Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes—Cash Acceptance) Regulations 2025

The key operational concept is the “reasonable opportunity” for a consumer to make a cash payment. The instrument sets out non‑exhaustive factors for determining whether a reasonable opportunity exists: the number of cash payment points operating at the retail site (with a floor of at least one), whether that number is reasonable and proportionate having regard to consumer demand for cash payments and the size and nature of the business; the level of effort required of the consumer to make a cash payment; and any other relevant matters (subsections 12(2) and 15(2)). This is a flexible, fact‑based standard. A retailer could not satisfy the duty by, for example, pointing to one cash‑only register that is rarely staffed or hidden in a back corner if demand is high. Conversely, a small‑format store with low cash usage might satisfy the duty with one well‑placed checkout that accepts cash.

A “cash payment” is defined as payment by way of cash in the form of coin or printed money (section 5). The instrument does not extend to digital currencies, cheques, or other instruments. An “in‑person payment” requires the individual to be physically present at the retailer’s premises while making the payment, whether for themselves or on behalf of another person. That excludes online payments, phone payments, or payments made by an agent not present. The payment must be for a supply of goods or services by the retailer in the course of its supermarket business or motor fuel business.

A “cash payment point” covers a counter, section of a counter, or kiosk (self‑service or otherwise) at which in‑person cash payments can be made. It also includes any other location reasonably identifiable as a place for cash payment. This definition captures manned tills, self‑service checkout lanes that accept cash, and service desks.

The term “small business entity” is central to the exemptions. It is defined by cross‑reference to the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997, but with two modifications. First, the effect of subsection 328‑110(4) of that Act (which works out aggregated turnover as at the end of the income year) is disregarded, so that the test can be applied at a point in time during the year without waiting for year‑end figures. Second, subsection 328‑120(3) of the Tax Act (which allows motor fuel retailers to exclude amounts from retail fuel sales when calculating aggregated turnover) is also disregarded, meaning that all fuel sales count toward the turnover threshold. This makes it harder for motor fuel retailers to qualify as small business entities, especially those with high‑volume fuel sales but narrow margins. Furthermore, a retailer that would otherwise be a small business entity loses that status if it is a “trade mark user” in relation to a registered trade mark and another retailer that is not a small business entity is also a trade mark user in relation to the same mark (subsection 6(2)). This provision catches independent retailers operating under a brand (e.g., a franchised grocery store or a branded petrol station) that is also used by a larger corporate entity. The effect is to treat the independent as if it were part of a larger network for the purpose of the cash acceptance exemption, even if the independent’s own turnover is below the threshold.

The concept of “legal tender” is imported from the Currency Act 1965 and the Reserve Bank Act 1959, making clear that the instrument does not require acceptance of any payment that is not legal tender. The note to section 7 cross‑references those Acts.

Finally, the instrument distinguishes between two separate industry codes: the supermarket code (Part 2) and the motor fuel code (Part 3). Each code applies to a different industry, but both contain substantively identical duties and exemptions. However, the motor fuel code has an additional exemption for sites that do not supply automotive unleaded petrol (subsection 15(4)). A site selling only diesel or other fuels is not covered.

The primary regulated entities are corporations that carry on a supermarket business in Australia (“supermarket retailers”) and corporations that carry on a motor fuel business in Australia (“motor fuel retailers”). The definitions in section 5 use the term “corporation”, which limits the instrument’s direct application to incorporated entities. Unincorporated sole traders or partnerships that operate a grocery store or petrol station are not caught by the letter of the instrument, unless they are otherwise covered under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010’s extended meaning of “corporation” in certain circumstances. Given the instrument is made under the CCA, the constitutional power relies on the corporations power; non‑corporate retailers may be outside scope. This creates an odd distinction where a small incorporated grocery store is bound but a similar unincorporated store is not.

Within the class of covered corporations, two subsets are exempt. Small business entities (as defined in section 6) are wholly exempt from the cash acceptance duty. However, the trade mark user rule in subsection 6(2) removes the exemption from any retailer that uses a registered trade mark also used by a non‑small business entity. This primarily affects franchisees, fuel licensees, and independent grocers operating under a banner group. For example, a franchisee operating a convenience store under a major supermarket brand with turnover under $10 million would not be a small business entity for the purposes of this instrument if the parent company (a non‑small entity) also uses the same trade mark. That franchisee must therefore comply with the cash acceptance duty, even though its own turnover is low.

Motor fuel retailers are further subdivided by subsection 15(4): retail sites that do not routinely supply automotive unleaded petrol are exempt from the duty. A truck stop selling only diesel, or a site selling only premium fuels that are not “automotive unleaded petrol” as that term is ordinarily understood, is outside the code.

Consumers are the intended beneficiaries: they obtain a right to make cash payments at covered retailers during specified hours for transactions up to $500. But the instrument does not confer a private cause of action; enforcement is left to the Commission and the courts.

The Commission itself is affected: it must process exemption applications, decide whether to grant individual or class exemptions, and enforce compliance. The Administrative Review Tribunal will hear reviews of refusal decisions. The Commission may also issue guidance, though the instrument does not mandate this.

Trade mark owners and franchisors are indirectly affected because their brand usage can strip exemption status from their smaller brand users. A large brand that licenses its mark to many small retailers must consider that each such retailer will be treated as a non‑small entity for cash acceptance purposes if the brand owner itself is not a small entity. This may create contractual or commercial pressure to assist smaller licensees with compliance.

Finally, the instrument does not directly bind governments, but note that the Commission can exempt classes of retailers on its own motion.

The central duty is found in subsections 12(1) and 15(1) respectively: a supermarket retailer or motor fuel retailer must ensure that a consumer who is to make an in‑person payment at a retail site has a reasonable opportunity to do so by way of a cash payment, provided the payment amount is $500 or less and the payment is to be made between 7 am and 9 pm on a day. The duty is ongoing; it applies each time a consumer is to make a qualifying payment. It does not require that every transaction be in cash, only that the opportunity to pay cash is available.

The factors for determining “reasonable opportunity” are set out in subsections 12(2) and 15(2): the number of cash payment points operating (must be at least one), whether that number is reasonable and proportionate considering consumer demand for cash payments and the size and nature of the business, whether the level of effort required of the consumer is reasonable in the circumstances, and any other relevant matters. This places a heavy factual burden on a retailer seeking to defend a complaint. A retailer with only one cash point that is frequently down or has long queues may be in breach. Reasonableness is assessed at the time the payment is to be made, so fluctuating demand throughout the day matters.

Retailers that are small business entities have a right not to comply with the duty. That right is defeasible if the trade mark user rule applies, as discussed. Motor fuel retailers also have a right to be free of the duty at sites where they do not routinely supply automotive unleaded petrol.

The right to apply for an exemption is set out in subsections 13(1) and 16(1). A retailer may apply in writing to the Commission for an individual exemption. The Commission must be satisfied of one of two grounds: (a) exceptional circumstances outside the retailer’s control prevent or will prevent compliance, and the retailer has taken all reasonable steps to be able to comply; or (b) the costs of compliance pose a significant risk to the ongoing feasibility of the business. This is a high threshold. For ground (b), it is not enough that compliance is expensive or reduces profit; it must put the business at risk of closure. The retailer bears the onus of satisfying the Commission. The exemption may be conditional, limited in time, or limited to specific sites or times. A refusal can be reviewed by the Administrative Review Tribunal (section 10). The Commission also has a power to grant class exemptions on its own initiative where exceptional circumstances are widespread and outside retailers’ control (subsections 13(2) and 16(2)). That power is triggered only by exogenous shocks, not ordinary market conditions.

There is no right for a consumer to force a retailer to accept cash; enforcement is through the Commission. Consumers may complain to the Commission, which may then investigate and seek penalties. The instrument does not create any right to damages or compensation for a consumer denied cash payment.

The instrument designates the obligations in sections 12 and 15 as civil penalty provisions (section 9). The pecuniary penalty is set at 600 penalty units per contravention. As of the instrument’s making in December 2025, the value of a penalty unit under the Crimes Act 1914 is $313, making the maximum penalty $187,800 per breach. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (section 76) allows the Federal Court to order a person to pay a pecuniary penalty for contravening a civil penalty provision. The maximum penalty recoverable under section 76 of the CCA is generally the greater of a specified amount and the benefit obtained, but here the instrument prescribes 600 penalty units as the specific amount.

Crucially, subsection 9(2) provides that no provision of the instrument is a civil penalty provision during the period of six months beginning on the day of commencement (1 January 2026 to 30 June 2026). During that period, a retailer that fails to comply cannot be subjected to a pecuniary penalty. The provision is not, for that period, a civil penalty provision at all. However, the duty itself still exists. The Commission could potentially seek other remedies under the CCA, such as injunctions under section 80 or declarations, but the instrument does not specify whether those remedies are available for a provision that is not a civil penalty provision. The better view is that the underlying obligation remains legally binding, but the enforcement mechanism of pecuniary penalties is suspended. Retailers should not assume they can ignore the duty during the grace period, but the enforcement risk is materially lower.

After the six‑month period, the Commission can seek penalties for any contravention that occurs after the period begins. The penalty amount is substantial relative to the cost of maintaining a simple cash acceptance point. For a small independent supermarket with moderate turnover, $187,800 could be a significant deterrent.

The Commission also has the power to accept enforceable undertakings under Part VI of the CCA, issue infringement notices, or seek injunctions to compel compliance. The instrument does not create a criminal offence. Enforcement is in the Federal Court, with the Commission as the primary regulator.

The instrument also provides for merits review of individual exemption refusals by the Administrative Review Tribunal. That is an enforcement safeguard for retailers, but does not directly penalise.

This instrument sits within the broader framework of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, particularly Part IVB (Industry Codes) and section 51AE (prescribing industry codes). It is a legislative instrument made under that Act and has effect as if it were an industry code declared under Part IVB. Contravention of a civil penalty provision of an industry code engages section 76 of the CCA for pecuniary penalties, and sections 80, 82, 87, and other enforcement provisions of the CCA may potentially apply.

The instrument specifically cross‑references the Currency Act 1965 and the Reserve Bank Act 1959 regarding legal tender. Section 7 makes clear that no provision requires acceptance of non‑legal tender. The legal tender rules limit the type of coins and notes that must be accepted: for coins, the Currency Act 1965 limits amounts for certain denominations (e.g., 5c coins up to $5, $1 coins unlimited), and for banknotes, all Australian banknotes are legal tender. A retailer could lawfully refuse to accept, say, $500 worth of 20c coins, because that payment may not be legal tender. But the instrument does not impose a duty to accept that payment in any event; it only requires a reasonable opportunity for cash payment, and section 7 clarifies that the duty does not override legal tender limits.

The instrument also links to the Trade Marks Act 1995 for the definition of “registered trade mark” and “authorised user”. The trade mark user rule in section 6(2) uses the Trade Marks Act concept to determine when a small business entity loses its exemption. This creates a direct interaction between trade mark law and grocery/fuel regulation.

The Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 is referenced heavily in the definition of small business entity. Section 6 modifies the application of the small business entity test by disregarding certain provisions. For motor fuel retailers, the effect is to include fuel sales in aggregated turnover, which may push some retailers above the $10 million threshold who would otherwise be below it if fuel sales were excluded. That is a deliberate policy choice to narrow the exemption for fuel retailers.

The instrument also cross‑references the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes,Food and Grocery) Regulations 2024 for the definition of “supermarket business”. That earlier regulation defines supermarket business by reference to specified turnover thresholds and the sale of food and groceries. The cash acceptance code thus piggybacks on the existing grocery code’s definition, ensuring consistency between the two industry codes.

State and territory fair‑trading laws may also impose cash acceptance obligations, though none currently do in a general way. Some states have laws requiring businesses to accept cash for certain transactions (e.g., taxi fares). This Commonwealth regulation would not override those state laws, but it creates a uniform floor for the covered industries.

There is no interaction with banking or financial services regulation beyond the legal tender notes.

This instrument was made on 11 December 2025 and registered on the Federal Register of Legislation. It was signed by the Governor‑General on the advice of the Federal Executive Council, with Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers as the responsible minister. The instrument is a standalone regulation; it does not amend any prior instrument. As of the date of its making, there is no published amendment history because none has occurred. The instrument is scheduled to commence on 1 January 2026. Any future amendments would be made by further regulations under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, likely following a review by the Treasury or the Commission. The instrument contains a transitional provision in subsection 9(2) (the six‑month civil penalty moratorium), which will automatically expire, but that is not an amendment. The instrument’s content is unlikely to be static: the Commission may issue class exemptions that effectively modify the scope of the duty, but those exemptions are made by separate instruments, not amendments to this regulation. Interested parties should monitor future legislative instruments and notifiable instruments for exemptions. The definition of “supermarket business” cross‑references another regulation, so changes to that regulation could indirectly affect the scope of this cash acceptance code without this instrument being amended.

The instrument has not yet commenced, and as of its making there is no litigation history. However, several areas of potential future litigation can be identified from the text. The concept of “reasonable opportunity” is inherently subjective and will likely be tested. What constitutes a “reasonable and proportionate” number of cash payment points given consumer demand and business size is a factual question that may require expert evidence. The provision that the number must be “at least one” (subsections 12(2)(a) and 15(2)(a)) suggests a mandatory minimum, but the reasonableness test adds nuance; a retailer with one cash point that is routinely closed or has a two‑hour queue may be in breach. The “level of effort required” factor may generate disputes about whether directing a consumer to a service desk versus a checkout, or requiring them to wait, is reasonable.

The exemption grounds will be a fertile source of dispute. The phrase “exceptional circumstances outside of the retailer’s control” is not defined, and its application to events like armed robbery, cash‑in‑transit strikes, temporary banknote shortages, or vandalism of cash infrastructure will be contested. The alternative ground - costs that “pose a significant risk to the ongoing feasibility of the business” - sets a high bar. Retailers will need to produce financial evidence. The Commission’s decisions on exemption applications are reviewable by the Administrative Review Tribunal (section 10), so the Tribunal will develop a body of decisions interpreting these phrases.

The trade mark user rule in subsection 6(2) may generate litigation about whether a particular retailer is, at a given time, a trade mark user in relation to a registered trade mark that is also used by a non‑small entity. This will require evidence of trade mark ownership and authorised user status. Disputes may arise about informal or unregistered branding that is not captured, or about franchise agreements that grant a non‑exclusive licence.

The six‑month grace period may also be litigated: if a retailer breaches the duty during that period, can the Commission obtain an injunction? The instrument says the provision is not a civil penalty provision, but it does not say the provision is unenforceable. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010’s enforcement provisions may still allow other relief. This ambiguity may be resolved in court.

No case cites the instrument yet, but practitioners should monitor decisions of the Federal Court and ART from 2026 onward.

The most significant trap is the trade mark user rule in subsection 6(2). A small independent supermarket or petrol station that operates under a brand name owned or used by a large corporate retailer will not qualify as a small business entity for the purposes of this instrument, even if its own turnover is well below the $10 million threshold. For example, a family‑run grocery store that uses the “IGA” brand (if IGA were a registered trade mark and another IGA retailer were not a small business entity) could be caught. This rule is easily overlooked and could catch many franchisees or banner‑group members. They must comply with the cash acceptance duty even as small operators, while a completely unbranded independent with the same turnover is exempt.

The small business entity definition itself contains two modifications that are easy to misapply. First, the disregard of subsection 328‑110(4) means that aggregated turnover can be calculated at a point in time during the year without waiting for year‑end. This is helpful, but it also means turnover must be estimated based on current trading. Second, the disregard of subsection 328‑120(3) means that motor fuel retailers must include all retail fuel sales in aggregated turnover. This could push a moderate‑sized fuel retailer over the $10 million threshold even if its net margin is thin. Many fuel retailers with high‑volume, low‑margin fuel sales may be surprised to find they are not exempt.

The duty only applies to payments of $500 or less. Retailers that have a policy of not accepting cash for amounts above $500 may be compliant for those larger transactions. However, they must still accept cash for amounts at or below $500. A retailer cannot avoid the duty by charging a surcharge for cash payments - nothing in the instrument prohibits surcharging, but a surcharge that effectively denies the opportunity might be held to be unreasonable. The instrument does not mandate free cash access.

The cash payment point must be operating when the payment is to be made. If a retailer has a cash‑only register that is open only during peak hours, and a consumer comes at a non‑peak time when that register is closed, there may be no cash payment point operating. The retailer would need to ensure that at least one cash point is available continuously from 7 am to 9 pm. This may require staffing a register even during quiet periods.

The reasonable opportunity factors include “any other relevant matters”. That gives the Commission and courts wide discretion, which creates compliance uncertainty. A retailer cannot be certain it complies until tested.

The exemption grounds are very narrow. “Exceptional circumstances outside of the retailer’s control” is a high bar that excludes ordinary business difficulties. The cost ground requires that compliance costs pose a “significant risk to the ongoing feasibility” of the business. A retailer that finds compliance merely expensive or inconvenient has no grounds. The retailer must have taken all reasonable steps to comply before applying. The application process itself involves regulatory burden.

The six‑month grace period does not exempt compliance; it only immunises from civil penalties. A retailer that ignores the duty during that period still risks an injunction or other action, and may face reputational harm.

Finally, the definition of “motor fuel retailer” excludes sites that do not supply automotive unleaded petrol. A site selling only diesel, LPG, or electric charging is not covered for cash. But if the same site also sells convenience items, the convenience store may be part of the same business; the instrument only exempts the fuel supply part. If the retail site includes a shop, that shop may still be a supermarket or grocery retailer unless separately exempt.

A covered retailer must first determine whether it is a small business entity under section 6. Calculate your aggregated turnover (including all retail fuel sales for motor fuel retailers) at the current point in the income year, ignoring the effect of subsection 328‑110(4) of the Tax Act (so you can use an estimate). If your turnover is below $10 million and you are not a trade mark user of a brand also used by a non‑small entity, you are exempt. If you are a trade mark user in a brand shared with a larger user, you are not exempt. If you are not exempt, proceed to compliance.

For motor fuel retailers, also check if each retail site routinely supplies automotive unleaded petrol. If a site does not (e.g., diesel only), the duty does not apply to that site.

For each covered retail site, ensure that at least one cash payment point is operating and available for consumers making in‑person payments of $500 or less during the hours 7 am to 9 pm every day the site is open during those hours. The cash payment point could be a manned checkout, a service desk, or a self‑service checkout that accepts cash and is functional. If using a self‑service lane, ensure it is regularly maintained, has sufficient change, and is not locked out of cash mode.

Assess whether the number of cash payment points is reasonable and proportionate. Monitor consumer demand for cash payments at your site - for example, ask consumers, track cash transaction volumes, or use loyalty‑card data if available. Consider the size and nature of your business: a large supermarket in a low‑cash‑usage area may still need multiple cash points if demand spikes at certain times. A small convenience store may be fine with one. The level of effort required should be minimal: the cash payment point should be clearly signposted, accessible (not requiring excessive walking or staff assistance), and staffed or functional when the consumer wishes to pay.

Keep records of your cash payment point availability, demand data, any complaints, and any steps taken to improve access. In the event of a challenge, you will need to show that you considered the factors and acted reasonably.

If you face genuine obstacles, consider applying to the Commission for an individual exemption. Grounds are limited to exceptional circumstances outside your control (e.g., a natural disaster destroying cash infrastructure) or costs that threaten ongoing feasibility (e.g., the cost of retrofitting a remote site that has no cash handling at all and would become unprofitable). You must have taken all reasonable steps first - seek quotes, consider alternatives. The application must be in writing. Commission decisions are reviewable.

During the first six months (to 30 June 2026), civil penalties cannot be imposed, but you should still comply to avoid other enforcement action and to build good habits.

Nothing requires you to accept non‑legal tender. Post signs if necessary to inform consumers of any denominations you may reject under the legal tender rules.

Monitor the Commission’s website for any class exemption instruments that may apply to your retailer class.

Finally, review your franchise or banner agreement: if you operate under a shared trade mark, you may need to seek clarity on whether you are a trade mark user. If you are, and the mark owner is a large entity, you cannot rely on the small business exemption. You may need to negotiate support from the franchisor for compliance costs.