{"id":"C2004A02463","name":"Offshore Minerals (Registration Fees) Act 1981","slug":"offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"86 of 1981","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":6904,"registerId":"commonwealth-C2004A02463-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-03-30","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title [see Note 1]","content":"##### 1 Short title \\[see Note 1\\]\n\n  This Act may be cited as the Offshore Minerals (Registration Fees) Act 1981.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commencement [see Note 1]","content":"##### 2 Commencement \\[see Note 1\\]\n\n  This Act shall come into operation on the day on which the Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act 1981 comes into operation.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Interpretation","content":"##### 3 Interpretation\n\n  Expressions used in this Act that are used in the Offshore Minerals Act 1994 have, unless the contrary intention appears, the same meanings as they have in that Act.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Imposition of registration fees","content":"##### 4 Imposition of registration fees\n\n  (1) There is payable to the Designated Authority, in respect of a document that is lodged for registration under section 338 (a section 338 document) or 339 (a section 339 document) of the Offshore Minerals Act 1994 a fee equal to the prescribed percentage of:\n\n(a) the value of the consideration for the document; or\n\n(b) the value of the licence, share or interest transferred or otherwise dealt with by the document;\n\n  whichever is the greater.\n  (1A) The percentage prescribed for the purposes of subsection (1) is not to exceed 10%.\n  (2) Where, but for this subsection, the amount of the fee imposed by subsection (1) in respect of a section 338 or section 339 document would be less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of this subsection, the amount of the fee imposed in respect of the document is that prescribed amount.\n  (2A) The amount prescribed for the purposes of subsection (2) is not to exceed $2,000.\n  (3) For the purpose of calculating the fee payable under subsection (1) in respect of a section 338 document or a section 339 document that is lodged for registration, the value, as determined by the Joint Authority, of any approved exploration works to be carried out in pursuance of the document shall be deducted:\n\n(a) where the fee is to be calculated in accordance with paragraph (1)(a)—from the value referred to in that paragraph; and\n\n(b) where the fee is to be calculated in accordance with paragraph (1)(b)—from the value referred to in that paragraph.\n\n  (4) Where:\n\n(a) a section 338 document or a section 339 document was executed for the purpose of giving effect to a prior agreement; and\n\n(b) a party to the transfer or other dealing to which the section 338 document or section 339 document relates holds a certificate in respect of the document under subsection (6);\n\n  no fee is payable under subsection (1) or (2) for the lodgment for registration of that document but there is payable for the lodgment for registration of that document a fee of the amount prescribed for the purposes of this subsection.\n  (4A) The amount prescribed for the purposes of subsection (4) is not to exceed $20,000.\n  (5) Where:\n\n(a) 2 or more parties to a transfer to which a section 338 document relates, or a dealing to which a section 339 document relates are related corporations within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001; and\n\n(b) any of those parties is the holder of a certificate in respect of the document under subsection (7);\n\n  no fee is payable under subsection (1) or (2) for the lodgment for registration of that document but there is payable for the lodgment for registration of that document a fee of the amount prescribed for the purposes of this subsection.\n  (5A) The amount prescribed for the purposes of subsection (5) is not to exceed $20,000.\n  (6) Where the Joint Authority is satisfied that a prior agreement referred to in subsection (4) was not entered into, or is not proposed to be entered into, substantially for the purpose of avoiding or reducing the registration fees that would, but for the issue of a certificate under this paragraph, be payable under subsection (1) or (2) for the lodgment for registration of a section 338 document or a section 339 document that was entered into or is to be entered into to give effect to the prior agreement, the Joint Authority may, on an application in writing made at any time by a person who is or proposes to be a party to the prior agreement, grant a certificate that the Joint Authority is so satisfied.\n  (7) Where the Joint Authority is satisfied that a document referred to in subsection (5):\n\n(a) was or is proposed to be entered into solely for the purpose of the reorganization or the better administration of the related corporations or any of them; and\n\n(b) was not entered into, or is not proposed to be entered into, substantially for the purpose of avoiding or reducing the registration fees that would, but for the issue of a certificate under this paragraph, be payable under subsection (1) or (2);\n\n  the Joint Authority may, on an application in writing made at any time by any of those related corporations, grant a certificate that the Joint Authority is so satisfied.\n  (8) Moneys received by the Designated Authority as fees payable under this Act shall be deemed to be received by the Designated Authority on behalf of the Commonwealth.","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Regulations","content":"##### 5 Regulations\n\n  The Governor‑General may make regulations prescribing matters:\n\n(a) required or permitted by this Act to be prescribed; or\n\n(b) necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.","sortOrder":4}],"analysis":{"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[{"type":"retroactive_impossibility","section":"2 and 3","severity":"high","reasoning":"At the moment of commencement in 1981, the definitional foundation of the Act (section 3) referenced a non-existent statute. The Act was therefore definitionally incoherent from the day it commenced. While this may have been remedied by later amendment, on its face the Act purports to have always used 1994 Act definitions, which is a logical impossibility — expressions cannot 'have the same meanings as they have in' an Act that does not yet exist.","confidence":0.92,"description":"Temporal anachronism: The Act commenced on the day the Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act 1981 commenced, yet section 3 imports definitions from the Offshore Minerals Act 1994 — an Act that did not exist until 13 years after commencement."},{"type":"self_contradicting","section":"4(1) and 4(2)","severity":"medium","reasoning":"Subsection (1A) caps the prescribed percentage at 10%. For very low-value transactions, 10% of the consideration or asset value could produce a fee below the prescribed minimum in subsection (2), which can be up to $2,000. In such cases subsection (2) overrides and imposes the minimum. However, if regulations set the minimum at $2,000 and the percentage at 10%, a document with consideration of, say, $100 would produce a fee of $10 under subsection (1), which subsection (2) then raises to $2,000 — a rate of 2,000% of consideration. The Act provides no guidance on resolving this tension, and the minimum floor has no proportionality constraint relative to transaction value.","confidence":0.75,"description":"The minimum fee floor in subsection (2) can theoretically exceed the maximum fee ceiling implied by subsection (1A), creating an impossible fee calculation scenario."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"4(3)","severity":"medium","reasoning":"If the Joint Authority determines that the value of approved exploration works equals or exceeds both (a) the consideration and (b) the value of the licence/share/interest, the greater of the two values after deduction could be zero or negative. The Act is silent on whether the fee then defaults to zero, or whether the minimum prescribed amount under subsection (2) still applies. A literal reading of subsection (2) would impose the minimum fee even when the substantive fee base has been entirely deducted away, producing a result that contradicts the evident policy purpose of the deduction.","confidence":0.78,"description":"The deduction of approved exploration works value under subsection (3) can theoretically reduce the fee base to zero or below, yet the Act does not address this outcome or prevent a negative fee base from interacting with the minimum fee floor in subsection (2)."},{"type":"other","section":"4(4) and 4(5)","severity":"medium","reasoning":"A transaction between related corporations (engaging subsection (5)) could also have been executed to give effect to a prior agreement (engaging subsection (4)), with certificates held under both subsections (6) and (7). The Act provides no priority rule. A literal reading could require payment of two separate flat fees — one under subsection (4) and one under subsection (5) — while the base fees under (1) and (2) are excluded by both provisions. This is an unresolved gap that creates compliance uncertainty.","confidence":0.7,"description":"Subsections (4) and (5) both exempt parties from fees under subsections (1) and (2) and substitute a flat prescribed fee, but neither subsection addresses what happens if a document simultaneously satisfies both subsection (4) and subsection (5) conditions — leaving it unclear whether one or two flat fees are payable."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"4(6)","severity":"low","reasoning":"The phrase 'at any time' in subsection (6) permits post-lodgment applications. If a certificate is granted after fees have already been paid under subsections (1) or (2), subsection (4) would retrospectively render those fees not payable. However, the Act contains no refund provision, no time limit to prevent this anomaly, and no transitional rule. The practical result is either that 'at any time' is not given its plain meaning, or that the Commonwealth retains fees that were legally not payable — neither of which is a satisfactory legal outcome.","confidence":0.8,"description":"The certificate under subsection (6) may be applied for 'at any time' including after the document has already been lodged and fees paid, yet the Act provides no mechanism for refund or retrospective fee adjustment."}],"contradictions":[{"severity":"high","section_a":"2 (Commencement — references to Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act 1981)","section_b":"3 (Interpretation — references to Offshore Minerals Act 1994)","confidence":0.9,"description":"The Act's commencement is tied to a 1981 Act, but its operative definitions are drawn exclusively from a 1994 Act. The Act is therefore either meaningless from 1981 to 1994 (no definitions available) or the commencement provision is contradicted by the definitional structure."},{"severity":"medium","section_a":"4(1) and 4(1A) (percentage fee, capped at 10%)","section_b":"4(2) and 4(2A) (minimum fee floor, up to $2,000)","confidence":0.77,"description":"For sufficiently low-value transactions, the percentage-based fee under subsection (1) — even at the maximum 10% — will be less than the minimum floor under subsection (2). The two provisions produce conflicting fee amounts for the same document, with no tiebreaker other than subsection (2)'s blunt override, which can result in an effective rate vastly exceeding the 10% cap."},{"severity":"medium","section_a":"4(4) (flat fee substituted where prior agreement certificate held)","section_b":"4(5) (flat fee substituted where related corporations certificate held)","confidence":0.68,"description":"Both provisions independently waive fees under subsections (1) and (2) and substitute a prescribed flat fee. Where a document qualifies under both provisions simultaneously, the Act contradicts itself as to how many flat fees are owed and which subsection governs, with no harmonising rule."},{"severity":"medium","section_a":"4(3) (deduction of exploration works value reducing fee base)","section_b":"4(2) (minimum fee floor applying where calculated fee is below prescribed minimum)","confidence":0.74,"description":"Subsection (3) is intended to reduce the fee burden by deducting exploration works value, but subsection (2) can negate this entirely by imposing a minimum fee regardless. Where the deduction reduces the fee to zero, the minimum fee floor revives a charge that the deduction was designed to eliminate, directly contradicting the policy and operation of subsection (3)."}]},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains tightly focused on its original purpose of imposing registration fees on offshore mineral document lodgments. While it has been amended over time (evidenced by the 1994 Act reference and modern corporation law references), it has not expanded beyond the fee collection mechanism for offshore mining transactions."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-referencing to the Offshore Minerals Act 1994 for definitions and document types (sections 338 and 339)","Multiple calculation methods with 'whichever is the greater' logic (subsection 4(1))","Nested conditional exemptions requiring certificates from the Joint Authority (subsections 4, 5, 6, and 7)","Caps on prescribed amounts scattered throughout (subsections 1A, 2A, 4A, 5A)","Value determination subject to administrative discretion ('as determined by the Joint Authority')","Anti-avoidance provisions requiring subjective assessments of corporate purpose (subsections 6 and 7)"],"plain_english_summary":"This law sets up a system for charging fees when companies register certain documents related to offshore mining activities in Australian waters.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Charges fees on transfers and dealings** involving offshore mineral licences, shares, or interests. When companies buy, sell, or transfer rights to explore or mine for minerals in offshore areas, they must pay a registration fee to the government.\n- **How fees are calculated:** The fee is a percentage (up to 10%) of either the sale price or the value of the licence/interest being transferred—whichever is higher. There's also a minimum fee (up to $2,000) so small transactions don't escape charges entirely.\n- **Deductions allowed:** Companies can reduce the fee by the value of approved exploration work they commit to doing.\n- **Special rules for reorganisations:** If companies are just restructuring internally (moving assets between related companies) or implementing prior agreements, they can apply for a certificate to pay a flat fee instead (up to $20,000), provided the arrangement isn't mainly designed to dodge fees.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Mining companies operating in Australia's offshore mineral fields\n- The \"Designated Authority\" (the government body managing these registrations)\n- The \"Joint Authority\" (which assesses applications for fee reductions)\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis ensures the government collects revenue when valuable mining rights change hands, while providing flexibility for legitimate corporate restructures and encouraging exploration investment through deductions."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"},"summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The Act was originally enacted in 1981 as the 'Minerals (Submerged Lands) Registration Fees Act' alongside the Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act 1981. It has since been renamed and updated to reference the Offshore Minerals Act 1994, reflecting a broader legislative rebranding of Australia's offshore minerals regime. The core fee-charging mechanism remains consistent with original intent, but the addition of anti-avoidance certificate provisions and the cap provisions (subsections 1A, 2A, 4A, 5A) suggest amendments have refined and constrained the original scope of executive discretion in setting fee levels."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple fee calculation methods depending on circumstances (percentage-based, minimum fee, flat fee for concessions)","Fee amounts depend on regulations made separately under this Act, requiring cross-referencing","Requires understanding of related legislation (Offshore Minerals Act 1994, Corporations Act 2001) to fully apply","Certificate-based concession system involves discretionary decisions by the Joint Authority, adding procedural complexity","Anti-avoidance provisions (subsections 6 and 7) require assessment of purpose and intent behind transactions","Dual-track fee regime (prior agreements vs related corporations) with similar but distinct qualifying conditions","The deduction mechanism for approved exploration works (subsection 3) adds an extra valuation step to fee calculations"],"plain_english_summary":"The Act imposes registration fees on transfers or dealings in Australian offshore mineral licences, affecting mining companies and investors. Fees are charged as a percentage (by regulation, capped at 10%) of the consideration or licence value, with a minimum fee (capped at $2,000); the value of approved exploration work is deducted before calculation.\n\nLower flat-fee concessions (capped at $20,000) can apply for prior agreements or transfers between related companies if certified. Fees are paid to the designated authority and go to the Commonwealth."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The Act's scope, as expressed in the text, is to set fees and related rules for registering specified offshore minerals documents under the Offshore Minerals Act 1994, including calculation methods, allowable deductions, capped amounts and certificate exceptions (primarily in s4). Nothing in the provided text indicates an expansion or narrowing of that statutory scope beyond those mechanisms; definitions and operation depend on the referenced Offshore Minerals Act and prescribed regulations (s3, s4, s5)."},"complexity_factors":["Cross‑reference to Offshore Minerals Act 1994 for defined terms (s3) increases interpretive dependence on another statute","Two alternative bases for calculating the fee (consideration or value transferred) with requirement to take the greater (s4(1))","Caps and minima expressed as prescribed percentages/amounts plus statutory upper limits (percentage ≤10%; minimum ≤ $2,000; special fees ≤ $20,000) (s4(1A), (2A), (4A), (5A))","Deduction of value for approved exploration works as determined by the Joint Authority introduces valuation discretion (s4(3))","Discretionary certificate regime allowing fee reductions where documents implement prior agreements or intra‑group reorganisations, subject to Joint Authority satisfaction (s4(4), (6), (7))","Reference to related corporations under the Corporations Act 2001 ties application to external corporate law concepts (s4(5))","Commencement linked to commencement of another Act (Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act 1981) creates dependency (s2)","Regulation‑making power to prescribe further detail and limits affects delegated legislative complexity (s5)","Administrative and compliance burdens on parties to apply for Joint Authority certificates and establish values for calculation"],"plain_english_summary":"Requires payment of fees to the Designated Authority when documents lodged for registration under sections 338 or 339 of the Offshore Minerals Act 1994 are registered. Fees are a prescribed percentage (not exceeding 10%) of the consideration or value transferred, subject to a prescribed minimum (≤ $2,000) and special reduced flat fees for prior‑agreement or related‑corporation dealings (each capped ≤ $20,000). The Joint Authority can deduct approved exploration‑work value and may grant certificates allowing reduced fees. Payers are the parties lodging documents; fees are treated as Commonwealth receipts (see s3, s4)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981","history":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981/history","analysis":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/offshore-minerals-registration-fees-act-1981/documents"}}