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/2...7245113326.html

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: 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...7245113326.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...7245113326.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_page/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&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.

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...4,9888318%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.asp?pg=home&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

>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



--

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

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

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

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

>>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



--

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

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