Margin Lending
Margin lending is borrowing money which you use, in addition to your own money, to invest in financial products such as shares and managed funds.

The Benefits
The benefits
- Margin lending can give you an opportunity to increase the size of your investments and to diversify your investments.
- Borrowing allows you to invest at a time you want to invest, helping you to avoid missing out on investment opportunities.
- Interest on borrowed funds is generally tax deductible provided the funds are invested in Australian assets for income-producing purposes.
Please note: Deriving a tax benefit should not be your core focus. You should seek qualified tax advice from a registered tax agent so that you fully understand your personal tax position.

Borrowing limits
Margin lenders generally only allow you to borrow up to a certain value, or percentage, of the shares you wish to buy.
Commonly, limits are set at a maximum of 75% (known as the Loan-to-Value Ratio or LVR) of the value of the shares (less if the share is more speculative or risky). This means you have to make up the difference (i.e. 25%) with your own cash or existing shares. This difference is referred to as the “margin”; hence the term “margin lending”.

What are the risks involved?
Any borrowing strategy should always be approached with caution.
While borrowing to invest has the ability to leverage returns from investments, it also heightens investment risk. Margin lending should be implemented as a long-term investment strategy to allow time to overcome any market volatility and for the leveraging effects to work.
Borrowing to invest can be an effective long-term strategy for wealth creation as long as you understand the risks and the impact gearing may have on your overall returns.

News & Insights

In the 1930s, the US Treasury Secretary Henry Morganthau was widely regarded as the finest Treasury Secretary since Alexander Hamilton. However, if the current Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, continues to deliver results as he is doing now, he will provide formidable competition to Morganthau’s legacy.
The quality of Bessent’s work is exceptional, demonstrated by his ability to secure an agreement with China in just a few days in complex circumstances.
The concept of the "effective tariff rate" is a term that has gained traction recently. Although nominal tariff rates on individual goods in individual countries might be as high as 100% or 125%; the effective tariff rate, which reflects the actual tariffs the US imposes on imports from all countries, is thought to be only 20.5%. This figure comes from an online spreadsheet published by Fitch Ratings, since 24 April.

This effective tariff rate of 20.5% can be used in assessing the impact of import tariffs on US inflation. To evaluate this, I used a method proposed by Scott Bessent during his Senate confirmation hearing. Bessent began by noting that imports account for only 16% of US goods and services that are consumed in the US Economy. In this case, a 10% revenue tariff would increase domestic prices by just 1.6%. With a core inflation rate of 2.8% in the US, this results in a headline inflation rate of 4.4%. Thus, the overall impact of such tariffs on the US economy is relatively modest.
A couple of weeks ago, Austan Goolsbee, the President of the Chicago Fed, noted that tariffs typically increase inflation, which might prompt the Fed to lift rates, but they also reduce economic output, which might prompt the Fed to rate cuts. Consequently, Goolsbee suggested that the Federal Reserve might opt to do nothing. This prediction was successful when the Open Market Committee of the Fed, with Goolsbee as a member, left the Fed Funds rate unchanged last week.
A 90-day agreement between the US and China, masterfully negotiated by Scott Bessent, has dramatically reduced tariffs between China and the US. China now only imposes a 10% import tariff on the US, while the US applies a 30% tariff on Chinese goods—10% as a revenue tariff and 20% to pressure China to curb the supply of fentanyl ingredients to third parties in Mexico or Canada. It is this fentanyl which fuels the US drug crisis. This is a priority for the Trump administration.
How Import Tariffs Affect US Inflation.
We can calculate how much inflation a tariff adds to the US economy in the same way as Scott Bessent by multiplying the effective tariff rate by the proportion that imports are of US GDP. Based on a 20.5% US effective tariff rate, I calculated that it adds 3.28% to the US headline Consumer Price Index (CPI). This results in a US headline inflation rate of 6.1% for the year ahead. In Australia, we can draw parallels to the 10% GST introduced 24 years ago, where price effects were transient and vanished after a year, avoiding sustained high inflation.
Before these negotiations, the US was levying a nominal tariff on China of 145%. Some items were not taxed, so meant that the effective tariff on China was 103%. Levying this tariff meant that the US faced a price effect of 3.28%, contributing to a 6.1% headline inflation rate.
If the nominal tariff rate dropped to 80%, the best-case scenario I considered previously, the price effect would fall to 2.4%, with a headline US inflation rate of 5.2%. With the US now charging China a 30% tariff, this adds only 2% to headline inflation, yielding a manageable 4.8% US inflation rate.
As Goolsbee indicated, the Fed might consider raising interest rates to counter inflation or cutting them to address reduced output, but ultimately, it is likely to maintain current rates, as it did last week. I anticipate the Fed will continue to hold interest rates steady but with an easing bias, potentially cutting rates in the second half of the year once the situation stabilises.
My current Fed Funds rate model suggests that, absent this year's tariff developments, the Fed would have cut rates by 50 basis points. This could be highly positive for the US economy.

I’d like to discuss a presentation delivered by Austan Goolsbee, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, to the Economic Club of New York on 10 April. Austan Goolsbee, gave a remarkably animated talk about tariffs and their impact on the U.S. economy.
Goolsbee is a current member of the Federal Reserve’s Open Market Committee, alongside representatives from Washington, D.C., and Fed bank Presidents from Chicago, Boston, St. Louis, and Kansas City.
Having previously served as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama White House, Goolsbee’s presentation style in New York was notably different from his more reserved demeanour I had previously seen when I had attended a talk of his in Chicago.
During his hour-long, fast-paced talk, Goolsbee addressed the economic implications of tariffs. He recounted an interview where he argued that raising interest rates was not the appropriate response to tariffs, a stance that led some to label him a “Dove.” He humorously dismissed the bird analogy, instead likening himself to a “Data Dog,” tasked with sniffing out the data to guide decision-making.
Goolsbee explained that tariffs typically drive inflation higher, which might ordinarily prompt rate hikes. However, they also tend to reduce economic growth, suggesting a need to cut rates. This creates a dilemma where rates might not need adjustment at all. He described tariffs as a “stagflation event” but emphasised that their impact is minor compared to the severe stagflation of the 1970s.
When asked if the U.S. was heading towards a recession, Goolsbee said that the "hard data" was surprisingly strong.
Let us now look at our model of US GDP based on the Chicago Fed National Activity Index. This Index incorporates 85 variables across production, sales, employment, and personal consumption. In the final quarter of last year, this index indicated the GDP growth was slightly below the long-term average, suggesting a US GDP growth rate of 1.9% to 2%.
However, data from the first quarter of this year showed stronger growth, just fractionally below the long-term trend.
Using Our Chicago Fed model, we find that US GDP growth had risen from about 2% growth to a growth rate of around 2.6%, indicating a robust U.S. economy far from recessionary conditions.

We think that increased government revenue from Tariffs might temper domestic demand, potentially guiding growth down towards 1.9% or 2% by year’s end. Despite concerns about tariffs triggering a downturn, this highlights the economy’s resilience and suggests a “soft landing,” which could allow interest rates to ease, weaken the U.S. dollar, and boost demand for equities.
We will provide monthly reviews of these indicators. We note that, for now, the outlook for the U.S. economy remains very positive.

I want to discuss a simplified explanation of the US business cycle, prompted by the International Monetary Fund's forecast released yesterday, which, for the first time, assessed the impact of tariffs on the US economy. Unlike last year's 2.8% growth, the IMF predicts a drop to 1.8% in 2025. This is slightly below my forecast of 1.9 to 2%. They further anticipate growth will decline to 1.7% in 2026, lower than my previous estimate of 2%. Growth then returns to 2% by 2027.
This suggests that increased tariffs will soften demand, but the mechanism is intriguing. Tariffs are expected to reduce the US budget deficit from about 7% of GDP to around 5%, stabilizing government debt, though more spending cuts are needed. This reduction in US deficit reduces US GDP growth. This leads to a slow down.
The revenue from tariffs is clearly beneficial for the US budget deficit, but the outlook for the US economy now points to an extended soft landing. This is the best environment for equities and commodities over a two-year view. With below-trend growth this year and even softer growth next year, interest rates are expected to fall, leading the fed funds rate to drift downward in response to slower growth trends. Additionally, the US dollar is likely to weaken as the Fed funds rate declines, following a traditional US trade cycle model: falling interest rates lead to a weaker currency, which in turn boosts commodity prices.
This is particularly significant because the US is a major exporter of agricultural commodities, has rebuilt its oil industry, and is exporting LNG gas. The rising value of these commodities stimulates the economy, boosting corporate profits and setting the stage for the next surge in growth in a couple of years.
This outlook includes weakening US interest rates and rising commodity prices, continuing through the end of next year. This will be combined with corporate tax cuts, likely to be passed in a major bill in July, reducing US corporate taxes from 21% to 15%. This outlook is very positive for both commodities and equities. Our model of commodity prices shows an upward movement, driven by an increase in international liquidity within the international monetary system.
With US dollar debt as the largest component in International reserves , as US interest rates fall, the creation of US government debt accelerates, increasing demand for commodities. The recent down cycle in commodities is now transitioning to an extended upcycle through 2026 and 2027, fueled by this increased liquidity due to weaker interest rates.
Furthermore, the rate of growth in international reserves is accelerating, having reached a long-term average of about 7% and soon expected to rise to around 9%. Remarkably, the tariffs are generating a weaker US dollar, which drives the upward movement in commodity prices. This improvement in commodity prices is expected to last for at least the next two years, and potentially up to four years.