The determination rests on a small set of statutory and administrative concepts. The first is the statutory source: subsection 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 is invoked as the legal authority for making the determination. The determination itself does not reproduce the text of s 9(1), but identifies that subsection as the enabling provision. The implicit concept is that the Governor-General or a responsible minister (or delegate) may, under the Act, determine amounts to be paid to States and Territories as general purpose financial assistance (GPFA).

The second concept is general purpose financial assistance. The instrument explicitly states that the amounts in the schedule are “to be paid to the States for the purpose of making a grant of general purpose financial assistance to those States” (clause 3). The determination therefore operates within the federal payments architecture that separates “general purpose” payments from purpose-specific (tied) payments. While the determination does not define GPFA itself, it treats GPFA as the object of the payments authorised.

The third concept is the administrative act of fixing payment timing and amounts. The table is headed “General purpose financial assistance for payment on 23 April 2018.” That imposes a specific payment date and links the monetary entries to that date. The table lists jurisdictions and monetary amounts to two decimal places for each non-zero entry, and a final total. The presence of hyphens for some jurisdictions functions in context as the instrument’s way of indicating no amount is payable to those jurisdictions for the listed payment date.

The fourth concept is instrument formality: the determination includes a naming clause, a commencement clause, and a signature block with the official’s name and date. The instrument repeats its name and certain clauses later in the document; the repetition is part of the published record rather than a substantive legal change.

Finally, the instrument contains no conditionality, no obligations on the recipient States, no recoupment provisions, and no procedural guidance about how the Commonwealth will make the payments (for example, through departmental appropriation accounts or via Treasury instructions). The core operative concept is therefore a one-off monetary direction by executive determination, limited to naming the recipient jurisdictions, specifying amounts, and fixing a payment date.

The direct legal beneficiaries named by the instrument are the State and Territory governments listed in the payment table. Practically those beneficiaries are Western Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and, indirectly, the Commonwealth government as payer. Western Australia is allocated $69,068,366.58; the Australian Capital Territory is allocated $3,296,804.93; the total of the schedule is $72,365,171.51. The other jurisdictions listed , New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory , are included in the table but have hyphens in the amount column for the 23 April 2018 payment. Those hyphens, as published in the determination, constitute the instrument’s record that no amount was allocated to those jurisdictions for this payment date. The instrument does not expressly state whether a hyphen should be read as zero dollars or as “not applicable”, but given clause 3’s formulation that the amounts in the table “are to be paid to the States” the table functions as the primary legal record of who receives funds for that payment round.

At a secondary level, auditors, state accounting officers and Commonwealth treasury officers are affected operationally: they will need to process payment transactions consistent with the amounts and date fixed by the determination. Commonwealth departments charged with making payments and reconciling appropriations must account for the outflow against budget appropriation and the legal authority provided by the instrument. State treasuries and their accounting units will receive and record the grant amounts in their financial statements for the relevant period.

Taxpayers and budget-watchers are affected residually because the instrument commits Commonwealth funds for a specified purpose and date. The determination does not create private rights beyond the State and Territory recipients; it does not alter obligations of private parties, nor does it attach conditions that would affect municipal or private-sector behaviour. The decision-maker named in the instrument is Michael Sven Sukkar in his capacity as Assistant Minister to the Treasurer; the identity of the decision-maker matters for administrative law questions of delegation and validity, although the instrument does not include a statement of any delegation. The instrument therefore primarily affects (1) the named State and Territory recipients, (2) Commonwealth payment and accounting officers responsible for implementing the payment, and (3) the fiscal position reflected in Commonwealth and State accounting records.

The determination creates an obligation on the Commonwealth executive to make the payments specified in the table. Clause 3 frames this as amounts “are to be paid to the States for the purpose of making a grant of general purpose financial assistance to those States.” That phrasing operates as a direction: the Commonwealth must effect the payments set out in the schedule. The instrument itself does not specify the mechanism for payment, such as the appropriation account or the transaction system to be used, nor does it instruct a particular department or official to execute the payment. The duty therefore is one of disposition and recording of Commonwealth funds consistent with the instrument; operational duties will rest on Treasury and other administrative units by virtue of normal public finance processes, but those processes are not described in the determination.

Recipients , the State and Territory treasuries , obtain the right to receive the stated amounts on the announced payment date (23 April 2018). That right is limited to the amounts and payment date in the instrument; no further conditions or strings attach in the determination itself. The instrument does not create ongoing entitlements beyond the specified payment round. There is no grant agreement or conditions of use within the determination text; the funds are described as general purpose financial assistance, which in federal financial relations practice is money provided without a Commonwealth-imposed operational condition, but the determination does not expressly state any rights or ongoing duties for recipients beyond receipt and use consistent with their own priorities.

The determination does not impose compliance obligations on the recipient States within the instrument. It does not require reporting, performance measurement, or recoupment. It similarly imposes no express obligations on Commonwealth departments other than to carry out the payment. There is no mention of interest on late payment, audit arrangements, review mechanisms, or dispute resolution clauses. Where statutory or administrative frameworks external to the determination impose duties (for example, appropriation and accounting rules), the instrument functions as the legal authorisation for the payment in that framework, but it does not reproduce or modify those external duties.

Because the instrument is made under s 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009, it implicitly interacts with the duties and rights established by that Act; however the determination does not restate those obligations. Practitioners should therefore examine the enabling Act for any statutory duties on the Commonwealth or rights for States that emanate from that source. The determination’s operative content is confined to the duty to pay fixed amounts on a set date and the recipient States’ right to receive those amounts.

The determination contains no provisions establishing penalties, sanctions or enforcement mechanisms. There are no clauses that specify consequences if the payments are not made on the scheduled date, no statutory offsets or conditions that would trigger a repayment obligation, and no administrative penalties for misuse of funds. The instrument therefore leaves enforcement and remedial mechanisms to the wider legal and administrative framework.

Enforcement of the payment obligation will depend on the statutory architecture of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 and standard public finance procedures. The determination cites s 9(1) of that Act as its authority; any remedies for non‑payment would need to be sought against the Commonwealth under the Act or otherwise through judicial review or administrative law avenues if a recipient State alleged a failure to perform a legal duty. However, the determination itself contains no express right of enforcement by a State nor any penalties against the Commonwealth for non-compliance.

For recipients, the determination imposes no enforcement obligations or penalties for non-use or mis-use because it contains no conditions on the grant. Similarly, for Commonwealth officials and agencies charged with making the payment, the determination does not specify disciplinary or legal consequences for errors in processing; such accountability would arise from general administrative law, employment discipline frameworks, or financial management rules that are separate from the determination.

Operationally, the practical enforcement mechanism for ensuring payments occur is institutional: Treasury and appropriation controls normally ensure payments are made in accordance with legal directions. Where a party seeks relief because the specified payment was not made or was made incorrectly, the available legal pathways are not set out in this determination. Users should therefore treat the determination as a directional instrument lacking internal penalty provisions, with enforcement contingent on external statutory, contractual or administrative frameworks.

The determination identifies one statutory touchstone explicitly: subsection 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009. That provision is the legal basis for the instrument’s existence. The determination does not quote or summarise other sections of the Act, nor does it reference other statutes, appropriation items, or policy instruments. Its operative effect therefore depends on the surrounding framework of Commonwealth financial law, including appropriation legislation, the Financial Management and Accountability architecture operating at the time, and the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 itself.

Because the instrument directs Commonwealth payments to State and Territory governments, it implicates Commonwealth appropriation and public finance rules: payments must be made under an appropriation or statutory authority. The determination does not identify the appropriation authority or the internal budget classification to be used, so administrative officers must reconcile the direction in this instrument with the relevant appropriation and accounting rules in force. The determination likewise does not amend or replace any intergovernmental agreements between Commonwealth and the States; it is a stand-alone direction for a particular payment round.

The determination’s labelling of funds as “general purpose financial assistance” places these payments within the broader federal‑state financing scheme that distinguishes between general purpose (untied) payments and tied payments. Any statutory or administrative treatment that follows from that label , for example, reporting requirements or treatment in grants schedules , is not stated here but will be governed by the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 and associated Commonwealth policy.

Where the Act sets requirements for consultation, notification, or advice to Parliament in relation to GPFA payments, the determination does not record compliance with those procedural requirements. Practitioners should therefore check the enabling Act and related guidance for any procedural steps required before or after making such a determination. The determination does not purport to vary or displace state laws; it merely creates a Commonwealth payment obligation. Payment receipt by a State may then be treated under State law and accounting practice according to each State’s statutory and regulatory frameworks.

In short, the instrument is an executive financial determination that relies on s 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 for authority and interfaces with existing appropriation, accounting and intergovernmental regimes by operation rather than by express terms. The absence of cross-references to other legal instruments in the determination means that its practical legal effect must be read alongside those other instruments rather than as a comprehensive statement of all legal effects.

The text provided contains no amendment history. It records the making of Determination No.109 (April 2018) and repeats the name, commencement and determination clauses in the body of the document, but it does not record any previous versions or prior determinations that it replaces or amends. The signature block is dated 18 April 2018 and the payment scheduling is for 23 April 2018, indicating this instrument is a contemporaneous record of a single administrative action rather than an amendment instrument.

Because the determination is presented as a standalone instrument made under subsection 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009, any amendment history, revocation or replacement of this determination would be contained in subsequent determinations or in records of the responsible administrative bodies. The determination itself gives no indication of whether it supersedes an earlier instrument or will be superseded. There are no variant editions, version numbers, or footnotes indicating past changes within the provided text.

For practitioners who need to know whether this instrument is current or has been modified, the absence of an amendment history in the determination means that a check against an authoritative legislative instrument registry or the Federal Register of Legislation is required. The determination does not signal an ongoing series of payments; rather it fixes amounts for a specific payment date. Any later changes (for example, subsequent determinations authorising different payment amounts or cancelling the payment) would not be reflected in this instrument and would need to be located separately.

Finally, the document repeats certain headings and the table twice; that duplication appears to be a presentational repetition in the published text and does not, in itself, constitute an amendment. The instrument contains no savings clauses or transitional provisions that would typically appear if an amendment or repeal were occurring.

The determination contains no reference to litigation, and the provided text indicates no history of legal challenge or judicial consideration. It is a single-purpose financial determination that records amounts and payment date; the text contains no notation of legal proceedings, disputes, or court orders relating to the determination. The instrument therefore presents no litigation history within its own contents.

Because the determination is an administrative act under the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009, legal challenges, if any, would arise outside the text and would need to be identified by searching court records or administrative law reports. The instrument itself does not authorise or reference legal proceedings, nor does it incorporate decisions or directions from courts. The absence of litigation references in the determination does not preclude subsequent challenge, but there is nothing in this document indicating that litigation has occurred.

Practitioners requiring an authoritative statement about litigation should therefore consult the Federal Court and state Supreme Court records, administrative law databases and the Federal Register of Legislation for any cases referencing Determination No.109 (April 2018) or any related determinations under s 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009. Within the determination itself, there is no litigation material to analyse.

Several practical and interpretive issues arise from the instrument’s concise form and presentation.

1. Hyphen entries in the table. Several jurisdictions are listed with a hyphen in the amount column. The instrument does not define the hyphen. Clause 3 states that “The amounts specified in the following table are to be paid to the States,” and the total adds the two non-zero amounts to produce $72,365,171.51. The natural reading is that the hyphen indicates no payment for that jurisdiction for the 23 April 2018 round. However, because the instrument does not include a legend or explanatory note, users should not assume alternative meanings (for example, “amount to be determined” or “data unavailable”) without corroboration from administrative records.

2. Payment mechanics omitted. The instrument fixes amounts and a payment date but omits essential operational detail such as appropriation item references, bank account instruction, or departmental responsibility for execution. Implementation therefore requires administrative action to reconcile this direction with appropriation authorities and payment systems. Absent such reconciliation, there is a risk of mismatched accounting or delayed transfer.

3. No conditions specified. The funds are described as general purpose financial assistance but the instrument imposes no conditions, reporting or audit requirements. That lack of specificity may cause confusion for compliance officers who must determine whether other statutory or intergovernmental frameworks impose conditions that survive despite the instrument’s silence. Practitioners should not infer that funds are subject to no oversight; other legal regimes may apply.

4. Single payment round. The instrument is limited to a specific payment date. Users should note that receipt of an amount on 23 April 2018 is a one-off legal event recorded here and not a standing entitlement. Accounting and planning should therefore treat this as a discrete inflow.

5. Repetition and formatting. The instrument repeats its name and table later in the text. While repetition does not change legal effect, it may cause confusion when extracting machine-readable data or when relying on a single part of the published document for automated processing.

6. Delegation and authority. The determination is signed by the Assistant Minister to the Treasurer. The instrument cites s 9(1) as authority but does not show if the Assistant Minister acted under a delegation. For challenge or audit purposes, the provenance of authority (i.e., whether the Assistant Minister had delegated authority to make this determination) could be material. The text does not address that.

7. Currency and rounding. Amounts are shown to two decimal places; the total equals the sum of the two listed amounts. Practitioners should confirm whether any rounding or currency conversion rules apply in their accounting systems.

8. No express legal recourse. Because the instrument contains no enforcement or remedial language, any dispute about non-payment or mis-payment would need to be addressed under external statutory or administrative law mechanisms. Recipients should not infer from silence that remedies are enhanced or limited.

Each of these items is a concrete operational issue arising from the instrument’s form and content rather than an assertion about policy. Users should treat the determination as a narrow record requiring administrative follow-up to effect and reconcile payments.

For Commonwealth payment officers

• Treat the determination as legal authority to make payments on 23 April 2018 in the amounts specified (WA $69,068,366.58; ACT $3,296,804.93; total $72,365,171.51). Clause 3 provides the operative instruction that “the amounts specified in the following table are to be paid.”
• Reconcile this directional authority with available appropriations and budget allocations. The determination does not identify the appropriation item to be debited; therefore confirm the appropriation and any relevant departmental instructions before effecting the transfer to ensure compliance with appropriation law and internal financial controls.
• Ensure transactional details match the table entries, including number format and decimal places, and schedule the payments for the stated date (23 April 2018). Where automated payment systems parse published instruments, be aware the document repeats sections and that hyphens are used to indicate nil entries for several jurisdictions.
• Retain contemporaneous records linking the payment to Determination No.109 (April 2018), including a copy of the instrument, the authorising signature date (18 April 2018), and internal approvals. This evidentiary chain will be important for audit and for any administrative review.

For State and Territory recipients (finance and treasury units)

• Expect receipt of the listed amounts on 23 April 2018 and prepare internal accounting entries to recognise revenue on receipt. Western Australia should expect $69,068,366.58 and the ACT should expect $3,296,804.93. Other jurisdictions should confirm with their Commonwealth payment liaison whether a hyphen indicates no payment or whether alternate arrangements exist.
• No conditions are appended in the determination; however, treat the amounts as general purpose financial assistance in your own reporting. Reconcile incoming funds to the instrument and preserve records of the determination for audit purposes.
• Coordinate with Commonwealth payment contacts if the funds do not appear on the payment date, identifying the instrument (Determination No.109) and the signature date (18 April 2018) in enquiries.

For auditors and compliance officers

• Verify that payments made on 23 April 2018 correspond exactly to the amounts and beneficiaries recorded in the determination. Where deviations occur, seek documentary evidence of authority for any variation.
• Check that the payments were made against lawful appropriation. The determination is the legal authorisation to pay the specified amounts; the underlying appropriation authority should also be present in Commonwealth financial records.
• Where a hyphen appears, confirm that no payment was intended and that this was not a data error. Documentation from Treasury or the responsible payments office should clarify any ambiguity.

For legal advisers and counsel

• If advising on the validity of the instrument or on remedies for non-payment, observe that the determination cites s 9(1) of the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 as its statutory basis. Ascertain whether any delegations, internal approvals, or procedural requirements in the Act were followed; the determination itself does not state these.
• Where an issue arises concerning whether a hyphen constitutes zero or something else, procurement of a contemporaneous explanatory record from the payment authority will be necessary.

For parliamentary and transparency officers

• Include the instrument in registers of legislative instruments and financial determinations, and ensure metadata captures the maker, the date made (18 April 2018), the payment date (23 April 2018), and the exact amounts and recipients as recorded.

Overall, compliance requires administrative follow-through: using the determination as legal authority to effect specific payments and reconciling those directions with appropriation, accounting and audit frameworks. The determination itself is concise and leaves implementation detail to operational units.