Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 118

The benefits of low turnover for after-tax outcomes

The tax efficiency of some managed funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs) is often an underappreciated and less visible benefit for investors. In Australia, fund manager performance is most often assessed on pre-tax returns. A low portfolio turnover can potentially provide significantly better after-tax returns relative to that of a high turnover actively managed fund, assuming all other factors are equal. For broad Australian equities exposure, we provide an illustration of how a low turnover structure can potentially improve after-tax returns up to 1% p.a. Furthermore, the ETF structure typically better insulates investors from having to pay capital gains tax if there is a high level of redemptions from other investors, when compared to traditional managed funds.

Why low turnover lowers tax

One of the features of index-linked strategies is that they usually don’t require a high turnover of stocks from year to year, typically only around 10% a year while an Australian actively managed equity fund can be as high as 80%. The lower the portfolio turnover of a managed investment, the fewer assets will be sold each year and therefore the lower the potential annual capital gains tax (CGT). Low turnover means the tax payable on any accruing capital gains in a portfolio will largely be deferred until the gains are realised at a later date – typically when investors sell their investment – which, in turn, means an investor’s portfolio value can remain higher for longer. Investors receive more benefit from return compounding over time.

Low portfolio turnover also means that a greater portion of the assets are likely to have been held for more than a year, giving investors the benefit of CGT discounts applicable on long-term asset holdings. In Australia, individual investors apply a 50% discount to CGT when selling assets held for longer than one year, while superannuation funds (including SMSFs) apply a 33% discount.

We can demonstrate these tax effects using a simple numeric example. Assume that an investor places $100,000 in a managed investment that delivers pre-tax capital growth of 6% per annum, and sells the fund after two years (ignoring management fees and costs and distributions). The table below considers three cases: 1) no turnover in the fund over the whole period 2) a 10% turnover in the portfolio at the end of year one, and 3) an 80% turnover of the portfolio at the end of year one. Increasing portfolio turnover from 10% to 80% - assuming pre-tax returns are the same – significantly reduces post-tax returns. Indeed, for an investor in the top marginal income tax rate of 47%, the post-tax annualised returns are reduced from 4.5% to 3.5%. For superannuation funds (including SMSFs), the post-tax annualised return is reduced by 0.5%.

(Calculation details: If there is no turnover in the fund, the fund earns a compound 6% pre-tax return each year, growing to $112,360 on the date of sale. That means the investor is liable to pay tax on capital gains of $12,360. Assuming they are in the top marginal tax rate of 47%, and receive the 50% CGT discount, their tax payable is $2,905, reducing the after-tax value of their investment to $109,455, for an annualised two-year after-tax return of 4.6%. For a superannuation fund receiving a 33% discount on their 15% tax rate, the annualised two-year return is 5.7%. With 80% portfolio turnover at the end of the first year, however, the investor is liable to pay CGT (without any discount) on the 80% value of shares sold at the end of year one, reducing the value of the portfolio heading into year 2 even if all after-tax returns are re-invested. What’s more, when the whole investment is then sold at the end of year 2, around 80% of the gains relate to newly purchased assets held for less than one year, and so are again not subject to a CGT discount. Only the 20% of the portfolio held for two years is eligible for the discount. The end result is that the annualised after-tax return for an investor in the top income tax bracket falls to 3.5%. For superannuation funds, the return falls to 5.2%. With portfolio turnover of only 10% at the end of year one, however, the return for an investor in the top income tax bracket is 4.5%, or only 0.2% less than the ‘buy and hold’ case of zero turnover. For super funds, the return remains close to the 5.7% return for the zero turnover funds (the tax penalty associated with turnover is lower for super funds due to their lower marginal tax rate). The after-tax return is higher than in the case of 80% turnover because less CGT needs to be paid at the end of year one – allowing more of the portfolio to earn extra returns in year two – and because more of the CGT payable at the end of year two is subject to the CGT discount).

Dealing with investor redemptions

Another tax efficiency associated with ETFs is that their unique structure means investors are typically better insulated from having to pay capital gains tax if there is a high level of redemptions from other investors. In the usual managed fund structure, large investor redemptions mean the fund manager has to sell underlying assets to meet the cash demands of departing investors. In most cases – and especially where there are many small investors selling at the same time – it is administratively complex for the fund manager to assign (or ‘stream’) the capital gains tax associated with these sales to the individual investors in question. Instead, the fund is left with the capital gains tax liability which in turn is passed on to remaining investors in the fund at the end of the financial year.

With an ETF however, even if many small investors seek to sell their ETF holdings on the ASX at the same time, it is the authorised participant (AP) who facilitates these sales (effectively buying ETF units from individual investors in return for cash), and who then undertakes the redemption process with the ETF provider. Due to the fewer but larger redemptions involved, it is easier for the ETF provider to ‘stream’ the associated capital gains tax payable to the AP, sparing remaining investors in the ETF from having to pay this tax.

Tax efficiencies are an important benefit associated with ETFs and other low turnover structures that investors should keep in mind.

 

David Bassanese is Chief Economist at BetaShares, a leading provider of ETFs. This article is for general information purposes only and neither Cuffelinks nor BetaShares are tax advisers. Readers should obtain professional, independent tax advice before making any investment decision.

 

  •   16 July 2015
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

CGT reform and fund turnover: who really feels the impact?

The investment that sidesteps the new tax traps

Completing the reform of CGT: tax real losses like real gains

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.