The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 creates a legislative framework for imposing cost-recovery charges under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 for activities that are neither customs nor excise duties.
The Bill ensures that any charge and its amount must be prescribed in regulations and limited to recovering no more than the Commonwealth’s likely costs.
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 amends the EPBC Act 1999 by establishing a standalone Act under which the Governor-General, by regulation, may impose charges for prescribed matters connected with the administration of the EPBC Act that do not constitute duties of customs or excise. Key elements include:
The Bill itself does not set charge amounts or generate revenue; those details will appear in future regulations. It will have no impact on the Government’s Budget or on business costs until regulations are made.
By ensuring that the EPBC regulatory regime is funded on a cost-recovery basis, the Bill promotes efficient allocation of resources and avoids unnecessary burden on general taxpayers. Charging users of the system aligns with the “polluter-pays” principle, whereby those who benefit from or impose demands on environmental regulation bear its costs.
Cost-recovery charges help maintain a well-resourced assessment and enforcement framework under the EPBC Act, supporting rigorous protection of biodiversity and heritage. By limiting charges to actual costs and vesting charge-setting in regulations subject to ministerial certification, the Bill balances operational flexibility with transparency and accountability.
Over time, a stable funding model reduces fiscal uncertainty and enhances the Government’s ability to respond to emerging environmental challenges. Ensuring that the department can recoup the costs of scientific advice, site inspections and compliance activities strengthens the overall environmental protection regime [Judgment].
Imposing additional charges may erect financial and administrative barriers for applicants—particularly small developers, regional operators and community groups—potentially delaying critical projects or conservation activities. Even cost-recovery fees can deter voluntary compliance or inhibit timely submissions, reducing the effectiveness of environmental protection.
Uniform regulatory charges risk disproportionate impact on those with limited resources. Small businesses and First Nations land managers may face a heavier relative burden than large corporations, undermining equitable access to environmental approvals [Judgment].
There is also the risk that the Minister’s certification threshold for ‘‘no more than cost recovery’’ could be interpreted loosely, leading to over-recovery and hidden taxation. Without robust oversight, charges could escalate over time, further disadvantaging vulnerable stakeholders.
2025-10-30
Passed Both Houses
Unspecified
Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
Climate Change / Environment, Taxation