Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 80

Tax and the financial planning process

With the forthcoming Government White Paper on the Australian tax system and some comments that the Murray Inquiry made with respect to tax and the financial system, it is timely to have a look at where tax fits into financial planning.

An indicator of a good tax system overall, as the public finance economists love to say, is that tax should not impact on economic behaviour. Or, to put that another way, taxes should not ‘distort’ economic activity, which in the context of financial planning, means taxes should not ‘distort’ where individuals save because, after all, financial planning is just saving and investing.

All very well in theory. However, this is not the case in the real world and taxes can have a significant effect on how individuals save. In fact, the Murray Inquiry highlighted six different ways in which the Australian tax system distorts the way individuals save and it is these that will come under review with the Government White Paper.

So what are they and how do they affect the way a person saves?

  • Tax affects asset selection by individuals. That is, tax impacts on which assets an individual (or SMSF) will hold. Probably the best example of this is Australian company shares that pay imputation credits. Investors will actively seek out this class of investment specifically to get the tax effect of dividend imputation.
  • Taxes affect asset allocation by individuals. That is, tax impacts how much a person will invest in or allocate their savings to each type or class of asset. Perhaps the outstanding example of this is the family home, which is tax exempt and is the asset class owned by the majority of Australians.
  • Tax affects how much individuals will borrow. The Henry Review noted that the Australian tax system of negative gearing actually incentivised people to ‘gear up’ for favourable tax advantages.
  • Tax affects asset location. In other words, tax affects where the assets are held. SMSFs are the best example, and they have become the preferred holding vehicle for many people’s wealth.
  • Tax affects whether individuals will invest directly or use a financial intermediary. The tax affects here can be subtle, such as the use of carry forward tax losses, which is not as effective in financial intermediaries when compared with investing directly. Some retail and industry superannuation funds do not handle the transition from accumulation to pension efficiently when compared with SMSFs.
  • The Australian tax system affects when to dispose of an asset. Individuals get a 50% tax discount and SMSFs get a one-third tax discount if they wait at least 12 months before disposing of the asset.

 

Although the theory is that the tax system should have no bearing on how people save and invest, these six differences will come under serious scrutiny by both Murray and the Government White Paper.

 

Gordon Mackenzie is a Senior Lecturer in taxation and business law at the Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales.

 

4 Comments
Warren Bird
April 16, 2015

This website, which quotes ABS Census stats, confirms the accuracy of Gordon's statement.

http://www.ahuri.edu.au/themes/home_ownership

Kate
April 16, 2015

The family home is not owned by the majority of Australians. In my suburb Western suburbs Perth) it is approx 33% owned, 33% mortgage and 33 % renters. In the younger age group I know in other suburbs they are renters, mortgage stress (interest only ) or living at home with parents, please explain your facts a bit more clearly.

Mike Timmers
September 26, 2014

It is true that availability of imputation credits is frequently said to affect asset selection (ala point 1 in this article) - of Australian tax residents at least. But should it? Since an imputation credit is a fully refundable tax offset think of it like this - the paying company is distributing that part of its profit on a pre-tax basis and the franking amount has been withheld and remitted to the Tax Office as a type of prepayment of the shareholder's ultimate tax liability. As such dividends could be considered equivalent to other investment incomes, for example such as trust distributions and interest on deposits which are paid from pre-tax profits - which could have tax withheld and remitted to the ATO where the investor fails to provide a TFN or ABN. In this way the gross return from those forms of investments can be compared on a like-for-like basis. What is important is the gross income yield, not so much the tax prepayment represented by the tax withholding.

Of course shares carry a prospect for capital growth as well as risk of loss, compared with a cash deposit, which should be considered in the investor's risk-return equation.

Bruce Bennett
September 23, 2014

If negative gearing is to remain a part of the Australian taxation system, should its scope be limited and its benefits spread more widely? For example, in the case of residential or commercial real estate only allowing negative gearing for investments in new property or, in the case of equities, limiting it to investments in new infrastructure funds.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Things you must consider before subdividing a property

Negative gearing: is it a tax concession?

The when and why of four million Australian retirees

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Latest Updates

Planning

Will young Australians be better off than their parents?

For much of Australia’s history, each new generation has been better off than the last: better jobs and incomes as well as improved living standards. A new report assesses whether this time may be different.

Superannuation

The rubbery numbers behind super tax concessions

In selling the super tax, Labor has repeated Treasury claims of there being $50 billion in super tax concessions annually, mostly flowing to high-income earners. This figure is vastly overstated.

Investment strategies

A steady road to getting rich

The latest lists of Australia’s wealthiest individuals show that while overall wealth has continued to rise, gains by individuals haven't been uniform. Many might have been better off adopting a simpler investment strategy.

Economy

Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia?

As inflation eases, the Albanese government is switching its focus to lifting Australia’s sluggish productivity. Can corporate tax cuts reboot growth - or are we chasing a theory that doesn’t quite work here?

Are V-shaped market recoveries becoming more frequent?

April’s sharp rebound may feel familiar, but are V-shaped recoveries really more common in the post-COVID world? A look at market history suggests otherwise and hints that a common bias might be skewing perceptions.

Investment strategies

Asset allocation in a world of riskier developed markets

Old distinctions between developed and emerging market bonds no longer hold true. At a time where true diversification matters more than ever, this has big ramifications for the way that portfolios should be constructed.

Investment strategies

Top 5 investment reads

As the July school holiday break nears, here are some investment classics to put onto your reading list. The books offer lessons in investment strategy, financial disasters, and mergers and acquisitions.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 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.