{"id":"BILL-r7413","name":"Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Legislation Amendment Bill 2025","slug":"coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":446006,"registerId":"commonwealth-BILL-r7413-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-05-05","status":"introduced","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[],"analysis":{"summary":{"status_summary":"The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on 26 November 2025 with second reading debate held on 10 March 2026 and a Senate committee report issued on 23 March 2026.","complexity_score":6,"likely_questions":["What steps must an employer follow to enter into an unpaid levy payment arrangement?","How does the bill ensure employees receive their full long service leave entitlements?"],"complexity_factors":["multi-stage approval process for payment arrangements","provisions allowing assumptions for incomplete records"],"plain_english_summary":"The Bill creates a voluntary framework letting coal employers settle historical unpaid payroll levies to the portable long service leave scheme through approved payment arrangements, including instalments and a 20% waiver on remaining liability once fully compliant. It allows reasonable assumptions about wages where records are lacking and protects employees’ full entitlements.\n\nIt primarily affects employers with past unpaid levies, the administering Corporation, and employees eligible for long service leave."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":8,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"This Bill materially expands the operational remit of the existing laws. The original legislative framework mainly set out a levy collection mechanism to fund the portable LSL scheme and the rules for entitlement calculation. The Bill adds a substantive, bespoke remediation regime for historical unpaid levies: it creates binding instalment arrangements (ULPAs), prescribes audit and employee‑specific reporting, allows statutory assumptions where records are incomplete, authorises a 20% waiver of covered liabilities, and disapplies certain recovery and penalty powers while employers remain compliant (proposed Schedule 1; Admin Act proposed s39G). Those features move the law beyond pure levy collection and entitlement administration into negotiated debt remission and repayment policy — reallocating some historic recovery shortfalls onto the Fund and vesting the Corporation and the Minister with significant implementation discretion (proposed clauses 11, 14, 16, 19, 27)."},"complexity_factors":["Proposed new Schedule 1 to the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Payroll Levy Collection Act 1992 with multiple parts (framework, procedures, effects).","Multi‑stage approval process with strict time limits and extension powers (opt‑in notice, draft arrangement within 6 months, final ULPA within 5 months, Board decision timelines) — proposed clauses 5–9, 13–14.","6 target‑day instalment structure and postponement rules with review rights — proposed clauses 21–24.","Offset rules for long service leave cessation payments (RLSLCP) that operate at the employee level and cap offsets — proposed clauses 10, 25–26.","Mandatory and discretionary assumptions both before and after approval, including Ministerial power to set assumptions by legislative instrument and Corporation power to make reasonable assumptions — proposed clause 11; Administration Act proposed s39G.","Requirement for auditor reports and specified form/content for ULPAs (audit evidence, employee lists, wage periods) — proposed clauses 10–12, 16.","Interaction with existing Part 5A of the Administration Act and other statutory definitions (cross‑reference complexity).","Protections while compliant (waiver, no accrual of additional levy, no recovery proceedings) and sharp consequences for non‑compliance (treated as never compliant) — proposed clauses 19, 21, 27, 28.","Administrative discretion concentrated in the Corporation and Board, balanced by limited Administrative Review Tribunal review — proposed clauses 13–14, 17.","Replacement of the additional levy calculation method (amendment to Collection Act s7) — changes to penalty calculation add technical complexity."],"plain_english_summary":"**What this Bill changes (mechanically)\n\n- Creates a formal process that lets employers with historical unpaid coal‑mining long service leave (LSL) levy debts enter into a negotiated repayment plan with the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation (the Corporation). (See proposed Schedule 1 to the Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave) Payroll Levy Collection Act 1992.)\n- Replaces the existing method for calculating the extra penalty levy that applies to late levy payments. (Amendment to the Collection Act, Schedule 1 Part 1.)\n- Allows certain assumptions to be used when calculating historic liabilities where employers lack complete employee records. The Minister may make rules (legislative instruments) about the assumptions that may or must be used, and the Corporation may make reasonable assumptions in individual cases. (Administration Act, proposed section 39G; Collection Act, proposed clause 11.)\n- Sets out a multi‑stage approval process for an unpaid levy payment arrangement (ULPA): an employer opts in, prepares a draft arrangement, gets that reviewed by the Corporation, submits a final ULPA, and the Corporation’s Board approves or refuses it. (Proposed Schedule 1, Parts 2 and 3; proposed clauses 5–14.)\n- Requires ULPAs to list the employees and the wage periods covered, include an auditor’s report supporting the base unpaid levy amount (the “subclause 10(8) amount”), and allow specified long‑service‑leave cessation payments made to employees to reduce the employer’s ULPA liability (offset rules in proposed clauses 10, 25–26).\n- Provides that an employer who complies with an approved ULPA and meets the payment timetable receives a 20% waiver (remission) of the remaining covered levy liability; while compliant under the ULPA, the employer is protected from court recovery actions and from accrual of additional penalty levy for the covered amounts. (Proposed clauses 19, 21, 27.)\n- Prescribes the instalment schedule (six target days/target amounts) and permits limited postponement of target days subject to review; failure to meet a target day typically means the employer is treated as never having been compliant and loses the remission and protections. (Proposed clauses 22–24, 28.)\n- Gives review rights to the Administrative Review Tribunal for particular decisions of the Corporation (e.g. refusal to approve an ULPA or to extend certain time limits). (Proposed clauses 17, 24.)\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Employers in the black coal mining industry who may have unpaid levies because, historically, they treated some workers as outside the portable LSL scheme but later decisions (court rulings or administrative reviews) found those workers covered. These employers are the primary payers under the ULPA framework.\n- Current and former employees who are (or may be) covered by the portable LSL scheme: the Bill preserves their entitlement to receive full LSL payments from the Fund, even where an employer obtains remission of part of its debt under an ULPA (the Fund absorbs shortfalls so employees’ entitlements are paid in full).\n- The Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation and its Board: they gain new decision‑making, information‑gathering and approval powers and new duties to create forms, review arrangements and manage assumptions.\n- Auditors and advisers who prepare the required audit reports and calculations for employers seeking ULPAs.\n\nWhy it matters (official purpose, then how that interacts with costs and incentives)\n\n- Officially, the Bill is designed to resolve \"legacy\" disputes and large historic liabilities that arose after court decisions clarified who was covered by the scheme. The stated aims are to encourage employer participation in resolving unpaid liabilities, enable sustainable repayment over time, and protect the Fund so employees still get paid.\n\n- How that operates in practice and the trade‑offs you should note:\n  - Who pays: employers with historic unpaid levies are asked to make instalment payments; if they comply they get a 20% waiver of the covered liability (proposed clause 27). The Fund will effectively absorb that 20% remission to ensure employees still receive full entitlements. (Proposed clause 27 and EM discussion.)\n  - Who decides: the Corporation’s staff review drafts; the Corporation’s Board makes the formal decision to approve or refuse an ULPA (proposed clauses 8, 13–14). The Minister can set assumption rules by legislative instrument (Administration Act, proposed subsection 39G(3)). The Administrative Review Tribunal can review certain Board decisions (proposed clause 17). These are administrative rather than judicial choices in the first instance.\n  - Incentives and compliance: the 20% waiver and protection from additional penalty levy and recovery actions (while compliant) create a clear incentive for eligible employers to opt into the ULPA process rather than litigate or wait. The flip side is a concentrated benefit for employers who opt in and a diffuse cost to the Fund (and thus to future levy contributors or returns on investment) of the 20% waiver. (Proposed clauses 19, 21, 27.)\n  - Information and audit burden: employers must identify covered employees and periods, provide an auditor’s report attesting to the computed base liability, and supply payroll and cessation payment details. Where records are incomplete, the Bill allows specific, ministerially‑guided assumptions to be used, but those assumptions may change employer exposure depending on how generous or conservative they are. (Proposed clauses 10–12, 11; Administration Act proposed s39G.)\n  - Legal protections and limits: while complying employers avoid additional penalties and recovery actions for amounts covered by an approved ULPA, the Board can refuse an ULPA if there is insufficient information to calculate employee entitlements (proposed paragraph 14(6)(c)). That tension means some employers with very poor records may be unable to access the remission pathway.\n  - Risk of substitution and moral hazard: the availability of a remission and the Fund covering shortfalls could reduce the private cost of non‑payment in earlier years. The Bill attempts to counter that through requirements (audits, named employees/periods, and Board approval criteria) and by limiting remission to 20% conditioned on compliance. (Proposed clauses 10–14, 27.)\n  - Administrative discretion and parliamentary oversight: the Minister can make rules about assumptions by legislative instrument (subject to parliamentary scrutiny mechanisms), and the Corporation has discretion in form approval and enquiry powers. That concentrates implementation detail in regulatory instruments and administrative practice rather than the Act’s core text. (Administration Act proposed s39G; proposed clause 16.)\n\nPractical effects on behaviour\n\n- Employers with uncertain historic exposure are incentivised to engage with the Corporation, produce the required documentation, and accept a binding instalment timetable in exchange for a 20% remission and protection from penalties and recovery for covered debts.\n- Employers with genuinely insufficient records may face a choice: attempt to produce an ULPA relying on the statutory assumptions (if permitted) or risk having full recovery and penalty liability enforced if the Board refuses approval.\n- The Corporation and Board will spend additional resources assessing draft and final ULPAs, setting forms and assumption guidance, and supervising compliance.\n\nImplementation risks and costs to watch\n\n- Fiscal impact on the Fund: a 20% waiver for participating employers means the Fund must meet employees’ entitlements while accepting a reduction in recoverable receipts (proposed clause 27). That is a present cost to the Fund and may affect future levy settings or investment decisions if widespread.\n- Administrative burden and timing: multi‑stage approvals, information requests, auditor reports and potential Tribunal reviews mean the system could be time‑consuming and resource‑intensive for both employers and the Corporation (proposed clauses 6–14, 17).\n- Uncertainty from assumptions: where records are incomplete the Minister’s instrument and the Corporation’s application of reasonable assumptions will materially affect liability calculations; that introduces implementation risk and potential disputes about fairness or correctness (proposed clause 11; Administration Act proposed s39G).\n- Possible unequal effects across employers: employers who have kept good records and those who can demonstrate cessation payments will be advantaged relative to those with poor records; the Board’s discretion to refuse approval where entitlements cannot be calculated may leave some employers without access to the ULPA pathway (proposed paragraph 14(6)(c)).\n\nBottom line (mechanics then rationale)\n\n- Mechanically, the Bill creates a regulated, time‑limited pathway for employers with historic unpaid coal‑industry LSL levies to enter instalment agreements, subject to audit, assumptions rules, Board approval, and a 20% waiver if the employer complies with the arrangement. It also replaces the existing late‑payment penalty calculation method.\n- The government’s stated purpose is to resolve legacy disputes and preserve employees’ entitlements while enabling sustainable repayments by employers. That design shifts some historic collection risk away from aggressive recovery and into negotiated remediation, but it does this by reallocating a portion (20%) of recoverable amounts onto the Fund and by concentrating administrative discretion in the Corporation and the Minister’s instrument powers (proposed clauses cited above)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025","history":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025/history","analysis":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/coal-mining-industry-long-service-leave-legislation-amendment-bill-2025/documents"}}