Removing dividend imputation has unintended consequences

federal budget funds management

30 April 2015
| By Mike |
image
image
expand image

The Federal Government has been urged against removing dividend imputation on the basis that the unintended consequences may outweigh many of the benefits.

RSM Bird Cameron Financial Services financial adviser, Evan Tsipas, said that analysis conducted by his firm suggested that Australians might actually be worse off, on average, if the Government removed the dividend imputation system even after recent reforms had taken effect.

"The removal of dividend imputation may have some positive and negative side effects for business and the economy," he said. "Upon removal, corporations are likely to slash dividends, which would be double-taxed and of less value to Australian investors. We could also see an increase in corporate debt issued designed to reduce tax as corporations can generally deduct interest.

"New debt issued by corporations could be used to embark on share buybacks, new investment and mergers and acquisitions. However from a macro perspective we need to consider whether more debt would increase systemic risk," Tsipas said.

"The second- and third-order effects of the removal of dividend imputation need to be studied carefully. Encouraging companies to reduce dividends and increase leverage may put the Australian economy in a poor position to handle its next crisis."

He said opponents of the current system might argue it favours the wealthy who have a large exposure to Australian shares and that it was true that wealthier Australians who own Australian shares would be more greatly impacted by the removal of the dividend imputation system.

"However, if the average Australian superannuation investor is tens of thousands of dollars worse off over a 30-year period upon removal of dividend imputation, they could experience a more meaningful drop in living standards, as compared to a wealthier individuals who can better cope with the elimination of franking credits. These new proposals are in direct conflict with the desired outcomes of recent reform," Tsipas said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

1 month 3 weeks ago

This verdict highlights something deeply wrong and rotten at the heart of the FSCP. We are witnessing a heavy-handed, op...

1 month 3 weeks ago

Interesting. Would be good to know the details of the StrategyOne deal....

2 months ago

SuperRatings has shared the median estimated return for balanced superannuation funds for the calendar year 2024, finding the year achieved “strong and consistent positiv...

1 week 6 days ago

Original bidder Bain Capital, which saw its first offer rejected in December, has returned with a revised bid for Insignia Financial....

6 days 10 hours ago

The FAAA has secured CSLR-related documents under the FOI process, after an extended four-month wait, which show little analysis was done on how the scheme’s cost would a...

4 days 4 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS