While the nation's leaders throw around terms like 'franking credits' and 'negative gearing' like they are going out of style, many voters are left scratching their heads. How will they affect you?

Laid out in its simplest terms, negative gearing is a tax offset for property owners.

By running an investment property at a loss, the owner can diminish the gap between income and cost.

"An investment is either negatively or positively geared, and that has to do with whether it's costing you more than it's bringing you," said Dr Yapa Bandarra, senior lecturer in the business, justice and behavioural sciences faculty of Charles Sturt University.

"It's applicable to any investment, but investments in real estate is where it's widely discussed."

Dr Bandarra explains it as a deduction from your taxable income.

For example, purchasing a house and renting it out could bring you $21,000 a year.

But, that property may also cost you $26,000 in maintenance and mortgage repayments.

The tax department would then recognise your property as at a net loss of $5000.

If combined with your salary, you earn $65,000 a year, the taxation department would tax you for $60,000, subtracting your property loss.

Dr Bandarra believes negative gearing helps to improve the economic outlook of the nation by forming an an incentive for people to buy investment properties and rent them at affordable prices.

Even though the policy was instigated more than three decades ago, it has become the major battle ground of this year's election, with the sharpest of disagreements between the nation's major parties.

The change has emerged as a response to shifting parametres to housing affordability.

Labor is talking of scrapping the system in order to see higher income earners pay higher taxes.

Their fear is that investors are being given too much incentive and are unfairly driving up property prices by claiming so many nationwide.

The Coalition government have argued that removing the offset will result in higher rental prices and falling property prices.

Tony Brasier, managing director of real estate company PRDNationwide agrees with the Coalition's assessment.

"People who negative gear aren't necessarily the wealthiest people. About 75,000 teachers and nurses are on the books with negatively geared properties, so [getting rid of it] might just penalise the wrong group."

Also known as 'imputation credits', this is the process by which shareholders in a company can claim back tax paid on their dividends.

Dr Yapa Bandarra, senior lecturer in the business, justice and behavioural sciences faculty of Charles Sturt University explains it like this:

If you hold shares in a company and receive $700 in dividends, your statement from the company may say that you have up to $300 in franking credits.

This means the company has paid 30 per cent tax on that amount, and your dividend was $1000 before it got to you. Depending on your tax bracket, you could get that money back in your tax return.

"If your rate of taxation is only 20 per cent, you'll get the 10 per cent difference back. But if you are meant to pay 40 per cent on the dollar, the tax office gets more money back from you," he said.

"It is not avoiding tax, it's an adjustment of tax."

Labor is looking to reform it if they win office next week, calling it a 'free gift from the government'.

But Professor John Hicks, economics lecturer at Charles Sturt University calls this "the worst argument in the election".

"If people receive money back from this system, all it means is that their income is lower than a company's," he said.

The Coalition has objected to any changes, saying that not all beneficiaries of franking credits are indeed wealthy.

"It stands to penalise people who have self-managed superannuation. They will be treated differently to those who have industry super funds, because those with the industry funds will continue to have these offsets," Professor Hicks said.

Drought and overuse of the nation's largest waterway has contributed to problems in the Murray-Darling Basin.

In 2012, the federal government mandated a review into the management of the waterway, which led to water buybacks from irrigation farmers in NSW, Queensland, South Australia and Victoria.

The plan set out the amount of water that could be taken from the system each year and outlines targets to be met in consumption, environmental sustainability, and infrastructure development.

But, a recent return to drought and a summer plagued by dead fish has led a coalition of farmers to call for a pause to the plan.

Moulamein irrigator Darcy Hare joined the push early on.

"This is a river that caters to social, economic, and political needs, but the policy focuses on the environment," he said.

Mr Hare argues that previous policy has proven detrimental to the many needs surrounding the river and lower lake systems. He and many other irrigation farmers around the nation are calling for a thorough independent review that allows stakeholder input to find a winning solution.

"We're asking to pause the plan before June 30, so that we can have more time to do a cost [verse] benefit analysis on the water that's already been recovered," he said.

"It needs to be an assessment on the water that's there, not on what they want to be there."

While visiting Adelaide in March, the Opposition Water Minister Tony Burke indicated an "urgent" need for the plan's review, particularly looking at how climate change has impacted in recent years.

Coalition water minister David Littleproud has said the government would consider dissolving the Murray Darling Basin Authority. In an agency and a regulator would be set up to hold each other accountable.

'Death duties', or 'inheritance tax', has been one of the more problematic debate points.

It was a system that existed until 1979 and allows the government to take a cut of a deceased estate before the inheritance has been divided.

If instigated, it could mean that family members stand to receive little or no inheritance from a loved one's will.

"This is different from the other tax reforms [spoken of in the election] because if it does come through, it'll effect everyone," said Professor John Hicks, economics expert at Charles Sturt University.

But with both Labor's Bill Shorten and Liberal's Scott Morrison both proclaiming their dislike for the policy, there is no firm evidence that such a policy would be made a reality after the election.

As such Professor Hicks is not convinced it is too much to worry about.

"No-one has actually said it will be brought in," he said.

"I'd be very surprised if it did happen, from an economics point of view it doesn't make sense.

"This is money that has already been taxed. The deceased person has paid taxes on their income their entire life, and then to also pay this additional tax when they die, it doesn't make sense."

This was one of the earlier battlegrounds in the election debate.

Labor's Bill Shorten announced his intentions to see half of all new cars sold by 2030 to be electric. While Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison countered with a claim that an electric car "won't tow your trailer", and advocating instead for the great Australian ute.

The cheapest electric car on the market right now comes with a price tag of $45,000, while the premium models (those with capacity to actually tow a trailer) are priced at $100,000.

Compare that with a brand new ute, which can be bought from anywhere between $20,000 and $70,000.

With those prices in mind, economics expert Professor John Hicks is of the opinion that Labor's goal is almost attainable.

"Electric cars are the way of the future," Professor Hicks said.

"That's the way we should go, but it's the supply and demand that should dictate the uptake, not a government mandate."

Professor Hicks does not oppose incentives for the transition to electric cars, but said the main deterrent at the moment is a lack electric charges existing outside the major cities.

Currently, an electric car owner would have to complete the 550km journey to Sydney from Wagga on the one charge.

"It would take a lot of investment to bring the nation up to speed there," Professor Hicks said.