What's the source of your table? As for "inequitable and supported by lies" ABC Factcheck addressed the LNP misleading claims.... www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01...

I’m talking about Labor’s claims. The example is based on current tax rules. If you disagree with it, cite the line # you disagree with and provide reasons.

Yes - I understand what you are talking about - your so called "Labor lies". The "inequality" was addressed by the ABC FactCheck - it was proven to be "misleading" at the time (2019). Labor doesn't have any plans to reintroduce so is there any point to going into "your" example

The ABC factCheck confirmed franking credit refunds were “negative tax”? I missed that. Please supply a link, thanks

You seem to have a problem - you "missed that" because I didn't say that What I said was "The "inequality" was addressed by the ABC FactCheck. The link was provided in my earlier post above.

Just direct me to any FactCheck that disputes my claim that the tax remaining at ATO after any franking credit refund is the same amount of tax ATO would otherwise collect if the income was received from any source outside the franking system. I’ve found no such claim in your citation.

If you want your claims FactChecked you can contact them. This thread was discussing Tim’s new (non government employed) campaign manager role to tackle his latest campaign against Labor’s so called “family savings tax” - got anything to say on this

Oh. So to your knowledge my claims have NOT been debunked by any fact checking. OK. I’ve got nothing more to add.

"I’ve got nothing more to add." - excellent, but feel free to spam others with your franking credit claims. Cheers

👋

Good. In addressing the “inequality” how did ABC deal with the fact that the tax on franked dividends, even allowing for any refund, is no less now, than the tax which would otherwise be collected if the income came from ANY source OUTSIDE the franking system? I can’t see how that can be omitted?