Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Commonwealth Entities (Payment Surcharges) Bill 2024 and associated bills. It's important to set out the circumstances under which these bills were introduced. They have been introduced to address a historic issue in the authorisation of surcharges charged by Commonwealth entities. Since surcharges were established and regulated by the Reserve Bank in 2003, Commonwealth entities such as the Australian Taxation Office and Services Australia have charged surcharges for using certain payment methods—for example, credit cards. The practice enables Commonwealth entities to provide a range of payment options for customers who are paying fees and charges to the Commonwealth, and it's consistent with how surcharges are used, of course, in the private sector to make payments. While there was no standardisation or whole-of-government approach to the application of surcharges by Commonwealth agencies, they have been generally accepted as an appropriate tool to cover the cost of these Commonwealth agencies using payment platforms that often charge merchant fees—or, in this case, government fees.

On 23 October 2024, the New South Wales government announced that, following advice from the Auditor-General, it had concluded that the New South Wales Department of Customer Service had been unlawfully charging surcharges. The opposition has been advised that, following the announcement by the New South Wales government, the Commonwealth Treasury and Department of Finance commenced work to ensure that Commonwealth entities charging surcharges were doing so with an appropriate authorisation. Treasury and the Department of Finance, in consultation with the Reserve Bank, the Australian Taxation Office and Services Australia, concluded that it was likely there was no appropriate authorisation for the charging of surcharges by many Commonwealth entities. The opposition has been advised that this analysis is supported by legal advice from the Australian Government Solicitor; however, the opposition has not seen this advice. We were advised by the government on Friday that the government intended to progress legislation urgently through the parliament to authorise the historic use of surcharges going back to 2003, as well as going forward, and this legislation was introduced into parliament on Monday.

The bills formally authorise Commonwealth entities to collect surcharges for payments that have legislative authority. The formal authorisation is both retrospective, from 1 January 2003—that is the date that surcharges were first established and regulated by the RBA—and prospective. The bills also create a power for the Minister for Finance to make legislative instruments, which are subject to sunsetting and Senate disallowance, that set whole-of-government payments surcharging policies for Commonwealth entities.

The scope of this power is important. Under the legislation, Commonwealth entities must take all reasonable steps to comply with the surcharging policies when deciding to charge or collect a surcharge. This is intended to ensure consistency of surcharging practices across the Commonwealth and alignment between Commonwealth practices and broader reforms being introduced across the whole of the economy. However, under the legislation, a Commonwealth entity's failure to comply with the surcharging policies does not invalidate its decision to charge a payment surcharge. Furthermore, there is no obligation on Commonwealth entities to refund a payment surcharge where the entity has refunded in full or part the base payment.

The opposition is concerned, therefore, that there are not appropriate incentives to ensure compliance with the surcharge policy, if and when one is made. We will work with the government on this and related issues while acknowledging the context within which this legislation was introduced. We will therefore not oppose the bill in the House and will finalise our position in the Senate based on our ongoing discussions with the government. I take this opportunity to thank the finance minister and her office for making her staff and officials are available to the opposition for a briefing and for the continued good-faith engagement with her and her office.

Debate adjourned.