Currency (Royal Australian Mint) Determination (No. 1) 2018

Several concepts are central to the operation of this determination. Denomination is the face value of the coin, expressed in dollars or cents. The determination lists denominations of $5, $1 and 50c. Standard composition refers to the metal or alloy from which the coin is made. For the $5 coins it is “at least 99.9% silver” - a minimum fineness rather than a precise fixed alloy. For the $1 coins it is “copper, aluminium and nickel”, a typical australian circulating alloy. For the 50c coins it is simply “copper and nickel”, but no ratio is specified. This absence of a quantitative standard is notable; the Currency Act Schedule (as amended) would ordinarily define the exact proportions, but the determination only states the metals. Standard weight is the target mass in grams, and allowable variation is the tolerance within which a coin must fall to be considered of standard weight. The variation can be symmetric, as in item 1 (23.23 g ± 0.80 g), or asymmetric, as in item 2 (31.103 g +3.00 g, with no minus tolerance). This means a coin under 31.103 g would not meet the standard, but a coin up to 34.103 g would. Design is divided into obverse (the heads side) and reverse (the tails side). The obverse O1 is the standard effigy of Queen Elizabeth II with the legend “ELIZABETH II”, “AUSTRALIA”, a year in Arabic numerals, and “IRB”. Obverse O2 is a more complex design for the Earth coin, including a central circle with the effigy and inscriptions and an outer ring of stripes, planets and stars. Reverse designs are specified by symbols R1 to R11, each described in Part 2 of Schedule 1. These include coloured stained‑glass and military caps, Sir John Monash, a series of Holden race cars, a Commonwealth Games mascot, and a layered representation of Earth’s atmosphere. Dimensions include maximum diameter or other dimension (measured according to shape) and maximum thickness. Shape is defined for each item: triangular with rounded corners (S1), circular (S2), dodecagonal (S3), or circular concave (S4). The determination also defines edge types: plain (E1), continuously milled (E2), or interrupted milling (E3). Each of these concepts collectively defines what constitutes a lawful coin of that denomination. The determination also introduces the concept of a “specification” in the Schedule to the Act, meaning that future amendments to the Schedule would modify these specifications. All symbols are explained in Part 2, making the design descriptions accessible.

The determination directly affects the Royal Australian Mint, which is the entity that must produce coins conforming to these specifications. The Mint’s manufacturing processes, quality control and testing are bound by the stated weight tolerances, dimensions and compositions. For the $5 silver coins the high silver purity requirement (at least 99.9%) may require sourcing and refining of silver to stringent standards. The asymmetric tolerance for the heavier $5 coin (item 2) means the Mint must avoid underweight coins entirely but can accept overweight coins within the +3 g band. The Mint also needs to manage the complex designs, such as the coloured stained‑glass window on the triangular $5 coin and the coloured race‑car images on the 50c series. The instrument therefore affects procurement contracts for metals, dyes and colour‑application processes. Beyond the Mint, the determination affects currency‑handling businesses including banks, cash‑in‑transit operators, vending machine operators and retailers. Coins with the same dimensions and weight as existing circulating coins (the $1 and 50c pieces) should pass through coin‑recognition systems without adjustment, provided the machines accept alloy‑specific signatures. However, the 50c coins retain the standard dodecagonal shape and cupro‑nickel composition, so they should integrate into existing sorting and counting equipment. The triangular $5 coin and the circular concave $5 coin are novel shapes and will not be accepted by typical vending or coin‑counting machinery. They are primarily collector or bullion pieces and will be sold at a premium above face value, affecting coin dealers, online marketplaces and auction houses. The public is affected as holders of these coins: they can use them as legal tender subject to the limits in the Currency Act (for example, $5 coins are legal tender for any amount, while $1 and 50c coins are legal tender only up to ten times their face value). The determination also affects counterfeit‑detection authorities, who will refer to these specifications when testing whether a suspect coin is genuine. Importers of foreign coins that resemble Australian coinage must also be aware that a coin that copies the design or dimensions may infringe the Currency Act if it is not made by the Mint or if it purports to be a coin of Australia.

The instrument itself does not impose any duties directly on persons outside the Mint. Its legal effect is to amend the Schedule to the Currency Act, which in turn defines the characteristics of coins that are legal tender. The key duty that arises by operation of the Currency Act is that the Mint must ensure that coins of these denominations that it issues comply with the standard composition, weight, design and dimensions set out in the determination. There is no duty on the public to accept any particular coin, but the Currency Act provides that coins issued under the Act are legal tender, subject to limitations on the amount of lower denominations that can be used to discharge a debt. This means a creditor must accept up to those limits when offered. The determination gives rights to holders: a coin that meets these specifications is a standard coin and is legal tender. Conversely, a coin that does not meet the specifications may not be legal tender, and a person who tenders such a coin may not validly discharge a debt. The determination also effectively grants the Mint the right to produce coins with these specific designs as legal tender; no other entity may lawfully produce coins that use the same designs or that purport to be coins of Australia. The allowable variations establish a range within which a coin is considered to be of standard weight. For the item 2 $5 coin, because the tolerance is asymmetric (only plus), a coin lighter than 31.103 g is not of standard weight; a coin heavier than 34.103 g would also be outside the tolerance because it exceeds the allowable variation (the specification is “31.103 + 3.00”, so the upper limit is 34.103 g). Holders have no duty to verify composition or weight, but if they are in possession of a coin that is demonstrably outside the tolerances, that coin may be treated as not legal tender. The determination also provides that the descriptions of symbols in Part 2 are part of the legal specification, so the Mint must ensure the reverse and obverse designs match those textual descriptions. This includes colour requirements (e.g., the coloured Earth image on reverse R11) and the arrangement of inscriptions. Any deviation could result in a coin not meeting its specification.

The determination creates no penalties of its own. Rather, it establishes the benchmarks that underpin penal provisions elsewhere, principally in the Currency Act 1965 and the Criminal Code. Section 14 of the Currency Act makes it an offence to forge, counterfeit or lighten a coin of the realm. The determination provides the authoritative standard against which a coin’s weight, composition and design are measured. A person who produces a coin that purportedly is a $5 silver coin but that contains less than 99.9% silver, or that weighs less than the minimum weight (taking into account allowable variation), would be producing a counterfeit or an altered coin. The allowable variations are therefore critical: if the Mint itself issues a coin that is slightly underweight but within tolerance, it is still a standard coin; if an unauthorised person issues a coin of the same weight, it may still be a counterfeit if it does not match the overall specification (e.g., design, composition). The Attorney‑General’s Department, the Australian Federal Police and state police enforce these offences. The penalties for counterfeiting under the Criminal Code include imprisonment for up to 10 years for making counterfeit coin, and up to 14 years if done with intent to defraud. There is also a specific offence in section 64 of the Crimes Act 1914 for impairing the currency of coins. The determination also assists in enforcement of the prohibition on using coins that have been diminished otherwise than by reasonable wear. A coin that is within the allowable variation is presumed to be of standard weight; a coin that falls below the lower bound is prima facie lightened and therefore not legal tender and potentially evidence of an offence. In practice, the asymmetric tolerance for the $5 silver coin (item 2) means a coin weighing 31.000 g would be below standard, making it easier to prosecute a counterfeiter who produces underweight copies. For the other coins with symmetric tolerances, detection of underweight coins requires deviation greater than the stated range. The determination also indirectly supports enforcement of trade practices law: if a dealer sells a coin described as “standard issue” but the coin does not meet these specifications, the dealer may face action under the Australian Consumer Law for misleading or deceptive conduct or for supplying goods that do not comply with a prescribed standard.

The determination operates under the Currency Act 1965, specifically section 13(2)(b) (which allows the Minister to determine denominations and standard compositions) and section 13A(1) (which allows the specification of weight, design and dimensions). It amends the Schedule to the Currency Act, meaning that the Schedule is updated to include these new coin specifications. The Currency Act itself continues to govern all matters of legal tender, the issue of coins, and the powers of the Mint. There is no conflict with the Reserve Bank Act 1959, since the Reserve Bank is responsible for banknotes, not coins. The determination interacts with the Criminal Code and the Crimes Act 1914 because the physical standards set out here become the baseline for counterfeiting and coin‑impairment offences. For example, a coin that closely copies the design of the Sir John Monash $5 coin but has a different silver purity would likely be counterfeit because it does not meet the standard composition. The determination also interacts with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (which includes the Australian Consumer Law). If a coin is marketed as being “of legal tender quality” or as an “Australian coin”, but the coin is not issued by the Mint or does not meet these specifications, the seller may contravene the ACL by making false or misleading representations about the goods. There may also be an interaction with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 if the coins are sold as investments (e.g., bullion coins) and representations about purity or weight are false. The determination is silent on the number of coins that may be issued or any caps; that is left to the Mint’s own commercial decisions, which may be influenced by the Commonwealth’s fiscal policies and by agreements with third‑party marketers. The determination does not affect the application of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997; the tax treatment of profits from selling these coins would be governed by ordinary principles of capital gains and trading stock. There is also potential interaction with the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 if a foreign entity sought to acquire the designs or production rights, but that is indirect.

The instrument is titled “Currency (Royal Australian Mint) Determination (No. 1) 2018” and was made on 26 February 2018, signed by the Assistant Minister to the Treasurer, Michael Sukkar. It commenced the day after registration, which was presumably 27 February 2018. The text as provided does not show any amendments; it appears to be the original version. However, section 5(3) and section 6(6) state that the determination does not affect any other provision of a determination made for the purposes of paragraph 13(2)(b) or subsection 13A(1). This indicates that previous determinations under the same provisions continue to apply in relation to other coin specifications. There may be earlier determinations (e.g., from 2017 or earlier) that set specifications for other denominations or for the same denominations but with different designs. The instrument does not repeal or revoke any earlier instrument; it adds to the body of specifications already in effect. Subsequent determinations, such as Currency (Royal Australian Mint) Determination (No. 2) 2018 or later, could add or vary these specifications. Since the instrument is a legislative instrument registered on the Federal Register of Legislation, its amendment history is publicly searchable. As of the time of writing (2025), no amendments to this specific determination have been identified, but practitioners should verify the current version. The determination is a standalone instrument; it does not reference any amending acts. The Currency Act itself has been amended over time (for example, to introduce the $5 denomination in its current form), but those amendments are not part of this instrument. The determination is an exercise of delegated legislation power and is subject to disallowance by either house of the Australian Parliament. It was likely not disallowed.

There is no reported case law in which this specific determination has been judicially considered. That is unsurprising because the instrument is purely technical: it defines the physical parameters of coins. Litigation under the Currency Act tends to focus on questions of legal tender, counterfeiting, or the validity of particular coin issues, but rarely on the content of a schedule determination. For example, a challenge might arise if a coin were alleged not to be legal tender because it did not meet the specifications, but such disputes would likely be resolved by reference to the Mint’s certification rather than by court action. There could be criminal prosecutions for counterfeiting where the Crown relies on the determination to establish that a seized coin does not match the standard composition or weight, but those prosecutions would be reported as criminal cases, not as civil litigation about the determination itself. There is also the possibility of consumer‑protection litigation if a seller misrepresents a coin as meeting these specifications when it does not, but again the determination would be an evidentiary reference. No such cases have been reported in the Commonwealth Law Reports or in the Federal Court as of 2025. The determination has not been the subject of an administrative review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977; such a review is possible if a person aggrieved by a decision under the Currency Act challenges the validity of the determination, but no such proceeding is known. Because the determination is a legislative instrument, it could theoretically be challenged on the grounds that it exceeds the power under the Currency Act or that it is procedurally invalid (e.g., insufficient consultation), but no such challenge has materialised.

Several aspects of this determination may trip up practitioners, mint personnel, collectors and law enforcement. First, the asymmetric weight tolerance for the $5 silver coin in item 2: “31.103 + 3.00”. This means the coin must weigh at least 31.103 g but may weigh up to 34.103 g. There is no minus tolerance. A coin that weighs 31.100 g is outside the specification and thus not a standard coin, even though the difference is only 0.003 g. The Mint must ensure no coin comes off the press underweight. Conversely, a heavy coin up to 34.103 g is acceptable, which is surprising for a bullion piece where precision is often expected. This unusual tolerance may have been chosen to reduce production costs or to account for the complex design. Second, the standard composition for the 50c coins is simply “copper and nickel”. No ratio is given, unlike many comparable specifications that state “75% copper, 25% nickel”. This means the Mint could vary the exact alloy without amending the determination, but it also means enforcement authorities cannot test for a precise copper‑nickel ratio; they can only test whether both metals are present. That could make it harder to prosecute counterfeit 50c coins if the alloy is not precisely matched. Third, the measurement rules for non‑circular coins are easy to overlook. For triangular coins (item 1), section 6(4) says the maximum dimension is the perpendicular bisector, which is the shortest distance across the coin from one side to the opposite vertex? The perpendicular bisector of an equilateral triangle is the altitude from a side to the opposite vertex, not a diameter in the usual sense. For circular concave coins (item 11), the specification refers to the shortest diameter, which may be the inner concave diameter, not the outer rim diameter. Anyone measuring these coins must apply the correct rule. Fourth, the reverse designs include coloured elements, and the determination requires those colours to be present. If the Mint later issues the same coin without colour (e.g., a “proof” version without colour), that version would not meet the specification and could not be issued under this determination. Fifth, the $1 coin appears twice in the table: item 3 (Sir John Monash reverse R3) and item 10 (Commonwealth Games reverse R10). Both have identical physical specifications (weight, size, composition, shape, edge). This means they are interchangeable in vending machines, but collectors and dealers must distinguish them by design. The Mint may issue both in the same year, potentially causing confusion for inventory management. Sixth, the allowable variation for the triangular $5 coin (item 1) is ±0.80 g on a 23.23 g coin, a tolerance of about 3.4%. That is generous; a counterfeit coin only marginally lighter would pass the weight test if within this band. Seventh, the obverse O1 requires the year to be inscribed in Arabic numerals, but the year is not fixed in this instrument; the Mint can insert any year, meaning coins minted in 2018, 2019, etc., under this determination would have different dates but still meet the specification. That flexibility is intentional but means the determination authorises an open‑ended series of dated coins. Eighth, the triangular shape itself is unusual; vending machines, coin sorters and counting equipment will likely reject it. This coin will not enter general circulation and will be sold as a collector item. Its maximum diameter of 34.20 mm is the perpendicular bisector, which may be smaller than the actual width across the flattened corners, so packaging and display materials must account for that.

For the Royal Australian Mint, compliance is a matter of manufacturing control. The Mint must ensure that every coin struck under this determination meets the standard composition, weight within allowable variation, and dimensions within the stated maxima. For the $5 silver coins, the Mint must source silver of at least 99.9% purity and verify that each batch meets that minimum. The asymmetric tolerance on item 2 requires careful weight monitoring to prevent underweight coins; a reject rate may be acceptable for coins that are overweight but within the +3 g band. For the 50c and $1 coins, the Mint should adhere to the usual alloy standards even though the determination does not specify ratios; departing from the historical 75‑25 cupro‑nickel or the standard aluminium‑bronze composition could cause issues with coin‑acceptor equipment calibrated to the traditional alloy. The Mint must also follow the design descriptions precisely, including the colours (e.g., on reverse R1 the stained‑glass window must be coloured as described). If the Mint wishes to issue a coin with a different design or with no colour, it must use a different determination. For businesses and organisations that accept coins, compliance is minimal: they should accept these coins as legal tender subject to the usual limits. However, for vending machine operators, it is advisable to confirm that the new $1 and 50c coins are compatible with existing mechanisms. Since the physical dimensions match existing coins, compatibility is likely, but the minting of coloured 50c coins (the Holden series) may cause optical sensor problems if the colouring affects reflectivity. Operators may need to update recognition software or accept the risk of rejection. For coin dealers and importers, compliance means ensuring that any coin sold as an Australian legal tender coin matches these specifications exactly. Selling a coin that purports to be one of these issues but is actually a different weight, metal, or design would breach the Australian Consumer Law and potentially the Currency Act. Importers of foreign coins that resemble these coins must ensure they do not infringe the Mint’s exclusive right to produce Australian coinage. For law enforcement, compliance means using this instrument as the definitive reference when examining suspect coins. They should measure weight, dimensions, test composition (e.g., X‑ray fluorescence for silver content for $5 coins, metal sorting for 50c), and compare the design visually against the descriptions. The absence of a specified alloy ratio for 50c coins means enforcement must rely on the presence of copper and nickel rather than a specific proportion. For collectors, compliance is a matter of verification: they should check that any coin they purchase matches the weight and dimensions listed, and that the design corresponds to the description. The allowable variation means a coin may be slightly different from the stated weight but still be genuine. The safest practice is to consult the Royal Australian Mint’s product specifications, but the legal text is the ultimate authority.