Sparkling Adventures in Child Neglect: Now with Rats!

[ohnomoe]

I'll bet they're staying for 'free'. There's no way she could afford all the airfares, the data for her ipad, the very expensive toys, the fuel for the bus plus property taxes. But if she's claiming the house as the family home and yet doesn't live there, surely that's fraud? Or do they just say if you only own one property and don't rent sonewhere else it's your primary home by default?

There is a minimum amount of time that you have to spend at your home to claim it as your primary residence for welfare purposes, otherwise it is considered an asset and you suddenly become too wealthy for welfare (or just get a lot less). Periodically Lauren and the kids go back home and live in the garage/shed for "tax purposes", i.e. in order to claim the house as their principle home and continue to receive larger centrelink payments.

[lizziesmom]

There is a minimum amount of time that you have to spend at your home to claim it as your primary residence for welfare purposes, otherwise it is considered an asset and you suddenly become too wealthy for welfare (or just get a lot less). Periodically Lauren and the kids go back home and live in the garage/shed for "tax purposes", i.e. in order to claim the house as their principle home and continue to receive larger centrelink payments.

That is so wrong on so many levels.

[lilith]

There is a minimum amount of time that you have to spend at your home to claim it as your primary residence for welfare purposes, otherwise it is considered an asset and you suddenly become too wealthy for welfare (or just get a lot less). Periodically Lauren and the kids go back home and live in the garage/shed for "tax purposes", i.e. in order to claim the house as their principle home and continue to receive larger centrelink payments.

I'm sure that her address is listed as her home for centrelink purposes. Otherwise it would count as an asset and rent would count as income.

[August]

I'm sure that her address is listed as her home for centrelink purposes. Otherwise it would count as an asset and rent would count as income.

And of course there's no way they'd be able to discover she hasn't even been there since November. I'm sure they never google the names of recipients.

[ohnomoe]

Listing the address as her home is one thing but you also have to actually live there for a certain period of time as far as I know. I'm pretty sure that they do live in the property for the minimum amount each financial year because to not do so, claim it as a principle residence and therefore claim an extra $x in welfare would be serious fraud. Lauren is smart, as far as I know she doesn't do anything illegal, she just finds and exploits every loophole imaginable.

[August]

It seems there's no written rule, and that their tax purposes time in Australia was not in order to maintain that house as principal residence. It may have been to remain an Australian resident for tax purposes, but the tax people only care about capital gaons, and give you six years of grace.

[lilith]

It seems there's no written rule, and that their tax purposes time in Australia was not in order to maintain that house as principal residence. It may have been to remain an Australian resident for tax purposes, but the tax people only care about capital gaons, and give you six years of grace.

I think that for Family Tax Benefit (her main income source) you have to be resident for a majority of the year.

[jaelh]

I think that for Family Tax Benefit (her main income source) you have to be resident for a majority of the year.

Ah.

August, there is no "written rule" on residency, but there are pretty specific tests that the ATO uses. (which I think is what you're talking about here? )

However, the rules for residency for the purpose of obtaining particular social security payments (ie: residency at a particular property resulting in rental assistance etc.. ) and tax residency (resident of Australia) are different things.

You have a threshold residency requirement to get SS; then you also have to meet specific tests regarding how you use your property to get benefits.

Lilith re Fam.TB, you have to be a resident (that's not tied to a majority of the year or otherwise; it's the particular ATO test) when you're claiming the benefit. You can apparently also make claims during short term absences from AU of up to three years.

and FWIW, trust me that the ATO is interested in more than just capital gains re property ownership. Don't mess with the tax office, even if you're entirely honest and make a mistake, ugh, it can get really really messy. the penalties can be astronomical.

[ohnomoe]

I think there are two things at play here. They need to live in Australia for most of the year in order to qualify for Family Tax Benefit and probably various other benefits.

Centrelink also does income and asset tests for parenting payments where "the value of any real estate, including holiday homes, you own (this does not include your principal home)" are counted as assets. Assuming that their property is completely paid off (no idea how they can afford everything they do if they are also making mortgage repayments and not collecting rent), the value of the property would easily place them over the asset limit.

In my quick search I can't find how long you have to live in the property to claim it as your principle residence but it follows logic that you have to reside there for at least some of the year.

[jaelh]

They need to live in Australia for most of the year in order to qualify for Family Tax Benefit and probably various other benefits.

No, they need to be resident to claim the Fam.Tax.Ben.

That doesn't (necessarily) have anything to do with living in Australia for most of the year.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/custome ... scriptions

http://ato.gov.au/Individuals/Internati ... d-to-know/

/pedant.

[ohnomoe]

Lauren has stated on her blog that they need to be in Australia for most of the year for their tax purposes. By tax purposes I suppose she really could mean anything and just not want to share the details.

http://www.sparklingadventures.com/index.php?id=1635

I'm happy enough to concede that don't fully understand parenting payments, asset assessments, or family tax benefit because I've been lucky enough not to have to deal with those things to this point in my life.

Does anyone know where they are headed at the moment? Are they on their way back to Brisbane?

[jaelh]

Lauren has stated on her blog that they need to be in Australia for most of the year for their tax purposes. By tax purposes I suppose she really could mean anything and just not want to share the details.

http://www.sparklingadventures.com/index.php?id=1635

I'm happy enough to concede that don't fully understand parenting payments, asset assessments, or family tax benefit because I've been lucky enough not to have to deal with those things to this point in my life.

Does anyone know where they are headed at the moment? Are they on their way back to Brisbane?

Sorry, I was being a bit of a %&*^/. I think she doesn't actually understand her position and is going on the majority of time = resident. It doesn't.

Anyway - sorry for being a twit :)

[Trudestar]

Does anyone know where they are headed at the moment? Are they on their way back to Brisbane?

It says on her website they're heading to Northern NSW for an un schooling thing from 13th Sept, then something else in that area early October.

But it's only a 2-3 hour drive from there to Brisbane...

[August]

I think that for Family Tax Benefit (her main income source) you have to be resident for a majority of the year.

Ah, I was looking at a different tax thing. Any chance you could call up and check if you'll lose your parenting payment if you go nomadic and let friends live in your house rent free?

[lilith]

Ah, I was looking at a different tax thing. Any chance you could call up and check if you'll lose your parenting payment if you go nomadic and let friends live in your house rent free?

I can tomorrow

[August]

Wherever her permanent home is, she sure hates South Australia. Drove straight across without stopping both times, even when she had to drove mostly across, turn left and drive back across to get to Uluru. Which route on the map makes me want to lie down and hyperventilate.

[Blahblah]

Wherever her permanent home is, she sure hates South Australia. Drove straight across without stopping both times, even when she had to drove mostly across, turn left and drive back across to get to Uluru. Which route on the map makes me want to lie down and hyperventilate.

Good. We don't want her.

[August]

But Blahblah, she has dreads!

[LadyBlue]

So I was reading a blog post from this time last year by a mother who lost her baby just after birth and in the comments is a comment from "Lauren" that says

We are not always the guardian angels of our children, but sometimes they are sent to be our angels instead — to guide us into new strengths and love.

I lost my little boy about two months ago. He was not quite seven months old.

He died after he and his dad fell into a river.

I weep for you, and I weep for myself. May we strengthen each other and comfort those whose paths cross our own."

When I clicked on the name of the poster, it unsurprisingly went to the Sparkling One's blog

[Trudestar]

Feeling particularly annoyed that that sparkling bitch is swanning round a pool in Alice Springs on my fucking tax dollars, while I'm here, getting up before sunrise in the cold, wind and rain, to go to work to fund her blissful lifestyle! :wtf:

More fool me, I suppose. Although I don't have it in me to bludge off my fellow Aussies.

Grrrrrrrrrr!!!!.

[August]

But if you were at a pool with four kids you'd be exhausted from trying to properly supervise them all. I never last more than an hour, myself.

[Artemis]

Yes, for all her high-flown rhetoric, she's basically just a selfish freeloader who has the brazen cheek to be superior about her lifestyle while bumming off hard working people. I'd respect her if she paid her own way, but she doesn't, and doesn't think she should have to.

If she shut up about, or showed the least shamefacedness about, the true costs of her 'sparkling' lifestyle or actually expressed the knowledge that other people work their butts off so she doesn't have to, she'd be a little more tolerable.

As it is, I find her less and less tolerable as her story progresses. And no, Lauren, that's not envy, or blackheartedness, or negativity. It's compassion for your poor neglected children, anger at your selfish disdain for their needs, and disgust at your classist, careless, unthinking hedonism.

[ShadowyOne]

But if you were at a pool with four kids you'd be exhausted from trying to properly supervise them all. I never last more than an hour, myself.

But Lauren doesn't watch them, that's the beauty part. See, problem solved!

/sarcasm

[Melissa19128]

Yes, for all her high-flown rhetoric, she's basically just a selfish freeloader who has the brazen cheek to be superior about her lifestyle while bumming off hard working people. I'd respect her if she paid her own way, but she doesn't, and doesn't think she should have to.

If she shut up about, or showed the least shamefacedness about, the true costs of her 'sparkling' lifestyle or actually expressed the knowledge that other people work their butts off so she doesn't have to, she'd be a little more tolerable.

As it is, I find her less and less tolerable as her story progresses. And no, Lauren, that's not envy, or blackheartedness, or negativity. It's compassion for your poor neglected children, anger at your selfish disdain for their needs, and disgust at your classist, careless, unthinking hedonism.

Lauren judges those who live in suburbia and go to work everyday yet she doesn't acknowledge her sparkling adventures are funded by those very people. She is too entitled to ever be thankful for the taxpayers who contribute to the generous parenting payments she collects. :angry-banghead:

[August]

But Lauren doesn't watch them, that's the beauty part. See, problem solved!

/sarcasm

Just think how much easier our lives could be if we'd only abrogate all responsibility for our spawn.

The sneering at workaday folk while shilling her friend's pyramid scheme is just ridiculous. But, it wouldn't pay her to work with three kids at home. When she's down to two in full time care and in before and after school care maybe she'd break even?