you are also slugging parents $90 to coach the footy team, help out on school excursions etc. Surely it doesn't cost the Govt $90 to run a search of names in a police database.

 

[RandB]

Clearly.

What's worse is the WWCC for volunteers is $90.

Once again, totally okay with the concept behind it for safety reasons, but you are also slugging parents $90 to coach the footy team, help out on school excursions etc. Surely it doesn't cost the Govt $90 to run a search of names in a police database.

Yeah, $90 for something like that is a little excessive. Sounds like they need to streamline their processes a bit better for such a commonplace check.

 

[Demon 16]

An individual can only make work related deductions against the assessable income of the position/role in question unfortunately. This expense is incurred too soon. Sounds like unlike a standard criminal history check, the prospective employer won't cover the cost. They obviously treat it similar to accreditation rather than a specific requirement of the employer.

I recommend saving the expenses and claiming it the following year, if you havnt earnt any money from it before this years tax time. It is most certainly not an accreditation.

If you are volunteering, then claim it as a charitable donation.

 

[RandB]

I recommend saving the expenses and claiming it the following year, if you havnt earnt any money from it before this years tax time. It is most certainly not an accreditation.

Technically not correct but it's bugger all anyway. If an annual or periodic renewal/check is required then that's deductible if you're working.

If you are volunteering, then claim it as a charitable donation.

Technically, there was consideration provided for the money, that being the checking service - this is not a donation. If the specific charity is willing to do up a donation receipt go for it but ultimately this is paid to the Vic Government and covers you for 5 yrs by the looks so if you took future charities/work in that time period you're covered.

 

[Demon 16]

Technically not correct but it's bugger all anyway. If an annual or periodic renewal/check is required then that's deductible if you're working.


Technically, there was consideration provided for the money, that being the checking service - this is not a donation. If the specific charity is willing to do up a donation receipt go for it but ultimately this is paid to the Vic Government and covers you for 5 yrs by the looks so if you took future charities/work in that time period you're covered.

Don’t worry I certainly understand that my suggestions were not technically sound, but I’m also Greek enough to know that if you put these through, the ATO would be very unlikely to pull you up on them, or hold these against you - unless of course you are doing a whole lot of other dodgy s**t.

 

[Cannon82]

Are the winter Olympics being televized or is there just a two week string of uninterrupted commercials until the closing ceremony? Reckon I've flicked over the channel 5 or 6 times and am yet to see any Olympic events.

 

[jhong]

Are the winter Olympics being televized or is there just a two week string of uninterrupted commercials until the closing ceremony? Reckon I've flicked over the channel 5 or 6 times and am yet to see any Olympic events.

Well they have to pay for their battery of Qc 's somehow .

 

[PerfectFooty]

I think i can say i'm definitely itching for Round 1

 

[PerfectFooty]

Popped up on my news feed this morning. I'm just viewer of their work on the internet, but i find this highly distressing
https://www.pcgamer.com/youtubers-gavin-free-and-meg-turney-survive-break-in-by-armed-deranged-fan/

 

[LeverPuller]

Popped up on my news feed this morning. I'm just viewer of their work on the internet, but i find this highly distressing
https://www.pcgamer.com/youtubers-gavin-free-and-meg-turney-survive-break-in-by-armed-deranged-fan/

Whoa wtf

 

[PerfectFooty]

Whoa wtf

Yeah it's pretty ****ed

 

[Toump Ass]

Gripe time.

Working with Children's check. The concept is totally fine, of course.

What's not okay for me is the $121 fee to have it processed for an employee.

As a new employee, the government is entirely independently putting a fee on people applying for employment. An additional cost which is not tax-deductible. And if you don't pay the fee, you can't take up the job.

It's basically a tax on anyone who wants to work with kids.

Shouldn't your employer pay for it? Mine did.