One Nation’s Policies: Here Are 5 That Could Help ASX-Listed Companies, And 5 That Could Hurt

As One Nation has sharply ascended in national polling ahead of the Coalition, everyone is wondering what a parliament with them having any seat at the table (whether winning outright or forming some kind of Coalition in a hung parliament) would mean for them. But few have asked what it would mean for their investments.

The issue moved from background chatter to front‑page debate last week when Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor used a Sydney Institute speech to warn that One Nation’s agenda would force interest rates up 3%, triple the nation’s debt and even spark a sovereign debt crisis. Whether investors agree with Taylor or not, the speech crystallised a broader concern that One Nation’s policies aren’t just a joke that we can just shrug off.

The irony is that as much as you’d think party’s platform is a neat ideological package, it really isn’t. It blends protectionism with deregulation, domestic manufacturing with resource nationalism, and lower energy costs with higher barriers to immigration and foreign investment. For ASX‑listed companies, this produces a genuinely mixed picture. Some sectors would welcome the shift; others would face structural headwinds.

Here are five that could support ASX earnings and valuations, and five that could undermine them. You’ll notice in advance that each would only benefit a handful of companies or only one sector – and often at the expense of others. This is why it is important to consider them.

5 One Nation Policies that may help ASX earnings

1. Cheaper electricity through expanded fossil fuel generation

One Nation’s strongest and most consistent economic argument is that Australia’s electricity costs are too high. Their solution is equally consistent: expand coal, gas and, more recently, nuclear generation. The party’s claim is that wholesale electricity prices would fall if fossil fuel capacity were restored or expanded, reducing input costs for energy‑intensive industries.

If wholesale prices genuinely fell over several years, the beneficiaries would be clear. Energy‑intensive manufacturers would see margin expansion; aluminium producers, cement makers, steel businesses and chemical manufacturers would gain a structural cost advantage. BlueScope and Brickworks (now part of Soul Pattinson) are the most obvious ASX examples. These companies operate in sectors where electricity is not just a cost line but a competitive determinant. A sustained reduction in power prices would flow directly into the bottom line.

The caveat is that electricity markets are complex. Lower prices require not just more generation but the right mix of dispatchable capacity, regulatory certainty and transmission investment. Nonetheless, if One Nation’s approach produced materially cheaper power, the industrial sector would be one of the clearest winners.

2. Stronger support for domestic manufacturing

Protectionism is one of One Nation’s core economic instincts. The party frequently argues that Australia should manufacture more products domestically rather than relying on imports. This is not simply rhetoric; it is tied to proposals for procurement preferences, tariff adjustments and industrial policy.

Companies that already manufacture locally would be well‑positioned. Industrial manufacturers, engineering firms, defence suppliers and packaging companies could benefit from a policy environment that favours domestic production. Government procurement preferences, in particular, would advantage firms with Australian plants and supply chains.

The ASX has a long tail of mid‑cap industrials that could gain from this shift. The benefit is not guaranteed – after all, protectionism can raise input costs or provoke retaliation. Yet for companies whose competitive edge is tied to local capability, One Nation’s manufacturing agenda could be commercially supportive.

3. Increased defence spending and domestic capability

One Nation generally supports stronger defence capability and more domestic defence manufacturing. This aligns with a broader geopolitical trend: rising defence budgets across the West, reshoring of critical supply chains, and heightened focus on sovereign capability.

Austal (ASX:ASB), Electro Optic Systems (ASX:EOS) and other Australian defence contractors would welcome this stance. Defence procurement cycles are long, capital‑intensive and politically driven. A party that favours domestic manufacturing and higher defence spending effectively signals a larger pipeline of local contracts.

The ASX defence ecosystem is small but strategically important. Any policy that increases domestic defence work (i.e. shipbuilding, surveillance systems, munitions, advanced manufacturing) would provide multi‑year revenue visibility for the companies involved.

4. Support for coal and gas producers

One Nation’s resource policy is based on a vehement belief that coal and gas should remain central to Australia’s energy mix. The party opposes accelerated phase‑outs, supports new development and argues that fossil fuels are essential for energy security.

Coal miners and gas producers would likely welcome this stance. Whitehaven Coal, New Hope Corporation (ASX:NHC), Yancoal (ASX:YAL) and LNG producers such as Woodside (ASX:WDS) operate in sectors where regulatory certainty is as important as commodity prices. Policies aimed at extending fossil fuel use reduce the risk of stranded assets, support long‑term capital planning and may improve investor sentiment.

The global trend is toward decarbonisation, but domestic policy still matters. A more favourable regulatory environment could support valuations, particularly for companies with long‑life assets and expansion options.

5. Reduced regulation and lower compliance burdens

One Nation often campaigns on reducing red tape. The party argues that excessive regulation suppresses business growth, particularly for smaller firms.

If implemented, reduced compliance burdens could benefit smaller listed companies, junior miners, SMEs and financial services firms facing high regulatory costs. The ASX is full of companies where compliance is not a marginal cost but a material drag on operating leverage. A lighter regulatory environment could free capital, accelerate project timelines and improve profitability.

The impact would depend heavily on which regulations were changed. Some compliance frameworks — particularly in financial services — exist for systemic reasons. But if One Nation targeted genuinely inefficient or duplicative rules, the benefit for smaller companies could be meaningful.

5 One Nation Policies that may be unhelpful for ASX companies

1. Lower immigration and slower population growth

This is arguably the single most economically significant policy in One Nation’s platform. Lower migration generally means slower population growth, fewer consumers, weaker housing demand and tighter labour markets.

The losers are clear: REA Group (ASX:REA) relies on housing turnover and listings volume whilst Seek (ASX:SEK) relies on job listings. Residential developers and apartment builders depend on population growth to sustain demand. Shopping centres and supermarkets benefit from rising foot traffic and household formation. A structurally smaller population trajectory would compress long‑run revenue growth across all these sectors.

Healthcare providers relying on skilled migration could also face staffing challenges. We also note that the tertiary sector and companies servicing it would face material revenue pressure. Just look at how IDP Education (ASX:IEL) was hit by the foreign student crackdown.

For investors, the key point is that population growth is one of Australia’s most important macro drivers. Any policy that materially reduces it would reshape earnings expectations across multiple sectors.

2. Less international trade and stronger economic nationalism

One Nation has historically supported stronger tariffs and greater economic nationalism. The party’s argument is that Australia should protect domestic industries and reduce reliance on global supply chains.

The risks are significant. Exporters could face retaliation; companies reliant on global supply chains could see higher input costs; agricultural exporters could suffer if trading relationships deteriorate. Treasury Wine Estates (ASX:TWE), A2 Milk (ASX:A2M) and Bega Cheese (ASX:BGA) are examples of companies whose business models depend on international market access.

Protectionism can support some domestic industries, but it can also provoke countermeasures. For a trade‑exposed economy like Australia, the downside risks are real.

3. Less support for renewable energy and net‑zero policies

One Nation opposes many renewable energy subsidies and net‑zero policies. The party argues that the transition has been too fast, too expensive and too disruptive.

Renewable developers, battery developers and clean energy equipment suppliers would be the obvious losers. Green hydrogen developers (large cap aspirants like Fortescue (ASX:FMG) and small cap aspirants too like H2 Global (ASX:H2G)) rely on policy support, subsidies and regulatory frameworks that encourage investment. A shift away from renewables would reduce project viability, slow capital flows and weaken long‑term growth prospects.

The global energy transition is not solely driven by domestic policy, but Australia’s regulatory environment matters for project economics. A reversal or slowdown would create uncertainty for the sector.

4. Greater scrutiny of foreign investment

One Nation has advocated stronger scrutiny of foreign ownership. The party argues that Australia has allowed too much foreign control of strategic assets.

For listed companies, the implications are clear: fewer takeover premiums, less foreign capital for major developments and lower valuations for companies seen as takeover candidates. Healthcare, infrastructure, agriculture and mining are sectors that often attract foreign investment. Restricting that flow would reduce optionality for boards and shareholders.

Foreign capital has been a major driver of Australian M&A activity. Any policy that constrains it would reshape valuation dynamics. Nonetheless, whatever One Nation and its supporters may say to the contrary, it is not as if we’ve been laisse-faire in relation to takeovers.

5. Banking interventions and stronger regulation of major banks

One Nation has periodically proposed stronger regulation of major banks and measures to improve competition. The party’s argument is that the banking sector is too concentrated and too profitable.

For the major banks, additional regulation could reduce fees or lending margins, compressing profitability. For smaller competitors, increased competition could create opportunities — but only if the regulatory changes are well‑designed.

The ASX financial sector is large, systemically important and sensitive to regulatory shifts. Any intervention that reduces bank profitability would have broad market implications – not just for the banks but by extension their customers.

Conclusion: One Nation’s agenda from an equities perspective is a mixed bag — and a reminder for investors

One Nation’s policy platform is a mixed bag that would help some sectors and hinder others. Energy‑intensive manufacturers, domestic industrials, defence contractors and fossil fuel producers could benefit. Property platforms, residential developers, trade‑exposed exporters, renewable energy companies and takeover‑sensitive sectors could face headwinds.

The broader point we’re trying to make is that whatever investors think of One Nation politically, it is important to consider how these policies could impact their investments. Not in the sense of how they should vote, but in the sense that these policies could happen.