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.

 

  •   19 September 2014
  • 4
  •      
  •   
4 Comments
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.

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.

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.

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

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

13 ways to save money on your tax - legally

When you can withdraw your super

Should we change the company tax rate?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

2 billion reasons to fix retirement income

A proposal to address Australia's 'stranded balances' in retirement by requiring super funds to transition members to pension phase at 65, boosting retirement income and reframing super as a source of income.

The ultimate superannuation EOFY checklist 2026

Here is a checklist of 28 important issues you should address before June 30 to ensure your SMSF or other super fund is in order and that you are making the most of the strategies available.

Do super funds need a massive wake up call?

UK retirement expert, Guy Opperman, believes super funds are failing at supporting members in deaccumulation. Here is what Australia should do about it. 

Two months into retirement

A retirement researcher's take on retirement and her focus on each of her six resource buckets to stay engaged during the transition and beyond.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 662 with weekend update

The debate over the budget is increasingly shaped by frustration and perceptions of unfairness, rather than clear-eyed assessment of policy outcomes.

Reforming the taxation of wealth and wealth transfers

As the budget approaches debate continues about the need and method for addressing wealth inequality. Could reinstating wealth transfer taxes be the answer?

Latest Updates

Back to the future - Why indexing CGT is a good idea

A return to indexation of capital gains would be a fairer way to compensate households for the effects of inflation than the current discount. Importantly, it opens the door to future, broader reforms to stop the taxation of inflation.

Australia has no death duties. Technically.

Australia may not levy formal death duties, but a growing web of tax measures is quietly shaping what wealth passes between generations. Now, the 2026 budget adds another layer.

Strategy

The folly of the Iran war

From oil shocks to fractured alliances, the Iran war carries the hallmarks of a historic policy misstep - one that could tip an already fragile global economy into crisis.

Taxation

Noel Whittaker’s take on the budget

Marketed as a fix for inequality and housing affordability, the latest budget instead delivers a tangle of tax changes that leave everyday Australians worse off.

Investment strategies

The red metal's long game

Copper has had a rough few weeks but investors should not ignore the potential for future price increases as supply increasingly falls behind demand.

Taxation

The lesser-known effects of changed property taxes

The budget’s property tax reforms are being framed as fairness measures, but they risk splitting the housing market, penalising lower‑income investors and introducing distortions that may prove costly.

Latest from Morningstar

Why stocks sometimes fall for no obvious reason

The vast and opaque world of private assets is a powerful gravitational force - and when trouble hits, it's the more liquid public equities that often the feel it first.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 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.