X
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
Get the latest news! Subscribe to the SMSF Adviser bulletin
  • News
    • Money
    • Education
    • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
  • News
    • Money
    • Education
    • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
No Results
View All Results
Home News

Labor’s franking credits proposal reignites debate

In a letter penned to shareholders, Wilson Asset Management has voiced its disagreement with the proposed changes.

by Maja Garaca Djurdjevic
October 3, 2022
in News
Reading Time: 3 mins read
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Last week, in a surprise move, which was detailed in a draft legislation published earlier this month, Labor confirmed it would be pursuing changes to franking credits.  

Speaking to the media on Monday, Treasurer Jim Chalmers assured that the planned changes are “nothing like” those proposed in 2019. But the announcement has shocked investors who are yet to forget Labor’s proposed crackdown which is widely considered the primary cause for the party’s surprise election loss.

X

In a letter penned on Wednesday, the chairman of Wilson Asset Management disagreed with the proposed “fundamental change” to former prime minister Paul Keating’s legislation, originally introduced to eliminate double taxation of company earnings.

“We will continue to advocate for shareholders who will be impacted by the changes put forward,” Geoff Wilson, who was a fierce opponent of Labor’s plan back in 2019, said.

According to the explanatory memorandum accompanying the new proposed legislation, the government’s intention is to prevent Australian companies from paying franked dividends to shareholders in circumstances where Treasury believes that the fully franked dividend can be directly or indirectly linked to funding received through capital raising.

“Rather than going after the recipients of franking credits as occurred in 2019 and failed, Labor are now going after the source, Australian companies who pay their taxes and will be denied the opportunity to reward their shareholders with fully franked dividends,” Mr Wilson argued.

According to him, as drafted, the proposed legislation appears to “inadvertently impact” situations of legitimate company operations and could accordingly “delay or discourage” the normal processes of capital raising, investment and economic growth in Australia, and interfere with the operation and the efficiency of the Australian capital markets.

“The legislation does not sufficiently distinguish between acceptable activities and the tax avoidance situations it intends to address,” Mr Wilson said.

The government has also outlined that it intends to backdate the integrity measure to coincide with the 2016–17 mid-year economic and fiscal outlook, to ensure that only distributions equivalent to realised profits can be franked.

But Mr Wilson believes that the retrospective application to 19 December 2016 could “unfairly prejudice franked dividends paid out to shareholders of Australian companies during this time and leave them with unexpected tax bills for dividends they have since received, to be paid at a time of economic uncertainty”.

“This legislation was initially drafted by the previous Liberal government which we also disagreed with,” the chairman said.

Mr Wilson also hit out at the government for calling for submissions on its policy by 5 October 2022, arguing that this is “an unacceptably short time frame” for Australian companies and shareholders to respond.

“We have today written to Treasury requesting an extension to this deadline. Our team is currently working on its submission and intends to share it with you shortly along with details on how you can write your own submission if you wish to do so,” he concluded.

“We are determined that everyone’s voice is heard by the federal government and will continue to advocate for retail shareholders and investors who are set to be impacted by this poorly constructed policy.”

Back in January, ahead of the federal election, Mr Chalmers assured that Labor would not be taking previous tax policies, including franking credit changes to the election.

“We’ve made it clear that those policies around negative gearing and franking credits and the like, they won’t be something that we’ll be taking to the next election,” said Mr Chalmers in a Channel Nine interview at the time.

Related Posts

Aaron Dunn, CEO, Smarter SMSF

Becoming a member of an SMSF is easy, but there are other things that need to be considered​​: expert

by Keeli Cambourne
November 26, 2025

Aaron Dunn, CEO of Smarter SMSF, said there has been a lot of discussion lately around trustee and member changes...

Peter Johnson, director, Advisers Digest

Lending money to members will breach SMSF compliance: adviser

by Keeli Cambourne
November 26, 2025

Peter Johnson, director of Advisers Digest, said section 65 stipulates that a fund cannot lend to a member or a...

Anthony Cullen, SMSF technical specialist, Accurium

Estate planning is more than just documentation

by Keeli Cambourne
November 26, 2025

Anthony Cullen, SMSF technical specialist for Accurium, said in a recent webinar  that an estate plan is not documents but...

Comments 3

  1. DavidL says:
    3 years ago

    So, a company has retained profits but no cash to pay dividends because it has reinvested into the business. Does this mean that raising capital to pay a reward to shareholders is now to be prohibited…..and backdated 6 years?!

    Reply
  2. John says:
    3 years ago

    ” I’m guessing the intent of the policy is fine”.
    Cosidering the Liberals did not pursue this (from 2015), so the indication is it’s likely not “fine”.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous says:
    3 years ago

    Surely for such a sensitive topic for Labor they should have consulted before releasing legislation for discussion, and should allow a longer time for submissions. Its looking like an early indication that Labor still can’t be trusted. Noting the Liberals drafted the policy and the discussion above, I’m guessing the intent of the policy is fine. The issue is the process. The lack of awareness suggests they don’t understand why the 2019 policy was so flawed, which is concerning.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.
SMSF Adviser is the authoritative source of news, opinions and market intelligence for Australia’s SMSF sector. The SMSF sector now represents more than one million members and approximately one third of Australia's superannuation savings. Over the past five years the number of SMSF members has increased by close to 30 per cent, highlighting the opportunity for engaged, informed and driven professionals to build successful SMSF advice business.

Subscribe to our newsletter

View our privacy policy, collection notice and terms and conditions to understand how we use your personal information.

About Us

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Collection Notice
  • Privacy Policy

Popular Topics

  • News
  • Strategy
  • Money
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
  • Feature Articles
  • Education
  • Video

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited

No Results
View All Results
NEWSLETTER
  • News
  • Money
  • Education
  • Strategy
  • Webcasts
  • Features
  • Events
  • Podcasts
  • Promoted Content
  • About
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

© 2025 All Rights Reserved. All content published on this site is the property of Prime Creative Media. Unauthorised reproduction is prohibited