La Vagabonde Contractory Stories

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, Terry.

[Group9]

I have nothing whatsoever against Riley and Elana. I really enjoyed watching their videos when they were still on the Beneteau, mainly because it's fun to watch people learn, and I could identify with them on that boat. As they moved into the million dollar boat range, it wasn't that I had anything against them, I'm happy they were able to pull it off, it's just that I didn't identify with them anymore and didn't enjoy watching that part of their adventure as much. I sure wasn't mad at them.

But in the end most of these YouTube channels are businesses. And they have a right to run them the way they see fit, and the way they can draw the most viewers and make the most money. I think we should all be thanking them because of the interest all of these channels have brought back in sailing and cruising, which was kind of dying for several years.

[Mapoz]

Originally Posted by Dave_S

In Australia (where, I assume they pay tax) the benifits of either, from a tax wise perspective seem to change.

Slightly off topic, but Australia, like all but 2 countries in the world (being the US and Eritrea, as I recall), tax citizens only on income earned IN the country. If R&E and their income are not obtained in the country, then they pay zero Aussie tax. Arguably, if any non-American YouTube sailor from do things right, then their entire income could be tax free, if they have no country of residence (typically 180+ days in-country). Essentially, only Uncle Sam reaches everywhere to tax Americans. One acquaintance whose wife and children live in the UK, lives in the UAE and flies back and forth routinely - he claims not to have paid any tax in 20+ years, anywhere.

[Mapoz]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Just curious, what would be the Australian Tax implications for the Vagabond couple making income this way.
Does it need to be reported?

I just posted on this - TL/DR: not if the income is earned when they're not working in Oz.

[Apollo19.5]

Originally Posted by Mapoz

I just posted on this - TL/DR: not if the income is earned when they're not working in Oz.

Not quite right. Still get taxed for foreign income in Aust. There are tax treaties in place between Aust and some/most other countries to ensure double taxing doesnt occur but definately foreign income has to be declared for Aust tax payers.

[Macdoug]

I agree. I am certainly taxed in oz on foreign earnings. There are treaties in place so that you don’t get double taxed. E.g. some of my uk earnings (I am a dual citizen) get taxed in the uk, and then that gets taken off whatever tax I need to pay in Australia. As far as I understand it tax is due where you are domiciled which may not be where you live. Where you are domiciled doesn’t just change because you are not there. That said it gets very complicated and I leave it up to the accountants to figure out as I don’t pretend to understand tax law.

[goboatingnow]

Most countries tax you on all earnings as long as you are a tax resident. You have to avail of double taxation treaties to avoid paying tax twice. It’s only if you are not a tax resident you don’t have to pay tax on earnings from foreign income.

Americans think they are unique is this regard, they arnt

The difference with the US is that once you are a citizen even if not tax resident in the US, you still must file US tax returns. This is not common elsewhere.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Most countries tax you on all earnings as long as you are a tax resident. You have to avail of double taxation treaties to avoid paying tax twice. It’s only if you are not a tax resident you don’t have to pay tax on earnings from foreign income.

Americans think they are unique is this regard, they arnt

The difference with the US is that once you are a citizen even if not tax resident in the US, you still must file US tax returns. This is not common elsewhere.

Another thing is that, if you get money from the U.S. government, (i.e Social Security), you can move to another country, and even renounce your US citizenship, and you still have to pay tax on that money.

[RaymondR]

Originally Posted by Mapoz

Slightly off topic, but Australia, like all but 2 countries in the world (being the US and Eritrea, as I recall), tax citizens only on income earned IN the country. If R&E and their income are not obtained in the country, then they pay zero Aussie tax. Arguably, if any non-American YouTube sailor from do things right, then their entire income could be tax free, if they have no country of residence (typically 180+ days in-country). Essentially, only Uncle Sam reaches everywhere to tax Americans. One acquaintance whose wife and children live in the UK, lives in the UAE and flies back and forth routinely - he claims not to have paid any tax in 20+ years, anywhere.

Since there is thirty to forty thousand pages of tax law in Australia I'm not sure you can be unequivocal about anything related to tax law in Australia.

I believe that whether or not income is taxable in Australia depends upon your residence status. If you earn income overseas but reside in Australia you are taxable on the overseas income in Australia unless you have already paid tax on it overseas. At least that's the way it used to be.

[Dave Noosa]

I can’t believe the negativity.

Firstly, they’ve done a business deal.

Secondly, they produce a product that people consume, and in return, the appreciative and grateful ones, financially support them so they can keep dedicating their time to producing content

Thirdly, do you have any idea for how long the sailing industry has been in steady decline? A flailing industry means less competition, higher prices, crappier workmanship.

The sailing Youtubers that many seem to despise are actually revitalising the industry and guess what…….people are buying boats. I wouldn’t be so quick to bag them

[David B]

Originally Posted by SmokedGouda

So many haters on here.

Have any of you considered that perhaps, the people contributing to La Vagabonde and other popular youtube channels are doing it for some other reason? Someone here said they would rather contribute to their own cruising kitty than someone else's. Had you considered that some people don't have the option to go cruising? Maybe it's financial, maybe they are a caretaker for an ill family member, maybe their health does not allow it or one of the other million reasons why people don't end up fulfilling their dreams that are often not their fault. Contributing that $3-20 a month lets you be part of that dream in some way, heck, it might even give you the chance to meet them and see that dream boat whenever they are in your part of the world. La Vagabonde is not my favorite sailing youtube channel by far, but if it makes someone happy who am I to judge? I have better things to do than worry about what some self important member of this forum thinks about my entertainment choices or how I spend my hard earned money. Life is too short for that crap.

Well said!

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by RaymondR

Since there is thirty to forty thousand pages of tax law in Australia I'm not sure you can be unequivocal about anything related to tax law in Australia.

I believe that whether or not income is taxable in Australia depends upon your residence status. If you earn income overseas but reside in Australia you are taxable on the overseas income in Australia unless you have already paid tax on it overseas. At least that's the way it used to be.

that is 100% correct

cheers,

[ParL]

If people want to watch cruising themed YT that is their choice. In my other hobby (wilderness travel & survival, bushcraft) there is a problem that there is no checks on quality. So people watch YT videos and (e.g.) learn ways to purify water that Does Not Work (i.e. *adds* bacteria to the water rather than removing them). *Then* you have a problem that perhaps needs to be addressed.



Cruising example would be if someone told people to ignore the pump-out regulations in the Swedish Baltic archipelago that would be an issue[1], but if they just sailed around and filmed cleavage, six-packs, G-strings or nautical style Tom of Finland[2] outfits on a sailboat it would be a non issue. In my not so humble opinion. No one forces anyone to watch a certain YT channel.



Pär



[1] Basically there has for decades been way, *way* too much N/P in the effluents reaching the Baltic, causing annual algal blooms and all the fun that comes from them.



[2] Google at work on your own peril if you don't know what that means

[ParL]

Originally Posted by Idlegreg

Are books snake oil ?
Is music snake oil ?
Are movies or TV shows snake oil ?

A bunch of the early (polar) explorers partly financed their life from traveling around holding lectures, because traveling the country and talking to any group that paid was one of the income streams (as was writing for newspapers and magazines). Making YT videos is not fundamentally different, even if it changes the details.

[nortonscove]

Originally Posted by Dave Noosa

I can’t believe the negativity.

Firstly, they’ve done a business deal.

Secondly, they produce a product that people consume, and in return, the appreciative and grateful ones, financially support them so they can keep dedicating their time to producing content

Thirdly, do you have any idea for how long the sailing industry has been in steady decline? A flailing industry means less competition, higher prices, crappier workmanship.

The sailing Youtubers that many seem to despise are actually revitalising the industry and guess what…….people are buying boats. I wouldn’t be so quick to bag them

👍👍👍 what they said sums it up nicely.