A recent ATO private binding ruling provides a useful reminder for estate planning, superannuation and financial advisers: when superannuation death benefits are paid to an estate, the tax outcome can depend heavily on how the Will is drafted and how the estate is administered.

The new Division 296 tax is now law and is scheduled to apply from 1 July 2026 to individuals with total superannuation balances above $3 million. The ATO has confirmed that the measure will reduce superannuation tax concessions for individuals above that threshold. There is a further threshold of $10 million where an additional tax will apply to earnings above that threshold.

The 2026 Federal Budget should prompt more than a tax review. For many Australian families, it should trigger an estate planning review. Much of the public discussion has focused on tax reform, housing affordability, negative gearing, capital gains tax and discretionary trusts. But for advisers, accountants and lawyers, there is a deeper issue. The real question is not just how wealth is taxed- it is how wealth is owned, controlled, protected and ultimately transferred.

The 2026 Federal Budget discussion has focused heavily on tax reform. For advisers, accountants and lawyers, however, the more significant issue may be broader than tax rates or trust distributions.

That is where joint tenancy can produce outcomes that neither client intended. In Australia, jointly held assets often pass by survivorship. This means the deceased’s interest does not pass under their will. It passes automatically to the surviving joint owner. That can be simple and effective.

Estate planners often assume title equals ownership. This case is a reminder that equity may say otherwise. The facts (in brief) A son and his partner funded the purchase of a property for his mother to live in. The understanding was simple: They paid for it It was put in her name It would “come back” to them on her death Early documents supported that: A will left the estate to them An enduring power of attorney was granted But later: The son died The relationship broke down

The estate of Nick Andrianakos, a prominent property and petroleum tycoon with an estimated fortune of $2 billion as per the 2025 Financial Review Rich List, is at the centre of a contentious inheritance battle in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Andrianakos passed away unexpectedly in March 2025 while in Greece, reportedly from a heart attack during a meeting in Argos. His death has sparked a dispute among his four children: Theo Andrianakos, Paul Andrianakos, Kristina Andrian

At Inherit Australia , we often hear the same concern from will-makers and advisers alike: “If I don’t leave something to my adult children, won’t they just be overturned?” A recent Supreme Court decision out of Tasmania provides a timely and reassuring answer and reinforces why good estate planning still matters . The case in brief In Smith, Smith and Burke v Flint [2026] TASSC 2 , three adult children brought family provision claims against their parent’s estate. The

The ATO’s draft determination TD 2026/D1, handed down on 28 January 2026, has quietly but decisively narrowed the circumstances in which a deceased estate can access the CGT main residence exemption where someone continues to live in the home after death

Should I divide my estate equally… even if my children’s lives are no longer equal? A recent story illustrates this perfectly. A father planned to leave his estate in three equal shares to his adult children. His wife disagreed — not out of favouritism, but because their children’s circumstances had diverged dramatically

Research conducted by NSW Trustee and Guardian in 2023 showed that 60% of NSW residents do not have a legal Will document in place. The recent Victorian Supreme Court decision in Re the Estate of Dunham serves as a stark reminder of what can go wrong when modern relationships collide with intestacy laws.

Robyn Margaret Wise died in April 2011, leaving a will that appointed her son Shane and her de facto partner Stephen as co-executors. The will gave Stephen half the value of the family home, with Shane and his brother Craig receiving a quarter share each of the remaining half. Probate was granted in March 2013, but the estate remained unadministered for over five years.

The Victorian Supreme Court's recent decision in Re Walker [2025] VSC 714 offers estate planning practitioners a compelling tale of two modern dilemmas: traditional probate challenges involving suspicious circumstances, and the emerging risks of artificial intelligence in legal practice. This judgment serves as both a masterclass in contested probate law and a stark warning about AI misuse.

After five years working with advisers, accountants and lawyers across hundreds of practices, one pattern stands out. Every practice has a group of clients who avoid estate planning. They delay. They postpone. They never commit. The reasons are usually the same. My affairs are simple. I do not want to meet a lawyer. It is too expensive. I already have a Post Office or online Will. It is too complicated. Here is the reality behind each one. 1. “My affairs are simple” This stat

When Robin Geoffrey Tarrant died in July 2024, he left behind his de facto partner of over eight years, Vanda Crothers, with only a limited right to reside in their jointly-owned home for ten years. Despite Ms Crothers having contributed $170,000 towards paying off their mortgage and sharing renovation costs, the Will essentially treated her as a temporary occupant rather than a life partner who had built a shared future. The court's decision to award Ms Crothers full owners

Ronald James Smith thought he was doing the right thing. At age 86, with dementia creeping in, he granted his beloved second wife Joyce an enduring power of attorney in January 2008. What happened next reads like a financial thriller—except the victims were real, and the damage was devastating.

Australia has long recognised that spouses and children should receive property from a deceased estate when a will doesn't adequately provide for them. Family provision laws, or testator's family maintenance, originated in New Zealand in the late 19th century and were gradually adopted by Australian states and territories from 1906. A recent Victorian Supreme Court decision, James v Rost; Lanagan v Rost [2022] VSC 98, demonstrates how these laws continue to evolve, particula

For many advisers, estate planning feels like a conversation best left to lawyers. Yet the most successful advisory practices treat it as part of holistic wealth management because clients trust their adviser to help protect not just their money, but their family outcomes.

When David Bonnici took his own life in December 2014, he left behind more than just heartbreak—he created a legal mess that would cost his family years of court battles and thousands of dollars in legal fees. The NSW Supreme Court case that followed offers important lessons for anyone dealing with wills, relationships, and estate planning.

The 2009 Victorian Supreme Court case Nicholson v Knaggs # is more than just a dramatic legal saga—it's a masterclass in what can go...