Rachel Waterhouse, chief executive of the Australian Shareholders Association, says it is advocating for the removal of the proposal to tax unrealised gains and the inclusion of indexation to ensure the fairness of any thresholds over time.
“ASA is also focused on ensuring retail investors understand how the proposed changes could affect them and is collecting member stories and case studies to strengthen our advocacy and highlight real-world implications,” Waterhouse said.
She added that the ASA is encouraging members to take action by contacting their local MP and signing the petition initiated by Wilson Asset Management.
“Signing the petition opposing the taxation of unrealised gains is one way retail investors can demonstrate broad community concern and push for a more balanced approach to reform,” Waterhouse said.
According to Waterhouse, the ASA does not dispute the need for taxation, but said introducing this measure without a holistic review of the broader tax system, and forcing people to act against their own retirement interests by taxing profits they have not received, goes beyond what most would consider fair.
“ASA will continue to advocate for a fair, transparent, and consistent superannuation system that supports the retirement ambitions of all Australians,” she said.
“While presented as a measure targeting only high-balance accounts by increasing the effective tax on earnings above $3 million from 15 per cent to 30 per cent, the proposal raises broader concerns about the taxation of retirement savings in Australia. It risks undermining long-term planning, reducing fairness in the system, and affecting more Australians over time than initially anticipated.”
She added that the proposed rules could also have broader consequences for investment behaviour.
“Being taxed on unrealised gains may discourage investment in high-growth and early-stage companies, particularly those with volatile share prices,” she said.
“Superannuation funds, both APRA-regulated and self-managed, are a major source of capital for these businesses, even if the exact level of investment is not publicly known. The prospect of tax on paper gains may lead funds to reduce their exposure, ultimately limiting capital flows to innovative sectors.
“If gains are taxed during growth but no relief is offered when values fall, investors may become reluctant to hold long-term growth assets. This could undermine Australia’s innovation ecosystem and reduce capital formation across the economy.”
Moreover, Waterhouse said the proposed changes also raise significant concerns about fairness and said it had the potential to create a two-tiered system.
“Many of those responsible for designing or implementing the policy may not be personally impacted, while the financial burden falls on others,” she said.
“This disconnect between the decision makers and those affected by the proposed policy is difficult to ignore. This demand for tax on profits that investors have not even received may lead to increased selling pressure as investors seek to fund the tax. This could contribute to greater market volatility, with detrimental impacts on all but the most savvy investors.”
Let’s hope the government finally realises that an inequitable “equity measure” is no equity measure at all.
But you forget David that Chalmers said that it was only affecting a “sliver” of people. He, the Labor party generally, and Treasury don’t care about the “sliver”. Also, I wonder how many are the “sliver” now (these figures ~79000 are over 3 years old) and, I wonder how many there will be in June 2026 – a lot less I would hazard at a guess.