Rabu, 30 Oktober 2019

Australia's 'backpacker tax' ruled illegal by court - BBC News

Australia has used a so-called "backpacker tax" to illegally tax foreign workers from eight countries, according to a landmark ruling.

In 2017, the government imposed a controversial 15% tax rate on two visa categories for working holiday-makers.

But a court on Wednesday found the levy was in breach of existing treaties with the UK, US, Germany, Finland, Chile, Japan, Norway and Turkey.

Tens of thousands of foreign nationals may be owed money, local media said.

The Australian Tax Office said it was considering whether to appeal against the ruling.

The levy was challenged by an international tax company on behalf of a British tourist, Catherine Addy, who worked in Australia between 2015 and 2017.

She welcomed the ruling, telling ABC News: "I think it is wrong that foreigners should be taxed more harshly than Australians when they are doing the same work."

About 150,000 foreigners travel to Australia every year on working holiday visas, with many finding work in the farming and hospitality industries.

What did the court find?

The Federal Court of Australia said the tax could not be applied to citizens of those eight countries who had been employed on category 417 or 462 visas.

This was due to treaties which required Australia to tax those foreign nationals in the same way as local workers.

Unlike foreign workers in Australia, locals do not pay any tax until their yearly income exceeds A$18,200 (£9,700; $12,500). In contrast, foreign workers on 417 or 462 visas are taxed 15% on the first $37,000 they earn.

In his ruling, Justice John Logan described the tax as "a disguised form of discrimination based on nationality".

During her working holiday, Ms Addy lived mainly in a house share in Sydney's Earlwood, a point that proved to be crucial to the case.

This meant she was considered a "resident" for tax purposes in Australia, while other foreign nationals who move around may be considered "non-residents".

The ruling may force the government to repay hundreds of millions of dollars in total, local media reported.

What reaction has there been?

Taxback.com, the accounting firm that organised the lawsuit, said it was clear the "backpacker tax" breached several international agreements when it was introduced in 2016.

"It also damaged Australia's reputation as a working holiday destination," Joanna Murphy, the firm's CEO, said.

The Australian Tax Office sought to play down the ruling, saying it would have no impact for most working holidaymakers.

"This decision only affects the tax rates applying to a minority of working holiday-makers who are also residents, and only those from countries affected by a similar clause in the double tax agreement with their home country," it said.

'It's very unfair'

Colin Mathews, 25, from Cornwall, lived and worked in Australia between October 2018 and May 2019, with his fiancée Emily.

When he returned from Australia, Mr Mathews said he had 15% deducted from wages he earned at a call centre.

"Local Australians couldn't believe we had to pay extra tax," Mr Mathews told the BBC. "I'm not averse to paying tax - I was using Australian services - but it should be on the same terms."

Oliver Bastock, from Derbyshire, is currently living in Melbourne and works in marketing, after moving to Australia in June 2018.

He said the tax system was confusing, adding he had no idea "why you don't get anything back".

You may also be interested in:

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50230702

2019-10-30 07:50:28Z
52780422675176

Australia's 'backpacker tax' ruled illegal by court - BBC News

Australia has used a so-called "backpacker tax" to illegally tax foreign workers from eight countries, according to a landmark ruling.

In 2017, the government imposed a controversial 15% tax rate on two visa categories for working holiday-makers.

But a court on Wednesday found the levy was in breach of existing treaties with the UK, US, Germany, Finland, Chile, Japan, Norway and Turkey.

Tens of thousands of foreign nationals may be owed money, local media said.

The Australian Tax Office said it was considering whether to appeal against the ruling.

The levy was challenged by an international tax company on behalf of a British tourist, Catherine Addy, who worked as a waitress in Sydney in 2016.

About 150,000 foreigners travel to Australia every year on working holiday visas, with many finding work in the farming and hospitality industries.

What did the court find?

The Federal Court of Australia said the tax could not be applied to citizens of those eight countries who had been employed on category 417 or 462 visas.

This was due to treaties which required Australia to tax those foreign nationals in the same way as local workers.

Unlike foreign workers in Australia, locals do not pay any tax until their yearly income exceeds A$18,200 (£15,700; $23,400).

In his ruling, Justice John Logan described the tax as "a disguised form of discrimination based on nationality".

It may force the government to repay hundreds of millions of dollars in total, local media reported.

You may also be interested in:

Media playback is unsupported on your device


Are you from one of the eight relevant countries and have been employed in Australia on category 417 or 462 visas since 2017? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also contact us in the following ways:

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50230702

2019-10-30 06:14:31Z
52780422675176

Selasa, 29 Oktober 2019

Shark bites 2 British men on Australia's Great Barrier Reef - NBCNews.com

CANBERRA, Australia — A shark bit off a British tourist's foot and mauled another's leg on Tuesday as the men snorkeled on Australia's Great Barrier Reef, officials said.

The men had been on a snorkeling tour in the Whitsunday Islands when they were attacked, tour organizer ZigZag Whitsundays said.

Officials did not immediately release the men's names but said they were 22 and 28 years old.

Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.

The shark severed one man's right foot and then circled back and mauled the other's right calf, Queensland state Ambulance Service spokeswoman Tracey Eastwick reported.

They were brought 7 miles by boat to the mainland town of Airlie Beach where paramedics were waiting for them, an ambulance official said. They were then flown by helicopter to a hospital in the city of Mackay in serious but stable condition, RACQ CQ Rescue said.

"An English tourist has had his foot bitten off and another has serious lacerations to his lower leg after a shark attack in the Whitsundays today," the helicopter rescue service said in a statement.

The victims told the helicopter crew "they were wrestling and thrashing about in the water" in a passage between Hayman and Whitsunday Islands when they were attacked, the statement said.

A shark killed a man in November last year in a Whitsunday Island harbor where two tourists had been mauled a month earlier.

The 33-year-old victim had been diving from a paddle board while on a yacht cruise.

The spate of attacks in the Whitsundays left authorities struggling to explain an apparent escalation in danger in the internationally renowned vacation destination. In September last year, two Australian tourists were mauled on consecutive days, including a 12-year-old girl who lost a leg.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/shark-bites-2-british-men-australia-s-great-barrier-reef-n1073196

2019-10-29 10:41:00Z
52780421791891

Australia Says Google Misled Consumers Over Location Tracking - The New York Times

SYDNEY, Australia — Australian regulators on Tuesday accused Google of misleading consumers about its collection of their personal location information through its Android mobile operating system, the latest government action against a tech company over its handling of vast quantities of user data.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission alleged in a lawsuit that Google falsely led users to believe that disabling the “Location History” setting on Android phones would stop the company from collecting their location data. But users were actually required to also turn off a second setting, “Web and App Activity,” that was enabled by default.

Google did not properly disclose the need to disable both settings from January 2017 until late 2018, the suit alleges. The company changed its user guidance after The Associated Press revealed in August 2018 that it was continuing to collect the data even after the Location History setting was switched off.

The commission also said that while Google made it clear to users what features they would lose by turning off location services, the company did not inform them adequately about what it would do with the data collected.

“This is part of a system of not being able to make informed choices about what’s being done with your data,” said Rod Sims, the commission’s chairman.

Mr. Sims called the lawsuit the first of its kind by a national government against a tech company over its use of personal data. The agency is seeking what he called significant financial penalties against Google, among other corrective measures. He added that he hoped the case would raise awareness among consumers over how much data is being collected.

“We need to be getting ahead of them, because this is a whole new world,” he said of data collection issues.

A Google spokeswoman said in a statement that the company was reviewing the allegations. She said Google would continue to engage with the commission over its concerns but intended to defend itself.

The action by Australian regulators comes as governments and consumer groups around the world have expressed growing concern about the power of tech companies, including their collection of personal data from devices that are indispensable to the lives of billions of people.

Consumer groups from several European countries had already sued Google over the location tracking issue under a comprehensive data privacy law adopted in Europe last year. Under that law, a French agency fined Google 50 million euros, or about $55 million, in January for not properly disclosing to users how it collected data to create personalized ads.

In the United States, regulators approved a $5 billion fine against Facebook this year over its role in allowing Cambridge Analytica, a political data firm hired by President Trump’s 2016 election campaign, to gain access to private information on more than 50 million Facebook users.

While Google has made changes to Android in later iterations that limit the location data it gathers, the business incentives for collecting as much personal data as possible remain great. Location-targeted advertising is worth an estimated $21 billion a year, and Google, along with Facebook, dominates the mobile ad market.

The Australian lawsuit is in part the product of a 19-month investigation by the consumer commission into the market power of Google and Facebook. It issued 23 recommendations, including an overhaul of privacy laws, to limit their reach and force them to take more responsibility for the content they disseminate.

The Australian government has also passed legislation challenging the power of tech companies, including a law in 2018 that compelled tech-industry giants to disable encryption. And under a new law criminalizing “abhorrent violent material” online, Australia is using the threat of fines and jail time to pressure platforms like Facebook to block such content, and it is moving to take down websites that hold any illegal content.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/29/world/australia/australia-google-location.html

2019-10-29 10:07:00Z
52780421795799

Shark attacks tourist off Australian coast, believed to have returned for another - Fox News

Two tourists snorkeling off the northeast coast of Australia were mauled in a brutal shark attack where the predator is believed to have attacked one of the swimmers first and then return for the other.

"One of the male patients was attacked first and the shark is believed to have returned and attacked the second patient," Tracey Eastwick, of Queensland Ambulance Service, told ABC.

A rescue helicopter seen on its way to rescue two shark victims off the Australian coast.

A rescue helicopter seen on its way to rescue two shark victims off the Australian coast. (RACQ CQ RESCUE)

The scene was chaotic, according to Reuters. The men reportedly told emergency workers that they were thrashing in the water before the attack. The two men are in their 20s and were swimming in Queensland’s Whitsunday Islands.

GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Shark attacks in the area are not uncommon, according to the BBC. Last September, there were two other attacks that resulted in a 12-year-old girl losing her leg.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.foxnews.com/world/shark-attacks-tourist-off-australian-coast-believed-to-have-returned-for-another

2019-10-29 05:34:39Z
52780421791891

Jumat, 25 Oktober 2019

Australia's Uluru scaled by final climbers before ban on sacred site goes into effect - Fox News

Nature seemed to be siding with indigenous Australians' demand for Uluru to be respected as a sacred site on Friday when high winds threatened to prematurely end the generations-old tradition of climbing the sandstone monolith.

Rangers warned hundreds of anxious tourists who gathered at the base of the iconic rock before dawn that they would miss their last opportunity to ever scale its 1,140-foot summit unless blustery conditions subsided.

But the winds calmed and the first of around 1,000 climbers began their ascent at a chain handhold up the steep western face three hours later than scheduled. An indigenous onlooker booed them.

The ascent was permanently closed to climbers late in the afternoon, while those already on the rock had until unset to find their way down. A potential medical problem was reported with a climber but authorities could not immediately provide details.

Tourists climb the sandstone monolith called Uluru that dominates Australia's arid center at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Friday, Oct. 25, 2019, the last day climbing is allowed.

Tourists climb the sandstone monolith called Uluru that dominates Australia's arid center at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Friday, Oct. 25, 2019, the last day climbing is allowed. (AAP via AP)

Janet Ishikawa flew from her Hawaiian home to central Australia to make the climb on the final possible day. She likened the Uluru controversy to a furor over plans to build a giant telescope on Hawaii's highest peak, which protesters consider sacred.

"It's a total overreaction. All of a sudden they want to take ownership of all this stuff," Ishikawa said. "They say you shouldn't climb because of all this sacred stuff. I can still respect it and climb it."

CHRIS THE SHEEP, KNOWN FOR WORLD-RECORD AMOUNT OF WOOL, DIES IN AUSTRALIA

The ban was a unanimous decision made two years ago by 12 members of the Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park Board of Management. But it's an outcome that has divided both indigenous Australians as well as the wider world.

The polarity of opinions has been highlighted in recent months as thousands of visitors converged on one of Australia's most famous landmarks to make a final trek to the top. Tourists have been illegally camping on roadsides for miles because the local camping ground and accommodation were booked.

Sammy Wilson, who chaired the board that banned the climb, described the prohibition as a cause for celebration. Wilson is member of the Anangu tribe who are Uluru's traditional owners.

"If I travel to another country and there is a sacred site, an area of restricted access, I don't enter or climb it, I respect it," Wilson said. "It is the same here for Anangu. We welcome tourists here. We are not stopping tourism, just this activity."

Tourists line up waiting to climb the sandstone monolith called Uluru that dominates Australia's arid center at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Friday, Oct. 25, 2019, the last day climbing is allowed.

Tourists line up waiting to climb the sandstone monolith called Uluru that dominates Australia's arid center at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, Friday, Oct. 25, 2019, the last day climbing is allowed. (AAP via AP)

There has long been tension within the indigenous population around the money that climbers bring and the rock's significance as a sacred site.

"I am happy and sad, two ways," said Kevin Cooley, a resident of the Mutitjulu indigenous community in the rock's shadow who collects the Uluru tourists' garbage. He fears that tourist numbers and the local economy will decline.

The biggest drop in foreign visitors could be the Japanese who have proven to be the most committed climbers. Signs around the rock have long discouraged climbing, describing Uluru as a "place of great knowledge" and noting that Anangu traditional law prohibits climbing.

MISSING AUSTRALIAN WOMAN FOUND IN OUTBACK AFTER 'SOS' MESSAGE SPOTTED ON SECURITY CAMERA

The proportion of visitors who climb has been steadily declining, with more than four in five respecting the Anangu's wishes in recent years.

The Anangu refer to tourists as "munga," or ants. The analogy was clearest in recent weeks with queues forming long before the climb opens at 7 a.m. each day at the base of the rock's steep western face. From there, an eclectic mix of climbers begin their ascents in narrow columns.

Prominent indigenous academic Marcia Langton reacted to the stream of climbers with a tweet: "A curse will fall on all of them."

"They will remember how they defiled this sacred place until they die & history will record their contempt for Aboriginal culture," Langton added.

At least 37 climbers have died, mostly from medical events, since 1948, when the first road was built in the hope of attracting tourists. Every death causes the Anangu anguish.<br data-cke-eol="1">

At least 37 climbers have died, mostly from medical events, since 1948, when the first road was built in the hope of attracting tourists. Every death causes the Anangu anguish.<br data-cke-eol="1">

Minister for Indigenous Australians Ken Wyatt said he was disappointed by the final rush to climb the rock, which is renowned for its changing colors with the seasons and the time of day.

"It would be equivalent to having a rush of people climbing over the Australian War Memorial, if I can be so brazen in that regard, because sacred objects, community by community, are absolutely important in the story of that nation of people," said Wyatt, who is indigenous.

Reaching the rock doesn't guarantee the summit is attainable. Climbing is often canceled at short notice because of high winds or heat.

At least 37 climbers have died, mostly from medical events, since 1948, when the first road was built in the hope of attracting tourists. Every death causes the Anangu anguish.

Denying climbers access to the World Heritage-listed landform is part of an evolution of the Australian narrative since British colonization that has traditionally edited out the original inhabitants.

While the rock had been known as Uluru for thousands of years, British-born explorer William Gosse was credited with discovering it in 1873 and named it Ayers Rock after the then-premier of the British colony of South Australia, Sir Henry Ayers.

BOA CONSTRICTOR 'AT LARGE' IN AUSTRALIAN TOWN, 'FRESHLY SHED' SKIN DISCOVERED

In 1993, it became the first official dual-named feature in the Northern Territory when it was renamed "Ayers Rock / Uluru." The order of the names was reversed a decade later at the request of regional tourism operators.

But the tourist accommodation nearest Uluru retains the name Ayers Rock Resort, in deference to the monetary value of the international brand recognition that has built up around it.

The date of the closure is also significant in the history of restored indigenous influence in the region. Saturday — the day from when climbing becomes punishable by a 6,300 Australian dollar ($4,300) fine — marks 34 years since the federal government gave the Anangu the land title to the national park in which Uluru stands.

The traditional owners immediately returned the park to the government under a 99-year lease on condition that the park is jointly run by a board with a majority of Anangu members.

Grant Hunt, chief executive of Ayres Rock Resort operator Voyages Indigenous Tourism Australia, dismissed predictions of a significant decline in tourism. He said bookings in November after the climb's closure were at a record high, with around 95% occupancy booked for the first three weeks.

"The traveling public have become much more culturally mature than they were 20 years ago," Hunt said. "Most people expect this and in fact want it to happen."

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

"There's a minority who still don't, of course, and you always get that with any decision, but certainly our research and feedback says about 80% of people are supportive of the climb closing," he added.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.foxnews.com/world/australia-uluru-final-climb-sacred-site

2019-10-25 11:28:01Z
52780418284229

Does Australia Have to Bring Its Women and Children Home From Syria’s Camps? - The New York Times

The Australia Letter is a weekly newsletter from our Australia bureau. Sign up to get it by email. This week’s issue is written by Livia Albeck-Ripka, a reporter with the Australia bureau.

Early last week, I took a road trip from Melbourne to Canberra. In many ways, it was a normal Australian road trip: an eclectic playlist, dead kangaroos on the road, and, of course, a stop at The Dog on the Tuckerbox.

But, it also wasn’t.

I was driving with Kamalle Dabboussy, whose 28-year-old daughter, Mariam Dabboussy, has been languishing for months in a camp for the families of ISIS fighters in Syria, together with her three children.

Mr. Dabboussy was making his way to Parliament House to lobby to get his daughter, and the more than 65 other women and children from Australia who are stuck there, brought home.

“If there is a will, there will be a way,” Mr. Dabboussy told reporters gathered in the courtyard of Parliament House on Tuesday last week. He pleaded to lawmakers: “Make them safe.”

On Monday and Tuesday this week, we aired Part I and Part II of Mr. Dabboussy’s story on “The Daily,” and since then, many have asked for more details on the stories of these women and children, as well as the complexities involved in repatriating them.

Here are answers to some of those questions:

How did the women end up there? Is it true they were all forced or tricked?

While the details of many of the women’s stories are unknown, some have come forward to explain themselves, including Mariam Dabboussy. She says that in late 2015, she was forced by gunpoint over the Turkish border with Syria, after traveling there in what her husband claimed was an attempt to extract a relative who was trying to escape the Islamic State.

Other women entered ISIS territory as teenagers, and are now adults with multiple children themselves — their relatives cite this as evidence that they were forced, and are not culpable. A lack of evidence as to what the women did under the ISIS regime can make it difficult to verify some of their claims.

Why won’t the Australian government bring them home?

The Australian government cites multiple reasons for not repatriating the women. It has maintained that it would not put other lives in harm’s way to extract them from the Al-Hol camp, and following the pullout of U.S. troops from the region, these dangers have only escalated. Even if the current cease-fire holds, the Australian government has said it is still far too risky to consider getting them out.

Second, ministers have said they have evidence that some of these women are radicalized, and could pose a threat.

Third, they argue that the women are simply suffering the consequences of their own decisions, and while that is unfortunate, it is not the government’s responsibility to extract them.

Legally, what does the Australian government owe these people? Doesn’t it have to bring them back?

The lawyers acting on behalf of the women argue that yes, Australia has a constitutional duty to repatriate citizens and apply due process. These legal obligations, they say, include a duty to investigate crimes of an international nature, and to protect Australian citizens who are detained overseas.

United Nations Security Council resolutions mandate that countries take action to have their citizens who joined the Islamic State brought before the law.

Policy experts also say that the state has a duty to take the children of those mothers who are radicalized into state custody. And others argue that the government has a moral obligation to extract children who had no say in their parents’ journey to Islamic State territory.

Are the children actually Australian?

While many of the children in Al-Hol were born in Syria, they can be conferred citizenship by descent if one or both of their parents are Australian. In order to establish their parentage, however, the Australian government would need to conduct DNA testing. Peter Dutton, the home affairs minister, has repeatedly brought up this process as a hurdle to repatriating the women and children.

So, what’s going to happen to them?

At the moment, the fate of the women and children is unclear. Mr. Dutton has staunchly maintained his position that they will not be removed from the camp or repatriated, but other lawmakers have shown slightly more flexibility. On Tuesday, Australia’s prime minister, Scott Morrison, indicated there may be some chance of repatriation should the women manage to get themselves to a border. Politicians from the opposition Labor Party, as well as independent M.P.s, have also shown empathy toward their plight.

The relatives of the women are becoming increasingly concerned as the region further destabilizes, and as winter approaches, which humanitarian organizations say is likely to cause further sickness, and possibly even death, among those remaining in the Al-Hol camp.




Tell us what you think at NYTAustralia@nytimes.com.

Sign up here or forward to a friend. For more Australia coverage and discussion, start your day with your local Morning Briefing and join us in our Facebook group.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/24/world/australia/syria-isis-camps.html

2019-10-25 01:17:00Z
CAIiEAnrI5gdIMc7NnsF70HwexcqFwgEKg8IACoHCAowjuuKAzCWrzww5oEY