Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Jim Chalmers:

Our economy grew in the March quarter, but slowly. Just 0.2 per cent in the March quarter, and 1.3 per cent through the year. Our economy continues to grow despite very substantial global headwinds. We saw those set out by the OECD overnight and also in the commentary in the Reserve Bank minutes that were released yesterday. There wasn’t a lot of growth in March, but what growth there was was private sector led, and that’s an encouraging sign.

With all of the uncertainty in the world, any growth is a decent outcome. Even modest growth is welcome in these global economic circumstances. Growth was weaker than expected because public spending came off in the quarter, and we also saw the impact of natural disasters and global volatility on exports, but also on the economy more broadly. Productivity was flat again, and I’ll come back to that towards the end.

But even in this environment, even in this difficult global context, there were a couple of very positive developments that I wanted to talk about today with you before I take your questions. And those 2 positive developments are around private demand and also the continuing recovery in real disposable incomes.

On the first one, the private sector is stepping up now, as the public sector takes a step back. All of the growth in the March quarter was from the private sector, and that’s a good thing. That private growth was broad. Consumption grew a bit more weakly than we were anticipating, but it grew. Business investment made a contribution, or it was flat, and dwellings grew as well. I think when it comes to new dwellings investment, I think we’re seeing the strongest growth from memory in about 4 years. And so the private economy did all of the heavy lifting in this March quarter.

The second thing which was pleasing in this data is that there was quite solid growth in real incomes per capita. And you’d know that this is the chosen measure of living standards adopted by really all the participants in this national economic conversation. Real incomes per capita and living standards, we saw solid growth once again. The measure of real incomes per capita was up 1.1 per cent in the quarter. That was the third consecutive quarter of growth. Now remember, real incomes were falling 1.7 per cent when we came to office, and they’re now up 1.7 per cent through the year. And this comes from the combination of moderating inflation, solid wages growth and the tax cuts, which are all central features of our economic plan, combined with lower interest rates as well.

If you think about it this way, in the second half of last year, real incomes in Australia grew faster than the OECD average and almost twice the G7 average and that is a welcome development. When we came to office, real incomes per person were falling sharply, and we’ve been able to get them growing again and we saw that again in this data. We also saw that the prices measure fell again in these numbers, it’s the lowest in 3 years now, which more or less mirrors the moderation we’ve seen in the CPI. The wages share rose again, it means wages share of income is almost 54 per cent which is up from less than 50 per cent when we came to office. And it’s also worth remembering that only a tiny bit of the interest rate cuts which began in February are captured in this data.

So if you think about the full effect of the now 2 interest rate cuts that we’ve got flowing in our economy, we expect that to add about $10 billion to household balance sheets over a year and about $6 billion to business balance sheets over a year as well. And so there’s a little bit of that captured in these March National Accounts, but overwhelmingly the benefit of those 2 interest rate cuts will be captured in subsequent quarters, remembering that this is the March quarter, and so a very backward looking measure. And so it’s clear from this data, that in the March quarter growth was subdued in our economy, also clear that our economy is not productive enough.

But I also wanted to offer this perspective when you look at these numbers today. No major advanced economy has our combination of unemployment in the low fours, inflation below 2.5 per cent, and 3 years of continuous growth. That 0.2 per cent in the quarter, the 1.3 per cent through the year should be seen in the context of most of our peers in the OECD have had negative quarters, a number of them have had multiple negative quarters and recessions. What we’ve been able to do collectively as Australians, is to get inflation down without paying for that with negative quarters of growth or substantially higher unemployment and because of that progress the Reserve Bank has had the confidence to cut interest rates twice in the course of 3 months this year.

So we are well placed and we are well prepared to deal with what is coming at us from around the world at the same time as we do what we can to make our economy more productive and our Budget more sustainable over time. And with that, I’m happy to take some questions. We’ll start up the back and then come down to Greg, and then Tom and then Ben.

Journalist:

Treasurer, the UK has had an exemption from some of Donald Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs. They’re now only going to have a 25 per cent one instead of the doubled 50 per cent levy. What do you make of that? Does that give Australia more hope of securing its own carve out from those levies?

Chalmers:

I don’t take any outcomes for granted when it comes to that engagement we’ve got with the Americans. We’ve made it very clear what we think about those tariffs, and so we will continue to engage, as the friends in the UK have, and most countries have, trying to get the best deal that we can for our people and for our industries. That’s the approach we’ve adopted to here, and it’ll be the approach we will take from here as well. Greg then Tom then Ben.

Journalist:

Treasurer, are you willing to drop the unrealised capital gains component of your proposed superannuation tax reforms and negotiate a new model with the Coalition?

Chalmers:

First of all, I’m not convinced that the Coalition wants to have a conversation about these changes. I think we all saw what Matt Canavan, for example, said today about these changes. I think even on the same day that Ted O’Brien was occupying real estate in your paper, the Finance Spokesman was saying something completely different. So first of all –

Journalist:

– the finance –

Chalmers:

Well, can I just finish my answer, Greg? So first of all, I’m not convinced that they are fair dinkum when it comes to bipartisanship. I don’t think they’re being real about that.

When it comes to the comments that the Prime Minister made yesterday and reported in your paper today. I think they’re important points, obvious points, self‑evident points. First of all, that we don’t have the numbers on our own in the Senate to pass any of our legislation, including this legislation, and so there’s always an element of engagement. Second point that the Prime Minister made, again, reported accurately in your piece today, is that there are a number of opportunities for the Coalition to behave in a bipartisan way, including our efforts to cut student debt and some of the other things that they’ve opposed. And so let’s see that bipartisanship beyond an interview in a newspaper which contradicts the comments made by other senior colleagues in his Coalition parties.

Now on the point more broadly about unrealised gains. It is important to remember that these changes were announced almost 2 and a half years ago now. We did multiple rounds of consultation, and we said to people, if there is a better, fairer way of making this calculation, tell us about it. The unrealised gains calculation was recommended to us by Treasury. We provided years of opportunities for people to suggest different ways to calculate that liability, and nobody has been able to come up with one. And so that’s an important bit of perspective as well.

When it comes to the issue more broadly, this is a change which is modest, it is methodical – as I said it has been on the books for years now – and it makes a meaningful difference to the Budget, and it helps us fund some of our other priorities. It’s all about making sure that the superannuation system is fairer, that it’s more sustainable. It only impacts about half a per cent of people with superannuation accounts. And so we put this proposal out there some years ago. There have been multiple occasions for people to propose alternative ways of calculating the liability. This is the way recommended by Treasury, and it’s the way that we intend to proceed.

Tom then Ben.

Journalist:

Treasurer, a question on 2 different budget headaches. Chris Minns has had some comments in recent days about tobacco excise, obviously, that revenue is falling away. What’s your view on whether a change is needed?

And secondly, on defense spending, the US suggestion of 3.5 per cent of GDP, that’s quite a lot of course, for you to fit in the Budget. From a budget perspective, what’s your view on that?

Chalmers:

Two important questions. First of all, I’m not proposing to cut taxes on cigarettes to make them cheaper for people. We’ve seen tax revenue for cigarettes come down for 2 reasons. One of them is a good reason. One of them is a bad reason. The good reason is fewer people smoking. The bad reason is we know that we’ve got a challenge when it comes to illegal tobacco, that’s why we’ve provided 2 substantial amounts of money in 2 consecutive budget updates to work with the states on compliance. And so I respectfully disagree with Chris, he’s a friend of mine, I work closely with Premier Minns. I don’t think the answer here is to make cigarettes cheaper for people. I think the answer here is to get better at compliance. And the feds have come to the table I have, and Mark Butler has, and the relevant ministers like Tony Burke and others have come to the table with hundreds of millions of dollars in new funding to try and combat the scourge of illegal tobacco.

On defense spending, we’re already making a very substantial increase in investment in our Budgets, and we’re proud to be doing that. We’ll see defense spending as a share of GDP rise substantially. I think about $10 or $11 billion in extra spending in tight budgets over the course of the forward estimates, I think $50 billion plus from memory over the course of the next 10 years. And so we’ve made room for substantial new and increased investment in defense spending. There will always be calls to do more. There will always be people who say we should spend more on defense. There’ll be a lot of people who say we should spend less on defense. We’re doing what we can to responsibly and substantially increase defense spending in our Budgets.

Journalist:

Almost since the day you came to office, you have been asked about major tax reform, about making big tax reform. When will big tax reform come? Where’s the big tax reform? At the same time, we’re entering almost the second year of a big campaign against your superannuation changes, which, as you’ve said, affect not every Australian household. Given the reaction to these superannuation changes that has been the community, do you think that makes the challenge of even larger tax reform that may even affect every Australian even more difficult and potentially impossible?

Chalmers:

That remains to be seen. It doesn’t augur well for bigger, broader tax reform, when such a modest and methodical change is being resisted in some quarters. We should resist the temptation to think that because overwhelmingly 2 media outlets don’t like this change, to assume that that concern is broadly and deeply felt in the Australian community, we’re talking about half a per cent of people with superannuation being impacted, people with more than $3 million balances.

What it means, and what I could have said if in the answer to Greg’s question as well, don’t forget, the concessions here are still very generous. We’re not eliminating tax concessions for people with big balances. We’re still providing very substantial tax breaks, just slightly less substantial.

If someone’s got $3 million in super by one set of assumptions, their superannuation tax concession before this change is a bit over $14,000, after this change a bit over $13,000, so still very generous tax concessions for people with big balances in super.

I think that there’s an issue here when it comes to tax reform. A lot of people say they’re in favor of tax reform in the abstract, but they very rarely, if ever, support it in the specific and I think there’s an element of that playing out here as well.

I also think and this coheres your question with Tom’s a moment ago as well, a lot of the same people say we need to dramatically increase defence spending, we need to dramatically cut the company rate, we need to abandon the changes to make superannuation tax concessions fairer, and we need to deliver bigger surpluses. Often it’s the same people saying that, if you can believe it. And so my job, and Katy’s job and the Cabinet, the government’s job, is to make it all add up. Sometimes that involves decisions which not everybody likes. Obviously I understand that not everybody likes this change, but we have to do what’s right and responsible, and I’m confident that this.

Journalist:

People are opposing not so much the getting more revenue through superannuation, but the actual model of unrealised capital gains.

Chalmers:

First of all, I’m not convinced that’s right, Greg. Respectfully, I’m not convinced that’s right. I think some of this opposition comes from people who would like the extremely generous tax concessions, not the slightly less extremely generous tax concessions, to be fair, and we’ve given people multiple opportunities to propose alternatives to this calculation.

It’s also important to remember that this calculation of unrealised gains exists elsewhere in the tax system, multiple places in the tax system. It’s not new that this is the way that we are proposing to calculate it. Treasury proposed it to us. We did multiple rounds of consultation.

People will say it’s about the calculation. Some people will say it’s about the indexation. But I think in a lot of instances, again, respectfully to you and to people making these comments, and I welcome people making a contribution to the national economic debate, but I think a lot of it is not really about the method of calculation.

Journalist:

Can you confirm that the tax on $3 million superannuation funds will only apply to the Prime Minister once he leaves office, that he won’t pay any extra tax on his superannuation until he leaves office under your legislative proposal.

Chalmers:

I’m so pleased you asked me this question, because people have been lying about this. We’ve had people, I think shamefully, say that the Prime Minister or other senior politicians at the federal level, on defined benefits, are somehow exempt from this change. They are not. We made that clear that they are included in the legislation we released in November 2023 and in the regulations we released, I think, in March of 2024 more than a year ago. It’s been abundantly clear in black and white that the Prime Minister is included here, and people should stop lying about it.

Now to the substance of your question, which I do understand, you’re making a more specific point about the calculation. We’ve been clear about how defined benefits would be treated since we announced the policy, just as the previous government did with their changes to super we apply commensurate treatment to defined benefit interests to ensure that there are equivalent tax outcomes and the same rules apply to everyone on defined benefit schemes without the constitutional exemption, including federal politicians.

Now when it comes to the deferred liability, which is the very specific kernel of your question, these deferred liabilities on defined benefits are consistent with the long standing approach taken in other areas of super, like the extra contributions tax for high income earners. Tax liabilities are deferred until the pension phase because members in those schemes can’t access their super to pay tax debts until that point. It’s a function of necessity that that’s how that calculation is made. But we charge an interest rate on those liabilities to make sure that people don’t receive an inappropriate advantage from the necessity of calculating and paying those liabilities on retirement.

So you have to be very careful with what some people, including, I think some of the lower echelons of our political opponents, some of the things that they’ve said, and unfortunately, some of those things which have been reported as fact, have to be very careful here. Defined benefits schemes like the Prime Minister’s are in. They’ve been in all along. The calculation reflects the same sorts of ways it’s been calculated in the past. And because the liability is paid on retirement, there’s an interest rate applied to it to make sure that there’s no inappropriate benefit.

I genuinely really appreciate the opportunity to clear all of that up, because too much has been written about that which has been wrong.

Journalist:

Just on the Australia‑US relationship. We spent the last 6 months talking about how tariffs, whether they’re on or off, causing havoc across all of the world’s economies, really, can we afford to keep kind of trying to meet the demands of the US now they’re calling for defence spending increases? Should Australia be looking elsewhere?

Chalmers:

The Prime Minister did a terrific job of explaining our approach to this. I think it was yesterday, or might have been the day before, in Perth, when he said that we’ll determine our defence priorities and we’ll fund the capability that we need in a world that is becoming more dangerous, and our funding for defence is determined by our government. We obviously take into consideration what’s happening in the world and the views of our allies and partners, but our decisions about defence funding are made in this cabinet room, and in the national security room next to it as well.

The world is a dangerous place. It’s dangerous in security terms. It’s dangerous in economic terms as well. One of the defining influences on this second term of this Albanese government will be what is shaped by global circumstances, certainly in the defence sphere, but in the economic sphere as well.

I was speaking to a very large American investor this morning about trying to attract more capital here, whose decisions may be influenced by the unpredictability and the volatility in the US. And so all of this churn and change in the global economy is obviously very concerning for us, but also an opportunity for us. We intend, as we have been doing throughout, we intend to try and be beneficiaries of all that change, rather than victims of it.

Journalist:

As you’ve acknowledged, the Trump effect is subduing growth. But what are the opportunities for Australia amongst Trump’s tariff war?

Chalmers:

A lot of global investors are rethinking their investment strategies, and without going into the details of private or commercial in confidence conversations, including a great conversation I had this morning, that I referenced before, there is a global scramble for capital because people are rethinking their investment strategies. You can see in the American bond prices, for example, that people are rethinking their approach to the American economy.

I think primarily for me, my focus, including today, is, how do we get that capital deepening that we want to see to make our economy more productive. Foreign investment from trusted sources has a really important role to play there. And the opportunity for Australia as a country with wonderful human capital, stable government, big opportunities in the energy transformation, big opportunities in technology and data, an economy that’s grown despite all the challenges thrown at it, we’ve got a very compelling story to tell the world, and there is a big global scramble for capital, and we will be a very competitive part of that.

Journalist:

Just on the National Accounts, investment in machinery and equipment has fallen 3.7 per cent over the last year, and you rightly point out that productivity remains flat. Most people agree that business investment is the thing that’s needed to be required to lift productivity. What is the government’s plan to lift business investment to get productivity growing?

Chalmers:

We’ve got quite a substantial reform agenda already underway, but we are prepared to contemplate next additional steps when it comes to attracting investment. I strengthened and streamlined the foreign investment review process. The feedback I got today and the discussion I had earlier is that that is working to speed up, strengthen, but also streamline and speed up the FIRB process. That’s part of it. Also the work that we’re doing on the Single Front Door to try to concierge investment in major economy changing projects in our country, recognising that the time it takes for approvals can be too long.

I think Andy Leigh gave a great contribution on this front, I think it was earlier this week, when he was talking about the abundance agenda, that thinking has been very influential in our circles. This idea that if we want good things to happen in our economy, we need to make it easier for those good things to happen, faster, more efficiently. So the Single Front Door is part of that effort as well. All the work I’m doing on competition policy, unilaterally and with the states, the Productivity Fund, all of this is about making Australia a more attractive destination for investment.

If you think about the major challenges we have in productivity, even though the level of business investment is the highest it’s been in 12 years. Growth rates, including today in the National Accounts, were not especially strong, and we’re not making the most of these deep available pools of domestic and national capital. And if we do a better job of making the most of that, we will make our economy more productive over time, not overnight, but over time. That is a huge, huge part of the work that I’ve been doing in the month or so since we’ve been re‑elected, but before that as well.

If people come to us with great ideas, whether it’s about attracting investment, capital deepening, making our economy more productive, then we’ve got a very open door and open mind to those suggestions.

Journalist:

Just running through the good things in the economy. Unemployment is down. Inflation is back in target. Interest rates coming down, GDP still positive. Things are actually pretty good on a fair analysis of what is going on. But usually when things, the only thing that’s out of kilter is that usually governments run surpluses when things are good, like this, you’ll probably be one of Labor’s longest serving Treasurer, do you think you’ll ever see a surplus again in your time? And is this as good as it gets for the Australian economy? Does it only sort of soften and get worse from here? Or what are you trying to sort of soften the ground for?

Chalmers:

First of all, while you’re away, Matthew, I knocked out a couple of surpluses, and that’s the first time that’s happened for almost 2 decades. So I like to see that acknowledged sometimes. That was a combination of savings and banking most of the upward revision to revenue. Those are choices that governments make, and if we’d adopted the approach of our predecessors, those surpluses wouldn’t have happened. So let’s not dismiss those 2 surpluses that Katy and the Cabinet and I worked very hard to deliver.

It’s self‑evident that the pressures on our Budget are intensifying rather than easing. I do acknowledge that, I think one of the things, partly as an aside, which you may have noticed, or you will notice in the course of the afternoon, poring through the National Accounts data, we’re actually making really good progress in areas like the NDIS. One of the reasons why public demand fell in the quarter is because of the progress we’re making on the NDIS, aged care as well, even with the developments that Mark and Sam announced this morning, we’re making progress there. We’re making progress on interest costs, but overall, the pressures on the Budget are intensifying rather than easing. Of course, we don’t ignore that.

Your question about is this as good as it gets? I am quite optimistic about the future of our economy. There are some temporary factors in this quarterly outcome. There are natural disasters in here, not just Alfred, but the flooding in Townsville and Cairns and the surrounding communities earlier in the year, the fall in public demand because some of the big state projects came off, there are some temporary factors in here as well. We shouldn’t overinterpret that March data.

But growth is softer than we would like it to be, and I’m confident that growth will accelerate in our economy. Even if you look at that OECD report, you would have pored over it, Matthew, what it said was there was a little downgrade for growth this year for Australia, but actually an upgrade in growth for 2026.

And so the rest of the world looks at Australia, it’s an experience familiar to me from the GFC, most of the rest of the world looks at Australia, and they see low unemployment, lower inflation, interest rates coming down, real wages and incomes growing, debt‑to‑GDP is much smaller here than in most other countries. We’ve knocked out those 2 surpluses. Most of the rest of the world sees what’s happening in Australia, and they think that there are some very good things happening in Australia. This is part of the story to link your question with John’s, that we tell the world. It’s a compelling story.

But I firmly believe that there are good reasons to be optimistic about our economy. If I believed that Australia had peaked, or this was the best that we could hope for, I wouldn’t be here.

Journalist:

Treasurer, just to follow up from Tom’s question – tobacco consumption fell 6.4 per cent for the quarter, almost 16 per cent over the year for households. Do you actually believe that? Because that’s not being reflected in what’s going on in what’s going on in the streets of Sydney and Melbourne and Queensland.

Do you think that there is a causation effect between the increases in tobacco excise and what’s going on? Are you going to end up like Eliot Ness – ‘oh, look, we can’t control it. We can police it and police it, but you can’t control it.’

Chalmers:

First of all, I did notice that obviously there’s substantial decline in tobacco in the national accounts. We have to resist the temptation to think it’s either 100 per cent people giving away the darts, or 100 per cent illegal activity.

I think, as I acknowledged in my response to Tom’s good question, it’s both of those things. One of those developments is very good. One of those developments is very challenging. We’re not ignoring it. We’re not dismissing it in the way that the end of your question implied.

We’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars in compliance. Because we do acknowledge that this is a real challenge. More people are giving up the darts, but more people are also doing the wrong thing. I’m not convinced that cutting the excise on cigarettes would mean that that would be the end of illegal activity.

Journalist:

Would continually increasing excise just add to the financial incentive for people to go buy illegal ciggies?

Chalmers:

I know that that’s a view put forward, but I don’t share that view. I don’t propose to be cutting taxes on cigarettes. I don’t propose to be making cigarettes cheaper. It is a substantial public health challenge still in our economy. It’s also a law and order challenge, and we’re addressing both of those things simultaneously.

Journalist:

But freeze, Treasurer – might you freeze rather than cutting it? Freezing it because this, the 2 are related to legal activity and –

Chalmers:

It’s not something we’ve been considering.

Journalist:

Earlier you said the Coalition haven’t offered any alternative proposal to the super tax changes, but the Greens have proposed an alternative around indexing the threshold. Are you open to good faith negotiation with the Greens to change the model, to say they’ve achieved the same outcome, but addresses one of those concerns that’s been put forward? Or are you determined to push it through without any change?

Chalmers:

Our preference is to push it through without any changes. The timing of that is to be determined, and unless I missed an announcement, I’m not sure that there’s a shadow Treasury spokesperson yet in the Greens team. If there is, at some point between now and the parliament going back, obviously, we engage with the parliament in an effort to pass our legislation, but my preference, my intention, is to pass the changes that we have proposed.

I will obviously engage in a respectful way with the crossbench in the Senate, because, as the pm said yesterday or the day before, and as I repeated today, we don’t have the numbers on our own in the Senate, so there’s always an element of discussion to try and get our legislation passed.

Journalist:

You briefly mentioned the changes to aged care being delayed. A couple of questions on this issue. Presumably it means that Australians will not start paying more for their aged care for another 4 months than you were originally planning. So what impact does that have on revenue?

Also, the government voted multiple times against amendments put forward by the Coalition to have a 12‑month transition period for this legislation. There’s been warnings for months that this was not ready to go. There’s been complaints the whole way through. Is this not a failure on the government’s part to actually have communicated effectively the information that the sector needed to be able to implement the changes on July 1?

Chalmers:

I think Mark and Sam have been through most of the answers to your question earlier today in terms of the fiscal impact. We’ll update that in the usual way in the mid‑year budget update, but a delay like this is likely to cost in the order of $900 million over the forward estimates. I think we’ve done this in good faith, out of necessity, it wasn’t ready to go, and so we’ve got a responsible delay here.

We shouldn’t forget that, even with this modest delay, the changes that were worked up by Anika and Mark and are being implemented by Sam and Mark are really important changes to make our budget more sustainable. You think about those areas where there is substantial pressure on the Budget, areas like aged care, like the NDIS, like interest costs, we have made good progress. And so even with this delay that mark and Sam have announced today, these are really important reforms. They’re really important for the Budget. Most importantly of all, they will help ensure that we deliver the standard of care that older Australians need and deserve.

Journalist:

Very briefly, you acknowledge that you can’t pass legislation by yourself.

Chalmers:

I don’t think that’s new news, Tom.

Journalist.

No, no, of course. But in the context of $3 million super the Greens have said indexation, or a $2 million threshold – any interest on the threshold, you’ll probably have to compromise somewhere?

Chalmers:

Really the same answer as I gave before. My preference and my intention is to legislate the package that we proposed more than 2 years ago, the legislation and regulations we made available 18 months and a year ago. That’s my preference, that’s my intention.

I think pointing out that we don’t have the numbers on our own in the Senate is just a reflection of the reality. I’ll have a discussion with the crossbench, with the Greens at some point between now and when the parliament returns.

Journalist:

Treasurer, in the months before the election, Australians heard you say that the economy had turned a corner and better days were ahead. Just wondering if your comments just then that the pressures are increasing and not easing on the Budget. Are better days still ahead, but just a bit further off?

Chalmers:

It remains the case that the Australian economy is turning a corner as the global economy has taken a turn for the worse. It’s still the case. There are some temporary factors playing out in this March quarter – as I said, natural disasters, state public demand, the conclusion of big projects in some state budgets, for example. But overwhelmingly, our economic story in Australia is a story of relative economic strength. I’ve had the opportunity to speak with a number of my colleagues over the course of – international colleagues and counterparts over the course of the last 2 months or so, and they all look at the kind of data that we’re getting as a good thing.

I think I’m having a discussion with my new Canadian counterpart tomorrow morning at 7am – so the Australian story is a compelling one. The economic story is a story of economic strength, as I said before, that combination of lower inflation, very low unemployment, higher wages and incomes, interest rates coming down, debts come down. We haven’t had a negative quarter of growth.

In the context of what we’re seeing around the world, those are very decent outcomes – better than that, and I still am very firmly optimistic about the future of our economy. Despite all of these very substantial global economic headwinds, we have a lot of advantages that a lot of other countries don’t have.

Journalist:

It seems Australia [inaudible] the letter to US and other countries asking for their best offer on a trade deal. Just quickly, what would your elevator pitch be to the US president about why we need a better deal?

Chalmers:

I’m unlikely to see him in an elevator. But the point that we have made repeatedly is that ours is a relationship of mutual economic benefit. We are different to a lot of these other countries that the Americans are negotiating with in that, apart from some unusual quarterly outcomes, overwhelmingly they’ve run a big trade surplus with us, and so we’re different. It’s a relationship of mutual economic benefit, and we see these tariffs and trade tensions as self‑defeating.

I really encourage you to read that OECD piece of work that came out yesterday afternoon – it really lays out, I think, in quite confronting ways, the costs and consequences of these escalating trade tensions, and even in a world where some of these tariffs get unwound, when you speak to global investors like I do as part of my job, it’s the unpredictability as well that is buffeting people’s investment intentions and the global economy more broadly, and so I would say to the Americans publicly what we say to them privately: it’s a relationship of mutual economic benefit. We are different to a lot of the other countries that they are negotiating with, and we overwhelmingly, to be blunt about it, see these tariffs as a very bad development for the American economy, for the global economy, for the regional economy, and we won’t be immune from that.

Journalist:

Just following on from both of those 2 last questions, amid all this global uncertainty, you say that Australia has still turned the corner, and you’re optimistic about things ahead, but if you could put that into context for the everyday Australian, are living standards going to get better, worse or the status quo for the rest of this year?

Chalmers:

Living standards are getting better. One of the stunning, positive components of these national accounts is that we’ve got the most appropriate measure of living standards growing at 1.7 per cent – they were falling 1.7 per cent when we came to office. We finished last year, the second half of last year, where living standards in Australia were growing faster than the OECD average, growing I think around twice the G7 average the measure of living standards. And if you look at the Treasury forecasts in the Budget, they expect growth in living standards to accelerate. That’s because of the progress that we’ve made as Australians together.

The measure of living standards reflects inflation coming down very substantially. It reflects interest rates coming down. It reflects the tax cuts. It reflects the progress we’ve made on wages, and what a sensational outcome yesterday was for a fifth of the workforce relying on awards in our economy.

This is not accidental. This is deliberate. This is our economic plan, lifting living standards in our economy, and we expect that to continue. We acknowledge that people are doing it tough still; that they’re still under pressure. We acknowledge the big hole that people were in when we came to office, and we’ve worked our tails off to try and turn that around and we’re seeing in these national accounts data that that is being turned around. Now we acknowledge, as I have probably 30 or 40 or 50 times in your presence, that sometimes or often, how people feel and fare in the economy doesn’t match the aggregate national numbers that we see in the national accounts, but you’d rather them heading up than heading down? They’re heading up now under us. They were heading down under our predecessors, and the fact that they’re heading up now is deliberate, not accidental. It’s gradual, but it’s important.

Journalist:

Treasurer, are you concerned that the Prime Minister might be about to poach Steven Kennedy to lead Prime Minister and Cabinet?

Chalmers:

A little! But I don’t know.

I pay tribute to Glyn Davis in the first instance. Glyn Davis and I go way, way back. I was a researcher for Glyn in the Premier’s department in the late 1990s and I’ve just got a mountain of respect for Glyn Davis. I’m personally sorry to see him go. He is a person of towering intellect. He is a massive brain who made a huge contribution in this gig that he’s leaving shortly, but also over a lifetime of service, and so I pay tribute to Glyn in the first instance.

I see the speculation about candidates for that role that Glyn is vacating. No doubt the Prime Minister is considering a handful of wonderful people. I’m very fortunate that I get to work with Steven Kennedy, and the decisions about the secretaries are decisions for the prime minister in consultation with us, and no doubt, before long, he’ll make his views clear.

Journalist:

Treasurer, just back on back on defence spending, the sorts of increases that our comparable countries are looking at would be for us in the order of $40 billion a year. Joel Fitzgibbon was out publicly a month ago saying he worried that there wasn’t an appetite in Australia to do what needs to be done on defence to get ready for what’s coming in the not too far future.

Do you think – is that sort of money, $40 billion a year, like is that even feasible in the economic environment that we have at the moment?

Chalmers:

Well, it’s a substantial amount of investment. I think one of the unfortunate things about this – I respect Joel’s view, obviously, and Kim Beazley and others – I know that there will be a constituency always for more defence spending. There will also be a substantial constituency for less defense spending. We get pressure. We get pushed and pulled in both directions when it comes to defense spending and our job, our responsibility, which we embrace, is to try and make the right decisions for the right reasons, and recognising the global environment is tricky.

The global environment in security terms and economic terms is dangerous, and that’s why we are substantially increasing investment in our defence capability. We’ve sat in here for hours and hours and hours on end, finding room in budgets to make very substantial increases to defence spending, and that’s because we share the view overall that defence spending needs to rise, and that’s why it’s rising in the 4 Budgets that we’ve handed down.

Is that everyone? Thanks very much, guys, thank you.

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

The NT Police Force is calling for information in relation to an aggravated robbery in Tennant Creek overnight.

Around 2:10am, the Joint Emergency Services Communication Centre received reports of an unlawful entry and stolen motor vehicle from a lodge on Paterson Street.

It is alleged an unknown number of offenders stole a white Ford Ranger. The vehicle exited the premises by ramming through the gates of the lodge.

General duties members coordinated a response and successfully deployed a tyre deflation device on the vehicle along Paterson Street before it came to a stop in bushland nearby Mulga Camp. The offenders fled the scene, and police are continuing investigations to identify those involved.

Anyone with information in relation to the incident is urged to contact police on 131 444. Please reference to job number P25150339. You can anonymously report crime via Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

The Northern Territory Police Force is continuing to investigate the death of a 24-year-old man in police custody in Alice Springs.

This incident is being investigated by the Major Crime Section, which operates under strict protocols.

The coronial investigation has been paused, while the criminal investigation into the man’s death is undertaken to determine whether any criminality was involved.

The coroner has been made aware of the decision and will be provided with regular updates as the criminal investigation progresses.

All evidence collected in relation to the death, including CCTV, cannot be released until the criminal investigation is concluded.

The timeline for this investigation is unknown at this early stage.

The cause of the man’s death remains undetermined.

An independent examination of the initial undetermined findings of the autopsy is also being undertaken.

The forensic pathologist is in the process of completing further investigation to ascertain the cause of death.

The NTPF is aware of the public interest in this matter and further updates will be provided through a media release as relevant information becomes available.

*This release was updated at 3:25pm on 4/06/2025. 

Source: Australian Green Party

​Hyperdome music festival on 7 June 2025 will be the third music festival to participate in the continuing NSW drug checking trial.
The free and anonymous drug checking service allows festival patrons to bring a small sample of substances they intend to consume to be analysed. Qualified health staff provide a rapid evaluation of the main components of the substance in line with available technology, and an indication of potency where possible.
NSW Chief Health Officer, Dr Kerry Chant said there will always be risks involved when consuming these substances and this is not an endorsement of illicit drug use.
“The drug checking trial is designed to help patrons make safer choices by connecting them with experienced health and peer staff who can provide information along with harm reduction advice,” Dr Chant said.
“The service is staffed by peer workers, health workers and analysts who clearly communicate the capabilities and limitations of drug checking to festival patrons. 
“Patrons are never advised that a drug is safe to use. Staff will provide patrons with a referral to health and welfare services available at the event and in the community to help support harm minimisation.”
The first trial site was located at the Yours and Owls music festival in Wollongong on 1 and 2 March 2025. The second trial site was located at the Midnight Mafia Festival in Sydney on 3 May 2025.
NSW Health and NSW Police Force are working closely with festival organiser Symbiotic and other stakeholders to ensure safe and effective implementation of the trial at the Hyperdome festival. The trial operates alongside other harm reduction and medical services at participating festivals. Illicit drugs remain illegal in NSW.
“Drug checking is one more tool in the belt to create a safer event and we welcome and support NSW Health on this Government-led harm reduction initiative,” Symbiotic Co-Director Janette Bishara said.
The 12 month trial will be independently evaluated. Up to nine additional festivals will be included in the trial following Hyperdome.
The trial comes after the NSW Government’s Drug Summit concluded in early December. The recently released Report on the 2024 New South Wales Drug Summit provides a priority action recommending a trial of music festival-based drug testing.
Further information on the NSW drug checking trial can be found here.
More information for young people around how to keep themselves and their friends safe at music festivals is available on the Your Room website.

Source: New South Wales Community and Justice

Devonport man charged with trafficking

Wednesday, 4 June 2025 – 3:15 pm.

A man has been charged with major trafficking and police have seized significant quantities of ice and cannabis as part of an ongoing operation in the North West.
The 43 year old Devonport man was charged yesterday after members from Western Drugs and Firearms Unit and Task Force Scelus, with the support of specialist police resources, executed a search warrant at a Devonport address.
During the search police located and seized 25 grams of ice, 350 grams of cannabis, ammunition, and a chainsaw believed to have been stolen.
The Devonport man was charged in relation to yesterday’s search as well as trafficking alleged to have occurred between December 2024 and June 2025.
As part of the targeted operation, police have now seized a total of 65 grams of ice, and 1 kilogram of cannabis.
The man has been charged with two counts of trafficking in controlled substance, possessing a controlled drug, dealing with proceeds of crime, possessing ammunition when not the holder of a firearms licence and unlawful possession of property.
He was remanded in custody to appear in the Devonport Magistrates Court this afternoon.
Anyone with information is asked to contact police on 131 444 or Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or at crimestopperstas.com.au. Information can be provided anonymously.

Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

Most people comply with their tax obligations. However, there are a small number of people who deliberately do the wrong thing. The ATO-led SFCT was established to respond to this, targeting the more serious financial crimes in Australia.

The case studies on this page reinforce that those who deliberately cheat the system will be held to account.

Stay up to date on the latest SFCT outcomes by subscribing to general email updates. Subscribers will receive updates on all new general content on our website, including the latest SFCT case studies.

Government fraudster sentenced to jail

Paolo Esmaquel was sentenced on 28 May 2025 in the Melbourne County Court to 18 months of imprisonment in addition to the jail time previously imposed for similar federal offences in November 2024.

She was charged with 3 categories of offending against Government at both federal and state levels: tax fraud, identity and counterfeiting fraud, and social security fraud.

The ATO worked collaboratively with other partner agencies across Government to hold Ms Esmaquel to account for her actions.

An operation conducted by the ATO-led SFCT uncovered her elaborate scheme to commit tax fraud by stealing the identities of 3 different individuals.

One of the assumed identities was registered by Ms Esmaquel as a tax practitioner with the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB). To do this, she submitted forged documents to the TPB that falsely claimed she completed the required tertiary education to become a tax agent and forged a declaration from a chartered accountant.

Following this, she set up a tax agent profile on ATO Online Services and linked several taxpayers to her account. Ms Esmaquel then lodged 10 fraudulent business activity statements on behalf of these taxpayers without their knowledge or consent.

As a result of the investigation, the TPB cancelled her tax agent registration.

Acting Deputy Commissioner and Serious Financial Crime Taskforce (SFCT) Chief Kath Anderson acknowledges the prevalence of identity crime, saying ‘With a rise in scammers and cyber criminals out in the community, it’s more important than ever to protect your personal identifying information. This case shows how far criminals will go to commit identity fraud and exploit the tax and super system.’

‘We have strengthened our systems against fraud and financial crime through prevention, early detection, containment and consequences, such as the jail time Ms Esmaquel received’.

Read more in the media release.

Former registered liquidator sentenced to prison

Former liquidator Peter Amos has been sentenced to 4 years imprisonment for dishonestly gaining an advantage for his business and himself contrary to the Corporations Act.

Mr Amos was a registered liquidator and business owner of Amos Insolvency Pty Ltd (Amos Insolvency).

Between 6 October 2016 and 31 December 2022, Mr Amos transferred $2,498,546 from the accounts of Mikcon Employment Services Pty Ltd, TPC (Vic) Pty Ltd, P O W 4X4 Pty Ltd, A-Force Electrics Pty Ltd, and Conomi Group Pty Ltd to Amos Insolvency.

ATO Deputy Commissioner and Serious Financial Crime Taskforce Chief John Ford welcomed the court’s decision, saying the sentencing is a warning to those looking to use their position to exploit the system.

‘This outcome sends a clear message to those who look to game the system to gain an unfair advantage – you will be caught,’ Mr Ford said.

Read more about the outcome in the media releaseExternal Link.

Woman sentenced for false claims and forged documents

On 1 October 2024, Ashmita Sharma appeared before the Downing Centre Local Court in NSW for sentence.

Ms Sharma received two 18-month suspended sentences, to be served concurrently. She pleaded guilty to committing GST fraud, JobKeeper fraud and attempting to pervert the course of justice, contrary to sections 134.2(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth) and 43(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) respectively.

Ms Sharma was also ordered to be of good behaviour for 3 years and repay the remaining $26,426 in stolen funds to us.

In August 2020, Ms Sharma lodged:

• a false COVID-19 JobKeeper application on behalf of a dormant company that listed her father as the sole director, without his knowledge or authorisation
• 3 separate business activity statements
• a false claim for a Cashflow Boost Stimulus which was taken into account on sentence.

In total, Ms Sharma received $30,926 as a result of the offending.

During the course of the matter, Ms Sharma was also charged with one count of attempting to pervert the course of justice by forging a medical certificate to avoid attending court.

Operation Hyacinth is part of a broader investigation by the SFCT into the misuse of government funds. Our message is clear; those who think they can steal and cheat the system for their own financial gain will be caught. Attempting to avoid these consequences can make the situation worse.

This SFCT matter was prosecuted by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) (CDPP) following a referral from the ATO.

To report any known or suspected illegal behaviour you can either complete the tip-off form or phone us on our tip-off hotline on 1800 060 062.

Find out more about the Serious Financial Crime Taskforce.

Attempts to commit gold bullion fraud didn’t have the outcome 2 fraudsters had planned.

The investigation, conducted under the ATO-led SFCT, revealed that Cedric Adrian Millner and Jonatan Kelu purchased GST-free gold bullion, refashioned it into scrap and then sold it inclusive of GST to a refiner. Millner and Kelu claimed GST input tax credits by falsely stating that the GST-free gold bullion was purchased inclusive of GST under the GST second-hand rules.

The reward for engaging in this complex $40 million fraud activity was a sentence of 8 years in jail for both men, handed down in the Supreme Court of NSW.

These criminals thought their actions would go undetected, but our expert team of investigators uncovered the fraud and worked to solve the case, bringing together thousands of documents and multiple data sets to form a solid brief that would ultimately be their downfall.

Operation Nosean was established to look at network participants in the gold bullion and precious metals industry. This included refiners, bullion dealers, gold kiosks, dealers and buyers within established supply chains involved in gold recycling arrangements, seeking to exploit the GST rules in relation to precious metals.

New laws were introduced in April 2017 to combat fraud in the gold bullion and precious metals industry.

Our message is clear to those who seek to evade or cheat the tax system: there is no place for you to hide and we will not tolerate this behaviour.

For more information see:

Second sentencing for Australia’s largest tax fraud case

On 29 March 2018, Michael Issakidis faced the Supreme Court of NSW for his involvement in the largest prosecuted tax fraud case in Australia’s history.

Alongside his co-conspirator Anthony Dickson, Issakidis deliberately absorbed $450 million of otherwise assessable income. He did this using complex domestic and international trust and tax evasion structures. This caused a loss to the Commonwealth of $135 million. By creating a web of false identities and siphoning money offshore, the pair acquired approximately $63 million.

Issakidis was sentenced to 10 years and 3 months jail for his involvement in the operation. This followed the 2015 sentencing of Dickson, whose original 11-year sentence was increased to 14 years on appeal.

The significant penalties handed down to both Issakidis and Dickson demonstrate the success of the SFCT in dealing with those who deliberately cheat the system. As a member of the SFCT, we are equipped with the resources, data-matching capability and international and domestic intelligence-sharing relationships to uncover even the most complex tax evasion schemes.

People who deliberately avoid paying the correct amount of tax will be caught and will face the full force of the law.

For more information see:

Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

The Northern Territory Police Force is continuing to investigate the death of a 24-year-old man in police custody in Alice Springs.

This incident is being investigated by the Major Crime Section, which operates under strict protocols and with full transparency.

In consultation with the Northern Territory Coroner, the coronial investigation has been paused, while the criminal investigation into the man’s death is undertaken to determine whether any criminality was involved.

The coroner has requested, and will be provided, with regular updates as the criminal investigation progresses.

All evidence collected in relation to the death, including CCTV, cannot be released until the criminal investigation is concluded.

The timeline for this investigation is unknown at this early stage.

The cause of the man’s death remains undetermined.

An independent examination of the initial undetermined findings of the autopsy is also being undertaken

The forensic pathologist is in the process of completing further investigation to ascertain the cause of death.

The NTPF is aware of the public interest in this investigation and further updates will be provided through a media release as relevant information becomes available.

Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry

Today’s National Accounts show that our economy continues to grow in the face of substantial economic headwinds at home and abroad.

While overall growth in the Australian economy remains subdued, the private sector recovery we have planned and prepared for is gradually taking hold.

With all the uncertainty in the world, any growth is a decent outcome.

Lower public demand, combined with global economic uncertainty and the impact of natural disasters, meant growth was weaker than expected.

Even with these challenges, we are seeing private demand and incomes continuing to recover.

Today’s numbers show the private sector stepping up as public demand steps back.

The economy grew 0.2 per cent in the March quarter, leaving annual growth steady at 1.3 per cent.

While growth in the quarter was weaker than expected, the Australian economy remains one of the strongest in the world.

No major advanced economy has achieved what we have, with unemployment in the low 4s, inflation below 2.5 per cent and continuous growth for three years.

Public demand has played a role in keeping the economy from going backwards over the past two years, but we know strong and sustainable economic growth is driven by the private sector.

Our plan has always focused on restoring the private sector to its rightful place as the main driver of growth in our economy.

While the private sector‑led recovery was always going to be gradual, today’s data shows encouraging signs it is continuing.

Private demand grew 0.5 per cent, contributing 0.3 of a percentage point to growth in the quarter.

The contribution from private demand was greater than overall GDP growth.

Growth in private demand was broad based, with consumption, new business investment and dwelling investment all growing in the quarter.

These three components have grown at the same time in only around 1 in every 3 quarters since records began.

Consumption grew 0.4 per cent in the quarter, contributing 0.2 of a percentage point to growth.

Consumption growth was weighed down by the impact of natural disasters and households continuing to exercise caution in spending, with the saving ratio rising to 5.2 per cent – the highest in more than two and a half years.

While consumption growth was modest in the quarter, it was encouraging to see solid growth in real incomes per capita.

Getting real incomes growing again has been central to our Government’s economic strategy after they were going backwards 1.7 per cent when we came to office.

Real incomes per capita grew 1.1 per cent in the quarter and are up 1.7 per cent through the year. This is the strongest quarterly growth rate for real incomes in more than three years.

Growth in real incomes reflects a combination of moderating inflation, solid wage and employment growth, the Government’s tax cuts for every taxpayer and lower interest rates. There was also some support from insurance claims related to weather events.

In the second half of last year real incomes in Australia grew faster than the OECD average and almost twice the G7 average, and we have now recorded a third consecutive quarter of real income growth.

Private investment was an important contributor to growth in the quarter, driven by dwelling investment and new business investment.

Dwelling investment grew by a solid 2.6 per cent in the quarter, to be 5.6 per cent higher through the year, well above average quarterly growth over the past ten years of just 0.2 per cent. This is the type of investment the Government’s $43 billion Homes for Australia Plan will continue to encourage as we deliver on our housing agenda.

New business investment rose 0.4 per cent in the quarter, driven by construction investment, taking the level of business investment to a 12 year high.

Since we came to office, new business investment has grown by an annualised average of 4.4 per cent, compared to an average decline of 1.3 per cent under our predecessors.

Public demand fell 0.5 per cent in the quarter, detracting 0.1 of a percentage point from growth. The moderation in public demand growth means that public demand as a share of GDP fell in the quarter by 0.3 of a percentage point.

The quarterly fall in public demand was driven by a wrap up of a number of large projects in the previous quarter and partly by a moderation in growth of NDIS spending due to the Government’s reforms.

Net exports detracted 0.1 of a percentage point from growth, reflecting the impact of natural disasters and subdued global economic conditions.

Extreme weather events had an impact on mining, tourism and shipping activities in the quarter. Coal export volumes declined by 6.4 per cent in the quarter, weighing down overall non‑rural goods exports, which fell 2.3 per cent.

Despite all the challenges coming at us, Australians are earning more and keeping more of what they earn under Labor.

Compensation of employees grew by 1.5 per cent in the quarter, to be 6.5 per cent through the year. This has seen the wage share of income rise to 53.7 per cent from the below 50 per cent before we came to office.

Wages in future quarters will be supported by the Fair Work Commission’s welcome decision to award a real wage increase for award workers.

Our tax cuts for every taxpayer have contributed to another fall in tax as a share of income. Income tax as a share of income was 15.5 per cent in the quarter, down from 16.3 per cent in the quarter before our tax cuts started rolling out.

The substantial and sustained progress we’ve made on inflation was confirmed again in today’s data, with the National Accounts consumption deflator moderating to 3.3 per cent in annual terms, the lowest in three years.

The first of the interest rate cuts saw mortgage interest costs fall in the quarter. As the rate cuts flow through to household mortgages, we expect them to play more of a role in boosting real incomes in future quarters.

Under Labor, inflation is down, real wages and living standards are rising, unemployment is low, interest rates are falling and the economy is continuing to grow.

All of this progress Australians have made together means that we are well placed and well prepared for the heightened uncertainty and volatility in the global economy in the period ahead.

Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

ACCC grants interim authorisation to allow Battery Stewardship Scheme to continue with limited levy and rebate adjustments.

The ACCC has granted interim authorisation with a condition to the Battery Stewardship Council (BSC) to continue operating the Battery Stewardship Scheme with a limited adjustment of the Scheme’s levy and rebates.

The BSC was formed in 2018 with the primary goal of establishing a Battery Stewardship Scheme to significantly increase battery collections and recycling in Australia.

In September 2020, the ACCC granted authorisation to the BSC to establish and operate a national scheme which manages end-of-life batteries. Under the Scheme, the BSC imposes a weight-based levy on imported batteries at a rate of 4 cents per equivalent battery unit.

By granting interim authorisation, the ACCC will allow the BSC to adjust the levy to take account of changes in the Consumer Price Index since the Scheme’s commencement.

“The Scheme results in significant environmental benefits by diverting the number of batteries headed for landfill, as well as raising public awareness around battery disposal and re-use,” ACCC Deputy Chair Mick Keogh said.

“This interim authorisation is needed to ensure the Scheme’s financial viability, given that costs have risen since its inception.”

Under the interim authorisation, the BSC will also be able to progress the development of new levy arrangements involving an eco-modulated levy to be applied based on battery type. This aims to provide sufficient funding to ensure that rebates provided to participants in the Scheme reflect the actual costs of safe collection and sorting, and to reward processing performance.

“Granting interim authorisation provides the BSC with financial stability, enabling it to maintain the Battery Stewardship Scheme while the ACCC completes its assessment of the proposed broader levy and rebate arrangements,” Mr Keogh said.

In order to address the continued risk of harm from consumers storing button batteries, the ACCC has imposed a condition that the BSC continue implementing its Button Battery Safety Strategy.

“We acknowledge the broader issues raised by interested parties in relation to the Scheme’s performance so far as well as the pathway forward,” Mr Keogh said.

“We will investigate these issues further in our draft determination.”

The interim authorisation will take effect from 4 June 2025 and will remain in place until the ACCC issues its final determination, unless it is revoked or amended by the ACCC.

The ACCC is continuing to assess the BSC’s substantive application, which includes proposals to broaden the scope of the Scheme and further develop levy and rebate mechanisms. Stakeholders will have a further opportunity to comment on the ACCC’s draft determination.

More information, including the ACCC’s reason for decision, is available online on the ACCC’s public register at Battery Stewardship Council.

Note to editors

ACCC authorisation provides statutory protection from court action for conduct that might otherwise raise concerns under the competition provisions of the Competition and Consumer Act (CCA).

Section 91 of the CCA allows the ACCC to grant interim authorisation when it considers it is appropriate and in the public benefit. This allows the parties to engage in proposed conduct while the ACCC is considering the merits of the substantive CCA authorisation application.

The ACCC may review a decision on interim authorisation at any time, including in response to feedback raised following interim authorisation.

Background

Product stewardship is an environmental management strategy that means whoever designs, produces, sells or uses a product takes responsibility for minimising that product’s environmental impact through all of the stages of its life cycle.

The BSC is a not-for-profit entity established to oversee the Battery Stewardship Scheme, which promotes the safe collection, recycling, and disposal of end-of-life batteries. The scheme does not cover automotive lead-acid batteries or batteries already included in other recycling programs.

The BSC first sought authorisation in 2020 for a static, weight-based levy which was charged on imported batteries at a rate of 4 cents per equivalent battery unit. The weight-based charge on imported batteries (or equivalent fee to be paid by members of the scheme) is to be passed on to consumers as a visible levy and used to fund the scheme and a rebate system for service providers responsible for the battery’s collection, sorting and processing.

That authorisation is due to expire on 26 September 2025.