Drug scandal rocks Australian cycling

Drs

"A drug scandal has rocked Australia's Olympic preparations,
with explosive claims in Federal Parliament that up to six
elite cyclists used an Australian Institute of Sport
residence as a "shooting gallery"."

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/18/10872451-
13326.html

--

A: Top-posters.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Unregistered

"DRS" <drs@remove.this.ihug.com.au> wrote in message
news:cavcnk$5k9$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> "A drug scandal has rocked Australia's Olympic
> preparations, with
explosive
> claims in Federal Parliament that up to six elite cyclists
> used an Australian Institute of Sport residence as a
> "shooting gallery"."
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2.../18/1087245113-
> 326.html
>
> --
>
> A: Top-posters.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
>
>

*YAWNS* <sarcasm> What a shock! Athletes using performance
enhancing drugs!</sarcasm> Must be a slow news day over at
The Age.....

Now, where did I put my syringe?

L'Acrobat

I'm stunned.

Athletes, who can get huge endorsements if they win, are
prepared to cheat to do so.

"DRS" <drs@remove.this.ihug.com.au> wrote in message
news:cavcnk$5k9$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> "A drug scandal has rocked Australia's Olympic
> preparations, with
explosive
> claims in Federal Parliament that up to six elite cyclists
> used an Australian Institute of Sport residence as a
> "shooting gallery"."
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2.../18/1087245113-
> 326.html
>
> --
>
> A: Top-posters.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Unkey Munkey

L'acrobat wrote:
> I'm stunned.
>
> Athletes, who can get huge endorsements if they win, are
> prepared to cheat to do so.

... and then they don't like to pay tax on these
endorsements:

From <http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_pa-
ge/0,5744,9888318%255E2702,00.html>

THE High Court will determine a test case on whether
government grants and prize money given to amateur
athletes should be liable for taxation because they
constitute a business.

Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow yesterday granted the
federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a decision
that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in prizes and
grants were tax-exempt because, unlike sponsorships, they
were not considered "carrying on a business". ... etc etc

See also <http://www.gf.com.au/articles_222.htm> <http://-
www.olympics.com.au/default.asp?pg=home&spg=display&artic-
leid=2502>

This shits me. Why the hell shouldn't they pay tax? In this
case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings is not
carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I
can understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not
wanting to declare it as income, but come on.

Which leads me to another pet hate .. that professional
athletes don't have to pay back any of the money spent on
them at the AIS. I have to pay HECs on my university
training, why can't they pay it on their sports training?

- Munk3y

Peter Signorini

"Unkey Munkey" <spam@munk3y.net> wrote in message
news:cb0gjj$vij$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> L'acrobat wrote:
> > I'm stunned.
> >
> > Athletes, who can get huge endorsements if they win, are
> > prepared to
cheat
> > to do so.
>
> ... and then they don't like to pay tax on these
> endorsements:
>
> From
>
<http://www.theaustralian.news.com.a...story_page/0,5-
744,9888318%255E2 702,00.html>
>
> THE High Court will determine a test case on whether
> government grants and prize money given to amateur
> athletes should be liable for taxation because they
> constitute a business.
>
> Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow yesterday granted
> the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
> decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in
> prizes and grants were tax-exempt because, unlike
> sponsorships, they were not considered "carrying on a
> business". ... etc etc
>
> See also <http://www.gf.com.au/articles_222.htm>
>
<http://www.olympics.com.au/default....me&spg=display-
&articleid=2502>
>
> This shits me. Why the hell shouldn't they pay tax? In
> this case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings is
> not carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a
> year? I can understand someone who wins, say $10k per
> annum not wanting to declare it as income, but come on.

I have to agree wholeheartedly. My wife working part time to
earn $25k will have tax taken out of her salary, so why the
f#&k shouldn't some high flying athlete on a 6 figure
payroll have to pay a damn sight more tax too!

Cheers Peter

hippy

>Originally posted by L'Acrobat
>Athletes, who can get huge endorsements if they win, are
>prepared to cheat to do so.

Is it still cheating if everyone is doing it?

hippy

__________________
hippy
http://www.thehippy.net/

hippy

>Originally posted by Unkey Munkey
>This shits me. Why the hell shouldn't they pay tax? In this
>case the claim that over $100k a year in earnings is not
>carrying on a business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I
>can understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not
>wanting to declare it as income, but come on.

You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax on
their winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit wins will
now be $9..

>Which leads me to another pet hate .. that professional
>athletes don't have to pay back any of the money spent on
>them at the AIS. I have to pay HECs on my university
>training, why can't they pay it on their sports training?

Never thought about this. I thought it was all down to these
guys having to give up everything in order to pursue a sport
for the glory of the country..? or something like that

Maybe they pay with their health by volunteering their bodies for
all the testing, drugs, supplements, etc. they have to endure?

Remember that people going to uni/school on scholarships aren't
paying for their education - same thing here?

Check: http://www.ais.org.au/overview.htm

hippy

__________________
hippy
http://www.thehippy.net/

Marty Wallace

"hippy" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
newsuTAc.53748$K3.39187@fe04.usenetserver.com...
> >Originally posted by Unkey Munkey This shits me. Why the
> >hell shouldn't they pay tax? In this case the claim that
> >over $100k a year in earnings is not carrying on a
> >business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I can
> >understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not
> >wanting to declare it as income, but come on.
>
> You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax
> on their winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit
> wins will now be $9..
>

Hmm... So does that mean you can claim depreciation and
maintainance costs of your bike? Or laundry costs of your
cycling knicks? And travel costs for that last event you
went to? And what about those Carboshotz? Are they to help
you earn your income or did you eat them in your own time?

Time to add another volume to the taxation rules.

Marty "Tax Free" Wallace

hippy

>Originally posted by Peter Signorini
>>Unky posted this stuff:
>> Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow yesterday granted
>> the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
>> decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in
>> prizes and grants were tax-exempt because, unlike
>> sponsorships, they were not considered "carrying on a
>> business". ... etc etc
>
>I have to agree wholeheartedly. My wife working part time to
>earn $25k will have tax taken out of her salary, so why the
>f#&k shouldn't some high flying athlete on a 6 figure
>payroll have to pay a damn sight more tax too!

Well, as far as I am aware, Joanna Stone is a police officer. She
would be being taxed on that income just like your wife. If your
wife took up a sport, won lots and received sponsorship and
prize money - would you be so willing to have her pay tax on
that?

I'd like to see taxes on 4wd's brought into line before worrying
about the winnings of a sports star..

hippy

__________________
hippy
http://www.thehippy.net/

Unkey Munkey

hippy wrote:
>
> You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax
> on their winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit
> wins will now be $9..

It would be a simple matter to set an annual threshold, or
have a tiered system.
>
>
>>Which leads me to another pet hate .. that professional
>>athletes don't have to pay back any of the money spent on
>>them at the AIS. I have to pay HECs on my university
>>training, why can't they pay it on their sports training?
>
>
> Never thought about this. I thought it was all down to
> these guys having to give up everything in order to
> pursue a sport for the glory of the country..? or
> something like that

So if they do it for the glory of their country, then surely
they wouldn't mind paying tax on their earnings? Like Pat
Rafter being a citizen of Bermuda when he was awarded
Australian of the Year?

>
> Maybe they pay with their health by volunteering their
> bodies for all the testing, drugs, supplements, etc. they
> have to endure?

I don't they would do anything that is detrimental to their
health. And I'm sure they would all be queing up to sue AIS
tested a drug on them that was detrimental (pro sportsmen
being a particularly litigious lot these days).

>
> Remember that people going to uni/school on scholarships
> aren't paying for their education - same thing here?
>
> Check: http://www.ais.org.au/overview.htm
>
> hippy
>

The only uni graduates I know who don't pay HECS are the
folks at ADFA. .. and I don't see any of them making $100k+
TAX FREE from endorsements and winnings.

Even trainee police have to pay HECS to go to the
police academy.

- Munk3y

hippy

>>Unky posted this stuff:
>> Justices Michael Kirby and Bill Gummow yesterday granted
>> the federal Taxation Commissioner leave to appeal a
>> decision that javelin thrower Joanna Stone's $136,448 in
>> prizes and grants were tax-exempt because, unlike
>> sponsorships, they were not considered "carrying on a
>> business". ... etc etc

Furthermore...
(can you tell I'm up for a whinge/argument? )

This explains the reasoning behind the decision:
http://www.gf.com.au/articles_222.htm

A point to note: If you were skilled at darts or something and
travelled around country fairs earning money on similar games
of skill.. would you declare that income? Is it only because she
earned $100k+ that it's an issue for you? Where's the cutoff?
Is it okay to earn $20k prize money and not pay tax on it? $50k?

Just out of curiosity - how much tax does Tiger Woods or Michael
Jordan pay?

hippy

__________________
hippy
http://www.thehippy.net/

Unkey Munkey

Marty Wallace wrote:
> "hippy" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
> newsuTAc.53748$K3.39187@fe04.usenetserver.com...
>
>>>Originally posted by Unkey Munkey This shits me. Why the
>>>hell shouldn't they pay tax? In this case the claim that
>>>over $100k a year in earnings is not carrying on a
>>>business. An amateur that gets $100k a year? I can
>>>understand someone who wins, say $10k per annum not
>>>wanting to declare it as income, but come on.
>>
>>You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax
>>on their winnings or none. That means that my $10 crit
>>wins will now be $9..
>>
>
>
> Hmm... So does that mean you can claim depreciation and
> maintainance costs of your bike? Or laundry costs of your
> cycling knicks? And travel costs for that last event you
> went to? And what about those Carboshotz? Are they to help
> you earn your income or did you eat them in your own time?
>
> Time to add another volume to the taxation rules.
>
> Marty "Tax Free" Wallace
>
>
You would only be able to claim against the proportion of
tax paid on your earnings for that activity, so in this case
Hippy would get his $1 back.

- Munk3y

Shane Stanley

In article <ouTAc.53748$K3.39187@fe04.usenetserver.com>,
hippy <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote:

> You can't have it both ways... either ALL athletes pay tax
> on their winnings or none.

Not necessarily. For example, a professional farmer pays tax
and clainms deductions, but a small hobby farmer does
neither. Same goes for professional punters, as opposed to
the mug in the street. There's plenty of precedent.

--
Shane Stanley

Shane Stanley

In article <cb12ia$ck6$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>,
Unkey Munkey <spam@munk3y.net> wrote:

> Like Pat Rafter being a citizen of Bermuda when he was
> awarded Australian of the Year?

For the record: resident, not citizen.

--
Shane Stanley