Division 296 SMSF Property Owners' Action Guide: What to Do Before 30 June 2027

A Sydney CFO, 51, has a $2.1M industrial unit inside her fund, plus $1.2M in cash and equities. Add the $480K still sitting in her old industry fund from her first job and she's at $3.78M — well over the threshold she didn't realise was personal, not per fund.

A retired couple in Adelaide, both 67, sit on a $4.6M SMSF balance, mostly in two residential investment properties bought through the fund a decade ago. Already in pension phase. They thought retirement meant they were done with planning.

Both households are in scope for Division 296 — the new tax on the realised earnings attributable to Total Super Balances above $3 million (an extra 15% on the $3M–$10M slice, and 25% above $10M). It received Royal Assent on 13 March 2026, took effect from 1 July 2026, and the first measurement date is 30 June 2027.

For many SMSF property investors, this is still one of the most significant one-time planning decisions of the decade. The final law taxes realised earnings — not paper gains — but property-heavy funds still face an important choice: the one-off cost-base reset to 30 June 2026 market value, made with your 2026–27 SMSF return, which shelters years of pre-commencement growth from the eventual realised-gain calculation. Get it right and you protect that growth permanently; skip it where it would have helped and you leave money on the table.

This guide is the action plan: who is affected, how the cost-base reset works, how to position your balance ahead of the 30 June 2027 first measurement, and how recontribution strategies change the answer — with case studies at $2.5M, $3.5M, $5M, and $8M TSB.

Who This Guide Is For — and Who Should Skip It

This guide is built for SMSF members with property exposure who need a working plan, not a legislative summary.

Read this guide if any of the following apply:

• Your Total Super Balance is $2.5M or above today and growing
• You're an SMSF trustee with commercial property in the fund
• You're a couple running a two-member fund with combined balance over $4M
• You're approaching pension phase or transitioning between phases
• You expect a TSB above $3M by 30 June 2027 due to inheritance, business sale, or growth

You can safely skip this guide if:

• Your TSB is under $2M and unlikely to grow into the threshold within 5 years
• Your super is fully in industry/retail funds with no SMSF plans
• Your SMSF holds no CGT assets (cash and term deposits only) and you have no plans to acquire any
• You've already made the cost-base election decision with your SMSF accountant

At a Glance

• Start date: 1 July 2026. First measurement date: 30 June 2027. Royal Assent: March 2026.
• Threshold: $3 million Total Super Balance, per individual (not per fund, not per couple).
• Indexation: the $3M threshold indexes in $150,000 steps and the $10M threshold in $500,000 steps.
• Additional tax rate: 15% on the proportion of realised earnings attributable to the balance in the $3M–$10M band, and 25% above $10M — on top of the 15% accumulation-phase tax already paid by the fund.
• Realised earnings only: the controversial unrealised-gains method was dropped. Earnings are the fund's actual income and realised capital gains — your fund is not taxed on a paper gain you have not sold.
• One-off cost-base reset: SMSFs can generally elect to reset the cost base of CGT assets held at 30 June 2026 to their market value, sheltering pre-1-July-2026 growth from the eventual realised-gain calculation. The election is lodged with the 2026–27 SMSF tax return.
• Liquidity choice: Division 296 tax can be paid personally or released from super (with limits). Property-heavy funds need to plan this in advance.
• Affects pension phase too: pension-phase balances still count toward your TSB. Being in retirement does not exempt you.
• Contribution caps from 1 July 2026 (based on projected indexation): concessional $32,500, non-concessional $130,000, bring-forward maximum $390,000.
• Transfer Balance Cap from 1 July 2026 (based on projected indexation): $2.1 million for new pensioners in 2026–27.

How Division 296 SMSF Tax Actually Works

The mechanics are simpler than the commentary suggests if you separate the four moving parts: the threshold test, the earnings calculation, the proportional allocation, and the tax liability.

Step 1 — The Threshold Test

The ATO compares your Total Super Balance at 30 June each year to the thresholds — $3,000,000 (indexing in $150,000 steps) and a second tier at $10,000,000 (indexing in $500,000 steps). The test is per individual member, not per fund and not per household. A couple jointly running a single SMSF will have two separate TSB tests applied to their respective member balances. (For Division 296 purposes, LRBA borrowings are disregarded when working out your balance.)

Step 2 — The Earnings Calculation

Under the enacted law, Division 296 “earnings” are the fund's realised taxable earnings attributable to the member — income (rent, dividends, interest) plus realised capital gains, less deductions — for the year. This is the biggest change from the original proposal, which measured the year-on-year movement in your Total Super Balance and so swept in unrealised gains.

The practical consequence for property-heavy funds is significant: if your fund's property revalues from $1.5M to $1.8M but you don't sell, that $300,000 is not counted — no sale, no realised gain, no Division 296 on it. Only when the asset is actually sold does the realised gain enter the calculation.

Step 3 — The Proportional Allocation

Division 296 only taxes the proportion of earnings attributable to the part of your balance above $3M:

Proportion = (Closing TSB − $3,000,000) ÷ Closing TSB

A member at $4M has 25% of earnings allocated. A member at $5M has 40%. A member at $10M has 70%.

Step 4 — The Tax Liability

The additional tax is 15% × (proportion × realised earnings) for the part of the balance in the $3M–$10M band, plus a further 25% on the proportion attributable to any balance above $10M (indexed in $500,000 steps). For most property-owning SMSFs in 2026–27, the whole calculation sits in the $3M–$10M band at the 15% rate.

Worked Example — Mechanics Only

This sits on top of the 15% accumulation-phase tax already paid by the fund, producing an effective rate of approximately 30% on that portion. Pension-phase earnings at the fund level are 0% but the Division 296 layer still applies because the threshold test uses TSB, not taxable income.

What Happens in a Negative Earnings Year?

Because earnings are realised, a negative year arises when the fund's realised capital losses and deductions exceed its income and realised gains — for example, a year in which you sell an asset at a loss. It is not triggered by a paper fall in a property's value.

You don't get a refund. Instead, the negative amount is carried forward as a Division 296 loss, available to offset Division 296 earnings in future years. There is no expiry on the carry-forward.

For property-heavy funds, the realised-earnings basis is a meaningful improvement over the original proposal: an unsold property that rises and falls in value creates no Division 296 liability along the way. The tax event is the eventual sale — which is precisely why the timing of any sale, and whether you have made the cost-base reset, matter so much.

How Division 296 Differs From the Current Super Tax

Most SMSF members know super earnings are taxed at 15% (accumulation) or 0% (pension). Division 296 is layered on top of that, not a replacement. The contrast that matters:

For property-owning SMSFs, the key change is the extra layer of tax on the above-threshold share of realised earnings — not a new tax on unsold assets. Like the existing system, Division 296 still only bites on a property when it is sold; what changes is the effective rate on that realised gain once your balance is above $3M.

The threshold is also portable. An industry fund member with $4M in super faces Division 296 too — it follows the person, not the structure. Because the tax is now on realised earnings, a single-property SMSF is assessed on the same realised basis as a diversified APRA-regulated fund; the practical difference is that an SMSF controls the timing of when its gains are realised.

Who Is Actually Affected — TSB Calculation Pitfalls

Treasury estimates roughly 80,000 individuals affected in year one. Four common reasons people misjudge whether they are in scope:

Pitfall 1 — Forgetting old APRA-regulated balances. TSB is the total of every super account you have. Old industry or retail fund balances from previous employers still count. Members who think they're at $2.6M routinely find an extra $200K–$500K in legacy accounts.

Pitfall 2 — Forgetting pension phase still counts. Pension phase reduces fund-level tax to 0% on supported earnings but does not exempt you from Division 296. A retiree with a $3.5M account-based pension is in scope.

Pitfall 3 — Misjudging how a leveraged purchase interacts with the threshold. Using $800K of fund cash plus an $800K LRBA to buy a $1.6M property doesn't lift the member balance by $1.6M — and for Division 296 the LRBA borrowing is disregarded when working out your balance. Annual revaluations of the property don't create a liability either. What matters is your Total Super Balance at 30 June and, later, the realised gain when the property is eventually sold — so model where a future sale would land you rather than fearing paper revaluations.

Pitfall 4 — Couples with uneven balances. A couple at $4.5M / $0.5M has one member fully in scope and one with $2.5M of unused headroom. The same couple at $2.5M / $2.5M is fully out of scope. Equalising legitimately is one of the highest-leverage moves available — and it has to be done through real strategies, not paper transfers.

The TSB at 30 June each year is the figure that matters: every super account, every phase, every projected revaluation.

The Cost-Base Election Decision

This is the one-off lever most property-owning SMSFs need to think hardest about.

What the Election Does

An SMSF can generally elect to reset the cost base of its CGT assets held at 30 June 2026 to their market value at that date. Pre-1-July-2026 capital growth is then sheltered: only the realised gain that accrues from 1 July 2026 onwards flows into Division 296 earnings when the asset is eventually sold.

The election generally applies across the fund's CGT assets together rather than asset-by-asset, and is lodged with the SMSF's 2026–27 tax return (the valuation date remains 30 June 2026). The precise application varies by asset type and CGT status (including treatment of any pre-CGT assets, pooled investments, and CGT discount eligibility) and should be confirmed with your SMSF adviser.

Worked Example — Property in a Long-Hold SMSF

A fund holds a commercial property bought in 2014 for $750,000, now worth $1,650,000 at 30 June 2026. Pre-commencement gain: $900,000.

Without the election: when the property is eventually sold for $2,100,000, the full $1,350,000 realised gain ($2.1M − $750K) feeds into Division 296 earnings in the year of sale (subject to proportional allocation).

With the election: cost base resets to $1,650,000. Only the $450,000 post-commencement gain feeds in. The $900,000 of pre-commencement growth is sheltered.

For a fund with TSB of $4M at sale, the proportional allocation captures roughly 25% at 15% — saving approximately $33,750 of Division 296 tax on this property alone. Add a residential property and the saving easily compounds past $50,000.

Worked Example — Where Electing In Backfires

Same fund, but holding a CSL share parcel bought at $300/share now sitting at $230 (an unrealised loss). Two years later CSL recovers to $290.

Without the election: the original $300 cost base produces a capital loss available to offset other gains.

With the election: cost base resets to $230. The recovery to $290 is treated as a $60/share gain, taxable inside the fund and counted in Division 296 earnings.

If your fund holds significant assets currently sitting below original cost base, those assets argue against electing in. Because the election generally applies across the fund's CGT assets, the decision is a portfolio-level optimisation — not asset-by-asset.

How to Decide

Two tests:

1. Is the fund net-unrealised-gain positive at 30 June 2026? Sum of unrealised gains exceeds sum of unrealised losses across all CGT assets.
2. Is the fund expected to be over the $3M threshold at the eventual sale? If you are confident TSB will be below $3M when assets are sold, Division 296 doesn't apply at sale and the election is irrelevant.

Run both tests with your SMSF accountant. The election is recorded on the 2026–27 SMSF return — there is no second opportunity.

Commercial Property Valuation Timing

For SMSFs holding commercial property, the 30 June 2026 valuation is the most important number on your fund's books for the next decade. Three things make it more urgent than usual.

Lead times are already running 4–6 weeks. Valuers servicing the SMSF market are reporting backlogs from late March 2026 onwards. Once we move into May, expect 6–8 weeks. SMSFs that wait until June will struggle to get a properly executed valuation in time.

The valuation needs to meet ATO standards. A drive-by appraisal or an agent's market opinion will not suffice for a Division 296 cost-base election. You need an independent, qualified valuer's report with documented comparable sales, capitalisation rate analysis, and a statement of fair market value at the test date. The ATO has signalled increased scrutiny of valuations underpinning the cost-base election.

Mistimed valuations create disputes later. If your 30 June 2026 valuation is later challenged as inflated, the cost-base election can be partially or fully unwound. The cost of getting it right — typically $1,500–$3,500 for commercial property — is trivial compared to the tax exposure.

For residential property, a properly documented appraisal from a licensed real estate agent referencing recent comparable sales is usually accepted. For borderline cases, paying for a sworn valuation is a defensive move that pays for itself if the property appreciates strongly.

Pre-1-July Repositioning Levers

Five legitimate levers are available — some tied to the 30 June 2026 reset baseline, others to reducing your balance before the 30 June 2027 first measurement. Each has trade-offs.

Lever 1 — Realise Specific Gains Before 1 July 2026

Selling and repurchasing assets sitting on large unrealised gains crystallises the gain at the 15% accumulation rate (effectively 10% with the one-third CGT discount), avoiding the proportional Division 296 layer that would apply later. Most useful for shares and managed funds where transaction costs are low.

Property is much harder to "sell and repurchase" because of stamp duty. A round-trip on a $1.5M commercial property could trigger $80,000–$120,000 of stamp duty plus agent fees — usually larger than the Division 296 saving. The cost-base election achieves the same outcome for property without the friction.

Lever 2 — Adjust Contributions

Members close to the threshold with flexibility on contributions can slow contributions in 2025–26 to keep closing balance lower. Members below the threshold with surplus capacity should consider bringing forward contributions before 30 June 2026 to lock in pre-Division-296 contribution headroom.

Lever 3 — Strategic Withdrawals (Where Condition of Release Met)

Members who have met a condition of release (typically age 60 with retirement) can take lump-sum withdrawals to reduce TSB. Withdrawing $500,000 reduces both the closing balance and the post-commencement balance against which Division 296 calculates. Effective, but reduces compounding inside the lower-tax super wrapper.

Lever 4 — Restructure Member Allocations Within the Fund

Where two members of the same fund have unequal balances, contribution splitting, spouse contributions, and recontribution strategies can move balance from higher-TSB to lower-TSB member. Treated in detail in the next section.

Lever 5 — Wind-Down or Partial Roll-Out

Rolling balance from an SMSF to an APRA fund does not reduce TSB. Both balances still count. The threshold follows the person, not the fund. Don't waste setup costs on this idea.

What does help is consolidating household assets to legitimately equalise across two spouses where the fund and structure allow.

ATO Scrutiny — What Will Be Watched

The ATO has signalled Division 296 avoidance as a focus area. Practices likely to attract scrutiny:

• Inflated 30 June 2026 valuations without supporting evidence
• Aggressive contribution-splitting or recontribution timing structured purely for tax purposes with no commercial logic
• "Round-trip" transactions — selling and repurchasing the same asset to crystallise pre-commencement gains without commercial substance
• Unusual investment strategy changes immediately around 30 June 2026
• Valuations from non-independent or unqualified valuers

Use real strategies with proper documentation. If a step in your plan would feel uncomfortable to explain in an audit interview, redesign it.

Liquidity Stress — A Worked Example

Consider a single-member fund with $4.2M TSB, 90% in a single commercial property valued at $3.8M. In a normal year the property returns net rent of about $164,000 and the fund earns 4% on its remaining $0.4M cash ($16,000) — realised earnings of about $180,000 (an unsold revaluation would not count). Proportion above $3M: ($4.2M − $3M) ÷ $4.2M = 28.6%. Division 296 tax: 28.6% × $180,000 × 15% = $7,722. In a year the property is sold, the realised capital gain is added to earnings and the bill is far larger — that is the year to plan liquidity for.

The member faces a choice:

• Pay personally from non-super funds: $7,722 from the household budget in a normal year. No fund impact, but a real cash hit — and materially larger in a sale year.
• Release from super: ATO mechanism allows release to cover the tax, but the fund needs liquidity. Cash on hand is $400K, which covers many years of likely Division 296 — but if a tenant exits and rent stops, that cash buffer also has to fund property holding costs.
• Forced partial property sale: not viable — commercial property doesn't sell in slices, and a full sale to fund a $17,830 tax bill is grotesque.

The right answer for property-heavy funds is usually a dedicated cash buffer of 12–24 months of expected Division 296 plus property holding costs. Build it before you need it.

Recontribution and Spouse Equalisation

The single highest-leverage strategy for couples sitting near or above the threshold is balance equalisation.

A couple with combined balance $5M:

If the same couple's balance grows to $6M while skewed, member 1 sits at $5.4M and faces Division 296 on roughly 44% of all earnings. If the same growth happens with the equalised structure ($3M each), neither member is in scope.

Tools for Equalisation

Contribution splitting: a member can split up to 85% of their concessional contributions with their spouse each year. Splitting forms must be lodged before the end of the income year following the year contributions were made.

Spouse contributions: a member can make a non-concessional contribution into their spouse's super, subject to the spouse's contribution caps. For low-income spouses, a tax offset of up to $540 may apply.

Recontribution strategy: a member who has met a condition of release withdraws funds and recontributes them to a spouse who has not yet hit their TSB threshold.

Caveats: every equalisation strategy must respect the spouse's contribution caps, age-based contribution rules, and the TSB ceiling for non-concessional contributions (above which non-concessional contributions are not permitted; current settings should be confirmed). Limits change with indexation.

LRBA and TSB Interaction

For most superannuation rules, LRBA borrowings can affect your Total Super Balance — but for Division 296 specifically, LRBA amounts are disregarded when determining whether you exceed the thresholds and when calculating the liability. Your member balance, and the realised gain when a geared asset is eventually sold, are what drive the Division 296 outcome. Model the precise position with your SMSF accountant.

Tax Component Consideration

Recontribution can also rebalance the taxable vs tax-free components within super, which matters for death benefits paid to non-tax-dependant beneficiaries. A single recontribution can both equalise balances for Division 296 and reset tax components for estate planning. For couples in the $4M–$8M range with significant taxable components, this dual benefit makes recontribution one of the highest-yield strategies in the next 12 months.

For a deeper treatment of tax components, see our SMSF Property Tax Implications 2026 guide.

Division 296 and Estate Planning

Division 296 changes the estate planning calculus for SMSF property holders in three ways.

Death benefits to non-dependants. A super death benefit paid to an adult independent child is taxed on the taxable component (typically 17% including Medicare). For property-heavy SMSFs in scope of Division 296, the case for using recontribution to convert taxable to tax-free components has strengthened — the same recontribution serves both estate-planning and Division 296 purposes.

Reversionary pension nominations. A reversionary pension automatically continues to a surviving spouse, transferring the deceased's pension balance into the survivor's TSB. A surviving spouse with a $2.5M balance who inherits a $2M reversionary pension lands at $4.5M and becomes a Division 296 taxpayer overnight.

In-specie property transfers. Transferring a fund-owned property to a beneficiary as a death benefit triggers a CGT event in the fund. Where the cost-base election has been made, the post-2026 gain is what's taxed — usually meaningfully smaller than the historical gain.

For any SMSF over $3M with property and adult children outside the household, the estate plan and the Division 296 plan should be modelled together.

Division 296 Decision Summary Table

Case Studies at $2.5M, $3.5M, $5M, $8M TSB

Each scenario assumes the SMSF holds at least one property and uses realistic 2026 settings.

Case Study 1 — $2.5M TSB (Below Threshold, But Watching)

Profile: Single member, age 54, $2.5M TSB. Holds a $1.4M residential investment property and $900K in shares and cash.

Position: Below threshold. No Division 296 in 2026–27. Legacy industry fund of $200K brings combined TSB to $2.7M — still below $3M, but the buffer is small.

Action:

1. Roll the legacy industry fund into the SMSF or document the rationale for keeping it separate.
2. Track property valuation annually.
3. Skip the cost-base election. The valuation and lodgement cost is not worth it for a fund unlikely to be in scope.
4. Maximise concessional contributions to keep building the lower-tax super wrapper.

Watchpoint: revisit immediately if this member receives an inheritance, sells a non-super investment, or has a windfall income year.

Case Study 2 — $3.5M TSB (Just Over, Property-Heavy)

Profile: Couple, both age 60, joint two-member SMSF, combined balance $3.5M. Member 1: $2.4M. Member 2: $1.1M. Holds a $1.8M commercial premises (their dental clinic) plus $1.7M in cash, shares, and managed funds.

Position: Combined fund balance over $3M, but on a per-member basis, both are below $3M. No Division 296 applies in 2026–27 — the threshold is per-individual.

Action:

1. Maintain equalised balances. If member 1 grows to $3.2M while member 2 stays at $1.3M, member 1 enters scope.
2. Use contribution splitting to grow member 2's balance in parallel.
3. Get the commercial property valuation done by 30 June 2026 even though no election is needed today — establishing the market value baseline is good housekeeping.
4. Skip the cost-base election. Trigger costs outweigh the benefit when neither member is in scope.

Case Study 3 — $5M TSB (Clearly in Scope, Cost-Base Election Likely)

Profile: Single member, age 62, $5M TSB. Holds a $2.1M commercial property bought in 2013 for $1.05M, $1.4M in Australian shares (mostly large unrealised gains), $1.5M in cash and bonds. In transition-to-retirement pension.

Position: Clearly above threshold. Proportion: ($5M − $3M) ÷ $5M = 40% of all earnings subject to additional 15%. On a 5% fund-wide return ($250K), that's $100K × 15% = $15,000 of Division 296 in year 1.

Action:

1. Make the cost-base election. Property has ~$1.05M unrealised gain; shares add ~$400K. Resetting cost bases to 30 June 2026 values shelters ~$1.45M of pre-commencement growth permanently.
2. Book a sworn commercial valuation immediately.
3. Plan transition to full pension phase to bring fund-level earnings tax to 0%.
4. Consider partial withdrawal at 62 (condition of release met). Each $200K withdrawn shifts the proportion in scope from 40% to ~36% on the remaining balance.
5. If a spouse exists with low super balance, build equalisation into the next 24 months.

Estimated saving: Cost-base election alone saves $40K–$70K in present-value terms across a 10-year hold. Combined levers reduce year-one Division 296 toward $5K–$10K.

Case Study 4 — $8M TSB (Material Exposure, Multi-Lever Plan Required)

Profile: Couple, both age 64, two-member SMSF combined $8M. Member 1: $5.5M. Member 2: $2.5M. Two commercial properties valued at $4.6M combined (large unrealised gains), $2.4M in shares, $1M cash. Both still working part-time.

Position: Member 1 in scope, member 2 not. Member 1 proportion: ($5.5M − $3M) ÷ $5.5M = 45.5% of earnings subject to Division 296. On a 5% return attributed to member 1 ($125K of $275K total), that's $125K × 45.5% × 15% = ~$8,500 of Division 296 in year 1 — rising rapidly with growth.

Action:

1. Make the cost-base election. Combined unrealised gains likely exceed $1.8M; present-value saving could reach $80K–$140K across 10–15 years.
2. Aggressive equalisation. Target moving member 1 toward $3M and member 2 toward $5M over 18 months via contribution splitting, recontribution, and spouse contributions.
3. Two sworn commercial valuations booked this week.
4. Plan property sale sequence over 5–10 years to avoid concentrating gains in any single year.
5. Build cash reserve to pay Division 296 from the fund without forced sales.

Estimated impact: Combination of election, equalisation, and pension transition over 24–36 months could move year-1 Division 296 from $8,500 (no action) to under $2,000.

When Doing Nothing Is the Right Answer

Not every SMSF needs a Division 296 plan. Acting when no action is warranted creates real cost — valuations, accountant time, premature crystallisation of gains. The "do nothing" case is the right answer in three situations.

TSB comfortably below $3M for the foreseeable future. Annual tracking is enough. No valuations beyond standard practice. No election.

The fund holds little or no unrealised gain. Mostly cash, term deposits, and recently purchased assets means minimal pre-commencement growth to shelter. The election achieves nothing meaningful.

TSB will fall under $3M before any major sale. A near-retiree planning to draw down significantly may exit Division 296 scope before the planned property sale. Focus on pension transition and drawdown sequencing instead.

Don't let regulatory change pressure you into action that doesn't serve your situation.

Your 90-Day Action Plan

By the end of May 2026

• Calculate your current TSB across every super account, not just your SMSF
• Calculate your spouse's TSB
• Identify whether either of you will be over $3M at 30 June 2027 on current trajectory
• Book commercial property valuer for 30 June 2026 site inspection
• Draft a list of all CGT assets held in the fund, with original cost bases and current market values

By 30 June 2026

• Receive 30 June 2026 sworn valuations for any commercial property
• Receive documented appraisals for residential property
• Lodge contribution-splitting request for 2024–25 contributions if equalising
• Make any planned non-concessional contributions before EOFY (subject to caps and TSB limits)
• Run a draft cost-base election decision with your SMSF accountant — net unrealised gain position, expected sale horizon, threshold trajectory

Through 2026–27 (ahead of the first measurement)

• Complete any planned equalisation, recontribution and contribution-timing moves during the 2026–27 year
• Confirm your 30 June 2026 valuations are documented in the fund's records
• Update the fund's investment strategy to reflect Division 296 considerations and liquidity planning

By 30 June 2027 (first measurement date)

• All planned recontribution and equalisation moves completed
• Final TSB position locked in
• Liquidity buffer confirmed for any anticipated Division 296 tax due

The reset valuation date is fixed at 30 June 2026, balance-positioning levers run to the 30 June 2027 first measurement, and the cost-base reset election itself is locked in with your 2026–27 SMSF return (lodged in 2027–28). Booking the 30 June 2026 valuation is the urgent step now, because it must be struck as at that date.

Frequently Asked Questions

The Bottom Line

Division 296 is law. The mechanics: an extra 15% on the above-$3M share of realised earnings (25% above $10M), a per-individual threshold, and an optional one-off cost-base reset struck at 30 June 2026 values. For most SMSF property owners with a TSB above $3M, the next 12 months contain the most consequential planning decisions of the next decade.

The right plan is not panic. It's a properly modelled set of moves — a sworn 30 June 2026 valuation, a portfolio-level cost-base election decision, a multi-year equalisation plan for couples, and a liquidity buffer sized for the actual tax exposure. None of these need to be done dramatically. All of them need to be done before specific dates.

If you're in scope, the action this week is to book your valuer and book your accountant. The rest follows from there.