ASIC (Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy—Regulatory Costs) Instrument 2025/689

The instrument relies on a small set of interlocking concepts and legal hooks, each explicitly stated in the text.

• Applicable financial year. The instrument declares it applies to the 2024-25 financial year (s 5). That is the temporal scope for the cost figure and the attribution exercise.

• ASIC’s regulatory costs. The instrument records a single aggregate dollar figure for the year, $337,564,882 (s 6). The text does not break that figure into line items or explain the methodology used to arrive at it; it is an aggregate number presented as a fact in the instrument.

• Attribution to sub-sectors. Section 7 and the accompanying table allocate the aggregate amount across 48 named sub-sectors, each assigned an absolute dollar amount in column 3. The items are numerically labelled (Items 1 to 48 with some lettered items such as 2A, 2B, 8A, 24A, 25A), and include both large and very small allocations. The table is the instrument’s dispositive data set; it expresses extent of attribution to each sub-sector in monetary terms.

• Relationship to the Act. The instrument explicitly operates under the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017, abbreviated in the text as the Act (s 4(a)). Section 4(b) states that where a term used in the instrument is not defined in it, but is defined in the Act, the Act’s definition applies. The instrument is made pursuant to subsection 10(2) of the Act (s 3), which is cited as the source of authority to make the instrument.

• Commencement and retrospective effect. Section 2 sets commencement mechanics: the instrument commences on the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation (s 2(1)), but s 2(2) ties the actual taking effect of the instrument to provisions in the Act, specifically subsections 11(3) and 11(4), which determine when it takes effect. The instrument’s embedded Note 2 invokes subsection 10(8) of the Act and states that the Act has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application before the day it is registered. The instrument also directs readers to the Federal Register (s 2 note and footnote).

• Definitions and cross-references. The instrument deliberately uses the Act for substantive definitions. That means the labels in the table (for example, "Listed corporations", "Responsible entities", "Licensees that provide personal advice on relevant financial products to retail clients") are meaningful only insofar as the Act supplies their precise legal boundaries.

The instrument does not articulate procedural rules for calculating a per-entity levy, does not identify which agency or office will issue levy notices, and does not set penalties or sanctions. Those functions are left to the Act or other instruments. The instrument’s main conceptual role is to operationalise the Act’s requirement to quantify ASIC’s regulatory costs for a defined financial year and to attribute those costs to specified sub-sectors.

The instrument affects the 48 sub-sectors listed in the table in s 7 by attributing parts of ASIC’s total regulatory costs to those sub-sectors in absolute dollar amounts. The instrument itself does not define those sub-sectors; instead s 4(b) directs that, unless a contrary intention appears, any term used but not defined in the instrument takes its meaning from the Act. Therefore the population of entities impacted will be the persons or bodies that fall within each Act-defined sub-sector.

The table lists sub-sectors that span corporate entities (for example, Listed corporations; Public companies (unlisted); Large proprietary companies), financial market infrastructure (for example, Large securities exchange operators; Tier 1 clearing and settlement facility operators), service providers (for example, Registered company auditors; Registered liquidators; Corporate advisors), credit and lending sectors (for example, Credit providers; Credit intermediaries; Small and medium amount credit providers), insurers and distributors (for example, Insurance product providers; Insurance product distributors), licensees in the financial advice sector (several classes including those providing personal advice to retail clients and those providing only general advice), superannuation trustees, and specified specialised market operators and participants.

The absolute allocations indicate concentration of the attribution. The largest absolute allocations in the table are as follows (figures taken exactly from the table in s 7): Listed corporations $56,999,100; Licensees that provide personal advice on relevant financial products to retail clients $39,949,902; Responsible entities $28,978,249; Superannuation trustees $25,299,214; Large securities exchange participants $24,452,375. Smaller allocations and zeros are also present; for example Exempt market operators are attributed $0 and Tier 4 clearing and settlement facility operators are attributed $0. Very small attributions are recorded for some narrow categories, for example Exempt CS facility operators $5,890; Small securities exchange operators with self-listing function only $4,446.

Who pays on the ground is not declared in this instrument. The instrument attributes cost to sub-sectors; it does not itself say how or by whom payment will be collected, what billing or apportionment method will convert an attribution to a per-entity amount, or the timing of any invoices or payment obligations. Those operational details would be set out in the Act, other subordinate instruments, or implementing procedures not included in this instrument. Practically, entities that fall within any of the named sub-sectors should determine, by reference to the Act’s definitions, whether they are within the scope of a listed sub-sector, and then expect that this attribution will be used as a component of the broader levy regime under the Act for the 2024-25 financial year.

The instrument itself does not create detailed duties or rights. Its operative effect is to determine an aggregate cost figure and to allocate that figure across named sub-sectors. Those are determinations under the Act, made pursuant to subsection 10(2) of the Act (s 3). The instrument contains no provisions that, on their face, impose direct obligations to pay, specify rates, set payment dates, or create administrative appeal rights. For example, s 6 states ASIC’s regulatory costs in absolute terms; s 7 attributes those costs to sub-sectors in dollar amounts. The instrument does not convert those attributions into per-entity assessments or invoice amounts.

Because the instrument relies on the Act for undefined terms (s 4(b)), any operational obligations, procedural rights, or appeal mechanisms will be located in the Act itself or in other subordinate instruments that implement the levy framework. The instrument’s own procedural clauses are limited: it provides a commencement rule (s 2(1)), and it links the timing of its effect to the Act’s disallowance provisions (s 2(2)(a) and (b)). It also preserves the Act’s capacity to make the instrument retrospective (s 2 note 2).

Consequently, affected persons’ duties (for example, to pay a levy, to lodge information, to dispute a calculation) and rights (for example, to seek review, to be notified of assessments, to offset or appeal) are not articulated here. Practitioners and affected entities must therefore read the Act to identify binding duties and rights, and treat this instrument as the factual determination that the Act will use when it operationalises those duties. The instrument functions as a declarative input into the levy calculation architecture rather than as the source of the levy architecture itself.

It is also notable that the instrument does not reserve or delegate any discretions within its text. The making delegate is identified at the front of the document, and s 3 records the statutory authority under subsection 10(2) of the Act. The instrument does not set out administrative discretions, exceptions, or deferral powers in respect of the numbers recorded in the table.

This instrument does not specify penalties, sanctions, or enforcement mechanisms. There are no sections in the instrument that prescribe fines, criminal or civil sanctions, compliance notices, or enforcement pathways tied to the numbers in the table. The instrument confines itself to recording a total regulatory cost figure and attributing that figure to listed sub-sectors.

Enforcement and penalty regimes, if any, would be created and described elsewhere, principally in the Act or in other instruments that implement the Act's levy collection mechanisms. The instrument itself does, however, make procedural reference to the Act’s disallowance process and retrospective effect. Section 2(2) ties the taking effect of this instrument to subsections 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act, which the instrument identifies as containing special provisions dealing with the disallowance and taking effect of instruments of this kind. The embedded Note 2 to section 2 invokes subsection 10(8) of the Act and states that the Act has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application prior to its registration. Those references are procedural, not penal: they address parliamentary disallowance and the possibility of backdating, not enforcement mechanisms.

For a reader tasked with assessing enforcement risk, the takeaway from the instrument itself is limited: tracking enforcement outcomes requires consulting the Act to see what sanctions attach to failing to comply with levy obligations, who is empowered to enforce them, and what remedies or appeal processes are available. The instrument does not itself expand or narrow penalty exposure because it does not, within its own text, create enforceable payment obligations.

The instrument explicitly interacts with the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017. Section 3 declares that the instrument is made under subsection 10(2) of the Act. Section 4(a) defines the shorthand Act to mean the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017, and section 4(b) provides that terms used but not defined in the instrument take their meaning from the Act. Section 2 contains two notes that reference other subsections of the Act: s 2(2) references subsection 11(3) and subsection 11(4) regarding disallowance and taking effect, and an embedded Note 2 references subsection 10(8) regarding retrospective application.

Beyond those express cross-references to the Act, the instrument does not cite, amend, or otherwise purport to modify other federal statutes, regulations, or administrative regimes. The instrument also instructs where the register can be accessed (s 2 note). Any interaction with taxation law, corporations law, financial services law, or other regulatory regimes is not stated in this instrument; any such interactions would arise from the operationalisation of the levy regime under the Act and from the definitions of the sub-sectors as located in the Act.

Practitioners should therefore treat this instrument as one piece of an interaction chain. It supplies the numerical inputs (aggregate cost and sub-sector attributions) that the Act enacts as part of the supervisory cost recovery scheme. Operational interactions, including how levies reconcile with other statutory payment obligations or with regulatory licensing conditions, must be traced forward to the Act and to any implementing instruments or administrative guidance that set calculation formulas, apportionment methodologies, invoicing procedures, exemption rules, and dispute-resolution pathways.

In short, the instrument’s explicit legal interaction is with the Act only. Any further cross-legal effects are derivative: they depend on how the Act and other subordinate instruments use the numbers recorded here.

The instrument contains a limited internal history record. The front page records the instrument’s maker, the delegate (Lisa Rees), and the date the instrument was made, 30 October 2025. No prior versions, revocations, or amendments of this instrument are recorded in the text provided. The instrument does not contain a clause that expressly repeals or amends an earlier ASIC supervisory cost recovery levy determination; it simply makes the present determination for the 2024-25 financial year.

Section 2 addresses commencement and the timing of taking effect. It provides that the instrument commences on the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation (s 2(1)), and that it takes effect as provided by the Act’s subsections 11(3) and 11(4) (s 2(2)). The embedded Note 2 draws attention to subsection 10(8) of the Act, stating that the Act has the effect that the instrument can have retrospective application before the day it is registered. Those references are procedural rather than substantive amendments, but they do change how one reads the timing: the instrument may be retrospective to the 2024-25 financial year even though it was made on 30 October 2025 and will commence on registration.

The instrument does not set out a mechanism for its own amendment. Any amendment mechanism will be provided by the Act (for example the power in subsection 10(2) under which the instrument was made and possibly other sections governing subsequent determinations). The absence of any textual amendment history in this document means that, for a practitioner wishing to track changes over time, the Federal Register of Legislation and the Act’s regime for disallowance and registration will be the necessary sources to consult for prior or subsequent determinations.

If a reader is looking for prior determinations, revocations, or movements in the allocation methodology across years, those records are not contained in this instrument and must be sought from the Federal Register, from ASIC’s public materials, or from the Act’s legislative history. The instrument does not list any amendments, nor does it purport to be an amendment to another instrument in the body of the text provided.

This instrument contains no references to litigation, judicial decisions, or administrative tribunal outcomes. It does not cite any cases or judicial authority. The text is a standalone administrative determination: it records a fiscal figure and an allocation table, and it situates the instrument within the Act’s statutory framework by reference to the Act’s subsections governing authority, disallowance, and retrospective effect.

Because the instrument does not mention litigation, there is no internal record here of challenges, decisions, or precedent arising from its adoption. The document does not state that it has been subject to legal challenge, and it does not identify any litigation that interprets the numbers or the allocation methodology it contains.

For practitioners seeking litigation history relevant to the supervisory cost recovery levy regime, the necessary material will be external to this instrument: it will be found in judicial databases, tribunal records, or administrative law reports dealing with the Act, with prior determinations, or with levy collection mechanisms. The absence of litigation references in this instrument is an information point: one must not infer from that absence that the regime is free from legal risk, only that no such litigation is recorded in this document.

Several practical issues arise from the instrument’s text that are relevant for affected entities and advisers.

1. Timing mismatch and retrospective language. The instrument is dated 30 October 2025 but applies to the 2024-25 financial year (s 5 and the instrument header date). Section 2(1) states the instrument commences on the day after registration, while s 2(2) ties the instrument’s taking effect to subsections 11(3) and 11(4) of the Act. Note 2 to s 2 states that subsection 10(8) of the Act allows the instrument to have retrospective application prior to registration. The practical effect is that, depending on how the Act’s subsections operate, the attribution may be treated as operative for an earlier period than the registration date. Entities should not assume registration date equals effective date.

2. The instrument records dollar attributions but not per-entity calculations. Section 7’s table assigns absolute dollar amounts to sub-sectors. The instrument does not set or disclose the per-entity levy rates, the apportionment basis within a sub-sector, threshold rules, or rounding rules. Because that conversion from an aggregate attribution to per-entity liabilities is not in this instrument, entities must consult the Act and any implementing instruments or guidance to see how the attribution will translate into invoices.

3. Reliance on Act definitions. Section 4(b) makes the instrument’s use of labels contingent on the Act’s definitions. Many of the sub-sector labels are shorthand for categories that will have specific boundaries and exclusions in the Act. The precise set of entities captured by an item in the table is therefore not determinable from this instrument alone.

4. Zero and minimal allocations. Some sub-sectors are attributed $0 or very small amounts (for example Item 10 Exempt market operators $0; Item 45 Tier 4 clearing and settlement facility operators $0; Item 9 Exempt CS facility operators $5,890). Those entries could indicate de minimis treatment in the allocation, rounding conventions, or an explicit policy decision to attribute no cost to certain small categories. The instrument does not explain the rationale.

5. No procedural or appeal text. The instrument contains no description of dispute-resolution procedures, review rights, or administrative processes relating to contested attributions. If a sub-sector disagrees with its attribution, this instrument does not create a statutory pathway for resolution; the dispute mechanism, if any, will be elsewhere in the Act or other instruments.

6. Delegation and making authority. The instrument is signed by a delegate, and s 3 states it is made under s 10(2) of the Act. The instrument does not specify the extent of the delegate’s internal discretion or any prior approvals. Practitioners should be attentive to the fact that the instrument records numbers but not underlying decision processes or modelling.

7. Public register and notice. The instrument points users to the Federal Register for access (s 2 notes). The instrument does not purport to provide personalised notice to entities. Affected entities should check the register and ASIC communications rather than rely on receipt of a separate notice.

8. Currency of numbers versus administrative action. The numbers in s 6 and s 7 represent an attribution exercise only. Absent further instruments or administrative steps, those numbers do not automatically correspond to levies payable at a particular time or in a particular manner. Entities should be careful not to treat the recorded allocations as final invoices without cross-referencing the Act and any levy notices.

The instrument itself does not set payment mechanics or procedural compliance steps, but it does supply the core numeric inputs that the Act will use. A practicable compliance checklist derived from the instrument’s content is as follows.

1. Identify whether your entity falls within a listed sub-sector. The table in s 7 uses labels whose legal meanings are located in the Act. Section 4(b) states that where a term used in the instrument is not defined in it, it takes its meaning from the Act. Start by matching your corporate or operational profile to the Act’s definitions for each relevant item in the table.

2. Note the allocated dollar amount for your sub-sector. The table in s 7 records the magnitude of attribution for each listed sub-sector. Use the exact figure recorded for your item as the aggregate figure that will be used by the levy regime for the 2024-25 financial year.

3. Check the instrument’s effective date and registration. Section 2(1) states the instrument commences on the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation. Section 2(2) attaches the taking-effect to provisions of the Act; Note 2 refers to subsection 10(8) of the Act and the potential for retrospective application. Therefore verify registration and any Act-driven effective date rules on the Federal Register rather than assuming the instrument’s header date equals the effective date.

4. Consult the Act for calculation and invoicing rules. This instrument does not specify how the attribution is converted into per-entity levies, how intra-sub-sector apportionment works, whether there are exemptions, or the payment timetable. Practitioners should consult the ASIC Supervisory Cost Recovery Levy Act 2017 to identify calculation formulas, billing procedures, offsets, exemptions, credits, objection and appeal mechanisms, and enforcement procedures.

5. Monitor ASIC communications and the Federal Register. The instrument references the Federal Register and will be registered there (s 2 note). ASIC may issue explanatory materials, levy notices, or schedules that implement the attribution. Stay subscribed to relevant ASIC announcements and the Federal Register to capture subsequent instruments or guidance.

6. Prepare accounting and budget entries. Although this instrument does not specify individual invoices, the attribution figures are the inputs to the levy regime and therefore may translate into actual liabilities. Entities should prepare for cashflow impacts, incorporate likely levy liabilities into budgeting for the 2024-25 financial year where appropriate, and set up record-keeping to reconcile any future levy invoices against the attribution.

7. Keep documentary evidence of classification decisions. Because the instrument’s table uses Act-defined labels, keep records that demonstrate why a given entity is (or is not) within a particular sub-sector category under the Act. Those records will be needed if an administrative review or dispute arises.

8. Seek advice where attribution appears anomalous. If the attribution figure for a sub-sector is zero or very small and you believe that is inconsistent with your regulatory footprint, obtain legal or accounting advice and consider contacting ASIC for clarification about methodology and potential redress mechanisms in the Act.

9. Watch disallowance and parliamentary processes. Section 2 links the instrument’s taking effect to s 11 of the Act, which the instrument identifies as dealing with disallowance. If parliamentary disallowance or other statutory processes are engaged, timing and legal effect may change. Keep an eye on parliamentary notices and the Federal Register for disallowance actions.

10. Do not treat the instrument as a standalone invoice. The instrument is a determination of regulatory costs and allocations. It does not itself require payment. Expect levy notices or further instruments to operationalise payment obligations; ensure your compliance function is ready to reconcile those future documents with the attribution recorded here.

These steps are the practical conversion of an attribution table into a compliance workflow. Because the instrument defers critical operational and definitional matters to the Act, your immediate compliance work should concentrate on sub-sector classification, monitoring for levy notices, and preparing financial and documentary records that will support any future interactions with ASIC or administrative reviews.