ࡱ> 647` bjbjss 2$Jd6 6 6 6 J 2j  $h:*  ] ] ]   ] ] ] :, ^ @h/6 E 02ORd vdd) 0 "]  S 2 rr$2 29 May 2006 Same-Sex Inquiry Human Rights Unit Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission GPO Box 5218 Sydney NSW 2001 Via email:  HYPERLINK "mailto:samesex@humanrights.gov.au" samesex@humanrights.gov.au Dear Sir/Madam Thank you for providing the opportunity to responding to your enquiry. There are a number of ways in which I am discriminated against because of my sexual orientation. However, as this HREOC enquiry is specifically looking at issues surrounding financial and work-related benefits, I will focus my attention on 2 issues. The first involves superannuation, specifically spouse contributions, tax on death and interdependency. Spouse Contributions and taxation offset: As a state government employee, I am unable to open a superannuation account for my same-sex spouse with QSuper, which is the Government Superannuation Fund for Qld Government workers. I am denied this, as the account must be opened with a spouse contribution, which is something that is not permitted to same-sex couples under the Federal Tax Act. Making a spouse contribution is important to me because it (a) would mean I could claim an 18% tax offset for the first $3,000 contribution, (b) It would further prove interdependency, if required and (c) would ensure my partner had access to the low fees and subsidiary benefits (such as fee-free financial advice) that the fund offers to its members. Because the Federal Tax Act does not recognise same-sex couples in its definition of spouse I am denied the rights that my co-workers who happen to be in heterosexual relationships take for granted. Perhaps if same-sex couples are not afforded the same tax rights as others, we should be excluded from paying tax altogether now wouldnt that go down well federally!! Tax on death and interdependency: According to SIS (Superannuation Industry Supervision act 1993) if I was to die, any death insurance that I hold through my superannuation would only be paid to my same-sex spouse tax free (up to the pension RBL) if she could prove interdependency. When I asked ASFA (Association of Super Funds of Australia) and the ATO (Aust Tax Office) how does one prove interdependency, they were unable to answer my query, except for stating that my partner would (probably) need to show banking records and photos as proof. Why is this necessary? Do heterosexual couples need to show banking records and personal effects to prove they are in a relationship? I cant imagine the horror that has been or will be faced by many Australian gay or lesbian people, when faced by death and subsequent grief of a loved partner to have to then prove their relationship status. What an inhumane request, especially seeing as though opposite-sex couples do not have to suffer the same experience. In addition, a note on the wording of interdependent. The very notion that same-sex couples are demeaned by being described as merely interdependent, is abhorrent. Does the Tax Act call defacto heterosexual couples as interdependent? No they are titled and respected as spouses. Does it describe a married couple as interdependent? No they are titled and respected as spouses. Surely a same-sex partner should be recognised under SIS as a spouse in the same way as heterosexual couples are. The second issue I would like to discuss is Medicare, specifically the Medicare safety net. Medicare Safety Net: My partner and I both live with disabilities. I have Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) and my partner has hypothyroidism, pernicious anemia and pancreatic exocrine deficiency. As a combined total we are require to regularly see specialists and have had a number of day procedures as part of treatment for our conditions. As we are not allowed to register as a couple or family for the Medicare Safety Net, we are required to meet the out-of-pocket expense limit as two single people. This means that we will each need to meet $1,000, (or $2,000 combined). This figure is DOUBLE what a heterosexual couple needs to meet (as heterosexual couple is AUTOMATICALLY considered a family). An opposite-sex couple needs only meet $1,000 combined for out of pocket expenses (or $500 each). Why are we entitled to less than what a heterosexual couple is entitled to? Yours Sincerely [Name Withheld] + % & * A Lؾؾ؟rbSGS7Shhb5CJaJmH sH hCJaJmH sH hhbCJaJmH sH hh(e5CJaJmH sH hhI?CJaJmH sH hh(eCJaJmH sH hhCJaJmH sH hmH sH ,hh>*B*CJ^JaJmH ph$sH 2jhhB*CJU^JaJmH phsH )hhB*CJ^JaJmH phsH #hB*CJ^JaJmH phsH  z* + & ' =$a$gd $ & Fa$gdM $a$gd $ & Fa$gd $ & Fa$gd(e$a$gd(eddd[$\$gdLj 0<=Qmegq*:ĨĨę~vkh(eh(emH sH hM mH sH hhxCJaJmH sH hxCJaJmH sH hhCJaJmH sH hCJaJmH sH hhM 5CJaJmH sH hhRCJaJmH sH hhM CJaJmH sH hhbCJaJmH sH hhCJaJmH sH $ $h^ha$gdb $h^ha$gdR0&P 1F. A!"#$%7 H@H Normal CJOJQJ_HaJmH sH tH DAD Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k(No List HH x Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJ$ "& "& \ z*+&' =  PS PS PS  s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s   z*+&' = 000000000000 0 00 0000000 z*+&' = I00I00@0I00h0h0h0h0h0h0h0h0h0I00I00h00000000L XŵLƵHB{sT"uh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHj={sT                  Vof  dqM ,'eu1KzN_5,' ddt;8`JKzN8`J ddb]_5W Q^t; dd)` d)` dd ~oW Q^2rVXyVXyqM ddM b(e?՜.+,՜.+,< px  L  Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSA|q"mailto:samesex@humanrights.gov.auDocumentSummaryInformation88CompObjq