Gives the Commonwealth power to make regulations that impose excise charges (duties of excise) in connection with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (section 7).
Allows regulations to set the amount of any charge either as a fixed sum or by prescribing a method for calculating it (section 8).
Requires the Minister to be satisfied that any charge is set to recover no more than the Commonwealth's likely costs in connection with the prescribed matter (section 8(2)).
Allows regulations to provide exemptions from charges (section 9) and gives the Governor‑General power to make the necessary regulations (section 10).
Confirms commencement mechanics, territorial reach (including external Territories and extra‑territorial application), and that the Act binds States but does not impose a tax on State property (sections 2–6).
Who this affects and who decides
Who pays: people or entities specified in the regulations as liable for a prescribed matter connected with administration of the EPBC Act (section 7). The Act does not itself list liable classes — that detail will be in subordinate legislation.
Who decides: the executive (Governor‑General acting on regulation-making power, and the responsible Minister) sets which matters attract charges, how much they are, and who is exempt (sections 7–10). The Minister must be satisfied that amounts are limited to likely Commonwealth costs (section 8(2)).
This Act imposes charges that are duties of excise in relation to prescribed matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It forms one of three companion charge imposition Acts that together establish authority for cost recovery across general, customs and excise categories. The operative provisions allow regulations to prescribe a charge in relation to any matter connected with the EPBC Act or its regulations, with the charge imposed as a tax only to the extent it qualifies as an excise duty under section 55 of the Constitution. Section 7 provides the core imposition power, while section 8 requires the Minister to be satisfied that any prescribed charge recovers no more than the Commonwealth's likely costs in connection with the matter. Section 9 permits regulations to create exemptions, and section 6 expressly preserves the constitutional prohibition on taxing State property. The Act binds the Crown in right of the States, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory, extends to external Territories and applies extra-territorially. Commencement of sections 3 to 10 occurs on proclamation or automatically 12 months after royal assent on 1 December 2025. In the context of the seven-bill reform package, this legislation supports new administrative functions introduced by the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, including national environmental standards, bioregional plans, restoration contribution charges, national interest proposals and the expanded compliance role of the National Environmental Protection Agency. Without separate excise imposition authority, charges linked to activities that fall within the constitutional definition of excise, such as certain manufacturing, production or importation-related environmental approvals, could not be validly levied. The package also amends nine other environmental statutes to transfer functions to the new Agency CEO, creating additional administrative costs that these charges are intended to offset. The bill therefore completes the financial architecture needed to implement the Samuel Review recommendations on cost recovery while maintaining constitutional compliance.
Official source available
Zoe has indexed the source text for search and analysis. Use the official register for the original document and download formats.
Part of a package of 7 bills to implement the recommendations of the 2020 Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the Samuel Review), the bill imposes charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
Parliamentary progress
Progress
House of Representatives
Introduced and read a first time
30 Oct 2025
Second reading moved
30 Oct 2025
Second reading debate
04 Nov 2025
Second reading debate
05 Nov 2025
Second reading debate
06 Nov 2025
Second reading agreed to
06 Nov 2025
Third reading agreed to
06 Nov 2025
Senate
Introduced and read a first time
24 Nov 2025
Second reading moved
24 Nov 2025
Second reading debate
27 Nov 2025
Second reading agreed to
27 Nov 2025
Committee of the Whole debate
27 Nov 2025
Third reading agreed to
27 Nov 2025
Finally passed both Houses
27 Nov 2025
Assent
Act no: 65
Year: 2025
01 Dec 2025
Notes
Documents and transcripts
Text of bill
First reading
As passed by both Houses
Explanatory memoranda
Explanatory memorandum
Transcript of speeches
All second reading speeches
Minister's second reading speech
Proposed amendments
No proposed amendments have been circulated.
Schedules of amendments
No documents at present
Bills digest
Behaviour change: once regulations exist, affected businesses or individuals will face a financial charge when engaging in regulated activities or processes connected to the EPBC Act. That may alter project costs, investment decisions, and choices between doing an action, seeking an exemption, or using alternative compliance pathways.
Why the Commonwealth says it matters (official rationale)
The Act is part of a package of reforms to the EPBC Act and is intended to enable cost recovery for the Commonwealth’s administrative work under the reformed environmental law. The Explanatory Memorandum and related bills treat the charges as tools to fund administration and, where linked across the package, to support schemes (for example, restoration contributions) established by other Acts.
Testing the official rationale against practical effects, trade‑offs and implementation risks
Cost and incidence (who pays): the Act does not itself define liable persons — the regulations will. That means the immediate economic incidence (which firms, project proponents, permit holders, importers, exporters, etc.) is set by regulation. The Minister’s constraint (charges designed to recover no more than likely Commonwealth costs; section 8(2)) aims to limit charges to cost recovery, not revenue raising. Practically, however, the design of the regulations determines whether costs fall heavily on a small number of firms (concentrated) or are spread across many.
Compliance and administrative burden: the Act enables new charging obligations but leaves details to regulation. This creates administrative burdens for regulated parties (tracking, paying charges, recordkeeping) and for the department (billing, collection, account management). Those burdens will rise with the number of chargeable matters and the complexity of calculation methods (section 8).
Executive discretion and delegated rule‑making: the Act confers broad delegated power to prescribe charges, amounts and exemptions by regulation (sections 7–10). Although the Minister must be satisfied about the cost‑recovery cap (section 8(2)), operational discretion over who is charged and how is largely in subordinate legislation. That increases the importance of regulatory design and transparency, and raises implementation risk if regulations are poorly drafted.
Constitutional and legal risk: the Act expressly confines charges to the portion that are duties of excise (section 7(4)) and cross‑refers to section 55 of the Constitution. What qualifies as an excise has been the subject of High Court jurisprudence and can be contested. If regulations are framed so charges are not properly duties of excise, they may be vulnerable to legal challenge.
Interaction with other reforms in the package: this Act is narrowly focused on excise‑type charges but sits alongside other bills that create restoration contributions, general charges and customs charges. The overall economic effect depends on how the separate charging regimes are allocated across activities (for example, whether paying an excise charge substitutes for providing offsets or restoration actions under other Acts).
Market effects: because the Act allows cost recovery charges to be imposed on regulated activities, it may increase marginal costs for proponents of projects that interact with the EPBC regime. For private enterprise this can affect project viability, contract pricing and competition between firms (especially if exemptions or charge levels differ across sectors). The Act itself does not set prices or allocate funds — that is done by regulation and later administrative arrangements.
Accountability and transparency: the statute builds only a narrow statutory check (the Minister’s satisfaction about cost recovery). It does not set specific transparency or reporting obligations for the use of collected monies (those arrangements will appear in other Acts or administrative rules). That concentrates importance on regulatory and administrative detail for oversight.
Key practical points to watch when regulations are made
Which specific EPBC‑connected matters will attract excise charges and which classes of persons are liable (regulation detail).
How charge amounts will be calculated (flat amounts versus formulae) and whether the calculation meets the cost‑recovery constraint (section 8(2)).
The relationship between excise charges under this Act and other charges in the package (restoration contributions, general, customs) to avoid double charging or gaps.
Whether charges will be challenged in court on the ground they are not duties of excise (section 7(4)).
Sections of the Act most relevant: 7 (power to prescribe excise charges), 8 (how amounts are set and Minister’s cost‑recovery check), 9 (exemptions), 10 (regulations), and 3–6 (Crown, territorial and constitutional limits).
Main concepts
The central concept is the constitutional separation of taxation powers, requiring distinct legislative vehicles for duties of excise, duties of customs and general charges. Section 7(4) expressly limits the imposition to excise duties, ensuring the Act does not purport to levy taxes outside that category. Cost recovery is the guiding principle, with section 8(2) mandating that the Minister must be satisfied the charge level does not exceed the Commonwealth's likely costs before regulations are made. The regulations may prescribe either a flat amount or a calculation method, and may apply to one or more matters or to multiple charges on the same matter. Another key concept is the regulation-making framework itself, which delegates detailed design of charges to the executive while embedding a statutory safeguard on quantum. The Act also embodies the principle of targeted cost recovery for environmental administration, linking charges to specific matters under the EPBC Act such as permit applications, assessment processes, accreditation of frameworks, bioregional plan registration, national interest exemptions and Part 13 exemptions. This sits alongside the Restoration Charge Imposition Act, which creates a separate restoration contribution charge paid into the Restoration Contributions Special Account. The broader package introduces concepts such as net gain tests, unacceptable impacts, national environmental standards and the new National Environmental Protection Agency, all of which generate administrative activity whose costs may be recovered through the charges enabled here. Extra-territorial application and binding of State Crowns reflect the national scope of the EPBC Act and the need for uniform charging rules across jurisdictions and offshore activities.
Who it affects
The Act primarily affects proponents of controlled actions and other persons seeking approvals, permits, licences or exemptions under the EPBC Act and related statutes. This includes mining and resources companies, renewable energy developers, agricultural operators, housing and infrastructure proponents, and participants in sectors covered by amended legislation such as the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act, the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act and the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act. The new National Environmental Protection Agency and its CEO will administer many of the functions for which charges may be prescribed, so the Agency becomes both a beneficiary of recovered costs and an entity whose activities trigger charge liability. State and Territory governments and their agencies may be affected when they participate in bilateral agreements, strategic assessments or accredited authorisation frameworks, although section 6 prevents charges on State property itself. Commonwealth departments and agencies involved in environmental assessment and enforcement will see their administrative costs potentially offset by revenue from these charges. Indirectly, the legislation affects communities and stakeholders who rely on timely environmental decision-making, because recovered costs are intended to resource the Agency and support faster or more robust assessments. Regulated industries that currently pay fees under existing EPBC provisions may face new or restructured charges once regulations are made. The Restoration Contributions Special Account and the Restorations Contribution Holder established in the wider package will interact with the charging framework when restoration charges are imposed in lieu of traditional offsets. No direct effect on individual members of the public is created, although increased compliance costs for business may flow through to consumers or affect project timelines in sectors such as clean energy and housing.
What people will want to know
People will want to know which specific matters will attract excise charges once regulations are made, and whether charges will apply to routine approval applications, strategic assessments, bioregional plan registration or national interest exemptions. They will ask how the cost recovery cap will be calculated in practice and whether independent verification of costs will occur. Project proponents will seek clarity on timing, particularly given that operative provisions commence on proclamation or within 12 months of assent while the National Environmental Protection Agency itself commences on 1 July 2026. Stakeholders will want to understand interaction with the separate restoration contribution charge and whether paying an excise charge discharges offset obligations. Industry groups will ask whether charges will be flat fees or variable according to project scale, location or environmental risk. The public and environmental organisations will want reassurance that revenue is directed toward improved environmental outcomes rather than general revenue. Housing and renewable energy developers will ask whether new charges could increase project costs or delay approvals. First Nations organisations and land councils will want to know how charges apply to actions on Indigenous land or under new bioregional planning provisions. All parties will seek information on consultation processes for the regulations and whether existing fees will be replaced or supplemented. Because the Act itself contains no penalty provisions, people will also want to know how non-payment will be enforced, likely through refusal of approvals or existing EPBC compliance mechanisms.
Status and what happens next
The bill received royal assent on 1 December 2025 and became the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Act 2025, Act No. 65 of 2025. Sections 1 and 2 commenced the following day. Sections 3 to 10, which contain the substantive imposition, amount, exemption and regulation-making provisions, will commence on a day or days fixed by proclamation or automatically on the day after the end of the 12-month period beginning on assent. The Environment and Communications Legislation Committee reported on the broader package on 2 April 2026, and the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2025. No proposed amendments were circulated during passage. Next steps include the preparation and making of regulations that prescribe actual charges and the matters to which they apply. These regulations must be accompanied by the Minister's satisfaction that charges do not exceed cost recovery. The regulations will need to align with the commencement of the National Environmental Protection Agency on 1 July 2026 and with the substantive reforms in Schedule 1 of the Environment Protection Reform Act 2025, including new assessment pathways, bioregional plans and the Restoration Contributions Special Account. The government will also need to establish administrative systems for collecting and accounting for the charges. Because the three charge imposition Acts operate in parallel, further work is required to map which matters fall under excise, customs or general categories to avoid overlap or constitutional invalidity.
Powers, duties and rights created
The Act creates a regulation-making power vested in the Governor-General under section 10, covering all matters required or permitted by the Act or necessary for its operation. Section 8 imposes a duty on the Minister to be satisfied that any prescribed charge recovers no more than the Commonwealth's likely costs before regulations are made. Section 7 confers the power to impose charges as taxes, limited to excise duties. The regulations may create exemptions from charges, thereby defining who is not liable. No new private rights are created for individuals or corporations; instead, the Act establishes the legal foundation for future obligations to pay charges once regulations prescribe them. The Act preserves existing constitutional protections by not imposing tax on State property and by limiting its reach to excise. It extends existing Commonwealth powers to collect revenue in support of EPBC administration to activities that qualify as excise. The CEO of the National Environmental Protection Agency will exercise functions under the EPBC Act that may generate chargeable matters, but the Act itself does not confer new powers on the CEO. The framework interacts with powers in the wider reform package, such as the Minister's power to make national environmental standards, approve national interest proposals and issue bioregional plans, because charges may be attached to those instruments. Overall, the Act shifts from appropriation-funded administration toward a user-pays model for specific environmental regulatory services.
Money, penalties and enforcement
Charges imposed under the Act are taxes collected as duties of excise and paid into Commonwealth consolidated revenue unless specific legislation directs them elsewhere. In the case of restoration-related charges, revenue may be credited to the Restoration Contributions Special Account established by the Environment Protection Reform Act 2025. The Act contains no criminal or civil penalties for non-payment. Enforcement of charge obligations will rely on existing mechanisms under the EPBC Act and general tax administration law, such as refusal to grant or variation of approvals, permits or exemptions until charges are paid. The Minister's satisfaction requirement in section 8(2) provides a procedural safeguard against over-recovery but does not create an enforceable right for payers to challenge individual charge amounts beyond standard judicial review. The absence of dedicated penalty provisions in this short Act means that any sanctions for late or non-payment will be developed in the regulations or through consequential amendments to the EPBC Act itself. The package increases civil and criminal penalties for substantive environmental breaches, but those amendments sit in the Reform Bill rather than this imposition Act. Cost recovery is capped at the Commonwealth's likely costs, reducing the risk of charges being used as general revenue raising, yet the Act provides no independent audit or reporting requirement on actual cost recovery performance.
Pressure points and controversies
The bills digest records that stakeholders raised significant concerns about whether the overall reform package will protect the environment or simply reduce regulatory burdens for business. For this specific Act the principal policy trade-off lies between securing adequate funding for the new National Environmental Protection Agency and expanded assessment functions on one hand, and avoiding the imposition of charges that could deter investment or increase housing and energy costs on the other. The constitutional requirement for a separate excise bill creates administrative complexity, as the government must correctly classify each chargeable matter into excise, customs or general categories to maintain validity. A further trade-off exists between the flexibility of broad regulation-making power and the need for parliamentary oversight of new taxes, even when limited to cost recovery. Industry stakeholders have called for certainty on definitions such as net gain and unacceptable impacts, and any charges attached to those new concepts will attract scrutiny. Environmental groups have expressed concern that cost recovery models may prioritise efficiency over rigorous assessment. The requirement that the Minister be satisfied on cost levels before regulations are made provides some protection, yet the absence of mandatory public consultation or independent costing in the Act itself leaves room for debate about transparency. Because the Act forms part of a larger package that also introduces restoration charges and bioregional planning, interactions between multiple charging streams may create cumulative cost pressures on proponents. The Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee examined the bill, indicating standard parliamentary attention to the delegation of taxing power.
What changes if it passes
With royal assent already granted, the changes are now law and will take practical effect once sections 3 to 10 commence. The Commonwealth gains clear statutory authority to prescribe and collect excise charges for EPBC-related matters, enabling a shift from full budget funding toward partial cost recovery for the National Environmental Protection Agency and new regulatory functions. Proponents will face new financial obligations when regulations prescribe charges for applications, assessments, exemptions or registrations under the reformed EPBC framework. The government will be able to resource expanded compliance, enforcement and environmental information functions without equivalent increases in general appropriations. Project approval processes may incorporate charge payment as a precondition, affecting timelines and budgeting for mining, energy, infrastructure and development proposals. The three parallel charge Acts together create a comprehensive constitutional foundation for cost recovery, reducing legal risk that charges could be struck down as invalid taxes. Revenue collected may support the Restoration Contributions Special Account and the delivery of net gain outcomes through the Restorations Contribution Holder. Over time, the level and scope of charges will influence the cost of doing business in sectors regulated by the EPBC Act and may affect the competitiveness of Australian projects relative to jurisdictions without similar cost recovery. The Act itself does not alter substantive environmental protections or approval criteria, but it supplies the financial mechanism intended to make the broader Samuel Review reforms operationally sustainable.
Social post angles
New excise charges framework for EPBC Act now law after royal assent. This post explains how the short Act enables cost recovery for environmental administration without breaching constitutional rules on excise duties. Cost recovery charges coming for national environmental approvals under the Samuel Review reforms. The legislation sets out the rules for prescribing excise charges that fund the new National Environmental Protection Agency and assessment pathways. What the EPBC excise charges Act actually does in ten short sections. A plain English breakdown of imposition powers, the cost recovery cap and regulation-making process for practitioners and project proponents. Three charge Acts, one goal: constitutional validity for EPBC cost recovery. This angle highlights why separate general, customs and excise bills were needed alongside the main reform package. When will EPBC charges commence and who pays. Practical timeline and affected sectors once the operative provisions start on proclamation or within twelve months. How restoration charges and excise charges interact under the new laws. The post clarifies the relationship between the Restoration Charge Imposition Act and this excise Act for offset and approval holders. Industry checklist for the new EPBC excise charges regime. Key questions project proponents should ask about upcoming regulations and potential cost implications for approvals.
Bills Digest
Notes
Referred to Committee (30/10/2025): Environment and Communications Legislation Committee; Committee report (02/04/2026)
Considered by scrutiny committee (05/11/2025): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 7 of 2025
An electronic version of this Act is available on the Federal Register of Legislation (www.legislation.gov.au)
This package of 7 Bills implements the second and now final stage of the Albanese Government’s response to the second independent statutory review of the EPBC Act (Samuel Review).
The Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 amends the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and 11 other Acts to implement substantive reforms. These include national environmental standards, ‘unacceptable impacts’, ‘net gain’ and restoration charges in lieu of environmental offsets, reforms to the national interest exemption and a new ‘national interest proposal’, streamlining reforms to approvals and accreditation pathways, reforms of the nuclear actions trigger, improved compliance and enforcement powers, and increases in criminal penalties and civil penalties.
The National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025 establishes a statutory agency to be known as the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA). The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is given functions and powers under 9 environmental laws. The Minister may also delegate additional functions and powers to the CEO under the EPBC Act.
The Environment Information Australia Bill 2025 establishes the SES position of Head of Environment Information Australia (EIA) within the department and sets out the Head’s functions.
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025 establishes a framework to enable the imposition of restoration charges in lieu of a proponent establishing environmental offsets.
Three additional Bills provide for regulations to prescribe general charges, customs charges and excise charges, as necessary for cost recovery purposes.
In the lead up to the introduction of the Bills, stakeholders have variously raised significant concerns about whether the proposed reforms will actually protect the environment or will reduce and/or remove ‘red and green tape’ for business.
The Bills have been referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications for inquiry and report by 24 March 2026.
Introductory Info
Date of introduction: 30 October 2025
House introduced in: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water
Commencement: the Bills or specific schedules of the Bills commence as set out below:
Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025:
Sections 1 to 3
On Royal Assent.
Schedule 1, Parts 1 and 2 other than item 571
On the earlier of proclamation or 12 months after Royal Assent.
Schedule 1, item 571
Schedule 1, Part 3
On the day after Royal Assent.
Schedule 2, Part 1
Schedule 2, Part 3
Schedule 3
At the same time as the National Environment Protection Agency Act 2025, but does not commence if that Act does not commence.
Schedule 2, Part 2
On the later of (a) the same time as National Environment Protection Agency Act 2025and (b) the time item 35 of Schedule 1 to the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Act 2023 commences; the provisions do not commence if the provisions in (b) do not commence.
National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025: 1 July 2026.
Environment Information Australia Bill 2025: At the same time as the National Environmental Protection Agency Act 2025, but does not commence if that Act does not commence.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025: sections 1 and 2 commence the day after Royal Assent; sections 3 to 18 commence on the earlier of proclamation or 12 months after Royal Assent.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025: sections 1 and 2 commence the day after Royal Assent; sections 3 to 10 commence on the earlier of proclamation or 12 months after Royal Assent.
This is a preliminary Bills Digest produced to assist early consideration of the Bill. It provides some background and links to relevant resources. It will be replaced with a more comprehensive Bills Digest in due course.
Purpose of the Bills
This package of 7 Bills implement the second and now final stage of the Albanese Government’s response to the second independent statutory review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (formerly referred to as the Nature Positive Plan).
Background to the EPBC Act and EPBC Act reforms is provided in the following Parliamentary Library publications:
Sophie Power, ‘Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999: a quick guide’, Research paper series, 2018-19, (Canberra: Parliamentary Library, May 2019)
Dr Emily Gibson, ‘Reform of Australia’s national environmental law’, in Parliamentary Library Briefing Book: Key issues for the 47th Parliament, (Canberra: Parliamentary Library, June 2022)
Dr Emily Gibson, ‘Reforming Australia’s national environmental law: an overview of the government’s response to the Samuel Review’, Research paper series, 2023-24, (Canberra: Parliamentary Library, November 2023)
Dr Emily Gibson, ‘Nature Positive Reforms - April 2024 update’, Flagpost, (Canberra: Parliamentary Library, 3 May 2024)
Dr Emily Gibson, ‘Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024 [and related Bills]’, Bills Digest, No. 75, 2023-24, (Canberra: Parliamentary Library, 24 June 2024).
The Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications’ report from its inquiry into the 3 Nature Positive Bills introduced in May 2024 as part of the ‘second stage’ of the Nature Positive reforms also provides helpful analysis and information on stakeholder views.
Structure of the Bills
Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025
The Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 (Reform Bill) implements a significant number of substantive reforms to the EPBC Act. It also amends 8 environmental laws to allow the CEO of the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) to exercise a range of functions and powers. The Bill has 3 Schedules.
Schedule 1,General amendments
Note: there are a significant number of amendments, and this list is not comprehensive.
Part 1:
allows the Minister to make, vary and revoke national environmental standards, as legislative instruments, and inserts new provisions to require that approvals and certain other instruments are not inconsistent with the national environmental standard (new Part 19B (item 571).
inserts a new definition of unacceptable impacts on protected matters (new section 527F) and amends or inserts new provisions requiring that actions or classes of actions not be approved (including when approved under other instruments) if the action would have an unacceptable impact.
inserts a new definition of ‘net gain test’ (new sections 527J and 527K) and inserts new provisions requiring that approved actions (and actions authorised under certain instruments) pass the net gain test; that is, that restoration actions taken to address the residual significant impacts of a controlled action achieve a ‘net gain’ environmental outcome.
introduces a new framework for delivering restoration actions (formerly environmental offsets), comprising a Restorations Contributions Holder (an SES employee of the department), a Restoration Actions Advisory Committee, and Restoration Contributions Special Account (new Part 12B; item 323). Proponents may be able to pay a restoration contribution charge to be invested by the Restorations Contribution Holder to achieve environmental outcomes.
introduces national interest proposals (new Division 2A of Part 11; item 291), allowing the Minister, on their own initiative or the proponent’s application, to enable the Minister to approve an action even if it had unacceptable impacts, was not consistent with national environmental standards, and did not meet the net gain test.
repeals and replaces the national interest exemption (new Division 3 of Part 11; item 292), allowing the Minister to, on their own initiative or on an application from or on behalf of a proponent (including a Commonwealth, state or territory Minister) exempt a proposed action from the application of Part 3 (requirements for environmental approvals) or Chapter 4 (environmental assessments and approvals) of the EPBC Act ‘in the national interest’.
introduce a new requirement for a proponent to provide information about the greenhouse gas emissions for the action at the assessment stage (new section 84A; item 191), with key matters to be provided in regulation, and for the Minister to be satisfied that certain arrangements provide for the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions information.
amends Part 8 (assessing impacts of controlled actions) to introduce streamlined assessment pathways; the available assessment pathways would be an accredited assessment process, a streamlined assessment, an environmental impact statement or a public inquiry. The amendments also introduce new Subdivision C in Division 3 of Part 8, which allows the Minister to revoke an assessment determination and make a substituted assessment determination.
amends various provisions to clarify requirements for requests for further information and how time is counted.
amends provisions in Part 10 relating to strategic assessments with the aim of improving processes such as allowing for revocation, variation or the addition of conditions of a Part 10 approval, and for the transfer, variation and surrender of Part 10 approvals. The Minister would not be able to approve the taking of an action or class of actions under a Part 10 approval unless satisfied of specified matters such as prescribed national environmental standards and that actions would not have unacceptable impacts (new sections 146FA to 146FC).
amends or repeals and replaces provisions in Chapter 3 relating to bilateral agreements, including by allowing states and territories to approve actions under an accredited management or authorisation framework if the Minister is satisfied that the framework is not inconsistent with specified matters (such as national environmental standards and net gain provisions) and that action would not have unacceptable impacts. The amendments make corresponding amendments to provisions allowing states and territories to assess actions under an accredited framework. Bilateral agreements would be of no effect unless the relevant state or territory has provided mandatory undertakings (new sections 48A, 48B and 48C). The amendments provide for suspension, revocation and review of a bilateral agreement and for an exclusion determination such that the agreement would not apply to actions in a class of action.
amends Division 3 of Part 7 relating to reconsiderations by introducing a 28-day time limit on when a person other than a designated proponent can request reconsideration of a decision that an action is (or is not) a controlled action under subsection 75(1) (new subsection 78A(1A)) and inserting new section 79A allowing a person to request reconsideration of a decision that an action is not a controlled action if taken in a particular manner. The amendments also clarify the standard of information that must be provided. The Minister would be able to issue a determination allowing a proponent affected by a reconsideration decision to continue the action until the Minister makes a final reconsideration decision.
inserts new Part 19C (item 572) to allow the Minister and CEO of the NEPA to publish ‘rulings’, as written instruments, which set out the Minister or CEO’s opinion on the ‘way in which provisions of environmental law should apply in relation to persons, activities and other matters’.
repeals and replaces existing provisions relating to bioregional plans to allow the Minister to make bioregional guidance plans (new sections 176 to 176E) and inserts new Part 12A (item 323) allowing the Minister to make bioregional plans. Both will be written instruments (not legislative instruments). A bioregional plan must specify development zones in which one or more classes of action (a priority class of action) may be taken, conservation zones in which one or more classes of action (restricted action) may not be taken, and bioregional restoration measures. The Minister would be able to vary, suspend or revoke a bioregional plan, and to grant exemptions for restricted actions in exceptional circumstances and in the national interest.
amends subsection 29(1) to allow state and territories to approve controlled actions relating to the ‘water trigger’ under a bilaterally accredited management arrangement or authorisation process (item 77)
renames the nuclear action trigger the ‘radiological exposure action’ trigger and clarifies its application to certain mining activities (see new definition, item 36)
repeals and replaces Subdivision A of Division 4 of Part 11 (‘special environmental assessment process’ (section 160)) (item 299) and makes consequential amendments to Part 3 of the EPBC Act and to the Airports Act 1996, Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981, Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989, Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act 1989 so that proposed actions are assessed by the standard assessment and approval pathways.
amends conservation planning and heritage provisions to:
update requirements for recovery plans for listed threatened species or listed threatened ecological communities, for listed key threatening processes and threat abatement plans, was well as for National Heritage and Commonwealth Heritage listing
introduce a new definition of critical habitat (new subsection 207A(4))
introduce new ‘protection statements’ for listed threatened species and listed threatened ecological communities (new Subdivision BA of Division 5 of Part 13, at item 431); the purpose of the protection statement is to translate ‘the scientific information in recovery plans and approved conservation advices into language and requirements that are able to be more easily applied to regulatory decisions’ (p. 409). A protection statement would be the primary conservation planning document, which the Minister would be required to not act inconsistently with, and would be required to have regard to, when making a relevant decision or approving a particular instrument or arrangement (‘turning off’ recovery plans and approved conservation advice (p. 75)).
repeals and replaces Division 12 (environmental audits) of Part 17 (enforcement) to allow the CEO of the NEPA to direct or require 2 different types of audits - a directed environmental audit and a compliance audit, and to require the CEO of the NEPA to establish a register or auditors (item 550).
The amendments in Division 12 of Part 17 to are substantially similar to the amendments in Part 1 of Schedule 11 of the Nature Positive (Environmental Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024 (2024 Amendment Bill) (with the addition of a provision allowing the CEO of the NEPA to impose conditions on registration of an auditor).
inserts new Division 13A of Part 17 allowing the CEO to issue environment protection orders.
The amendments in Division 13A of Part 17 to are substantially similar to the amendments in Part 1 of Schedule 11 of the 2024 Amendment Bill (with the addition of a power to issue an order in relation to a contravention of an environmental exemption).
amends the Nature Repair Act 2023 to repeal the prohibition on the use of biodiversity certificates for an environmental offsetting purpose and to allow methodology determinations made under that Act to specify whether or not a biodiversity certificate can be used for an environmental offsetting purpose (items 625 to 627).
amends the EPBC Act (new Division 2A of Part 4, at item 114) and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (OPGGS Act; items 628 to 635) to provide that actions covered by a NOPSEMA management or authorisation framework (i.e. under the OPGGS Act and associated regulations) do not require approval under Part 9 of the EPBC Act. The Minister would be able to declare, in writing, the specified class of actions that are covered by this arrangement and may only do so if satisfied that the framework is not inconsistent with specified matters such as prescribed national environmental standards and that actions would not have unacceptable impacts. NOPSEMA would be required to report annually on how the framework complies with any relevant conditions. This would in effect replace the approved strategic assessment under Part 10 of the EPBC Act.
Part 2:
Division 1 amends the EPBC Act to increase criminal penalties in Part 3 of the Act (taking an action without an approval)
Division 2 amends the EPBC Act to increase civil penalties and introduce a new civil penalty formula for civil penalty provisions in Part 3 and subsection 142(1).
The amendments in Part 2 to are identical to the amendments in Part 2 of Schedule 11 of the 2024 Amendment Bill (noting there are new civil penalty provisions in new Part 12A-Bioregional plans).
Part 3: sets out application and transitional provisions which prescribe how amendments apply to particular circumstances.
Schedule 2,Consequential amendments and transitional provisions for the National Environment Protection Agency Act 2025
Part 1:
Items 1 to 187 amend the EPBC Act to replace select references to the Minister, and the Secretary of the department, with the CEO of the NEPA, including to allow the CEO to issue evidentiary certificates under Part 3, grant or refuse to grant permits under Part 13 and undertake compliance and enforcement activities under Parts 17, 18 and Schedule 1 of the Act. It also inserts proposed section 515AAA (item 155) to allow the Minister to delegate some or all of the Minister’s powers and functions to the CEO or a member of the staff of the NEPA (other than powers and functions in new subsection 515(1A), at item 574 of Schedule 1), and to allow the Secretary to similarly delegate some or all of the Secretary’s powers and functions to the CEO or a member of staff of the NEPA. It also requires that a public register of instruments of delegations is established (item 157).
Items 188 to 216 amend the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 to replace select references to the Minister with the CEO to allow the CEO to grant (or refuse to grant) permits, vary, suspend, revoke or cancel permits, appoint inspectors and analysts, and issue evidentiary certificates.
Items 217 to 290 amends the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports Act 1989 to replace select references to the Minister with the CEO, to allow the CEO to grant (or refuse to grant) permits, vary, suspend or revoke permits, issue certain orders, appoint inspectors, and exercise regulatory powers.
Items 291 and 292 amend the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Act 1995 to replace select references to the Minister with the CEO, for example to allow the CEO to grant exemptions from levies, and to make consequential repeals.
Items 293 to 364 amend the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act 1989 to replace select references to the Minister and Secretary with the CEO and make related consequential amendments. It would allow the CEO to grant (or refuse to grant) licences, vary, suspend or cancel licences, appoint inspectors, exercise regulatory powers, and deal with seized and forfeited goods.
Items 365 and 366 amend the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Act 1995 to replace select references to the Minister with the CEO, for example to allow the CEO to grant exemptions from levies, and to make consequential repeals.
Items 367 to 387 amend the Product Emissions Standards Act 2017 to replace select references to the Minister and Secretary with the CEO and to make related consequential amendments. It would allow the CEO to determine if a product complies with an emissions reduction standard, grant exemptions from compliance, appoint inspectors, exercise regulatory powers, and deal with seized and forfeited goods.
Items 388 to 590 amend the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act 2020 to replace select references to the Minister and Secretary with the CEO. It would allow the CEO to grant (or refuse to grant) export licences, vary, suspend or cancel export licences, appoint authorised officers, and exercise regulatory powers. The Schedule would also allow the CEO to approve new co-regulatory product stewardship arrangements, and to issue improvement notices to underperforming co-regulatory product stewardship arrangements.
Items 591 to 598 amends the Underwater Cultural Heritage Act 2018 to replace select references to the Minister and Secretary with the CEO and inserts proposed section 54A to allow the Minister to share information with the CEO. It would allow the CEO to exercise regulatory powers, deal with forfeited vessels, equipment or articles, and appoint inspectors.
Part 2: provides a contingent amendment to the Sea Dumping Act.
Part 3: provides transitional provisions relating to the formation of the NEPA, including for the transfer of documents and records and the application of an Enterprise Agreement to APS staff of the NEPA.
Items 1 to 187 in Part 1 are substantially similar to Schedule 2 of the 2024 Amendment Bill.
Items 188 to 598 in Part 1 and Parts 2 and 3 are substantially similar to Schedules 1 and 3 to 10 of 2024 Amendment Bill.
Schedule 3,Consequential amendments and transitional provisions for the Head of Environment Information Australia
Part 1: amends Part 21 (reporting) of the EPBC Act as a consequence of responsibility for preparation of State of the Environment reports transferring to the Head of Environment Information Australia (HEIA).
Part 2: provides transitional provisions which specify the time that the HEIA would be required to prepare and publish its first State of the Environment report (no later than 15 December 2028) and first statement of national environmental economic accounts; it also clarifies that the national environmental goals for the first State of the Environment report are those publicly available environmental targets identified and notified by the Minister.
National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025
The National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025 establishes a statutory agency to be known as the National Environmental Protection Australia (NEPA), which is to be led by a Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The Bill contains provisions relating to the governance and operation of the CEO and NEPA. The CEO is given functions and powers under 9 environmental laws, as provided for by amendments made by Schedule 2 of the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025.
The Bill is substantially similar to the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024. The principal differences are:
NEPA will also be responsible for monitoring and auditing the operation of certain declarations, bilateral agreements and bioregional plans under the EPBC Act
the CEO of NEPA will not be permitted to delegate a power or function under new Part 19C (rulings) of the EPBC Act.
The Minister would be able to designate the CEO as the designated report writer for recommendation reports under certain new assessment pathways (new section 84B; Reform Bill).
Environment Information Australia Bill 2025
The Environment Information Australia Bill 2025 establishes the SES position of Head of Environment Information Australia (HEIA) within the department. The Bill sets out the functions of the Head of the EIA (HEIA) which are to prepare and publish the State of the Environment report, establish and maintain environmental economic accounts, and declare national environmental information assets.
The Bill is substantially similar to the Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024. The principal difference is that references to nature positive and the associated monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework for determining whether nature positive is being achieved in Australia are removed.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025 would enable a restoration contribution charge, bioregional plan registration charge, national interest exemption charge and Part 13 exemption charge to be imposed if specified as a condition of an approval or exemption granted under the relevant provisions of the EPBC Act. A restoration contribution charge could be imposed as a condition of a standard approval or in relation to an approved strategic assessment under Part 10 of the Act.
The charge is intended to enable the approval or exemption holder ‘to discharge their liability to compensate for the damage likely to be caused by the residual significant impacts of their proposed action’ by paying the charge to the Commonwealth to compensate ‘for any such damage to a net gain’ (p. 5). The charge would be imposed in lieu of the approval or exemption holder being required to provide environmental offsets.
The charge would be determined by the regulations, with the Explanatory Memorandum indicating that this would either be a prescribed flat rate for the bioregional plan registration charge, national interest exemption charge or Part 13 exemption charge, or prescribing a method to work out the charge (pp. 2-3). The regulations would prescribe the persons or classes of persons who are liable for the charges or are exempt from the charges.
The charge would be credited to the proposed new Restoration Contributions Special Account and the proposed new Restorations Contribution Holder would be able to use the monies to ‘deliver benefits for matters of national environmental significance’, such as delivering restoration actions (p. 2).
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 enables regulations to prescribe general charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the EPBC Act. The charges are intended to be limited to those ‘necessary for cost recovery purposes’ (p. 1).
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 enables regulations to prescribe customs charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the EPBC Act. The charges are intended to be limited to those ‘necessary for cost recovery purposes’ (p. 1).
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025 enables regulations to prescribe excise charges in relation to prescribed matters connected with the EPBC Act. The charges are intended to be limited to those ‘necessary for cost recovery purposes’ (p. 1).
Background
Brief overview of the EPBC Act
The EPBC Act is the primary Commonwealth environmental law and is administered by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW; the department). The Act implements key aspects of the 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment and the 1997 Heads of Agreement on Commonwealth and State Roles and Responsibilities for the Environment, and consolidates 5 Commonwealth laws relating to environmental impact assessment, national parks, world heritage, and endangered species.
The Act establishes 9 ‘matters of national environmental significance’ (MNES) (protected matters), largely drawn from Australia’s international obligations under a range of environment and heritage treaties, and also provides for the protection of the environment on Commonwealth land. The Act sets out 2 regimes:
an environmental impact assessment and approval regime for actions by any person that are likely to have a significant impact on protected matters, actions by Commonwealth agencies that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment, and actions by any person likely to have a significant impact on the environment on Commonwealth land (Parts 3 to 11)
a regime for biodiversity conservation (for example, processes for listing and managing threatened species and ecological communities), protected areas (for example, National and Commonwealth Heritage places, Commonwealth reserves), and regulation of the trade in wildlife (Parts 11A to 15B).
The Act also:
establishes a range of advisory, expert and management bodies, namely the Threatened Species Scientific Committee, the Director of National Parks, and the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Unconventional Gas Development and Large Coal Mining Development
sets out compliance and enforcement provisions
provides for review of decisions, including extended standing for judicial review
provides for annual reports and 5-yearly state of the environment reports
sets out interpretive provisions, including key definitions.
The Act mandates 10-yearly independent statutory reviews of the Act’s operation and the extent to which its objects have been achieved (section 522A).
Need for reform
The reforms are being introduced in response to the second independent statutory review of the EPBC Act (Samuel Review). The statutory review was initiated in October 2019 and was led by Professor Graeme Samuel, with the support of an expert panel comprising Bruce Martin, Dr Wendy Craik, Dr Erica Smyth and Professor Andrew Macintosh.
The Samuel Review, having observed that ‘Australia’s natural environment and iconic places are in an overall state of decline and under increasing threat’ (p. ii), concluded (p. ii):
The EPBC Act is out dated and requires fundamental reform. It does not enable the Commonwealth to effectively fulfill its environmental management responsibilities to protect nationally important matters. The Act, and the way it is implemented, results in piecemeal decisions, which rarely work in concert with the environmental management responsibilities of the States and Territories. The Act is a barrier to holistic environmental management which, given the nature of Australia’s federation, is essential for success. [emphasis added]
The Final report made 38 recommendations for improving the operation and effectiveness of the Act as part of a staged pathway of reform (p. ii):
The reforms … are designed to enable the Commonwealth to step up its efforts to deliver nationally important outcomes for the environment by:
setting clear outcomes through new, legally enforceable National Environmental Standards that set the boundaries for decision-making to deliver the protections needed
actively restoring the environment and facilitating the scale of investment needed to deliver better outcomes
taking an adaptive approach, through better planning, measuring the effectiveness of implementation and adjusting where needed to achieve outcomes
harnessing the knowledge of Indigenous Australians to better inform how the environment is managed.
Early in the 47th Parliament, the then Minister for the Environment Tanya Plibersek released the Albanese Government’s response to the review, Nature Positive Plan: Better for the environment, better for business. Among the range of reforms, the Minister promised legislation built ‘on three basic principles: clear national standards of environmental protection, improving and speeding up decisions, and building trust and integrity’ and an independent Environment Protection Agency.
The Minister subsequently split the reforms into 3 stages and, having achieved stage 1, introduced a suite of Bills in May 2024 to implement the stage 2 reforms. The Minister is reported to have negotiated amendments with the Australian Greens and Independent Senator David Pocock to secure passage of the Bills through the Senate; however, in the face of lobbying from industry and an upcoming election, the Prime Minister reportedly intervened, and the Bills were withdrawn in February 2025.
At the beginning of the 48th Parliament, the newly-appointed Minister for the Environment Senator Murray Watt described reform of the EPBC Act as ‘a very high and immediate priority for the government’. The reforms been repositioned as central to improving national productivity and facilitating Australia’s transition to a decarbonised economy.
For example, in August 2025, the Productivity Commission’s interim report Investing in cheaper, cleaner energy and the net zero transformation recommended (p. 37):
Reform national environment laws
The Australian Government should reform environment laws to expedite approvals for clean energy projects and better protect the environment. The reforms should:
introduce national environmental standards
facilitate regional planning, particularly within renewable energy zones, with stricter statutory deadlines for assessing projects in ‘go zones’
provide accessible, high-quality information about the environment and past assessment decisions
make offsetting arrangements more efficient, such as by enabling developers to meet their offset obligations by contributing to an Australian Government offsets fund
set clear expectations about engagement with local communities and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Following the government’s August 2025 Economic Reform Roundtable, Minister Watt announced that the reform timetable would be accelerated, and would focus on implementing the three core principles of the Samuel Review: ‘stronger environmental protection and restoration, more efficient and robust project assessments and greater accountability and transparency in decision-making’.
The Minister has pointed to departmental analysis that determined that speeding up the consideration of projects and their approval would save the ‘business community and the national economy… at least half a billion dollars and potentially up to $7 billion in savings to the national economy’ (p. 3).
Policy position of non-government parties / independents
Australian Greens
The Australian Greens have long called for significant changes to the EPBC Act to ensure the Act actually protects the environment, considers climate impacts of actions, and operates efficiently. The Australian Greens spokesperson for the Environment, Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, recently outlined key areas of concern:
Environment laws that protect nature must include:
protection of critical habitat and forests
stop species extinction
a climate trigger
federal control over approvals.
Senator Hanson-Young has previously indicated that there ‘was “no prospect” of a deal on passage of the legislation unless Labor committed to a plan to end native forest logging’.
Following an October 2025 briefing on draft legislation, Senator Hanson-Young described the proposed laws as ‘not worth the paper they’re printed on’. The Senator said:
This bill has been drafted with the interests of mining industry front and centre. It weakens environmental protection. It will take us backwards and is worse than the status quo.
Coalition
The Liberal-National Coalition has been highly critical of the Albanese Government’s Nature Positive Plan. Reflecting previous ‘one stop shop’ policies, the Coalition has argued in favour of measures that streamline approvals processes and remove duplication with state and territory assessment and approval processes. It has described the establishment of the EPA as an ‘added layer of bureaucracy that is the last thing our economy and environment needs’.
Following an October 2025 briefing on draft legislation, Leader of the Opposition Sussan Ley described the proposed amendments as ‘a red light to jobs and … a handbrake to investment and development’ (p. 3). Ms Ley reportedly wrote to the Prime Minister seeking that the reforms be split into ‘“practical” measures to speed up assessment times for projects’ and deal with the ‘more contentious environmental elements’ of the reforms later.
The new Shadow Minister for the Environment, Angie Bell, has indicated a willingness to work with Labor in good faith negotiations, saying:
We want to make sure that we strike a balance between conserving our environment but also making sure there is certainty for industry moving forward and investment and jobs in our country.
More recently, Ms Bell:
…called on the government to immediately regulate ‘unacceptable impacts’, provide certainty on the definition of ‘net gain’ whiles removing scope one and two emissions reporting and cleaning up Labor’s “sad excuse” of an Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).
Ms Bell also called for the proposed ‘unacceptable impacts’ provisions to be moved into an environmental standard, greater clarification on key definitions (such as ‘net gain’), and for the CEO of the EPA to instead be made accountable to (and dismissible by) the Minister, with an official statement of expectations, and subject to a binding direction of the Minister.
The Deputy Leader of the Nationals Kevin Hogan has indicated reservations with the proposed legislation, including a requirement that proponents of major projects disclose their carbon emissions and the application of national environmental standards to regional forest agreements. He said ‘we think this will make it harder for industry to produce economic income for this country’ (p. 1).
Independent members and senators
Numerous independent members of the Parliament have campaigned for improvements to the EPBC Act, principally by incorporating a ‘climate trigger’ and removing the exemption for native forest logging under regional forest agreements.
Senator David Pocock and Senator Lidia Thorpe, along with the Australian Greens, are reported to want EPBC Act ‘to assess land clearing to try to stop native forest logging, climate considerations included in environmental assessments and decision-making, and a greater inclusion of Indigenous knowledge in environmental governance and decision-making’.
Independent MP Zali Steggall has expressed deep concern about attempts to rush legislation through the Parliament, stating ‘while reform is urgently needed, Australians expect such monumental legislation to undergo proper and meaningful parliamentary scrutiny before being passed’. As well as calling for the ‘deforestation loophole’ to be closed, Ms Steggall has foreshadowed amendments that would require the Environment Minister to take into account the following when deciding whether to grant an approval:
the economic costs and benefits an affected ecosystems would deliver if the damage from development did not occur, compared to the costs and benefits of the development
risks to the climate of the proposed development.
Stakeholder response to the Bills
The following table provides links to key stakeholder statements - both during the weeks prior to the introduction of the Bills and immediately following their introduction.
Stakeholder(s)
Statement
Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF)
ACF’s position on national nature law reform
ACF responds to Labor’s Environment Protection Agency announcement
ACF warns weak nature laws risk repeating decades of destruction
ACF
Greenpeace
WWF Australia
Environment groups welcome new enforcement powers and increases in penalties for nature laws
Climate Council
EPBC: How Australia’s national environmental law measures up on climate
Humane World for Animals
EPBC Act reforms must prevent bad decision-making, put nature first
Greenpeace
Nature law reform can’t be “big rubber stamp for the big end of town”: Greenpeace
Invasive Species Council
EPBC Act: Reforms to address threats to nature
Central Land Council
Tiwi Land Council
Northern Land Council
Anindilyakwa Land Council
Environmental law reform must safeguard future of remote communities
Environmental Defenders Office
Long-awaited EPBC reforms fall short of fixing a failing Act - Environmental Defenders Office
National Farmers Federation
Farmers urge balance and practicality in EPBC overhaul
Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Environmental laws must get the balance right
Australian Industry Group
Environment reform is a decent balance and a strong improvement
Business Council of Australia (BCA)
Business Council welcomes Government’s decision to fast-track EPBC reform
Business Council says environmental approvals reform needed but warms key changes are critical to success
Housing Industry Association
Time to stop playing politics and fast track overdue EPBC reforms
Association of Mining and Exploration Companies (AMEC)
Reforms to EPBC Act are on track after WA and Federal Governments reach agreement
Vital step forward for environmental approvals but some clarity still needed
Australian Energy Producers
EPBC reforms an opportunity to fix Australia’s broken environmental laws
Minerals Council of Australia
EPBC reform must deliver outcomes for communities, environment and economy
Work needed to ensure environmental laws succeed
Other relevant expert commentary includes:
Justine Bell-James, ‘Labor’s environmental law overhaul: a little progress and a lot of compromise’, The Conversation, 30 October 2025
Justine Bell-James, Martine Maron, Phillipa C McCormack and James EM Watson, ‘Groundhog Day: The EPBC Act reform process’, Environment and Planning Law Journal, 41 (2025): 19-40
Atticus Fleming and Andrew Macintosh, ‘Biodiversity is in catastrophic decline. Here are three ways to ensure Australia’s conservation law actually works’, The Guardian, 28 October 2025
Ken Henry (Chair of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation), Speech to the National Press Club: Our last, best change - national environmental laws to restore nature and power the net zero economy, Canberra, 16 July 2025
Phillipa C. McCormack, ‘Ken Henry urges nature law reform after decades of “intergenerational bastardry”’, The Conversation, 16 July 2025
Frances Medlock and Rachael Chick, ‘One step forward, two steps back - EPA, EIA and the long awaited reformed to Australia’s environmental laws’, Environment and Planning Law Journal, 41 (2025): 19-40 (authors employed by Environmental Defenders Office)
Euan Ritchie, Phillipa C. McCormack and Yung En Chee, ‘Labor is close to a deal on environmental law reforms. There are troubling signs these will fall short’, The Conversation, 10 October 2025.
Appendix
A brief history of efforts to reform the EPBC Act
Date
Description
12 November 1998
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Bill 1998 [1999] introduced. It passed both Houses on 29 June 1999 and substantive provisions commenced on 16 July 2000.
31 October 2008
First independent statutory review of the EPBC Act (Hawke Review), commissioned by the then Minister for the Environment Peter Garrett, commences. The review is led by Dr Allan Hawke, with the support of an expert panel comprising Paul Stein, Professor Mark Burgman, Professor Tim Bonyhady and Rosemary Warnock.
The review’s Final report, released on 21 December 2009, makes 71 wide-ranging recommendations revolving around 9 core elements.
The government releases its formal response on 24 August 2011; however, ‘[e]xcept for an environmental offsets policy, the response to the Hawke Review was never implemented’.
29 October 2019
Second independent statutory review of the EPBC Act (Samuel Review), commissioned by the then Minister for the Environment Sussan Ley, commences. The review is led by Professor Graeme Samuel, with the support of an expert panel comprising Bruce Martin, Dr Wendy Craik, Dr Erica Smyth and Professor Andrew Macintosh.
The review’s Final report, provided to the then Minister on 30 October 2020 and publicly released on 28 January 2021, concludes that (p. i):
The EPBC Act is out dated and requires fundamental reform. It does not enable the Commonwealth to effectively fulfill its environmental management responsibilities to protect nationally important matters. The Act, and the way it is implemented, results in piecemeal decisions, which rarely work in concert with the environmental management responsibilities of the States and Territories. The Act is a barrier to holistic environmental management which, given the nature of Australia’s federation, is essential for success.
27 August 2020
The then Minister for the Environment introduces the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Streamlining Environmental Approvals) Bill 2020 to support single-touch environmental approvals. The Bill is almost identical to a Bill introduced in 2014 and is widely viewed as inconsistent with the Samuel Review’s Interim Report (p. 3). It lapses at the end of 46th Parliament.
25 February 2021
The then Minister for the Environment introduces the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standards and Assurance) Bill 2020 to establish National Environmental Standards and an Environmental Assurance Commissioner. The Bill was viewed by some stakeholders as ‘cherry picking’ recommendations from the Samuel Review’s Final report (p. 3). It lapses at the end of the 46th Parliament.
16 June 2021
The then Minister for the Environment releases the Morrison Government’s response, A pathway for reforming national environmental law, recognising that reform was long overdue and agreeing with the central pillars of the Samuel Review’s recommendations (pp. 2-3).
19 July 2022
Following the election of the Albanese Government, the new Minister for the Environment Tanya Plibersek releases the 2021 State of the environment report, which documents the continuing decline in Australia’s environment. The Minister commits to providing a formal response to the Samuel Review by the end of 2022, with the aim of developing new environmental legislation for 2023 (p. 9).
8 December 2022
The then Minister for the Environment releases the Albanese Government’s response, Nature Positive Plan: Better for business, better for the environment. The Minister promises legislation built ‘on three basic principles: clear national standards for environmental protection, improving and speeding up decisions, and building trust and integrity’ as well as an independent Environment Protection Agency.
30 October 2023
Formal closed consultations commence with key stakeholder groups, as well as Commonwealth, state and territories agencies (p. 92).
December 2023
During final negotiations on the Nature Repair Bill 2023 and Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023, the government introduces a proposed amendment to the EPBC Act to amend the ‘water trigger’ to include all forms of unconventional gas development. This helps secure passage of the Bills through the Senate and partially achieves the Samuel Review’s first recommendation (p. 48).
16 April 2024
The then Minister for the Environment announces that the Nature Positive reforms would be progressed in a staged manner:
Establishing the nature repair scheme and expanding the ‘water trigger’ (completed in December 2023)
Creating Environment Protection Australia (EPA) and Environment Information Australia (EIA)
Delivering substantive reform to the EPBC Act, as outlined in the Nature Positive Plan.
29 May 2024
The then Minister for the Environment introduces the Nature Positive (Environment Protection Australia) Bill 2024, Nature Positive (Environment Information Australia) Bill 2024, and Nature Positive (Environmental Law Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2024. The Bills comprise the second stage of reforms and pass the House on 4 July 2024.
The Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee conducts an inquiry into the Bills and recommends their passage with amendments. However, the Coalition, Australian Greens, Senator David Pocock and Senator Lidia Thorpe each make separate recommendations.
25 November 2024
The then Minister for the Environment negotiated amendments with the Australian Greens and independent Senator David Pocock to secure passage of the Nature Positive Bills. These are reportedly set aside following Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s intervention, and the Bills are discharged from the Notice Paper on 5 February 2025.
25 March 2025
The then Minister for the Environment introduces the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025. The Bill removes the minister’s ability to overturn a controlled action decision in certain circumstances where the request for reconsideration was made more than 5 years after the action commenced.
The heavily criticised Bill, which responds explicitly to a request for reconsideration of salmon aquaculture in Macquarie Harbour and its impacts on the critically endangered Maugean Skate, passes both Houses the following day and commences on 28 March 2025.
16 May 2025
Following re-election of the Albanese Government, the new Minister for the Environment Senator Murray Watt states that reform of the EPBC Act is one of the highest priorities for the Albanese Government during the 48th Parliament.
19 June 2025
The Minister for the Environment hosts a high-level roundtable, bringing together stakeholders from environmental, resources, energy, climate, housing and agricultural sectors, as well as First Nations Representatives. The Minister noted support for reforms based on three pillars (p. 1):
Stronger environmental protection and restoration
More efficient and robust project assessments
Greater accountability and transparency in decision making.
The Minister also noted ‘strong support for key components of the reforms, such as National Environmental Standards, Streamlined approval processes, Regional planning, More robust offset regimes, Better data on environmental outcomes’ (p. 1).
27 August 2025
The Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy Josh Wilson introduces the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Board of Management Functions) Bill 2025. The Bill enables a Board for a Commonwealth reserve to continue making decisions after a management plan expires, provided those decisions are consistent with the expired management plan. While the Samuel Review made a number of recommendations relating to jointly managed Commonwealth reserves and, in particular, improving the contribution of Indigenous Australian’s traditional knowledge and participation in EPBC Act processes, the Bill primarily responds to the impending expiry of management plans for 2 reserves.
The Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee considered the Bill and recommends its passage.
The Bill passed both Houses on 28 October 2025 but is yet to receive Royal Assent.
30 October 2025
The package of Bills is introduced to the House of Representatives.
Links
The links to the Bills, their Explanatory Memoranda and second reading speeches can be found on the Bill home pages, linked above, or through the Australian Parliament website.
When Bills have been passed and have received Royal Assent, they become Acts, which can be found at the Federal Register of Legislation website.
All hyperlinks in this Bills Digest are correct as of November 2025.
Creative Commons
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, and to the extent that copyright subsists in a third party, this publication, its logo and front page design are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia licence.
In essence, you are free to copy and communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
Disclaimer
Bills Digests are prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament. They are produced under time and resource constraints and aim to be available in time for debate in the Chambers. The views expressed in Bills Digests do not reflect an official position of the Australian Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion. Bills Digests reflect the relevant legislation as introduced and do not canvass subsequent amendments or developments. Other sources should be consulted to determine the official status of the Bill.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the ParliamentaryLibrarian at webmanager@aph.gov.au. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or the Library‘s Central Enquiry Point for referral.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Act 2025
No. 65, 2025
An Act to impose charges that are duties of excise in relation to matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, and for related purposes
Contents
1 Short title 3
2 Commencement 3
3 Act binds the Crown 4
4 Extension to external Territories 4
5 Extra‑territorial application 4
6 Act does not impose tax on property of a State 4
7 Imposition of charges 4
8 Matters relating to amount of charges 5
9 Exemptions from charges 5
10 Regulations 5
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Act 2025
No. 65, 2025
An Act to impose charges that are duties of excise in relation to matters connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, and for related purposes
[Assented to 1 December 2025]
The Parliament of Australia enacts:
1 Short title
This Act is the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Act 2025.
2 Commencement
(1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms.
Commencement information
Column 1
Column 2
Column 3
Provisions
Commencement
Date/Details
Sections 1 and 2 and anything in this Act not elsewhere covered by this table
The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent.
2 December 2025
Sections 3 to 10
A day or days to be fixed by one or more Proclamations.
However, if any of the provisions do not commence within the period of 12 months beginning on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the day after the end of that period.
Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally enacted. It will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this Act.
(2) Any information in column 3 of the table is not part of this Act. Information may be inserted in this column, or information in it may be edited, in any published version of this Act.
3 Act binds the Crown
This Act binds the Crown in right of each of the States, of the Australian Capital Territory and of the Northern Territory. However, it does not bind the Crown in right of the Commonwealth.
4 Extension to external Territories
This Act extends to the external Territories.
5 Extra‑territorial application
This Act extends to acts, omissions, matters and things outside Australia.
6 Act does not impose tax on property of a State
(1) This Act does not impose a tax on property of any kind belonging to a State.
(2) In this section:
property of any kind belonging to a State has the same meaning as in section 114 of the Constitution.
7 Imposition of charges
(1) The regulations may prescribe a charge in relation to a prescribed matter connected with the administration of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 or regulations made under that Act.
(2) Charges prescribed under subsection (1) are imposed as taxes.
(3) Two or more charges may be prescribed in relation to the same matter, and a single charge may be prescribed in relation to 2 or more matters.
(4) This section imposes a charge only so far as that charge is a duty of excise within the meaning of section 55 of the Constitution.
8 Matters relating to amount of charges
(1) The regulations may prescribe a charge under subsection 7(1):
(a) by specifying an amount as the charge; or
(b) by specifying a method for calculating the amount of the charge.
(2) Before the Governor‑General makes a regulation under subsection 7(1) prescribing a charge in relation to a matter, the Minister must be satisfied that the amount of the charge is set at a level that is designed to recover no more than the Commonwealth’s likely costs in connection with the matter.
9 Exemptions from charges
The regulations may provide for exemptions from a charge prescribed under subsection 7(1).
10 Regulations
The Governor‑General may make regulations prescribing matters:
(a) required or permitted by this Act to be prescribed by the regulations; or
(b) necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to this Act.