Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 247

Labor's new franking policy is unfair to LICs

The Labor Party needs to articulate how it will treat shareholders in Listed Investment Companies (LICs) fairly under their proposal to deny refunds for excess franking credits.

The current system of taxation of dividends ensures that Australian resident shareholders are taxed at their applicable rate of income tax on dividends received from companies, rather than a minimum of the company tax rate. Denying refunds for excess franking credits will require complex changes to legislation to maintain the existing policy of allowing shareholders in LICs to effectively receive the CGT discount on capital gains earned by the LIC.

When a LIC earns a capital gain it pays income tax on the capital gain at the corporate tax rate, typically 30%. When it pays the capital gain to the shareholder as a LIC dividend, the shareholder is taxed on the dividend and franking credit in the usual way, but also receives a tax deduction that represents the CGT discount the shareholder would receive if they derived the gain directly or received it from a trust.

Below is the analysis showing the calculations for an investor (super fund or High Net Wealth Individual) investing in a LIC or either directly in shares or via a trust.

Calculation of tax payable on a $10,000 capital gain by:

  • Super fund in accumulation phase invested in an LIC (Super-LIC)
  • Super fund in accumulation phase invested in a trust or direct shares (Super-Trust)
  • High net worth individual (HNWI-Trust)

Currently, they receive a refund of the excess tax paid by the LIC above their tax rate after the tax deduction for the CGT discount. Denying the refund of excess franking credits results in the shareholder paying 30% tax on the dividend. This is a 27% higher rate of tax on a capital gain than is paid by someone on the top marginal rate of tax. This means a super fund will pay at least three times that rate of tax on a capital gain distributed by a LIC when compared to a capital gain it earns itself or via a trust and 27% more tax than an individual on the highest rate of tax.

(That is, a HNWI pays $2,350 on a $10,000 capital gain. A super fund in accumulation phase pays $3,000 on a capital gain earned by a LIC. The difference is $650 divided by the tax paid by the HNWI of $2,350 gives 27% more tax payable by the super fund).

Given that a large percentage of investors in LICs are super funds and that many investors in LICs are not wealthy, this is an inequitable result that will need to be addressed.

 

Howard Badger is a Partner in Tax Consulting at Pitcher Partners. This article is general information that does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

  •   5 April 2018
  • 5
  •      
  •   
5 Comments
Frankie
April 06, 2018

Another unintended consequence for the new policy to fix.

Don McLennan
April 08, 2018

Shorten's original plan was to only allow Franking Credits to used to pay tax.
Bill quickly changed so now SMSF in the pension phase are about the only sector to be hit by
this measure.
Most members of a SMSF in the pension phase with a balance below $1.6m could lose their "credits". In my case i will lose 20% of my income. In fact i would be better off paying the 15% tax which those in the accumulation phase
Most high wealth individuals that Labor aims to target probably have over $3m in "super".
As an adviser i would advise them to reduce their holdings of companies paying fully franked dividends in their $1.6 section Holding these in their section paying 15% tax
Many will be able to use all their franking credits in this section
So it seems that some of the middle class who have saved hard & are now self funded retirees will be the group mostly hit.

D Ramsay
April 12, 2018

Well said.
Additionally why doesn't the Labour party be honest and only go after the ones they really want - namely the folks in SMSF's that have >$1.6M in super and put in a means test that exempts those that are below the above threshold from losing their franking credits.
I believe the figures are such that 97% of folks receiving franking credits are on annual taxable incomes of <$87K.
Labour discourages people from being self funded in retirement.

Daryl Wilson (Affluence Funds)
April 09, 2018

Listed Investment Trusts such as recent IPO Magellan Global Trust (MGG) are a much better structure than an LIC. A LIT pays no tax, just passes on any taxable income (plus any franking credits received) to the end investor in the same way as an unlisted managed fund.

This is a much more efficient system and avoids the situation described above. In addition, it means any discounted capital gains can also be passed directly through - in our experience very few LICs actually state the capital gain portion of dividends and thus investors get very little advantage from the tax deduction.

Michael Newman
April 13, 2018

So why did Costello change it from Keating's original purpose and at what cost to revenue since and how did it work before the changes?

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

The missing 30%: how LIC returns are understated, and why it matters

It’s time for LICs to die

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Taxation

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.