ASIC (Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy—Annual Determination) Instrument 2023/778

This instrument revolves around a small set of statutory concepts that it defines by reference or supplies as data. Those concepts, and how this instrument treats them, are:

• Applicable financial year. The instrument applies to a single financial year, specified in s 5: the 2022-23 financial year. That ties the numerical inputs in the tables to the levy year for which ASIC will calculate supervisors’ cost-recovery levies.

• Sub-sector population. The Regulations contain a definition of “sub-sector population” (the instrument does not reproduce that definition). Section 6 of this instrument “specifies” the sub-sector population for each listed sub-sector for the purposes of that definition. The table in s 6 pairs each named sub-sector (column 2) with a numeric population (column 3). For example, Item 29 lists “Public companies (unlisted)” with a sub-sector population of 14,943; Item 15 lists “Large proprietary companies” with a population of 10,184; Item 11 lists “Insurance product distributors” with a population of 3,540. Item 25A records a population of 0 for “Operators of notified foreign passport funds and regulated former notified funds”.

• Sub-sector metric. The Regulations define the “basic levy component” and the “graduated levy component” and require an applicable metric for each (the instrument references those definitions). Section 7 of this instrument “specifies” the applicable sub-sector metric for each sub-sector for the purposes of those definitions. The metrics are the numeric bases the Regulations will use, under the formulas contained in the Regulations, to allocate basic and graduated levy amounts between sectors and between participants within sectors. Metrics vary in type and units: some are counts of entities (for example, 1 or 2), some are monetary aggregates (very large numbers consistent with asset or balance figures), some are activity measures (messages, lots, transactions), and some are unit counts used as denominators. Examples: Item 5 (Credit providers) lists a graduated metric of 714,409,148,579; Item 8 (Deposit product providers) lists a graduated metric of 2,961,345,734,368; Item 41 (Superannuation trustees) lists 2,205,973,506,916. Item 14 (Large futures exchange participants) supplies two graduated metrics with units identified in parentheses: 347,768,709 (messages) and 312,671,840 (lots). Item 17 lists metrics in messages and transactions.

• Basic levy component and graduated levy component. The instrument does not define the formulae for those components; it supplies the numerical inputs that, as a matter of law, are “for the purposes of” the definitions of these components in subsections 9(1) and 10(1) of the Regulations (s 7). In short, the instrument is an input table: Regulations tell you how inputs map to levy shares; this instrument supplies the inputs for 2022-23.

• Cross-reference to the Regulations. Section 4 defines “Regulations” as the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017 and adopts, unless the contrary intention appears, any expression used but not defined in this instrument that is defined in the Regulations. That means many operative terms used here (for example “sub-sector population”, “basic levy component”, “graduated levy component”) take their legal meaning from the Regulations, not from this instrument.

• Commencement and retrospective effect. Section 2(1) makes the instrument commence the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation; the accompanying note records that subsection 9(9) of the Act permits retrospective effect before registration. Section 2(2) identifies special Act provisions (subsection 11(3) and (4)) that may control when parts of the instrument take effect. The instrument therefore fits into a broader statutory timetable and parliamentary scrutiny mechanism set out in the Act and Regulations.

These are the main statutory concepts the instrument manipulates: it does not, on its face, change definitions, impose new duties, or authorise new enforcement powers. It supplies the numerical parameters that other statutory rules convert into monetary levies.

The instrument directly affects the classes of persons and entities listed as sub-sectors in the two tables in sections 6 and 7. Each row identifies a sub-sector by name and attaches two types of numerical data: a sub-sector population (s 6) and a sub-sector metric (s 7). The legal effect is that entities in those listed sub-sectors will be allocated levy obligations under the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy regime for the 2022-23 year, in accordance with the Act and the Regulations that use these numbers.

Practically, the instrument affects the following types of entities (not exhaustive; drawn from the tables):

• Financial market operators and participants: large and small securities exchange operators (Items 16, 39, 40), large and small futures exchange operators (Items 13, 38), established and new specialised market operators (Items 8A, 24A), market participants and participants in clearing and settlement facilities (Items 14, 17, 42-45), overseas market operators (Item 26), exempt market operators (Item 10), and exempt CS facility operators (Item 9).

• Licensees and advisers: corporate advisors (Item 3), licensees providing various types of advice (Items 18-21), managed discretionary account providers (Item 23), responsible entities (Item 32), custodians (Item 7), securities dealers (Item 35), payment product providers (Item 28), and risk management product providers (Item 34).

• Credit and deposit sector: credit intermediaries and providers (Items 4-6), deposit product providers (Item 8), margin lenders (Item 24), small and medium amount credit providers (Item 36), and credit rating agencies (Item 6).

• Insurance and superannuation: insurance product distributors and providers (Items 11-12), superannuation trustees (Item 41), wholesale trustees (Item 48) and traditional trustee company service providers (Item 46).

• Corporates and insolvency professions: public and listed corporations (Items 22 and 29), large proprietary companies (Item 15), registered company auditors and auditors of disclosing entities (Items 30 and 1), registered liquidators (Item 31), and registered auditors and auditors of disclosing entities.

• Investment fund operators and product issuers: responsible entities and operators of investor directed portfolio services (Items 25, 32), operators of notified foreign passport funds (Item 25A), retail OTC derivatives issuers (Item 33), and investment-related product providers.

• Energy and niche sectors: wholesale electricity dealers (Item 47).

The instrument lists numerical populations and metrics that determine the share of the total levy burden allocated to each sub-sector and, by extension via the Regulations, to individual entities within each sub-sector. For some sub-sectors the population is small (1-4 entities for items such as Australian derivative trade repository operators (Item 2), large futures exchange operators (Item 13), or Tier 2-4 clearing and settlement facility operators (Items 43-45)), making the per-entity share of any fixed sub-sector allocation potentially large. For other sub-sectors, populations are large (for example, “Public companies (unlisted)” Item 29 with population 14,943, and “Large proprietary companies” Item 15 with population 10,184), which means the fixed-cost apportionment mechanics in the Regulations will result in smaller per-entity shares of any basic levy allocation.

The instrument therefore affects both the universe of entities subject to levy apportionment (the population lists) and the numeric bases (metrics) that will scale graduated levies. Entities should check whether their activity or status is captured by the named sub-sector and, where relevant, confirm which of the supplied metrics applies (some items attach multiple metrics in different units). The instrument itself does not administer invoicing or collection; those actions will follow under the Act and Regulations using these inputs.

This instrument does not itself create new statutory duties or rights in the way that primary legislation or the Regulations do; rather it supplies the numerical inputs that the Regulations use to determine levy liabilities. The key operative duties and rights, and how this instrument interacts with them, are as follows:

• Specification duty exercised by ASIC. The instrument is an exercise of ASIC’s power to make annual determinations under the Regulations. Section 3 states the instrument is made under section 73 of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017. The act of specifying sub-sector populations and metrics is the duty the instrument performs; it is ASIC’s annual administrative function.

• Entities’ duty to pay levies. The instrument itself does not state who must pay levies or when payment is due. Those duties,who must pay, how much, payment timing, penalties for non‑payment,are set out in the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 and the Regulations. The linkage is explicit: s 4 of the instrument says “Regulations means the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017,” and s 7 states that the supplied metrics are “for the purposes of the definitions” of basic and graduated levy components in subsections 9(1) and 10(1) of those Regulations. In short, this instrument supplies inputs that will be transposed into payment obligations under the Act and Regulations.

• Right to know the numeric bases. Subjects regulated by the levy regime acquire, via this instrument, a concrete basis on which their levy will be calculated for 2022-23. The instrument specifies both the denominator (sub-sector population, s 6) and the graduated levy metric (s 7). That information is a fundamental component of any right to assess and challenge a levy calculation because it identifies the numeric inputs used by ASIC under the Regulations.

• Administrative review and parliamentary disallowance. The instrument records statutory modalities for effect and scrutiny. Section 2(2) refers to subsections 11(3) and 11(4) of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 as potentially governing when parts of the instrument take effect; the accompanying note to s 2 states that “Section 11 of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 contains special provisions dealing with the disallowance and taking effect of instruments of this kind.” That signals that the instrument is subject to the Act’s special parliamentary procedures for disallowance and timing. The instrument itself does not set out appeal or merits-review routes; those will be in the Act or other administrative law avenues.

• Interpretation and definitions. Section 4 provides that if an expression is used in this instrument but not defined here, and that expression is defined in the Regulations, then it has the same meaning in this instrument as in the Regulations. That effectively binds the instrument’s interpretation to the Regulations’ definitions. Entities therefore have a right to interpret the instrument only by reference to the Regulations’ definitional framework.

• Limits on discretion. The instrument is a specification of quantitative inputs. It does not, on its face, exercise discretion to depart from the lists; the instrument’s content is a list of figures. Where the Regulations grant ASIC discretion to determine particular metrics, this instrument is the manifestation of that discretion for the year. The Act’s special provisions (s 11) provide procedural controls, including disallowance by Parliament; the instrument itself does not identify internal procedural steps.

Entities affected should treat the instrument as binding numeric input under the statutory regime: it fixes the population and metric figures that the Regulations’ levy formulas will use, and those formulas then generate the levy amounts that give rise to payment duties under the statutory framework.

This instrument does not itself prescribe penalties, enforcement mechanisms, or collection processes. It is a data-setting instrument whose statutory role is to supply the sub-sector populations and metrics that the Regulations call for when calculating levy amounts. Accordingly:

• No penalty provisions in the instrument. The text contains no penalty schedule, default interest, infringement notices, or enforcement machinery. Sections 1-7 are limited to naming the instrument, fixing commencement and effect, stating statutory authority, defining cross-references, specifying the applicable financial year, listing sub-sector populations, and listing sub-sector metrics.

• Enforcement and penalties remain in the Act and Regulations. The instrument repeatedly cross-refers to the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017 (s 3-4) and to the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 (note to s 2). Any rules about enforcement, collection, penalty amounts, compliance notices, recovery through courts, or administrative remedies must be found in those instruments. This instrument supplies data for calculation; it does not change or disclose the enforcement regime.

• Parliamentary disallowance and timing. Section 2(2) and the associated note about s 11 of the Act indicate that statutory special provisions exist concerning how such instruments take effect and the parliamentary disallowance process. The instrument itself does not elaborate those processes; it only refers to them. The implication for regulated persons is that there is a statutory procedure (in the Act) that can affect the instrument’s effective date and may allow parliamentary scrutiny, but the instrument does not itself create remedies or enforcement steps.

• Administrative operation follows from the Regulations. In practice, after ASIC uses these inputs under the Regulations to calculate individual levy obligations, collection and enforcement procedures prescribed in the Act and Regulations will apply. Any sanctions for non-payment and any avenues to contest a levy calculation or liability will be found in the Act and Regulations; they are not set out here.

• Legal certainty of numeric inputs. Because this instrument fixes the numeric inputs, a regulated person’s ability to contest the arithmetic used by ASIC in applying the Regulations will generally depend on whether the instrument correctly identifies the entity’s sub-sector, population number, and applicable metric. Challenges based on incorrect numeric inputs would need to proceed against the instrument’s content as the source of the inputs, but any procedural challenge about the resulting levy assessments must be aligned with statutory processes in the Act and Regulations.

For a reader seeking enforcement or penalty detail, the instrument points to the place where that material is located but does not itself supply it. Entities should consult the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 and the Regulations to find the applicable penalty and enforcement regime.

The instrument expressly situates itself as a subordinate legislative act under the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017 and as part of the statutory architecture created by the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017. Its interactions with other laws are limited to those references in the text:

• Made under the Regulations. Section 3 states that the instrument is made under section 73 of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017. That establishes the instrument as a regulatory instrument authorised by the Regulations.

• Uses defined terms from the Regulations. Section 4 defines “Regulations” as the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017 and directs that, unless the contrary intention appears, expressions used but not defined in the instrument have the same meaning as in those Regulations. That creates a direct interpretive link: key terms used in this instrument (for example, sub-sector population, basic levy component, graduated levy component) are to be read with the Regulations’ meaning.

• Takes effect in relation to provisions of the Act. Section 2(2) references subsections 11(3) and 11(4) of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 as controlling when the instrument takes effect in certain respects. The note to s 2 also references subsection 9(9) of the Act as permitting retrospective application before registration on the Federal Register of Legislation. Those references show that timing and parliamentary scrutiny provisions in the Act affect when and how this instrument becomes operative.

• Federal Register registration. Section 2(1) requires registration on the Federal Register of Legislation for commencement the day after registration. That interacts with administrative law and publication requirements; the note cites the register’s URL. The instrument also acknowledges the Act’s special provision permitting retrospective operation prior to registration.

• No direct amendments to other statutes. The instrument does not amend or repeal any other instrument; it does not purport to modify definitions in the Act or Regulations. It simply supplies numeric values that the Regulations incorporate. Any substantive legal rights and obligations that result flow from the Act and Regulations; this instrument’s role is to populate statutory formulas.

• Parliamentary scrutiny and disallowance. The note to s 2 states that s 11 of the Act “contains special provisions dealing with the disallowance and taking effect of instruments of this kind.” That shows an explicit interaction with parliamentary processes for subordinate instruments under the Act. The instrument itself does not detail those procedures.

• Administrative coherence. Because the instrument adopts definitions from the Regulations, courts or reviewing bodies would interpret the instrument in the context of the Act-Regulations-instrument triad. Any inconsistency between this instrument and a higher-level statutory provision would be resolved by operation of constitutional and statutory interpretive rules, as normally applies to subordinate instruments, but the instrument itself does not address conflicts.

In summary, the instrument is an integrated administrative component of the cost-recovery levy legislative scheme. It relies on, and must be read with, the Act and the Regulations. Any analysis of liability, enforcement, deadlines, or remedies requires consulting the Act and Regulations in addition to this annual determination.

The document itself identifies as the ASIC (Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy,Annual Determination) Instrument 2023/778 and is dated 3 November 2023. The instrument contains no express amendments to prior instruments or stated amendments to itself. The text does not list prior versions or a schedule of changes relative to earlier determinations.

Key points about amendment and temporal operation that the instrument records:

• Single-year determination. Section 5 states plainly that “This determination applies to the 2022-23 financial year.” That indicates the instrument is intended as an annual, time-limited specification. Annual determinations of this type are standard practice under the Regulations; this one fixes the numbers for the stated financial year.

• Commencement regime and retrospective possibility. Section 2 sets the usual commencement rule,day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation (s 2(1)). The accompanying note records a statutory provision, subsection 9(9) of the Act, that “has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application before the day it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation.” That means that although the instrument will normally commence on registration, the Act can make certain instruments effective earlier. The instrument also references subsection 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act as determinative when those Act provisions apply (s 2(2)).

• Authority for annual determinations. Section 3 states the instrument is made under section 73 of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Regulations 2017. That identifies the regulatory power enabling annual determinations. Any future amendment to the Regulations or to section 73 would alter the legal basis on which such determinations are made.

• No express amendment clause. The instrument does not state that it amends, revokes, or replaces a prior determination. It does not include transitional provisions apart from the timing clauses discussed. If a different or amended set of inputs were required for 2022-23, that would require another instrument or amendment, using the same statutory processes under the Regulations.

• Parliamentary and administrative controls over amendment. The instrument’s notes about section 11 of the Act indicate that special procedural rules exist for instruments “of this kind,” which includes how such instruments take effect and can be disallowed. Those statutory controls would be the mechanism for parliamentary or administrative review of the instrument’s content or its effective date.

For practical purposes, this instrument should be read as the authoritative numeric determination for the 2022-23 financial year unless and until superseded by a later instrument made under the same regulatory power, or disallowed or otherwise affected by the procedural rules in the Act. If amendments are made to the Regulations or the Act after the date of this instrument, those legislative changes would affect future determinations or the legal framework governing the levy regime but do not retroactively change the numeric data set out here.

The instrument itself does not record any litigation history. It is an administrative annual determination that fixes numeric inputs; the text contains no reference to legal challenges, court decisions, appeals, or adjudicated disputes arising out of its content.

Relevant observations based on the instrument’s text and statutory placement:

• No cases named or cited. The instrument contains no references to judicial decisions or administrative tribunal outcomes. It is a technical determination document.

• Parliamentary disallowance and review processes are signalled. The instrument’s notes refer to section 11 of the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 as containing “special provisions dealing with the disallowance and taking effect of instruments of this kind” (note to s 2). That suggests that the Act provides a mechanism for parliamentary scrutiny and possible disallowance of such instruments, which is a non-judicial means of challenging subordinate instruments. The instrument does not, however, elaborate those procedures, and it does not assert the availability or preclusion of judicial review.

• Potential grounds for legal challenge outside the instrument. While the instrument does not itself describe dispute-resolution or challenge routes, parties who consider themselves adversely affected by a levy assessment calculated using these inputs would ordinarily look to the Act and Regulations for administrative review rights, merits review, or judicial review options. The instrument’s specification of populations and metrics could be the factual basis for a legal contest if a person alleges ASIC erred in applying the Regulations or exceeded its delegated powers as expressed in section 73 of the Regulations. The instrument itself contains no procedural statements about bringing such a challenge.

• Practical evidentiary role. If levy assessments are produced using the inputs in this instrument, the instrument itself will be primary evidence of the numeric inputs used. Any litigation or review contesting the numbers applicable to a sub-sector would refer to this instrument as the authoritative statement of those numbers for 2022-23.

In short, there is no litigation history recorded in the instrument; any litigation that might arise would need to be identified from external records (court or tribunal databases), and any legal challenge to levy assessments will be anchored to the Act and Regulations as well as to the numeric inputs set out in this instrument.

This instrument is compact, but there are multiple potential practical pitfalls for entities and advisers who rely on it without checking the Act and Regulations or without attention to detail. The following are source-grounded considerations drawn from the instrument’s text:

• The instrument supplies inputs but not formulas. Sections 6 and 7 provide numbers; they do not set out how those numbers convert into money. The definitions of “basic levy component” and “graduated levy component” are in subsections 9(1) and 10(1) of the Regulations, and this instrument only specifies the figures “for the purposes of” those definitions (s 7). A common mistake is to read these numbers as levy amounts. They are not levy amounts; they are inputs.

• Multiple metrics and units are present. Some items list more than one metric and specify units in parentheses (for example, Item 14 lists “347,768,709 (messages) 312,671,840 (lots)” and Item 17 lists “5,302,599,433 (messages) 955,764,505 (transactions)”). Entities must check which metric the Regulations instruct ASIC to apply to a particular graduated component. Misreading the unit (messages vs lots vs transactions) could produce a large drafting or calculation error in any internal levy modelling.

• Sub-sector population versus metric mismatch. The instrument distinguishes between “sub-sector population” (s 6 table) and “sub-sector metric” (s 7 table). For some sub-sectors the population is tiny (for example Item 2: Australian derivative trade repository operators, population 1) while the graduated metric can be large, or vice versa. Practitioners should avoid assuming population equals metric or that they are interchangeable for calculations; they fulfil different roles in the Regulations’ formulas.

• Zero population entry. Item 25A records a sub-sector population of 0 for “Operators of notified foreign passport funds and regulated former notified funds.” That is a clear indicator of either no entities meeting that description in the snapshot data or of a decision to exclude such entities for this year. Entities that think they fall within Item 25A must verify their status, because a population of 0 implies no apportionment from the population-based component. Do not assume zero population means no regulatory interaction; it simply means, for 2022-23, the population number used by the Regulations will be 0.

• Very large numeric metrics. Several graduated metrics are extremely large numbers (for example, Items 5, 8, 22, 32, 41, and 48 show metrics in the hundreds of billions to trillions). Absent knowledge of the rates or formulas in the Regulations, these figures indicate that graduated levies will be scaled by very large denominators or numerators. Small typographical errors with large numbers can dramatically distort calculations. Use precise copying and machine-readable data to avoid transcription mistakes.

• Timing and possible retrospective effect. Section 2(1) contemplates commencement the day after registration, but the note to s 2 states that subsection 9(9) of the Act “has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application before the day it is registered.” Entities need to verify whether their levy liabilities are affected retrospectively under the Act. Also s 2(2) flags subsections 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act as potentially determining when the instrument, or parts of it, take effect. Practitioners should check whether the Act’s procedural provisions alter the operative date or permit retrospective application.

• Interpretation depends on the Regulations’ definitions. Section 4 makes clear that expressions used but not defined in the instrument take their meaning from the Regulations. If there is ambiguity in sector definitions (for example, whether a particular entity is a “credit intermediary” or a “credit provider”), the Regulations’ definitions govern. Do not attempt to classify an entity solely by the instrument’s titles; consult the Regulations.

• Delegation and authorisation. The instrument is signed by an ASIC delegate (the front page identifies the delegate). If a party wishes to challenge the instrument’s validity on delegation grounds, they must examine the enabling provision (s 73 of the Regulations) and any relevant delegations within ASIC. The instrument itself simply states its legislative authority (s 3).

• No explicit remedies stated. The instrument does not outline procedures for correcting errors in the tables. If ASIC publishes an incorrect population or metric and then amends it, the process for correction and for dealing with previously issued assessments will depend on the Act and Regulations, not this instrument. Practitioners should not assume an internal correction will automatically alter previously calculated levy assessments without checking the statutory framework.

• Cross-referencing risks. The instrument relies on external instruments (Act and Regulations) and the Federal Register for commencement. Failure to check the Federal Register for registration status or subsequent changes to the Regulations could lead to mistaken reliance on a number that is no longer operative.

These “gotchas” are not speculative policy critiques. They are practical, source-grounded caveats: the instrument is a technical, numerical determination that must be read with the Act and Regulations and handled carefully to avoid classification, unit, timing, and transcription errors that could materially affect levy calculations.

Compliance with the cost-recovery levy regime requires actions by both ASIC and the regulated entities. This instrument signals what ASIC has done for 2022-23,fixing populations and metrics,but compliance duties (payment, reporting, objection) are governed by the Act and Regulations. The following source-grounded checklist sets out steps that entities and their advisers should take after reviewing this instrument.

1. Confirm sub-sector classification

• Read the list in s 6 and identify the sub-sector label(s) that match your entity’s legal and operational status (for example “Registered company auditors” Item 30, “Credit providers” Item 5, “Superannuation trustees” Item 41). Remember s 4 directs you to the Regulations for definitions: where the instrument uses a term but does not define it, the Regulations’ definition applies. Do not rely on colloquial descriptions; check the Regulations’ legal definitions.

2. Note the sub-sector population and metric that apply to your sub-sector

• For the identified sub-sector, record the sub-sector population (s 6 table) and the sub-sector metric(s) (s 7 table). Pay close attention to units. Items 14 and 17, for example, list different units in parentheses (messages, lots, transactions). Confirm which metric the Regulations instruct ASIC to use for which levy component (basic vs graduated).

3. Consult the Regulations and the Act for levy calculation rules

• Use the sub-sector population and metric from this instrument as inputs into the calculation frameworks in the Regulations (subsections 9(1) and 10(1) are cited in s 7). The Regulations specify how basic and graduated levy components are computed from these inputs and how the resulting dollar amount is allocated to individual entities. Do not attempt to compute payable amounts solely from the numbers in this instrument.

4. Check commencement and any retrospective effect

• Section 2(1) states the instrument commences the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation. However, the note to s 2 warns that subsection 9(9) of the Act “has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application before the day it is registered.” Therefore:
  • Monitor the Federal Register for registration and any notes about effective dates.
  • Determine whether relevant Act provisions (ss 9(9), 11(3), 11(4)) alter the effective date for your entity and whether any levies could be levied retrospectively for activity in the 2022-23 year.

5. Prepare for possible per-entity liability shifts

• For sub-sectors with small populations, the per-entity share of any basic levy allocation may be large. For sub-sectors with very large graduated metrics, graduated levy shares may be material. Ensure finance, compliance and billing teams can model different levy scenarios once the Regulations’ rates and formulas are applied.

6. Validate data and record-keeping

• Ensure your internal records substantiate any category claims you might make to ASIC (for example, whether you are a “credit intermediary” vs a “credit provider”), as classification disputes will depend on the Regulations’ definitions. Keep contemporaneous records that can demonstrate your sector classification, activity measures (messages, lots, transactions), and any other variable that the Regulations use.

7. Engage with ASIC or advisers if there is a discrepancy

• If you believe the instrument’s table lists an incorrect population or metric for the sector you occupy (for example, if Item 25A lists population 0 but you consider your entity falls within that category), contact ASIC promptly to seek clarification. The instrument itself does not provide the remedial process, so follow the contact and objection processes in the Act and Regulations.

8. Budget and cashflow planning

• Because the instrument fixes the inputs for the 2022-23 year, use these inputs together with the Regulations’ rates and formulas (and any public ASIC communications about levy amounts and invoices) to forecast the likely levy payable for the upcoming billing cycle. Large graduated metrics in some sectors suggest that graduated liabilities could be significant; budget accordingly.

9. Monitor for subsequent instruments or amendments

• Annual determinations are periodic. Confirm whether subsequent determinations, amendments, or corrections are published on the Federal Register. Do not assume this instrument’s numbers persist beyond 2022-23.

10. Prepare for formal review routes

• If, after the Regulations are applied, you receive an assessment you wish to challenge, identify the statutory review or appeal mechanisms in the Act and Regulations. The instrument provides the numeric inputs that will be used; any challenge to the legitimacy of the published numbers is likely to involve formal administrative processes or legal review consistent with the Act and Regulations.

Following these steps will ensure that entities interpret the instrument correctly, apply it coherently with the Act and Regulations, and prepare operationally for the financial effects once ASIC issues levy assessments that rely on these inputs.