Scott Morrison and his team are spending a lot of time talking about something that doesn't exist.

The so-called "retiree tax" is not a tax on retirees.

But coalition figures are constantly bringing it up because they're taking advantage of an understandable confusion about a complex but important handout.

The focus on Labor's dividend imputation changes could be the coalition acknowledging it needs to save the furniture before a wipeout at the federal election.

In the aftermath of the August leadership spill there were still plenty of Liberals who thought the coalition could retain government, despite the polls.

They're harder to find now, and the recent frontbench retirements show confidence isn't particularly high.

Many older voters who usually vote for the coalition abandoned the Liberals and Nationals following the Turnbull spill.

Many of them want the coalition to do more on climate change. Many have solar panels on their roofs.

"A lot of the victims of the banks have been older Australians," Bill Shorten helpfully pointed out too, before the royal commission's report is released on Monday.

The coalition needs to keep older voters on side, so harping on about a confusing "retiree tax" is a way of scaring them on an issue many don't understand.

So is there a tax on retirees? Not specifically, no.

Australia is the only country in the world to give cash refunds to share investors who pay no tax.

Some of those investors are retirees - some aren't - who have arranged their investments to ensure they get the generous government break.

Originally worth $550 million a year in 2001, the handouts will soon cost taxpayers $8 billion.

"Do we want to be a country who will spend more on tax concessions and tax subsidies to some people who are already quite comfortable and well off ... than we will on higher education or childcare?" Shorten asked on Thursday.

In the original version of the policy, about 300,000 pensioners were affected.

Labor changed the policy to remove them, taking out a quarter of those affected but keeping 94 per cent of the revenue.

"Don't believe the lies that say pensioners are immune from it," Mr Morrison told reporters in Brisbane.

The coalition vote is in trouble, even though the latest Newspoll showed a slight recovery.

But recovering from a "horrendous loss" to a slightly better "worst loss in 35 years" isn't much comfort.

As Morrison is trying to shore up the elderly vote, Shorten is out there trying to win a much larger slice of the electorate - people aged 18 to 45.

He's promising bigger personal income tax cuts, better healthcare, more renewable energy, better education, as well as surplus budgets and new infrastructure investment.

It's music to the ears of voters trapped in small apartments or outer suburban estates, who are paying more for energy, petrol, public transport, tolls, school fees and doctors bills.

Shorten made the hard decisions to rein in dividend imputation, negative gearing, and family trusts, giving him the cash to exceed the coalition's promises.

"We will match the local promises they make, so that's not an issue. You can vote for us, if there's a particular roundabout they're talking about, well, that'll be fine," he said.

Meanwhile, the prime minister is fighting back on another front - ex-Liberals and liberal-leaning independents who are going after long-time Liberal seats.

Rebekha Sharkie has already taken Mayo, Cathy McGowan took Indi. Kerryn Phelps took Wentworth.

Now former world champion skier Zali Steggall is lining up against Tony Abbott in Warringah. Former Clean Energy Finance Corporation boss Oliver Yates is taking on Josh Frydenberg in Kooyong.

Thanks to Morrison's intervention, former Liberal candidate for Gilmore Grant Schultz is running against the newly-installed Liberal candidate Warren Mundine.

"If I want to have a good civil war in Australia, I'd hire the Liberal Party," Shorten joked.

The coalition is fighting a rearguard action now, besieged on several fronts. Morrison is doing whatever he can to save votes.

Even if it means spending valuable time trying to confuse voters about a "retiree tax" that doesn't really exist.