Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy (Collection) (Initial Cost Estimates for 2024-25 Levy Period) Determination 2024

The instrument rests on three interlocking statutory concepts: (1) the operator’s capacity to make a determination of estimated costs for levy purposes pursuant to the Act, (2) sub-sector-based allocation of those estimates, and (3) fixed subcomponents mapped to specified paragraphs and subparagraphs of subsection 9(1) of the Act. The instrument repeatedly states that the amounts are “under subsection 9(1) of the Act” and that amounts are “for the purposes of paragraph 9(1)(a) of the Act” or “for the purposes of paragraph 9(1)(b) of the Act” (see ss 5-8). That language identifies the instrument as a statutory determination that performs a preparatory function under the Act’s levy architecture.

Definitions and cross-references are central. Section 4 makes plain that expressions used in the instrument have the same meaning as in the Act and the Levy Regulations 2023 (and refers to paragraph 13(1)(b) of the Legislation Act 2003 for that principle). The instrument therefore relies on external instruments for the operative legal descriptions of who is in each sub-sector (for example, “credit intermediaries sub-sector has the same meaning as in the Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Regulations 2023,” s 4). It also uses the Corporations Act 2001 definition of “financial services compensation scheme of last resort” where relevant, by cross-reference (s 4).

A recurring structural feature is the split of each sub-sector’s determined estimate into two top-level items. For each sub-sector the instrument specifies an amount “for the purposes of paragraph 9(1)(a)” and then an amount “for the purposes of paragraph 9(1)(b), comprising the following” with four numbered subcomponents mapping to subparagraphs (i)-(iv) of paragraph 9(1)(b) in the Act (see s 5(b), s 6(b), s 7(b), s 8(b)). The amounts assigned to the (iii) and (iv) subcomponents are identical across all four sub-sectors ($361,146.50 and $416,666.67 respectively , see ss 5-8). That uniformity is an observable structural choice recorded in the instrument.

Temporal staging is another main concept. The instrument declares the 2024-25 levy period is the second levy period (Part 2, Note 1) and notes that certain Act provisions (subparagraph 9(1)(b)(v) and paragraph 9(2)(c)) are not yet operative because they only commence at the fourth or later levy periods (Part 2, Note 2). The instrument therefore reflects an incremental staged implementation of the Act’s levy framework.

Finally, legal provenance and formality matter: the determination is made by the named operator and dated; it is expressed as an instrument under the Act, with a specific commencement rule that takes effect the day after registration (s 3 and s 2(1)). The instrument is narrowly purposive , it sets estimates rather than, for example, altering the Act’s collection, enforcement, or appeal mechanisms, which remain in the Act and Regulations.

The instrument’s target is sub-sector groups, not named firms. It fixes determined estimates for four sub-sectors specified by reference to the Levy Regulations 2023: credit intermediaries sub‑sector; credit providers sub‑sector; licensed personal advice sub‑sector; and securities dealers sub‑sector (s 4; Parts 2, ss 5-8). Because the instrument uses definitional cross-references, an entity’s exposure to the amounts set here depends on whether it is classed in one of those sub‑sectors under the Regulations. The instrument does not itself list individual levy payers or describe the per-entity apportionment method; those matters are within the Act and Regulations.

The numerical split of the operator’s estimates materially affects relative exposure at the sub‑sector level. The instrument’s totals are: credit intermediaries $1,799,985.77; credit providers $1,497,768.71; licensed personal advice $18,562,058.57; securities dealers $2,287,886.73 (ss 5-8). Aggregating those figures yields $24,147,699.78 in initial estimated costs across the four sub‑sectors. The licensed personal advice sub‑sector, at $18,562,058.57, accounts for roughly 76.85% of this aggregate estimate (18,562,058.57 ÷ 24,147,699.78). The remaining shares are approximately: credit intermediaries 7.45%, credit providers 6.20%, and securities dealers 9.48%. Those percentages derive directly from the instrument’s figures and therefore describe how the initial budgeted cost burden is distributed across the four sub‑sector groupings at this stage of implementation.

Who actually pays money will be determined under the Act and Regulations (this instrument provides the estimates “for the purposes of subsection 9(1) of the Act” , see ss 5-8). The instrument therefore sets the fiscal baseline from which levy notices, apportionment rules, collection notices, or invoices may follow under the Act’s collection machinery. Entities should check the Regulations for the precise definition of their sub‑sector and the Act for the mechanics of levy allocation, invoicing and payment obligations; this instrument alone does not create per-entity billing instructions.

Finally, the operator is explicitly named. The determination is made by the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Limited, operator of the financial services compensation scheme of last resort (front matter and s 3). That body is the immediate decision‑maker for the estimates and will be the administrative point of contact for queries or challenges arising from this determination.

This instrument itself does not create new day‑to‑day duties on individual entities; rather, it fulfils a statutory role in the Act’s levy process by fixing “determined estimates” for the 2024-25 levy period under subsection 9(1) of the Act (ss 5-8). The key operative acts in the instrument are the operator’s determinations of amounts allocated to paragraph 9(1)(a) and paragraph 9(1)(b) and the subcomponents of paragraph 9(1)(b). Therefore the instrument’s immediate legal effect is to provide the numerical inputs that the Act will use in later stages of the levy cycle.

Rights and duties that bind firms,such as receiving a levy notice, paying an apportioned levy, seeking review or lodging objections, or being subject to enforcement,are matters governed by the Act and Regulations rather than by this instrument. The instrument signals the operator’s expectation of the likely cost base for the second levy period: credit intermediaries $1,799,985.77; credit providers $1,497,768.71; licensed personal advice $18,562,058.57; securities dealers $2,287,886.73 (ss 5-8). Those figures are the basis on which future operational duties under the Act will arise, but the instrument does not itself spell out payment schedules, apportionment methods, or administrative obligations.

Several procedural particulars within the instrument are relevant to duties in practice. The commencement clause makes the instrument effective the day after registration (s 2(1)), so the determination becomes part of the statutory record from that point and can be relied on by the operator in administering the levy. Section 4 states that expressions take their meaning from the Act and the Levy Regulations 2023; that linkage means a firm’s rights or obligations (for example, contesting classification into a sub‑sector) will be judged against those external instruments.

A further operational point is the instrument’s allocation across paragraph 9(1)(a) and paragraph 9(1)(b) items. Each sub‑sector’s total is divided into a paragraph 9(1)(a) amount and a paragraph 9(1)(b) amount composed of four subcomponents that correspond to subparagraphs (i)-(iv) of the Act’s paragraph 9(1)(b) (ss 5-8). Because the instrument isolates these components, any duties that track those statutory categories under the Act,for example, how particular sorts of costs are to be recovered or treated,will be able to proceed without the operator later having to subdivide the aggregate estimate.

In short, the instrument’s duty-creating effect is indirect: it sets the numeric inputs that will trigger statutory duties under the Act. Entities’ immediate rights and duties are therefore to check their sub‑sector classification in the Levy Regulations and to watch for subsequent notices or actions taken under the Act that use these determined estimates as inputs.

The instrument contains no penalty, offence, or enforcement provisions within its text. It is a cost estimate determination made by the operator and limited to setting monetary figures for the 2024-25 levy period for the purposes of subsection 9(1) of the Act (see ss 5-8). The instrument’s authority is the Act (s 3), and any sanctioning, enforcement or recovery powers are matters reserved to the collection framework established in that Act and the Levy Regulations.

Because the instrument does not itself prescribe compliance mechanisms, it does not specify timelines for payment, remedies for non‑payment, interest on late payments, or any civil or administrative penalties. Those topics are therefore to be located in the Act and the Regulations. Readers seeking to understand liability exposure, penalties for late payment, or enforcement steps must consult the parent Act for the statutory enforcement architecture; this instrument simply supplies the initial financial estimates that the Act will put to use.

Two procedural details in the instrument are important to enforcement planning. First, the instrument commences the day after registration (s 2(1)), meaning the determination is immediately available as a statutory basis for the operator to pursue collection activities under the Act. Second, the instrument expressly records that some Act provisions (subparagraph 9(1)(b)(v) and paragraph 9(2)(c)) do not apply until later levy periods (Part 2, Note 2). That sequencing affects which statutory tools are available to the operator in the second levy period.

For compliance officers and lawyers, the practical implication is that the instrument creates no new sanction beyond its use as a numeric input to the Act’s levy process. Enforcement procedures, appeal rights, and administrative review processes remain governed by the Act and regulations. Any challenge to the operator’s numbers based on procedural fairness, error in calculation, or misclassification would therefore need to be framed against the Act’s dispute or review mechanisms and any administrative law remedies available to affected entities.

The instrument is explicitly connected to multiple statutory sources by cross-reference. Section 3 states that it is made under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy (Collection) Act 2023. Section 4 clarifies that expressions used in the instrument carry the same meanings as in that Act and in the Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Regulations 2023, and it cites paragraph 13(1)(b) of the Legislation Act 2003 as the general rule for expression meaning. The instrument also refers to the Corporations Act 2001 for the definition of “financial services compensation scheme of last resort” (s 4). Those references mean the instrument sits within a statutory matrix where the Act and Regulations set the operative definitions, procedural rules, collection and enforcement mechanisms, and possibly review and appeal processes.

Functionally, the instrument supplies numerical inputs that the Act will use for levy collection. It therefore interoperates with the Act’s collection provisions: once a “determined estimate” is in place (as this instrument provides for the second levy period), the Act’s provisions dealing with how those estimates translate into levy assessments, notices and payments will come into play. The instrument itself does not alter or displace any other statutory scheme; it is a determinate exercise required by the Act.

Because the instrument uses Regulation-based sub‑sector definitions, it also interacts with the Levy Regulations 2023: an entity’s legal position depends on how the Regulations classify it. That classification will determine which portion of the instrument’s aggregate estimate is relevant to the entity when the Act’s apportionment rules are applied.

The instrument’s Note 2 draws attention to phasing rules in the Act: subparagraph 9(1)(b)(v) and paragraph 9(2)(c) of the Act are not reflected because they apply only from the fourth or later levy periods (Part 2, Note 2). That staged activation implies an interaction across multiple levy periods between the instrument’s determinations and the Act’s longer-term scheme design.

Lastly, by naming the operator, the instrument ties into corporate and administrative law domains. Questions about the operator’s exercise of power, procedural fairness in determinations, or ultra vires challenges would interact with administrative law principles and the Act’s internal governance rules. Any such legal contest would require reference to the Act, the Regulations, and relevant administrative law doctrine; the instrument itself is the discrete administrative act whose legality would be tested within that wider legal framework.

The instrument contains a built‑in statement about its original form and commencement and does not record subsequent amendments within the text provided. Section 2 includes a commencement table stating that “the whole of this instrument” commences “the day after this instrument is registered.” The table also carries the standard note that it “relates only to the provisions of this instrument as originally made” and “will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this instrument” (s 2(2) table and following note). That language indicates the instrument’s text before any amendment and identifies the day-after-registration commencement rule as its operative start.

The front matter records that the determination is dated 14 March 2024 and that it was made by the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Limited. There is no schedule of earlier versions, and no in‑text amendment history or revision notes are included in the supplied text. The instrument therefore appears as the initial determination for the 2024-25 levy period (the second levy period under the Act), and the instrument’s own Note 1 identifies the 2024-25 levy period as the second levy period.

Because this instrument purports to apply only to the 2024-25 levy period and to be a determination under subsection 9(1) of the Act, any later amendments to the Act, the Levy Regulations 2023, or subsequent determinations by the operator would be recorded in subsequent instruments or in the legislative amendment history of the Act and Regulations. The text here contains no retroactive amendments, transitional provisions beyond the notes about staging (Parts 2, Notes 1-2), or revocation language; thus the instrument functions as a single, time‑limited determination rather than as an open-ended amendment instrument.

Practically, any user wishing to chart amendment history will need to check the public legislative instruments register and subsequent determinations from the operator for revisions, superseding determinations, or formal amendments. The instrument itself signals that it is the original and operative instrument as made on the date shown, and that the Act and Regulations are the loci for any changes to definitions or collection rules that would affect future determinations.

The instrument contains no record of litigation, judicial consideration, appeals, or administrative review proceedings. It is a primary statutory instrument in the levy machinery and does not itself narrate disputes or legal challenges. The operator’s determination is dated 14 March 2024, and no in-text references are made to any court or tribunal decisions.

Because the instrument is a determinate administrative act under the Act, any litigation arising from it would relate to its legal validity, procedural fairness, statutory interpretation, or the operator’s compliance with the Act. However, the supplied instrument text does not identify any such challenges, nor does it state that disputes have been brought or resolved. Readers seeking litigation history should review publicly available court and tribunal records, and administrative law filings, in addition to subsequent instruments or communications from the operator; none of that material is included in this instrument.

If a practitioner needs to assess the risk of litigation arising from these determinations, the relevant procedural and substantive hooks will be provisions of the Act and the Levy Regulations that govern notice, reviewability, merits review, or judicial review. Those mechanisms and any precedent would be located outside this instrument. The instrument’s silence on litigation history therefore indicates no recorded or disclosed challenges within the document itself.

1. This instrument provides estimates, not invoices. The text makes the purpose explicit: each figure is a “determined estimate … under subsection 9(1) of the Act” for a specified sub‑sector and the 2024-25 levy period (see ss 5-8). It does not itself issue levy notices or specify payment mechanics. A common error would be to treat these figures as per‑entity liabilities or immediate payment demands; they are inputs to the Act’s collection process.

2. Sub‑sector classification is decisive but not in the instrument. The instrument assigns totals to sub‑sectors by reference to the Levy Regulations 2023 (s 4). Entities must confirm their classification in those Regulations; the instrument does not itself classify particular licences, firms or entities. Misreading the instrument to assume a directly applicable firm list would be a procedural mistake.

3. Identical subcomponents across sub‑sectors. Subparagraph (iii) and subparagraph (iv) amounts under paragraph 9(1)(b) are the same for each sub‑sector: $361,146.50 and $416,666.67 respectively (see ss 5-8). That uniformity is explicit in the instrument and may surprise readers expecting wholly distinct sub‑sector cost profiles. Any analytical or advocacy argument about share allocation must incorporate that observed uniformity.

4. The instrument is time‑boxed to the second levy period. The 2024-25 levy period is the second levy period (Part 2, Note 1). Certain Act provisions do not yet apply , the instrument specifically states that subparagraph 9(1)(b)(v) and paragraph 9(2)(c) of the Act have not been included because they apply from the fourth or later levy periods (Part 2, Note 2). Readers should not assume completeness in relation to later-stage costs or mechanisms that the Act contemplates for later levy periods.

5. Rounding and cent‑level precision. Figures are given to the cent (for example $1,799,985.77 , s 5). Where the Act’s apportionment rules require allocation across many firms, rounding, pro rata calculations and reconciliation may produce small but administratively significant variances. The instrument does not provide rounding rules or error‑correction mechanisms , those will be in the Act or implemented by the operator.

6. The instrument creates no remedies in itself. If an entity believes a figure is incorrect or the classification is flawed, the instrument does not set out a dispute resolution procedure. Any challenge must be brought under the Act’s administrative, review or judicial mechanisms. Do not assume the determination itself contains appeal steps.

7. Operator identification matters. The determination is made by the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Limited (front matter). Procedural enquiries, requests for clarification or formal disputes should be directed to the operator because it is the statutorily named decision‑maker for this instrument.

8. Interdependence with external instruments. Definitions and operational details are in the Act and Regulations. Misreading the instrument in isolation risks overlooking material obligations and rights located outside the text provided.

This instrument supplies determined estimates that will feed into the statutory levy process; compliance in a practical sense requires engagement with three lines of work: (A) confirm legal classification, (B) prepare financial forecasting and cashflow planning, and (C) establish a procedural posture for disputes or queries.

A. Confirm legal classification

• Check the Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Regulations 2023 to confirm whether your entity is in one of the four named sub‑sectors (s 4). The instrument’s numbers are allocated at the sub‑sector level; misclassification will determine whether and how the estimate is used against you.
• If classification is ambiguous, obtain an authoritative determination or written guidance from the operator or from the regulator identified in the Act, and preserve correspondence for any future review.

B. Financial forecasting and cashflow preparation

• Treat the sub‑sector totals in ss 5-8 as the operator’s initial budgeted cost base for 2024-25 (credit intermediaries $1,799,985.77; credit providers $1,497,768.71; licensed personal advice $18,562,058.57; securities dealers $2,287,886.73).
• Use the instrument’s figures for internal scenario planning while recognising these are estimates and not final per‑entity levies. Incorporate contingency for timing uncertainty because the instrument does not set payment dates or collection mechanics.
• Account teams should anticipate that the operator and the Act will convert these determined estimates into individual levy assessments under the Act’s allocation rules. That conversion, and any apportionment base (for example, number of licencees, revenue, client numbers), must be obtained from the Act/Regulations or from the operator’s subsequent communications.

C. Procedural posture and record‑keeping

• Keep a record of the instrument (dated 14 March 2024) and of the operator’s identity. If you intend to challenge classification, calculation or procedural fairness, administrative law remedies will require contemporaneous records of communications and operational steps.
• Monitor the operator’s subsequent determinations, levy notices, and any guidance published under the Act. This instrument is an initial stage; later instruments or notices may refine, supplement, or operationalise these numbers.
• If you suspect an arithmetic error or a misapplication of subcomponents, identify the exact line item in ss 5-8 and raise the issue with the operator promptly. The instrument provides explicit cent‑level figures and the mapping to paragraph 9(1)(a) and subparagraphs (i)-(iv) of paragraph 9(1)(b), so any factual challenge will need to engage those specific entries.

D. Legal and compliance review

• Legal advisers should review the Act and the Levy Regulations 2023 to understand the collection, enforcement and dispute processes that will turn these estimates into obligations. This instrument provides the estimates; the Act provides the enforcement machinery.
• Consider whether to seek a formal ruling or guidance on classification if a business’s activity straddles sub‑sector definitions, to reduce the risk of later reclassification and retrospective adjustments.

In all cases the right immediate step is document review: confirm classification in the Levy Regulations 2023, reconcile your entity’s likely exposure against the four sub‑sector totals in ss 5-8, and await the operator’s follow‑up communications under the Act for the conversion of these estimates into actionable levy notices.