Australia’s self-managed super fund (SMSF) landscape has shifted dramatically with the passage of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Act 2026, which received Royal Assent on 26 June 2026.
From 10 August 2026, trustees will no longer be permitted to use Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements (LRBAs) to acquire residential property within an SMSF. While the change is strictly prospective and does not affect existing loans, it represents a definitive policy pivot away from leveraged residential property investment inside superannuation.
For many trustees and advisers, this marks the end of a core wealth-creation strategy that has thrived for nearly two decades since rules were introduced in 2007 to legitimise instalment warrants.
An LRBA is the only legal mechanism under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act) for an SMSF to borrow money. The structure relies on specific, interconnected components:
The defining feature of this structure is that it is "limited recourse." If the SMSF defaults, the lender’s recovery rights are confined strictly to the single asset held in the bare trust. The lender cannot claim against the SMSF’s broader retirement pool, protecting the fund from total collapse.
During the loan term, the SMSF retains beneficial ownership, collecting all rental income and capital growth. Once the loan is fully repaid, legal ownership can transfer directly to the SMSF. Alternatively, under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements – In-house Asset Exclusion) Determination 2014, it can safely remain in the holding trust without triggering an in-house asset breach if administrative or stamp duty complications prevent a smooth title transfer.
While a standard LRBA is legally straightforward, its practical execution stumbled when meeting the rigid lending criteria of commercial banks.
In a standard setup, the SMSF trustee acts as the primary borrower, but a separate holding trustee holds the legal property title. Lenders found this structural mismatch highly complex to underwrite and enforce under banking law. To streamline their risk profiles, banks demanded a structural flip. They insisted that the holding trustee act as the primary borrower, while the SMSF trustee stepped back to act as a guarantor.
Although this satisfied commercial lenders by aligning the loan debtor directly with the property title, it wasn’t aligned with the strict literal requirements of Section 67A of the SIS Act. This structural shift created an unintended compliance trap, treating the arrangement as an in-house asset and forcing the ATO to issue its 2020 determination (SPR 2020/1 (Superannuation Industry (Supervision) In‑house Asset Determination – Intermediary Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangement Determination 2020) to legitimise these intermediary borrowing frameworks.
The 2026 legislative amendment terminates the use of new LRBAs for residential real estate, while deliberately leaving commercial property options open.
Because the reform is prospective, critical transitional protections apply to existing arrangements:
For contracts currently in progress, timing is critical. Document sequencing must be flawlessly executed before the August cut-off to secure grandfathered status and avoid compliance and potential stamp duty issues.
With leveraged residential property off the table, trustees must evaluate alternative wealth-generation paths.
1. Ungeared Residential Acquisitions
Trustees can still buy residential real estate, but they must fund 100% of the purchase price, stamp duty, and settlement costs using existing cash balances. While this eliminates borrowing risk and interest expenses, it requires significant capital concentration and drastically reduces the fund’s liquidity and asset diversification.
2. Commercial Property LRBAs
Because the new restrictions apply solely to residential property, commercial real estate LRBAs remain fully operational. This is a powerful mechanism for small business owners, allowing their SMSF to purchase commercial business premises via an LRBA and lease it back to their operating company at market rates, funnelling profits into a concessionally taxed environment.
3. Gearing Outside the Super System
Investors determined to use residential property leverage can choose to execute purchases outside of super completely; such as using personal names, company structures, or discretionary family trusts. While this forfeits the tax efficiencies of the super system, it provides greater structural flexibility and escapes the rigid compliance constraints of the SIS Act borrowing guidelines.
The upcoming restriction on residential LRBAs closes a significant chapter in self-managed superannuation gearing strategies. While existing structures are protected, the message from regulators is clear: leveraged residential property is being phased out in favour of systemic risk reduction.
SMSFs remain highly flexible wealth creation vehicles, but trustees and advisers must now adapt their long-term portfolios to focus on commercial real estate or diversified, unleveraged asset classes.
Contact Our Team
If you are affected by these changes or have a transaction in progress, contact our specialist team for immediate assistance:
Please note: The information on this page is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is not intended to be comprehensive or to apply to any specific circumstances. You should seek independent legal advice before acting on any information contained on this page.