Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 666

Why strong returns matter as much as generosity

It’s that time of year again. June 30 is only weeks away, and for many Australians it brings the familiar mix of tax planning, investment decisions and, hopefully, some thought about charitable giving. I’ve written about this before for Firstlinks, and I make no apology for returning to it, as philanthropy benefits from repetition. The more people are reminded of the options available to them, the more likely they are to act.

Australian Philanthropic Services (APS) is a not-for-profit I founded more than a decade ago. Our APS Foundation is a public ancillary fund: a communal philanthropic structure in which individuals, families, and organisations can establish their own giving fund, typically within 24 hours and with an initial donation of $40,000 of more.

The mechanics of these structures are straightforward. You make a donation into your giving fund before June 30 and receive the tax deduction in this financial year (although if you prefer, the tax deduction can be spread over up to five years). The donated funds are pooled and invested by APS, with returns accumulating tax-free. You decide which eligible charities to support each year, giving you the space and time to make considered, thoughtful giving decisions.

I sometimes describe it to people as the superannuation model applied to giving. Just as many Australians pre-fund their retirement by contributing to super while they’re earning, structured giving allows you to pre-fund your philanthropy, claim the deduction when your income is highest, then support the causes you care about over time, alongside your children and grandchildren if that’s what you choose to do. The giving fund can be designed to last a lifetime, or many generations.

Why investment returns matter deeply to philanthropy

Giving is at its heart an altruistic endeavour, but I don’t think we speak enough about how the investment returns generated within philanthropic structures directly determine how much money flows to charities over time. A desire to give matters, as does returns.

APS Foundation’s General Portfolio, which I manage, has returned 10.1% per annum after fees since its inception in 2012, and is well diversified across the full investment spectrum. It distributes returns tax-free back to giving funds, compounding the capital available for charitable grants.

A giving fund that generates 10% per annum, distributes 4% to charity each year, and retains 6% for growth will roughly double in real terms over a decade. The charities supported in year 10 receive far more than those supported in year one. Strong returns benefit the investment portfolio and magnify the philanthropic impact for every year the fund operates. This is why, in my view, taking investment management seriously within a giving structure is key to its success.

This also speaks to an ongoing policy debate that is very much alive right now. The Government recently announced it would raise the minimum annual distribution rate for public ancillary funds from 4% to 6%. At APS, we understand the intention, but Treasury’s own modelling shows that higher distribution rates maximise short-term flows to charities at the expense of long-term giving, meaning funds run down faster, and the capital compounding effect is diminished. The 5% rate applied to private ancillary funds (also soon to increase to 6%) has long represented a balance between giving now and preserving capital for future generations. Eroding that balance through regulatory settings that prioritise the short term is, in my view, a mistake. The best way to deliver more to charities is to grow both the number of givers and the pools of capital they contribute to. Despite this change, private and public ancillary funds remain enormously effective options to magnify your giving.

A word on making the most of EOFY

June 30 is, for most Australians, primarily a tax deadline. But it is also one of the most useful prompts in the financial calendar for thinking about giving, and the ideal time to act on charitable intentions that might otherwise drift into "I'll get to it next year."

For those who have had a strong financial year, be it a business sale, a bonus, a capital gain, or simply a good run in their investment portfolio, June presents an opportunity to claim a tax deduction now and take your time to decide which charities to support. That combination of immediacy and flexibility is, in my view, one of the most underappreciated tools in the Australian financial landscape.

This matters particularly for people facing a one-off income spike. Marginal tax rates being what they are in Australia, a deduction taken in a high-income year is worth considerably more than the same deduction taken in an ordinary year. Structured giving allows you to lock in that deduction at the right moment, while the capital continues to be invested and grow tax-free inside the giving fund giving you time to make thoughtful granting decisions each year.

The bigger picture

Australia is in the midst of the largest intergenerational wealth transfer in its history - estimates put it at around $5.4 trillion over the coming decades. A growing number of Australians are asking not just how to transfer wealth to the next generation, but what kind of legacy they want to leave. I firmly believe that philanthropy can be a bigger part of that answer.

APS has more than 1,100 clients who donated over $242 million to charity last financial year and have committed more than $2.9 billion to charity held in structures they support. We see families establishing giving funds not just for tax efficiency, but to involve their children and grandchildren in decisions about charitable priorities. Some of the most meaningful conversations happening in family wealth planning right now are about shared values, purpose, and the kind of future people want to help build.

For anyone who has had a strong financial year and hasn’t yet thought about structured giving, now is the time to act.

 

Chris Cuffe is Portfolio Manager of the charitable trust Third Link Growth Fund and of the Australian Philanthropic Services Foundation General Portfolio. Chris is involved with many other groups as a director, chairman and investment professional. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any person. The views expressed are his own and they are not personal financial advice.

 

  •   10 June 2026
  • 10
  •      
  •   
10 Comments
Kevin Robbie
June 11, 2026

Good question. From an APS point of view re charities supported - we are donor led, last year there were over 2,600 charities funded and donors can fund any one of more than 25,000 charities that have DGR1 status.

1
Kevin Robbie
June 12, 2026

Great article Chris.
And very interesting question Davo. One that I've pondered in my time as CEO of couple of not-for-profits and now as Head of APS Foundation. There really isn't a correct answer to the question of whether to receive funds immediately or smaller funding sustainably over time. It's ultimately about choices and motivation.
Whilst there is massive need we know that structured giving allows for sustained, strategic philanthropy, supporting clients to evaluate their giving choices and consider a longer time horizon.  Further, given that funds are invested, grow and benefit from a tax-free environment, over time, the pool of money dedicated to the community is larger than it would have been otherwise. 
Within the APS Foundation we find that over the course of a few years, clients give well above what they would have had they donated the full amount upfront, whilst still maintaining the corpus for the benefit of future community needs. 
We acknowledge that there are certain causes that require immediate funding, such as disaster relief and crisis services.  Again, we find that during such times of emergency, APS clients typically give more from their giving structures to support the rising community need.
Immediate giving is vital in crises, but long-term structures support systemic change, capacity building, and innovation.
 
Note also that APS doesn’t claim to know better. APS respects the deep expertise, leadership and specialist knowledge embedded in the for-purpose community, and we work collaboratively with our peers across the sector to grow giving in Australia.

4
wuji
June 13, 2026

As an APS giving fund holder: a slightly different way to respond to Davo's question is that, as a family we discuss twice yearly what causes are important for us to help. In this way we remain engaged in philanthropic thinking rather than a helicopter drop, we learn what priorities each other has and consider how much we can "top-up" each year (from a capability and a taxation perspective). I think these are good conversations for families to have.
Chris captured this in the second last paragraph and also Kevin alluded to it by saying "sustained".

IIRC Peter Singer's book concurs with Davo's point about larger contributions earlier before inflation does its damage at both the giving and receiving end**. Chris' investment work will hopefully continue to outpace inflation, here is a past performance ref: https://www.australianphilanthropicservices.com.au/aps-foundation-investment-performance/

** I may be mis-remembering this as its also a narrative for helping your kids buy their home earlier.

2
Mark Hayden
June 11, 2026

Great article, thanks Chris. It is a win-win now and in the future; ie for the giving person and for their family and for quality charities. I disagree that the 6% drawdown is a concern. It is non-indexed, so funds will last a very long time. Sequencing risk is, at these drawdown levels, totally eliminated under my Investment Model by holding a small portion in cash and enabling dividends to replenish that when needed.

2
Kevin Robbie
June 11, 2026

Very good question regarding what charities are supported. At Australian Philanthropic Services APS we are donor led, last year there were over 2,600 charities funded across a very wide variety of areas and donors can fund any one of more than 25,000 charities that have DGR1 status.

2
Davo
June 11, 2026

Not chucking rocks, just seeking to understand: why would someone do this (or indeed have their own PAF) rather than just make a straightforward bulk donation in year 1? Why drip-feed a charity rather than just hand it all over and let them deal with it as the best see fit?

I understand the notion of distributing the 4% and it goes on for ever and ever and the capital just grows - this is how we do our personal finances. But isn't the charity in the best position to know if this is the best thing for them versus some capital project?

1
Lyn
June 11, 2026

Davo, re last question, sometimes yes or no. As co-executor whole of estate to large charity, almost unbelievingly discovered it not much experience of such situation. I knew which decision best but suggested it seek own financial/legal advice to decide. This it did via firm doing pro-bono work for it, assigned a junior solicitor & who failed to keep appointment with me. Some assets sold on her direct instruction to estate solicitor (co-executor), result approx $100,000 tax on estate which would have broken the giver's heart. Pro-bono cost it more than if it paid for top financial advice. Something to be said for article if inexperience of financials exists in chosen charity, recent trouble ensuring correct ABN for donaton to a particular field in very big charity, so may not be as rare as we perceive but lets it get on with what charity does best.

2
Mark Hayden
June 13, 2026

Hi Davo - the answer is in Chris' article - "structured giving allows you to pre-fund your philanthropy, claim the deduction when your income is highest, then support the causes you care about over time, alongside your children and grandchildren". Plus "You decide which eligible charities to support each year, giving you the space and time to make considered, thoughtful giving decisions."

3
Kevin Robbie
June 12, 2026

Great article Chris.
And very interesting question Davo. One that I've pondered in my time as CEO of couple of not-for-profits and now as Head of APS Foundation. There really isn't a correct answer to the question of whether to receive funds immediately or smaller funding sustainably over time. It's ultimately about choices and motivation.
Whilst there is massive need we know that structured giving allows for sustained, strategic philanthropy, supporting clients to evaluate their giving choices and consider a longer time horizon.  Further, given that funds are invested, grow and benefit from a tax-free environment, over time, the pool of money dedicated to the community is larger than it would have been otherwise. 
Within the APS Foundation we find that over the course of a few years, clients give well above what they would have had they donated the full amount upfront, whilst still maintaining the corpus for the benefit of future community needs. 
We acknowledge that there are certain causes that require immediate funding, such as disaster relief and crisis services.  Again, we find that during such times of emergency, APS clients typically give more from their giving structures to support the rising community need.
Immediate giving is vital in crises, but long-term structures support systemic change, capacity building, and innovation.
 
Note also that APS doesn’t claim to know better. APS respects the deep expertise, leadership and specialist knowledge embedded in the for-purpose community, and we work collaboratively with our peers across the sector to grow giving in Australia.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Two of the best-kept secrets for the EOFY

Maximising the impact of charitable giving

Structured giving's new moment

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

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.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

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.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

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.