Bear77   Interesting examples in your post about tax loss selling.

 I wonder if there is such a thing as a share gain non-selling tax effect. That is, investors with a current year tax problem who are holding off selling a good performing stock until after the 30/6/25 to avoid this year’s taxation.  

An example might be a CBA shareholder getting around with a woody just thinking about this year’s run up in the CBA share price, and come the 1/7/25 is ready to unload.   

At the time of writing CBA shares were selling at a kick-you-in-the-plums price of $191.  Who would have picked it?

Well, I guess it is only a matter of time before we see pop up on Livewire an interview with Barry Bumfluff from the: “Bumfluff Special Situation Alpha Positive Plus Plus Fund” who says he called CBA 18 months ago as a screaming buy and still thinks it is.   

Interesting concept @Scoonie - perhaps SRG and CDA could also have a little of that share gain non-selling tax effect, although nothing comes close to CBA.

But back to tax loss sells, how the $@&# did we forget RFT?!?!

Thursday 26th June 2025: A couple more, although we only have two trading days left of the FY, but here they are anyway:

Firstly Paragon Care (PGC), got sold down -4.5 cps (or -11.39%) yesterday to 35 cps (cents per share) which was also their day low SP yesterday (i.e. they closed on their lows) and a new twelve month low, which appears to be on the back of this announcement: Paragon-Care-Appointment-of-Chief-Executive-Officer.PDF

Today they closed up one cent at 36 cps but not before making a NEW 12 month low of 34.5 cps this morning.

This week's SP fall makes PGC look like a tax selling opp for anyone who is bullish on the company and wants to initiate a position or add to an existing position:

Another company that made a new 12-month low share price today (of $1.1075 before closing at $1.13) was BFG; not the Big Friendly Giant, but Bell Financial Group:

Certainly a tax loss selling candidate - however not sure if it's an opportunity or not - I don't follow them (or PGC for that matter), but unlike PGC, BFG doesn't have much of a following here on SM, and they don't seem like the sort of company that is going to provide massive upside potential, because of what they do.

My third chart is Treasury Wine Estates (TWE) which had already been mentioned in this thread as a tax loss selling candidate, and it certainly has been sold down further since then (when mentioned in late May). This is despite an Investor Update two days ago (June 24th) and then later on the same day, after the market closed, TWE confirmed that they'd settled the two class action lawsuits that they had hanging over them - see here: TWE-Court-Approval-of-Shareholder-Class-Action-Settlement.PDF with the settlements appearing to have been covered by insurance, if I read that one correctly.

Despite that, TWE have a terrible one year chart and their share price kept falling this week; they made another new 12-month low again today - this time being $7.62 during the day before closing at $7.76. If you like this company's longer term future prospects, they are certainly cheaper now than they were this time last year:

My final share price graph today is ARB, which hasn't been mentioned here in this thread before now, however they have clearly been sold down this year on tariff concerns and probably some tax loss selling as well, but having broken below $30/share very briefly in early April, they bounced back above $30, and have since bounced off $30 (on the downside) twice, so the selling has slowed down and $30 seems to be a new downside resistance level, for now.

See how much volume there is on the buy side right now (32,901 shares) compared to the sell side (6,139 shares). The ARB share price rose +3.33% today - which would likely have been mostly due to ARB Corp being upgraded from hold to buy by Jefferies.

Of course, new news on tariffs can change that quickly. ARB are currently rolling out new 4WD stores across selected (mostly southern) states of the USA, as shown below:

4 Wheel Parts (4WP) is now owned by Off Road Warehouse (ORW), and ORW is now 50% owned by ARB Corporation (ARB).

It's an interesting time to be doing a store roll-out in the USA when you're an Australian company that manufactures most of the stuff you sell in either Melbourne, Australia, or in Thailand; ARB also imports stuff into the USA from China.

As you can see below - a lot of this was initiated by ARB in September last year, BEFORE Trump got elected in November, so they likely didn't foresee the tariff fiasco that has played out so far this year.

Source (both of the slides above): ARB's FY2025 Half Year Investor Presentation

Anyway, I do hold ARB, so I'm talking up my own book here, but I am leaning towards thinking that they may have bottomed, or at least that $30 might provide some downside resistance from here. If it holds. And if you think the tariffs scenario is likely to end up being significantly better than the worst case scenarios that seem to be being factored into some stock prices, then ARB look reasonably priced here, keeping in mind that when they don't have something like this negative tariff sentiment priced in, ARB usually commands a quality premium in their share price.

Disclosure: I hold ARB, but not TWE, BFG or PGC (or RFT that I posted about briefly here last night).

I discussed ARB in this thread last night and how they may have bottomed for now with $30 looking to me like a bit of a downside resistance level now, which in more fundamental terms simply means that there are buyers prepared to step in and accumulate more ARB shares whenever they get down to $30, or just below $30, around that $30 level. They've bounced off $30 a couple of times in the past few weeks.

Today (Friday 27th June 2025) on the second last trading day of the FY, Reece (REH) released two announcements before the market opened and their share price dropped -18.66% to close at $14.12, a long way below their $25+ levels that they reached briefly in December 2021 and then traded at (above $25/share) for the majority of last year (2024). The two announcements were:

REH-FY25-Trading-Update-and-Results-Notification.PDF; and

Director-Resignation-RMcEwan.PDF

Regarding Ross McEwan, there's bugger-all notice because his resignation is effective from Monday (30 June 2025) however his reason seems innocuous enough: "Mr McEwan said, "I have enjoyed my time on the Reece board. In line with my recent decision to step down from the QinetiQ Group Limited Board, I will also be stepping down from the Reece board to devote my time and attention to my role as Chair of BHP Group Limited.” 

However I'm assuming the real issue the market had with Reece today was the guidance downgrade:

As anticipated at the half year, the trading environment has remained challenging during the second half of FY25, driven by ongoing housing market softness across both regions. Underlying volumes continue to be subdued and EBIT margins remain under pressure as we navigate the cycle. As a result, Reece expects Group EBIT for FY25 to be within the range of A$548m – A$558m (unaudited).

Peter Wilson, Chairman & CEO of Reece Group, said: “Our expected FY25 results reflect the backdrop of continuing macro-economic headwinds. We have not seen a material improvement in trading conditions in the second half.

“In Australia and New Zealand, volume settings remain soft, and recent interest rate cuts have not yet translated to improved housing activity. This will take time to flow through.

“In the US, our high exposure to the residential new construction (RNC) sector continues to impact our performance. Housing units under construction remain down year on year, particularly in the sunbelt region where we operate. Mortgage rates remain high and housing affordability continues to weigh on the US residential market.

“We have seen increased competition across all segments of our US business from new market entrants and the slowdown in RNC, which has impacted profitability for the year.

“We have seen similar cycles before and remain confident in our long term approach.” 

--- end of excerpt from today's REH-FY25-Trading-Update-and-Results-Notification.PDF

Reece is another company that has in prior years traded with a management premium in the share price, but the past 12 months have been rough for them:

Below is that same graph without my crude trend lines:

As we can see there, $15 appeared to be a level of support for REH in recent months, but it only took one poor update for them to break down through it and close below it, as they have today (at $14.12).

The same thing could happen to ARB (which I hold; I do not hold REH), because while the right side of ARB's 1 year graph looks similar to REH's 1 year graph, with $30 providing a similar level of support for ARB (see graph below) as $15 was providing for REH (see graph above), it would only take one bad update from ARB to produce a similar outcome with ARB to what we saw today with REH.

So yeah (Disclosure:), I hold ARB shares (both IRL & SM) and I should be watching them closely, however I'm going over to WA again next week for a short holiday (to catch up with my WA family) and I'm not too worried about ARB. What happened to REH today could certainly happen with ARB but I would have expected them to be a little bit more proactive than to wait until the second last trading day of the financial year to correct the market's expectations if they thought the market (analysts and brokers mostly) were expecting a better result than what they (the company) believe they are going to deliver in August for the full year. Which is exactly what Reece management have just done.

Also, ARB is such a high quality company that I would expect them to bounce back eventually, even from lower levels. In other words, even if they were sold down by another 50% from here, I would probably buy more ARB instead of selling out, as long as my understanding was that their issues were temporary rather than structural. And that all comes down to me having followed the Brown Brothers for many moons now and being very comfortable with their track record in every area of management, but especially with capital management decisions.

I don't have the same confidence with Reece, having not followed them for the past 7 or 8 years (I did previously), so I'll be staying on the sidelines with Reece (REH).

30-June-2025: How those 13 companies fared over the full month:

From best share price return in June to worst:

1. +24.31%, JLG
2. +15.74%, CU6
3. +11.36%, PPE
4. +7.66%, PLS
5. +2.17%, CCR
6. +1.28%, XJO (ASX200 TR)
7. -0.61%, JIN
8. -2.84%, MIN
9. -3.71%, CUV
10. -5.17, SKC
11. -5.91%, AD8
12. -7.46%, TWE
13. -17.79%, DMP
14. -52.95%, IEL

During the last few days, most of their share prices rose (just over half of them), so a little rally into the new FY.

Here are some of the other ones mentioned during June, and how June played out for them:

From best share price return in June to worst:

1. +5.62%, ARB
2. +1.37%, LBL
3. +1.28%, XJO (ASX200 TR)
4. -2.44%, AVA
5. -4.18%, BFG
6. -4.88%, BRN
7. -7.59%, PGC
8. -8.37%, REH
9. -9.09%, 3DP
10. -16.67%, RFT

I don't think there was much tax loss selling with those 9, other than RFT and 3DP, maybe some with PGC in the last week.

Reece (REH) fell on an earnings guidance downgrade on Friday and then bounced a little today, so no tax loss selling with REH.

On the previous graph (2nd graph up from here), the ones that looked most like they'd been sold off due to tax loss selling were Dominos (DMP), Treasury Wines (TWE), IDP Education (IEL), Audinate (AD8) and casino operator SkyCity Entertainment Group (SKC).

IEL might be an opp for people with long term investment horizons but they are facing headwinds right now and their management have done very little to inspire confidence over the past couple of years, in my opinion. RFT is a barge pole stock - there's not one long enough for mine. Likewise Dominos, their pizzas are very average and they are NOT a technology stock as some people seemed to think they were a few years ago. Not much to like there.

Of the 22 companies included on these two charts, I hold ARB and AD8, not the other 20. So it's little wonder that I see those two as the best opps out of those 22 at this point in time at these prices.

And here's another 11 that I haven't graphed before in this thread. Google and ChatGPT tells me they've not had a great year.

Here are those one year returns, for FY2025 - All 11 companies have negative returns:

1. -89.09%, Close The Loop (CLG)
2. -74.81%, Calix (CXL)
3. -72.02%, Cettire (CTT)
4. -58.70%, Novatti Group (NOV)
5. -51.43, 8Common (8CO)
6. -49.36%, Polynovo (PNV)
7. -46.30%, Janison Education Group (JAN)
8. -46.10%, NOVONIX (NVX)
9. -40.82, Recce Pharmaceuticals (RCE)
10. -37.57%, Flight Centre Travel Group (FLT)
11. -35.58, Retail Food Group (RFG)

Not sure if any of these companies pay dividends, but dividends are not included. This is just the share price movement for the 2025 financial year (ended 30th June) for each of those 11 companies.

The ASX200 Index (XJO) (the thick blue line) returned +10.68% for the year.

I don't hold any of those ones. Might be one or two opportunities there for anybody who is bullish on any those particular companies and believes they will come good and the share prices will recover. They are certainly cheaper than they were this time last year. There's usually good reasons for these types of share price falls, but then again, the market isn't ALWAYS right.

It might be good to look at these again in about 3 months time - end of September - to see if they've bounced or kept falling.

I still remember Calix

Luckily I don't hold any more after trading it a couple of times. Hardly been keeping track of that since they went the Green steel path which had that shocking negative npv when I saw the production cost was greater than the HBI spot price. That's a red flag if there ever is one.

Those guys need to go back and do a course in Finance 101.

Unfortunately I still have a few legacy holdings from that list. I’m part of the way through going back over Novatti, who want you to think they are in a turn around and then there’s Calix. Things haven’t been going so great for them while the continue to rely on grants and subsidies. I might get to them next …

Hey Bradbury

On a more positive note Calix is trading around 2x price to sales so does look cheaper than when I bought a few years back.

I think they need to review and cancel some projects especially Green Steel which is heavily reliant on a lower price for hydrogen. Perhaps that's a signal that they are getting their act together and it is time to dip in or hold.

JIN, JLG

@actionman I don't really do tax loss selling, as such, however I did exit two long-held positions in April (SM and RL) and I recognise I did not write them up here ... as it occurred at a time when I was busier than usual away from investing.

$IEL:

I exited on SM on 10-Apr at $9.13 (and a few days earlier in RL) because it finally dawned on me that Trump really is being totally reckless with the international order. A strong US student market was core to my thesis that international flows would at least in part balance out across $IEL's key destination markets of Australia, Canada and UK. In both Australia and Canada, the politics has clearly tagged international students as part of the housing affordability problem, and so I think the rebound is going to be gradual and we may see a trough for a longer period than I thought. UK seems to be more international student-friendly again, but they are making it harder for dependents to enter and the general "anti-immmigration" policy and tone in the UK is making it unwelcoming as a destination, despite the fact that the unis are absolutely desperate for the income - some on the edge of insolvency! Both Australia and UK have also raised financial barriers. e.g., fees and proof of financial independence. While small compared with the fees, when added to increasing living costs, it is increasing the barriers to study abroad.

We are continuing to see chilling things happening in the conflict between Trump and US elite universities, and with ICE sumamarily rounding up even legal migrants, and visitors having their phone social media histories checked at the border, I believe this is going to have a material, chilling effect on the US as a destination for international students.

So, that started to dawn on me in early April, and so I sucked up my losses at $IEL and sold it all. Despite, still believing that taking a long term view, this business is worth more than $14. I have to say that the environment has only worsened since early April, and eventually it looks like Trump and Harvard are headed to the Supreme Court, in what will almost certainly be a test for the US Constitution.

$JIN

I exited $JIN on 2-April at $10.45 (SM and RL). This was more a matter of timing my exit, as after the FY results I was unimpressed. Of course, there is a component of the $JIN SP which is random - linked to the number of large jackpots, and so I can see through that. However, a core leg of the thesis was that this was going to be a provider of SaaS lottery services to international business clients (esp. charities) - starting with the UK and Canada, building on the early Australian experience. However, these businesses and particularly the international acquisitions have been underwhelming. While I understand its rationale to expand its B2C offerings, this represents a fundamental strategic shift in my mind. I decided to manage my own exit, and gave up on awaiting a better time in early April.

So, while neither was driven by tax-loss selling considerations, $IEL has provided a nice little offset to some of my realised gains from earlier in the FY. Because I'd held $JIN for many year even before joing SM, I did have a modest positive return.

Agreed, IEL if I held it. Also JIN, which I wouldn't hold. But for tax loss selling to be most effective, you still need to minimise your losses by trying to avoid getting out right at the bottom. Waiting until June often means you're selling out at a lower price because others have the same idea. Selling out a few months earlier will often yield lower tax losses which can still be used to offset gains elsewhere but may provide superior financial outcomes overall, IMO. But it all comes down to conviction, and personally I like to sell out of companies as soon as I lose conviction, or as soon as I identify a better opportunity to switch that capital into.

On the flip side, there is sometimes money to be made from identifying oversold companies in the latter half of June and buying them at or near their lows and then either selling them in July or August at higher levels, or holding them for longer. Again, a company can look oversold and still go a lot lower, so that plan doesn't always work out so well.

Companies that may be sold for tax loss purposes in June this year may include the following. This graph is a three year share price comparison against the All Ordinaries Index (XAO). While Pointerra and Brainchip lost most in year one and have been trading mostly sideways since then, they may still have sellers who have finally lost conviction and may take the opportunity to sell out to crystalise their losses to offset gains elsewhere. The other 4 have had a poor FY25, which puts them in the scope.

Disc: Not holding any of these. I have held LBL, AVA and even IEL briefly in prior years, but sold out when I lost conviction.

AD8

I'm looking at possible tax-loss selling by others on PeopleIn (PPE) as a reason for me to top-up soon. Been on a 4-year decline, off what was a stupidly high price at the peak of the COVID recovery with businesses on a hiring rush. It's down another 4% today as-of-writing on no news. And down 15% this month. It did release news on 30 Apr that Q3 EBITDA was down 9% vs pcp. I don't expect FY25 results to be pretty. But at current market cap around $70m for a company doing >$1b in revenue, not much has to go right for this price to be stupidly low. Still, I'm sitting on a loss, so maybe the market knows more than I do. The employment market may need to pick up to create a catalyst for a re-rate on PeopleIn. But I don't pretend I can perfectly time that pop, so I'm likely to buy some more if price stays at this level or drops further.

@Slew I'm interested, are you tax loss selling AD8? The reason I ask is I am on a paper loss with AD8 but I am concerned if I sell, I can't buy back in for 45 days otherwise it could be classified as "wash sale". In that 45 day period there is a risk of sudden price rerating and missing out on the upside. Just wondering how other people might be navigating this risk. Maybe I should do nothing?

On a related theme, I was intertested in Strawman's story of holding on to Catapult on the Rich Life podcast. Unshaken belief in the thesis, holding on for 10 years until it took off. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6UHCGlT3oA . The CAT share price see sawed up and down and I'm assuming there was little or not trading in that time other than perhaps position sizing. I see AD8 as a very similar proposition of being a cracking business model and superior product that must one day come good if I am patient.

I use a different method for tax loss selling @actionman for shares that are a silly low price in the market, but that i have full conviction in the business. That sounds like $AD8 for you (based on your post at least).

My method is an easier solution, but you need multiple portfolios owned by different entities. In my case I have my SMSF, an investment Pty Ltd company and my personal portfolio IRL

Sounds complicated I know, but I still have the investment company from years ago when I did contracting and consulting and I'm still striping the old franking credits built up over those years, which is why it still exists.

Anyway, if I love a share/business and the market is tanking it around May/June I simply do an in specie, off market transfer between entities and realise the loss in the holding entity. You have 90 days to make this trade with the ASX paperwork. There is no wash trade arrangement, because the new entity remains the fulltime owner.

I don't know anything about a 45-day rule for wash trades. I'm sure if the ATO had an inkling you were avoiding tax on purpose then 45 days would be almost irrelevant.

There is a 45 day at risk rule for franking credits, i.e. you must hold (own) the share at risk for a minimum of 45 days, not including the buy or sell day (so effectively 47 days) in order to claim the franking credits on a dividend.

Also, if I didn't have multiple entities and had full conviction in the company, then I'd simply stop looking at the share price. In all my years of investing, I've never been able to time any market or share. I've been lucky and unlucky with timing, but unlike some market commentators that promote this type of trade (e.g. Marcus Today), I think stick with the tried and true for shares, property and whatever else you consider an investment.

Food for thought!!

@lowway, interesting advice regarding off market transfer. I've never done it, but could see it useful for moving shares between me and my wife's holdings. How complicated? Do you need to call in the lawyers? What's the process you use?

As i understand it @DrPete you just need to fill in this form:

transfer-form-for-non-market-transactions.pdf

I think you need to go through your broker if CHESS sponsored, or the Share Registry if not.

I've made off market transfers (OMT) numerous times. Yes @Strawman you go through your broker if CHESS sponsored by them. Only slight negative is the OMT fee is usually much higher compared to the usual brokerage if you are using one of those discount online brokers like me.

I'm interested, are you tax loss selling AD8? The reason I ask is I am on a paper loss with AD8 but I am concerned if I sell, I can't buy back in for 45 days otherwise it could be classified as "wash sale". In that 45 day period there is a risk of sudden price rerating and missing out on the upside. Just wondering how other people might be navigating this risk. Maybe I should do nothing?

The 45 day rule applies to franking credits. The ATO takes a more holistic approach to tax loss selling. Sort of "we'll know a wash sale when we see it". There probably needs to be an established pattern rather than just the odd sale and buy back in. Similar to Div 7A loans that are repaid before lodgement date. I doubt you need to be out of the market for 45 days though.

@UlladullaDave My two cents is that you cannot sell and buy shares as a means to recognise a loss. Having said that if you sold a stock as you have lost conviction in the stock and then bought it based on new information coming to light you could argue that you had bought it in good faith as new information had come to hand. This could be argued if you bought the shares within a week.

Having said that I am not sure that I would want to spend all my time arguing with the ATO about your decision making processes if it was found to have occurred and the ATO believes that it is a wash trade.... In other words, I wouldn't make it a regular occurrence, if you chose to do it this time. .

My two cents is that you cannot sell and buy shares as a means to recognise a loss.

Yeah. If you sell and then buy back that day you are really flying close to the Sun. But you don't need to wait 45 days – that rule applies to claiming franking credits – no one really knows how long you have to wait to satisfy the ATO, and it's not all about how long between sale and repurchase. The relevant ruling is pretty vague about what a wash sale actually looks like in the eyes of the ATO.

But yes, for the avoidance of doubt, you are correct that you cannot sell something purely to obtain a tax benefit.

Yes @DrPete, both @Strawman & @OxyBBear are mostly correct regarding in-specie transfers aka off market transfers.

Couple of key points:

• Both entities (seller & buyer or transferer & transferee) must be registered with the same CHESS sponsor and the share also.
• There is a fee for each transfer. I use Selfwealth for all of my entities and their fee is $27.50 per share transfer, irrespective of volume or total value, so in my mind that's reasonable.
• You must use the ASX closing share price on the day you nominate for the transfer/sale.
• You have a maximum of 90days in arrears to pick that date (that is the best feature as you have up to 90 days to pick the lowest price for transfer).
• I personally wouldn't have the 90 days roll across 2 financial years, as that may be complicated. So, if it was me, I would make sure you submit the form and date it pre-30 June for any transfer and make sure funds are also transferred between entity accounts to show this.

I discussed this in more detail about a year ago on a SM forum. Had a few pushbacks at the time, but my Tier 1 accountant had no issues with this method I used in 2020!!

How to Minimize CGT

@lowway is the only benefit of in-specie transfers from a personal account into SMSF that you have a 90 days in arrears to pick the lowest price for transfer?

Otherwise does selling to cash and doing a concessional or non-concessional cash contribution to the SMSF and repurchasing the same shares within the SMSF achieve the goal?

The CGT event would be the same?

The 90 days arrears hack is a good one though.

Well, in my case @Shapeshifter my SMSF is in pension phase, so effectively zero tax. Therefore, when I sell/transfer the title of a share to my SMSF it is a non-concessional contribution (i.e. declared as after-tax money or money that tax has already been paid on previously). The selling entity (myself or my investment company via me) does this when they think the share is in a capital loss situation and/or has the potential to make a significant gain in the future (i.e. you still have high conviction in the company). By selling/transferring into a zero tax (or if it was in accumulation phase still 10% CGT arena), any future gain saves a significant amount of CGT (personal CGT 50% added to taxable income, Pty Ltd 100% added to taxable income in that FY).

As you stated, having the use of 90 days of hindsight is also a rare opportunity in investing and one I utilised greatly in March 2020.

Hope that explains it a little clearer?

I think I understand your strategy @lowway and I can see how it could be valuable. My point is couldn't you achieve the same thing by selling the shares in your personal account or your investment company, transfer the cash to your SMSF, then repurchase the same shares back inside your SMSF? The frictional costs would be similar and no paperwork to deal with?

And miss out on that beautiful 90 days of hindsight @Shapeshifter!! Really, the paperwork is simple and the cost $27.50 versus $9.50 × 2 (a sell and buy fee) is virtually the same.

And if you're selling to buy it back again, in the long run all you're doing is lowing your cost base so if your conviction (which is why you're buying it back again) comes true, then the CGT will be even higher. If you need a tax loss, then better to sell something else you've lost conviction in.

But remember, I'm no expert. I don't need to fabricate capital losses, they come easily, it's the gains I need to get better at creating!

Yeah, I reckon IEL has moved up the rankings today for most likely to be sold down in June for Tax Loss purposes.

I know it was their Market-and-Trading-Update.PDF today (Tuesday 3rd June) that did most of the damage today, but it's not a good time of the year to be issuing earnings guidance downgrades, especially when your share price had already halved from $16 to $8 in the past 12 months, and today it halved again. This could certainly go lower for the next 4 weeks leading up to June 30th.

Disc: Not held.

MIN is another contender - massive SP fall in the past 12 months, plus not a lot going right for them right now.

The following two dot points are from MoM's "Director's Special" daily newsletter this morning:

• Iron ore fell to its lowest level since early May at $95/t after Trump said he would double tariffs on steel and aluminium (Bloomberg)
• A collapse in Chinese steel demand to its lowest levels in 8 years is an “ominous” sign for the ASX’s mining giants (AFR) - [excerpt below].

[Tuesday 3rd June 2025]

And we still have Simandou scheduled to begin exporting iron ore at the end of 2025. It is expected to ramp up over a period of between 2 years and 30 months to full production of 120 million tons annually. Initial production in 2025 is anticipated to be between 2 and 3 million tonnes, scaling up to 25–35 million tonnes in 2026, and reaching 60–70 million tonnes by 2027. The full 120 mtpa capacity is projected to be achieved within the first two to two and and a half years of operation. That's a lot of supply that will come online regardless of demand, and demand is not growing right now, it's reducing.

And so is MIN's share price on the back of that.

Disc: Not held.

Further Reading:

China steel demand slump an ‘ominous’ sign for ASX miners

by Joanne Tran, AFR Markets reporter, Jun 2, 2025 – 5.05pm

A collapse in Chinese steel demand to its lowest levels in eight years is an “ominous” sign for the ASX’s mining giants that the worst may not be over for the already beaten-down materials sector.

Steel rebar futures in China, a key indicator of construction activity, slumped to the lowest level since 2017 at the end of last week, as the world’s second-largest economy continues to grapple with a prolonged property sector crisis and waning industrial output.

Fund managers say weak demand for steel in China is a bearish signal for the iron ore price and mining giants.  

Given China is the largest buyer of Australian iron ore, fund managers including Blackwattle Investment Partners and Ten Cap, warn the implications are stark for the big miners.

Blackwattle portfolio manager Ray David said the latest data from China was “ominous” for both the iron ore price and mining companies.

“The valuations are starting to look appealing, but we just can’t really see any sort of positive catalyst for iron ore demand or price,” he said. The hedge fund manager owns BHP in his fund for index weighting reasons. 

David added that the structural headwinds facing China were unlikely to reverse anytime soon.

“Peak demand for housing has passed in China,” he said. “You’ve also got this exodus of manufacturing moving out of China because of tariffs and global trade wars, and then you’ve got supply in Guinea starting to ramp up.”

David was referring to Rio Tinto’s Simandou project in Guinea, which is expected to begin shipping iron ore as early as November, placing further pressure on the iron ore price which is trading below the key $US100 a tonne level.

Iron ore futures in Singapore on Monday fell below $US95 a tonne, its lowest level since early May, after US President Donald Trump announced he would double tariffs on steel and aluminium to 50 per cent to help protect American workers. The new tariffs are set to take effect on June 4.

The major mining producers – which account for more than 10 per cent of the ASX 200 – tracked the commodity price lower on Monday with BHP dropping 1.2 per cent to $37.78 apiece, Rio Tinto 1.7 per cent to $110.75 and Fortescue Metals 2.5 per cent to $15.

Perennial Partners resources fund manager Sam Berridge said the outlook for the key steel-making ingredient was “bearish”.

“Without demand growth from China, it’s very hard for the rest of the world to replace that,” Berridge said. “The iron ore price is likely to bumble along the top of the cost curve … between $US90 to $US100 per tonne. But once Simandou starts producing, it should bring the iron ore price down.”

Ten Cap portfolio manager Jun Bei Liu warned of significant downside risk for lower-grade iron ore producers such as Fortescue.

“If you have very soft demand, and then if you have potential steel cuts to support that market by the government, then you will have the lower-grade iron ore names underperform meaningfully,” she said.

The downturn in steel consumption has been most severe in China’s property and infrastructure sectors, which together account for about 60 per cent of the country’s steel demand.

Commonwealth Bank commodities strategist Vivek Dhar said both sectors would continue to weigh on demand unless Beijing injected significant stimulus into the economy.

The bank is tipping Chinese steel output to fall by about 2 per cent in 2025.

“Our expectation … is driven by subdued external demand, weaker domestic consumption from the property sector, and policy efforts to reduce oversupply,” said Dhar.

He forecasts iron ore prices averaging $US95 per tonne in the second half of 2025, with upside potential only if China’s expected stimulus leans more heavily on infrastructure.

--- ends ---

Source: https://www.afr.com/markets/equity-markets/china-steel-demand-slump-an-ominous-sign-for-asx-miners-20250602-p5m43g

@actionman just to clarify, I’m not selling AD8. I see it as a likely candidate for further selling pressure as we approach the EOFY. Anyone who bought in the last 12 months is down about 50%, and if you bought 18 months ago, your loss would be higher. AD8 was a crowd favourite back then, so I suspect a lot of holders are sitting on significant paper losses.

I sold about a third of my position a while back, when the stock was arguably overhyped, and I’ve let the rest ride down. Now I’m debating whether to top up or just hold. Honestly, I’m struggling with this decision. The big question is whether the video side of the business will deliver—it’s the great unknown and could make or break the investment case. I am questioning if I have a blind spot for AD8 and its story—have I been sucked in by the hype? Maybe I’ll end up selling, but for now I’ll at least hold until the next financial year.

I’ve just re-read some past reports and, if anything, they lean me towards the decision to hold. But as @thunderhead noted, the various changes in management could be a bit of an orange flag. On insider activity, there was a significant director/mang sell-down in March 2024, when the price was around $21. That made sense at the time, given how stretched the valuation was. Since then, I haven’t seen any major director buying at these lower levels, which would be a positive if it happened.

There’s potential for a good investment from here, but it’s not an easy buy—a “sick in the stomach” feeling for me. I’m deciding if I should wait for further clarity on video uptake and for the company to become profitable — perhaps that’s the inflection point to reinvest.

For now, I’m holding and undecided

Hey is this speculative buy?

Is the model , formula broken? Governments around the globe have reduced the student intake.

at ~ $4.00

IDP now estimates that Adjusted FY25 EBIT1 for FY25 will be in the range of $115m - $125m.

The business has continued cost control initiatives since the half year, with Adjusted Overhead Costs2 for H2 FY25 now expected to be approximately 5% below H2 FY24, despite IDP’s negative operating leverage. 

The stock short position at ~13% . How will this pan out for the shorters vs the long holders?

Not Held

Clarity has to be another tax loss selling candidate

Maybe IPD group too.

Clinuvel looks like a strong candidate for tax loss selling - I have no view on whether it's an opportunity or not, because I don't follow the company, but their one year graph looks horrible:

Very strong sell side with volume over 6x the buy side.

Latest news from CUV (links below) has failed to inspire any sort of share price recovery:

Study-confirms-NB-UVB-needed-to-activate-repigmentation-(Clinuvel-18th-June-2025).PDF [today]

CLINUVEL-management-update-(Friday 13th June 2025).PDF [last Friday]

Another one CCR which I hold. Driven by the AI hype to drive efficiencies which so far hasn't happened.

I think tiga also is a holder

Yes @edgescape TIGA/Thorney has been accumlating more and is now up to 17.5% of CCR:

For those who may not be aware, those shares are held in the name of TIGA Trading Pty Ltd, which is a controlled entity of Thorney Technologies Ltd (TEK.asx), so every time TIGA increases their stake by 1% or more and has to update the market with a "Change of..." notice, TEK (Thorney Technologies) has to issue a mirror notice, but both notices (on each occasion) always refer to the same holding; they are NOT two separate holdings.

BTW, TIGA stands for Thorney Investment Group Australia.

Agreed @edgescape that the recent fall from over 35 cps to down around 20 cps or just above it does make CCR look like a tax-loss candidate. Even more so when you look at their 10 year chart:

That's a big drop - from 95 cps to 21 cps. If there are long term holders who hadn't already dumped them, they might well be thinking about doing that this month, particularly considering the company's SP is heading back down to their previous all-time lows of 2023.

Just revisiting this topic and whether moving shares from one account to another to crytalise a loss is considered a wash sale.

Paul Aliprandi from Wilsons Advisory notes that people can be unintentionally caught out by the rules by activities like moving an asset from one account to another, such as from your personal account to your super account, so they should know the rules ahead of making decisions and report it accordingly in their tax returns.

https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/how-to-avoid-the-biggest-eofy-tax-mistakes

Hi @lowway! Re in-specie transfers (I'm transferring from my CMC Indiv account to my CMC SMSF account) do you put the date of signing as the same date of purchase/transfer?

I recently made a transfer where I made the xfer date 11 April 2025 and I signed the 'Date Signed' as 18 June.

My accountant emailed me: "There appears to be a variance between the date of signing/transfer and the price you applied for the off market forms. 

From a compliance perspective the auditor has to go off the date of signing to ensure the transaction is conducted at market rate. 

We will process them as the value per the forms as these are accepted by CMC and have already occurred however in future please ensure the value is within 30 days of the forms being signed, ideally even sooner."

I'm curious how you would respond to this from your accountant? :)

My candidates are you can roughly copy and paste all my portfolio here :)

Feels like it's a bit of a dog shelter and June performance pretty poor! Good luck all!

I've always made the dates the same @RogueTrader. It takes away any confusion and the signing date doesn't mean the submission date.

Not sure why he's using 30 days I guess that is relation the the signing date, not the 90 days in arrears that the ASX will accept and process the forms from CMC.

Maybe just say yes, in future the dates will align!!

Thanks for that @lowway ! I'm looking at doing another xfer with an April 4 xfer date, would you think my accountant or auditor might have a problem with me signing that with an April 4 date? (Or does that look too much like I'm trying to game the system?) :)

Not sure of their interpretation @RogueTrader as all auditors seem to have different slants or views on what is or isn't kosher.

That said, signing something back dated within 90 days and submitting now to ASX via CMC using the specific closing price on that day is how the system works. There is no need to nominate anywhere the day you physically gave CMC the paperwork, as you may have signed it officially in April and forgot to submit it until June. Also, I've had instances where either the ASX or Selfwealth have taken a few weeks to process the paperwor, so who is to say when it was physically submitted or if that is even of any value as the contract of sale between entities took place on the signing date at the closing price on that date.

Of course, this is all my opinion only, but I've done maybe 25-30 transfers over the years without any issues. This does not make me an inspcie specialist though, so tread your own path as Barefoot would say.

Thanks again @lowway , I hadn't been giving much thought to the difference between the signing date and the xfer date.

I'm also surprised that my accountant is only complaining about it now, considering that I've done the same thing with my five other in-specie xfers over the last 12 months. Maybe it's best not to bring that up with her? :) :)

Actually @lowway, since that article in 'The Australian' quotes "...current rules may allow you to nominate a date of transfer (and so price) within 90 days of transfer request", then why shouldn't we be allowed to sign and date a xfer request up to 90 days after the transfer date? (Instead of aligning the dates as you mentioned.)

Sorry @RogueTrader, it's not something I gave much thought to, as I always figured it would cause less grief by using the same date for the transfer and the actual sign off by me.

Your probably right, but then why pursue the possible confrontation, when simply using the same date solves that problem?

Anyway, that's the method I used and haven't ever had an issue with my accountant or the independent auditors.

That's a pretty interesting statement by Aliprandi @OxyBBear, especially as the example or warning he offers is different from the wording of the definition of a wash trade that he states immediately above his warning. More specifically, the warning example doesn't mention buying the same stock/shares back in the next financial year, which is the basis of a wash trade.

It looks like he's just throwing out a catch all,non-specific warning, which really is of little value IMO of course.

Everyone should of course make such strategic decisions with prior discussions with their tax accountant and independent auditor, if it involves an SMSF.

Thanks @lowway - believe me, the last thing I want is confrontation with tax auditors! :) Unfortunately I've made a total of five 'in-specie' xfers of shares from my Individual account to my SMSF over the last 12 months, mostly with the difference between signing date and xfer date of between 35 and 88 days.  Now after accepting the first four xfers, my SMSF accountant suddenly wakes up and advises me that it must be "within 30 days" or I could get the xfers rejected by the auditor.  So this rule must be written down somewhere - if anyone could post me a link that would be great!  

@lowway Are you saying that a wash sale occurs when you sell a stock to incur a loss to offset capital gains in the financial year and then buy back the same stock in the next financial year? I was under the assumption that the sale and re-purchase could occur in the same financial year to constitute a wash sale?

Hi @OxyBBear - I've had this discussion with an accountant and he said it's a relatively grey area because the definition revolves around "intent" - i.e. did you intend to buy the shares back when you sold them, and therefore was the intent to give yourself a taxation advantage?

In that respect, the time between the sell and the buy does actually matter, and it is far less likely to be picked up by the ATO automated system (software) if the buy is done in the next financial year. However it is still technically a wash sale if the purpose of it was to give you a tax advantage, i.e. create a tax loss (capital loss) to offset other capital gains.

The ATO has provided guidelines on this. The following link takes you to an ATO article published (or last updated) on 26 June 2022:

https://www.ato.gov.au/media-centre/wash-sales-the-ato-is-cleaning-up-dirty-laundry

Wash sales: The ATO is cleaning up dirty laundry

Last updated 26 June 2022

The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is warning taxpayers to not engage in ‘asset wash sales’ to artificially increase their losses and reduce gains or expected gains. Wash sales are a form of tax avoidance that the ATO is focussed on this tax time.

Wash sales typically involve the disposal of assets such as crypto and shares just before the end of the financial year, where after a short period of time, the taxpayer reacquires the same or substantially similar assets. This is a wash sale and is done to create a loss to offset against a gain already derived, or expected to be derived, in certain circumstances, in a tax return.

A wash sale is different from normal buying and selling of assets because it is undertaken for the artificial purpose of generating a tax benefit for the current financial year. The taxpayer disposes of and reacquires the asset for the deliberate purpose of realising a capital gains loss and obtaining an unfair tax benefit.

The ATO’s sophisticated data analytics can identify wash sales through access to data from share registries and crypto asset exchanges. When the ATO identifies this behaviour, the capital loss is rejected, resulting in an even bigger loss to the taxpayer.

Assistant Commissioner Tim Loh urges taxpayers not to engage in this behaviour.

“Don’t hang yourself out to dry by engaging in a wash sale. We want you to count your losses, not have them removed by the ATO.”

The ATO is warning taxpayers who may be engaging in wash sales are at risk of facing swift compliance action and additional tax, interest and penalties may apply. Taxpayers are urged to ignore any advice encouraging a wash sale of any asset. The clear advice from the ATO is to check the ATO website or check with an independent registered tax professional and not to rely on advice you may receive through media, social media, or advertisements. If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.

The ATO is also reminding tax advisors who may be promoting wash sales or other tax avoidance activities that they may face action from the Tax Practitioners Board.

“Most tax advisors do the right thing, but a small number encourage this behaviour. Promoting a tax avoidance scheme will have serious consequences for the tax advisor and could leave their client with a large tax bill,” Mr Loh said.

If you know or suspect a person, business or tax advisor is not playing fair by participating in tax avoidance activities, including asset wash sales, you can report them by:

• completing the ATO Tip-Off Form. The form is also available in the Contact us section of the ATO app
• phoning the ATO on 1800 060 062
• reporting tax advisors to the Tax Practitioners Board

For more information, see Taxation Ruling TR 2008/1 Income tax: application of Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 to 'wash sale' arrangements.

--- end of ATO article ---

Source: https://www.ato.gov.au/media-centre/wash-sales-the-ato-is-cleaning-up-dirty-laundry

---

Bear77 comment: One thing worth mentioning is that although a sell and a subsequent buy of the same company stock might LOOK like a wash sale, it is not illegal if you have a good reason for doing it. An example would be that you sold on June 27th because you'd lost faith in the company, and then you bought the shares back after reading an interview with the company's CEO or MD in which he or she outlined plans to divest a loss-making division, or to start paying higher dividends, or expand into a new area where you believed the company had a good chance of success. In other words, you are allowed to change your mind if the facts as you understand them change.

Another example: If you read a broker report on the company between the sell and the buy and your attitude to the company and its prospects changed as a result of reading that.

This is worth keeping in mind, because if the tax department flags that you've done one or more wash sales and contacts you about those, if you can explain that the reasons behind the transactions were legitimate and not done primarily to create a tax benefit, even though they did, then it is my understanding that the ATO would not be able to prove that they were wash sales and would therefore have to let them go.

[Which gets back to the key factor I mentioned at the top of this post: Intent.]

27th June 2025: 12:33pm: Just got the following in my inbox from Claude Walker at "A Rich Life":

email title: On the Subject of Tax Loss Selling!

A Rich Life Free Newsletter (including Arts, Culture, News and Investing). Welcome to the 61st free email from A Rich Life!

Just a quick one from me today, to let you know about some previously paywalled content I'm making available to our readers of this Free Newsletter. While we generally reserve our best content for Supporters, I also like to stay in touch with this free email list, as a large number of our eventual Supporters do first engage with us through it. And that's awesome!

The theme of this email is tax loss selling, that phenomenon where people (sometimes) rush to sell underwater investments prior to 4 pm on June 30 (this coming Monday). Now, you might argue that the strategy of buying a stock that is suffering temporary sell pressure is short-term focused, and in a way, it is. However, sometimes you get an opportunity to buy a company you quite like anyway, but at a slightly lower price than would otherwise be available.

We can never know for sure what someone else's motivations are, but for me, a memorable example of an opportunity to buy a stock that I think was partly created by tax loss selling was a stock I do hold today called RPM Global (ASX: RUL), way back in 2016. In fact, I stayed up late one night back then to deliver a recommendation just in time for my subscribers to take that opportunity (I worked for a different company at that time). Luckily, it worked out, though I couldn't be sure that it would.

Therefore, I strongly recommend Patrick's recent Livewire article on 3 Stocks That Could Be Hit By Tax Loss Selling. Now is a particularly good time to read that article, since one of those companies just released a disappointing update, so I really do think it may well be impacted by tax loss selling. While many people do see it as a high quality business, it's not one I follow closely.

In the same spirit as Patrick's article, I wrote an article earlier this month about 3 Stocks Likely Suffering From Tax Loss Selling, though, for largely unrelated reasons, one of those stocks already moved up a bit since I wrote the article. 

For those who like podcasts, check out the latest episode of our podcast, the ASX Small-Cap Wrap.

Finally, I have also just made Patrick's recent article on Eroad (ASX: ERD) free to read. I previously lost money on the stock, so I'm pretty skeptical of my own psychology on this one. Sometimes, I find when I make a mistake with a stock, it does make it harder to think about it clearly, hence why I asked Patrick to cover it instead of doing so myself.

Thank you for taking the time to discover us and read this newsletter. We are always grateful if you share our links online or forward the email to anyone else. Connecting with the community of engaged small-cap investors is my favourite thing about the job, and I hope that as a group we can do better than most fund managers!

--- end of excerpt ---

27th June 2025: Also got the following in my inbox today from LiveWireMarkets:

Buy Hold Sell: 5 of your most popular ASX stocks (and 2 big buys) | 3 stocks that could be hit by tax loss selling

Source: https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/3-stocks-that-could-be-hit-by-tax-loss-selling

Spoiler: The companies Patrick covers in the above article are REH, PWR & IDP.

Also:

Source: https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/buy-hold-sell-5-of-your-most-popular-asx-stocks-and-2-big-buys

Thanks @Bear77 Good to remember that intent is paramount. If you did sell a stock for a loss and then bought it back in a short period of time it might be wise to keep a note as to why you did so in case the ATO comes calling.

Exactly right @OxyBBear

NEU a recommendation by Henry Jennings at the end, Grady Wulff a holder from the LiveWide Buy Hold Sell. James Gerrish recommended SDR also at the end so if your interested have a listen (also relevant for BTI)

Thanks @Bear77

@Bear77, your post makes me recall the one and only please explain I have received from the ATO in 2012. 

The ATO took my house settlement date, 4 years before the letter, pulled out all overseas remittances that entered my bank account 30 days either end of that settlement and said Please explain. These were puny $3k transfers from my overseas bank account, a capt gains share sale etc. Having nothing to hide, I sent a 20 page flip-the-bird response with details of how I have accounted for each of those transactions in my tax return. Never heard back from them. 

Fast forward to 2025 and can't imagine it being too hard to get a 1st year tax grad to work through wash sales, who would then presumably enter the exact instructions into the ATO’s ChatGPT to get the data search code, ie. for taxpayer x:

1. Pull up every share sale 30 days prior to EOFY
2. ⁠Pull up every purchase of the same shares sold, 30 days in the new FY. 
3. ⁠Send preformatted Please Explain potential Wash Sale to taxpayer
4. Repeat for all tax payers who had share transactions

The onus would then be on the tax payer to explain why it was not a wash sale ...

The 2012 was an in-my-face lesson of the power of ATO data analytic capabilities and the need to be highly respectful of what the ATO could very easily find and match. In 2025, things should now be far simpler for the ATO with all the AI and data capability that they now have ...

Agreed @jcmleng so what I said about the ATO being less likely to pick them up if the buys were done in the following financial year is probably wrong. It wouldn't make any difference - they would still be able to detect the buy as being within x days of the sell regardless of which financial year it was in.

My thought process was probably a few years old back when the ATO, as I understood it, could access your trading data for any financial year as long as that financial year had ended - that understanding of mine could be wrong also - but regardless, I'm thinking that now they have access to all of that data live, in real time, or close enough to it.

But it really still means that taking notes when you buy back in to a company you have recently sold is probably a very good idea, because, as you say, the onus is on the tax payer to explain why a sale is NOT a wash sale, which comes back to intent. And I have never had trouble providing reasons for why I am buying shares.

@Bear77 , I don't work for the ATO and so, all that I am saying is pure conjecture which may or may not match reality. But my 2012 experience was a very real one.

Since then, the ATO has made clear it has access to more and more data. If the ATO can get the likes of AirBNB and Uber to hand over data, which it has publicly said, not hard to extrapolate that shares, crypto data would have already been gotten years ago.

Can't imagine them needing it real time either. A dump every quarter or even annually would do just fine as the ATO can go back as far as they want to pull the data and run the analytics at any time and for whatever time period. These should be simple changes to user-entered parameters, hit Enter to re-run. My 2012 experience occurred 4 years later.

There is also no need to get anywhere close to 100% success. The cost of labour and computing to spit out the data is virtually nothing. They will only need a few small wins to recover the cost of building that compliance check.

Taking notes of your actions and rationale, particularly in the 30 days either end of EOFY, is, in my view, not only a good idea, but a mandatory action to fully cover-your-ass and enable you to flip the bird to the ATO if it ever knocks on the door ...

The ATO is perhaps the most powerful organisation in Australia. More powerful than ASIO, AFP, or Ministers etc.

They have been big investors in AI and data analylitcs for many years.

And almost never own the burden of proof.

Powerful stuff! Underestimate at your own peril!

I personally think out Office of State Revenue in Qld makes the ATO look like pussy catsc@reddogaustin. Of course, no disrespect to the tenacity or breath of access of the ATO!!

@OxyBBear & @Bear77, @jcmleng in regards to my final word on supposed wash trades, In-specie transfers are perfectly legal and recognised as a common strategy by the ATO and are not, in their own right, a wash trade. Using it as a method to somehow avoid tax is. Anything I've ever suggested as a strategy using In-specie transfers on SM MAY assist in a possible capital loss crystallisation in one entity, but only works correctly if the other entity (in my case my SMSF) has a documented strategy and believes the purchased In-specie shares to be of long-term term value.

Everyone should make their own decisions with direction from their own tax accountant and auditor, prior to any implementation.

@jcmleng maybe an easy way to avoid detection is to reverse the order of transactions I.e. buy a second tranche of the shares then sell the first tranche a few days later? It would mean that you are holding double the number of shares for a few days instead of holding no shares for a few days but wouldn’t it be the same end result?