My take is that the structural and taxation benefits of different entities can be optimised when you can control the assets within them. Lets say someone had a total portfolio of $400k, had half their money in super (200k in super and 200k outside of super). They are boglehead, and have their portfolio split 50/50 between AUS and international shares. They own $200k of VAS, $100k of VTS and $100k of VEU. They are a buy and hold investor with a very long time frame - so no realised capital gains. VAS pays 5% (including franking credits), VTS 1.85% and VEU 3%.
Lets say our case study has a taxable income of $80k from earned income. Hence their personal marginal tax rate is 39% (37% plus 2% medicare / NDIS etc)
Case 1 - hold even assets inside and outside of super. i.e.
Super:
VAS: 100k, annual income $5000
VTS: 50k annual income $925
VEU: 50k annual income $1500
Total income: $7425, tax payable in super $1114
Personal:
VAS: 100k, annual income $5000
VTS: 50k annual income $925
VEU: 50k annual income $1500
Total income: $7425, tax payable in personal $2896
Total tax payable on investment income: $4010, after tax investment income = $10,840
Case 2 - hold higher income funds in super:
Super:
VAS: 200k, annual income $10000
Total income: $10000, tax payable in super $1500
Personal account:
VTS: 100k annual income $1850
VEU: 100k annual income $3000
Total income: $4850, tax payable in personal $1891
Total tax payable: $3391, after tax investment income = $11,459
Total tax saving = $619, (6% extra post tax income, or 15 basis points additional return on the $400k)
Worth thinking about this sort of tax entity asset allocation, irrespective if you are using SMSF or super providers.