Register of Foreign Ownership of Water or Agricultural Land Rules 2017

The instrument rests on a small set of interlocking concepts, all defined or invoked in the text. The key definitional and conceptual anchors are:

• Authority and scope: the Rules are made under s 35(1) of the Act, and operate to specify kinds of land and water rights that are excluded from the Act’s register obligations and to create exemptions from the Act’s notice provisions (s 3; Parts 2-4). The instrument does not itself prescribe the notification mechanics; it alters when the Act’s notification Parts apply.

• Definitions imported from other statutes: the instrument imports the meaning of core terms from external statutes and regulations, including foreign person, holding entity and subsidiary (as defined in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975), irrigation infrastructure operator and irrigation right (as defined in the Water Act 2007), and moneylending agreement (as defined in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015) (s 4). The instrument’s legal effect therefore depends on those external definitions.

• Excluded land: for s 5 of the Act, this instrument declares that land is not agricultural land for the Act if it is not agricultural land for the purposes of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 because of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 (s 5). This creates dependency: the same exceptions that exclude land under the Foreign Acquisitions Act regime will govern exclusion under the Register Act.

• Non-registrable water entitlements: the instrument removes particular water rights from the Act’s definition of registrable water entitlements. It expressly excludes private harvestable rainwater rights to capture, store or take rainfall for stock and domestic purposes, where those rights are conferred under State or Territory law (s 6). It also excludes certain rights held by irrigation infrastructure operators, in two distinct ways: (a) to the extent another person has an irrigation right in relation to water that may be held or taken from a water resource by the operator (s 7(1)); and (b) to the extent the operator’s right is conveyance water (s 7(2)). The instrument defines conveyance water as additional water required to deliver water to users, including losses in transit such as seepage, leakage and evaporation (s 7(3)). The instrument also notes that any irrigation operator right left after applying ss 7(1) and 7(2) may remain a registrable water entitlement (s 7 note).

• Exemptions tied to enforcement of securities and to custodian-corporation arrangements: Part 4 creates exemptions from the Act’s notice requirements where interests are acquired by enforcement of securities held solely for moneylending agreements, provided the acquirer is the original borrower or that borrower’s subsidiary or holding entity (ss 8-9). Section 10 provides that a foreign person is exempt from Parts 3 and 3B when the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 are satisfied, aligning the Register Act treatment with existing regulatory treatment for foreign custodian corporations.

• Temporal application: each exemption in ss 7-9 is expressly stated to apply irrespective of whether the person started to hold the relevant right before, on, or after the commencement of the section. The instrument therefore makes these exclusions and exemptions retroactive to existing interests as well as forward-looking acquisitions (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)).

These concepts operate by narrowing the class of land and water rights that feed into the Act’s register, and by removing certain persons from the notice obligations that would otherwise follow. The instrument relies heavily on cross-references and on external statutory definitions, which makes its practical application contingent on those other provisions.

The instrument affects a discrete set of actors by changing when their land and water interests are registrable under the Act and when they must give notice under the Act’s Parts 3 and 3B. The categories are:

• Foreign persons: the instrument is directed at treatment of interests held by foreign persons as defined in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (s 4). It modifies when Parts 3 and 3B apply to foreign persons by creating exemptions that can remove notification obligations (ss 8-10).

• Holders of agricultural land interests: persons who hold freehold interests in land or specified rights to occupy agricultural land as listed in the Act (the instrument cites Act provisions 19(1)(b), 21(b), 22(b), 23(b), 24(b), 25(b) or 26(b)) are directly affected by s 8. If such interests were acquired by enforcement of securities given solely for a moneylending agreement, and the acquirer is the original borrower or its holding entity or subsidiary, then Part 3 does not apply to that person (s 8(1)).

• Holders of registrable water entitlements and contractual water rights: s 9 provides an analogous exemption to s 8 for registrable water entitlements and contractual water rights specified in the Act (paragraph 30H(1)(b), 30L(b), 30M(b), 30N(b), 30P(b), or 30Q(b)). The same moneylending/security enforcement and identity conditions apply , the acquirer must be the borrower or the borrower’s holding entity or subsidiary for the exemption to apply (s 9(1)).

• Irrigation infrastructure operators: these operators are specifically addressed in s 7. Their rights are excluded from being registrable water entitlements to the extent another person has an irrigation right in relation to the same water (s 7(1)) and to the extent those rights are conveyance water as defined in s 7(3). However, s 7 contains an explicit note that an irrigation infrastructure operator’s retained rights after applying ss 7(1) and 7(2) may still be registrable (s 7 note). Thus irrigation infrastructure operators will need to analyse which parts of their rights are excluded and which remain registrable.

• Persons with private harvestable rainwater rights: individuals or entities that hold rights conferred by State or Territory law to capture, store or take rainfall for stock and domestic purposes will not hold registrable water entitlements for the Act’s purposes (s 6). This affects property owners and water users who rely on such rights.

• Custodian-corporation arrangements and foreign custodian corporations: s 10 excludes from Parts 3 and 3B foreign persons where the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 are met. The instrument therefore affects entities organised under custodian-corporation arrangements recognised in that subsection.

• Borrowers and their subsidiaries/holding entities: ss 8 and 9 explicitly treat the original borrower who entered a moneylending agreement, and that borrower’s subsidiaries and holding entities, as potential acquirers whose acquisition by enforcement of security will be exempt from the Act’s notice requirements where the security was held solely for the purposes of the moneylending agreement.

Who pays and who decides. The immediate compliance obligation for notice under the Act is reduced for the persons and rights described. The person who had an obligation to notify under Part 3 or Part 3B is the person in whose name the Part applies under the Act; this instrument removes that obligation in specified cases (ss 8-10). Decisions about whether an interest falls within an exclusion or exemption will depend on factual and legal characterisation under this instrument and the external definitions it imports, creating potential administrative decisions by the officials who interpret and enforce the Act and the related Regulations. The instrument itself does not create a novel administrative decision-making mechanism or penalties; it specifies circumstances in which the Act’s Parts do not apply (ss 8-10).

The Rules reframe duties and rights under the Act by exclusions and exemptions rather than creating new positive obligations. Key legal effects are:

• Duty to give notice under Part 3 and Part 3B: the instrument creates circumstances in which those duties do not apply. Sections 8 and 10 expressly state that for section 30 of the Act, Part 3 does not apply to specified persons; sections 9 and 10 do the same in relation to section 30U and Part 3B. The instrument therefore removes notice duties from a person only where the statutory conditions in the instrument are satisfied (ss 8-10).

• Exemption where interests arise from enforcement of securities for moneylending agreements: if a person started to hold a freehold interest or certain rights of occupancy in agricultural land by enforcing a security held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement, and the acquirer is the original borrower or that borrower’s subsidiary or holding entity, then Part 3 does not apply to that person (s 8(1)(a)-(b)). An equivalent exemption applies for registrable water entitlements or specified contractual water rights acquired by enforcement of such a security (s 9(1)(a)-(b)). Both provisions apply regardless of whether the acquisition occurred before, on or after commencement (s 8(2), s 9(2)). The critical legal attributes are: (a) the security must have been held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement (definition imported from the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015); and (b) the acquirer must be the original borrower, its subsidiary, or its holding entity (definitions imported from the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975) (s 4).

• Limited exclusions of water entitlements: s 6 removes private harvestable rainwater rights for stock and domestic purposes, conferred by State or Territory law, from the definition of registrable water entitlements (s 6). This is a rights recognition: holders of such rights are not treated as holders of registrable water entitlements under the Act.

• Irrigation infrastructure operator rights: s 7 excludes from registrable water entitlements two kinds of irrigation infrastructure operator rights: (1) to the extent another person has an irrigation right in relation to the water that the operator may hold or take (s 7(1)); and (2) to the extent the operator’s right is conveyance water as defined (s 7(2)-(3)). The instrument expressly warns that any residual rights retained by the operator after applying those exceptions may remain registrable (s 7 note). The concept of conveyance water is defined by reference to additional water required to deliver water to users including transit losses like seepage, leakage and evaporation (s 7(3)).

• Interaction with other statutory definitions: the instrument’s duties and rights are shaped by multiple imported definitions and conditions (s 4). This means duties and rights under the Register Act are in practice co-determined by the definitions in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015, and the Water Act 2007.

• Temporal continuity and retroactivity: the instrument unambiguously states that several of these exemptions apply irrespective of when the person began to hold the right, so the duties that would otherwise have attached are removed for existing and future holdings alike (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)). That changes the universe of past and present obligations.

Rights of appeal, enforcement remedies, or monetary penalties are not specified in the Rules instrument itself. Any enforcement consequences for failing to give notice in circumstances where the instrument does not provide an exemption will remain those provided in the Act. The Rules therefore function as a gatekeeper, limiting when the Act’s duties apply rather than creating new standalone rights or penalties.

The Rules do not themselves create new offences, penalties or enforcement mechanisms. Their operative effect is to exclude particular classes of land or water rights from being treated as agricultural land or registrable water entitlements, and to exempt certain persons from the notice requirements in Parts 3 and 3B of the Act (ss 5-10). Consequently:

• The instrument modifies the trigger conditions for the Act’s enforcement regime. Sections 8-10 repeatedly state that particular Parts of the Act do not apply to a person in the enumerated circumstances. The Act itself contains the enforcement, penalty and civil consequence architecture that attaches when a Part applies. Because the Rules do not amend those Parts, any penalty or enforcement consequence remains in the Act and will apply where the Rules do not operate to exclude a person or a right.

• Determination of whether the Rules’ exemptions apply is a jurisdictional fact for the Act’s enforcement machinery. Enforcement officers, administrators and courts applying the Act will need to determine whether the conditions in ss 6-10 are satisfied in a given case. For example, they will need to assess whether a right is a private harvestable rainwater right under State or Territory law (s 6), whether a right held by an irrigation infrastructure operator is conveyance water (s 7(2)-(3)), whether a security was held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement (ss 8-9), and whether the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 are met (s 10).

• Administrative interpretation and evidentiary issues: because the Rules import definitions and conditions from other statutes and regulations (s 4), the enforcement machinery must interpret cross-referenced regimes. For s 10, for example, proof that the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 are met will be a determinative fact. The Rules do not specify evidential thresholds or procedural steps for proving these conditions.

• Retroactivity of exemptions may alter exposure to past breaches: the instrument states that several exemptions apply whether the person started to hold the right before, on or after commencement of the relevant section (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)). That means persons who had previously failed to give notice because they believed Parts 3 or 3B applied may find themselves exempted retrospectively, subject to administrative decision-making about the facts. Conversely, persons who relied on a different interpretation should still be ready to justify it because the Rules do not themselves vacate or confirm past compliance assessments.

• No new enforcement body created: the Rules do not designate a new regulator or establish any new enforcement powers; they operate within the Act’s existing compliance and enforcement framework. The instrument’s effect is therefore to constrain the instances in which that framework can be applied.

Practitioners considering enforcement or defence will therefore need to look to the Act and to the cross-referenced instruments and State or Territory laws for the detailed mechanisms of penalty, litigation timetables and remedies. The Rules will operate as a procedural and definitional filter in any enforcement or compliance matter.

The Rules rely heavily on, and interact with, at least three external statutory instruments and applicable State and Territory laws. The interaction is structural: the Rules import definitions and reference conditions in other regimes to determine the Register Act’s scope. The main interactions are:

• Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975: the Rules adopt the definitions of foreign person, holding entity and subsidiary from that Act (s 4). Section 5 of the Rules expressly makes the determination of whether land is agricultural land under the Register Act coterminous with the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act as modified by its Regulation 2015, by stating that land is not agricultural land for the Register Act if it is not agricultural land for the purposes of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 because of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 (s 5). Therefore any amendment to the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act or its regulation that alters the definition of agricultural land will change the Register Act’s treatment where the Rules rely on that definition.

• Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015: multiple Rules provisions cross-refer directly to that Regulation. The moneylending agreement definition is imported from it (s 4). Section 10 relies on subsection 41A(2) of that Regulation to determine whether a foreign person is exempt from Parts 3 and 3B of the Act. Because the Regulation contains the substantive conditions for custodian-corporation arrangements, any changes to subsection 41A(2) will alter who is exempt under s 10 of the Rules.

• Water Act 2007: the instrument imports the terms irrigation infrastructure operator and irrigation right from the Water Act 2007 (s 4) and therefore depends on the Water Act’s definitions and regulatory context to identify which irrigation infrastructure operator rights fall outside registrable water entitlements (s 7). The instrument further defines "conveyance water" for the purposes of s 7 (s 7(3)), but the characterisation of irrigation rights vis a vis water resources depends on the Water Act’s regime.

• State and Territory law: s 6 excludes from registrable water entitlements the right to capture, store or take rainfall for stock and domestic purposes where the right is conferred by or under State or Territory law. Thus the scope and content of those State or Territory statutory rainwater rights determine whether a particular right is excluded. This creates a multi-level regulatory interaction where local statutes can produce exemptions under the Register Act.

• The Register Act: the Rules are made under s 35(1) of the Register Act and operate specifically to alter the application of Parts 3 and 3B of that Act (ss 8-10). The instrument explicitly references the Act’s own sections (for example, section 5 of the Act in s 5 of the Rules, and sections 30 and 30U in ss 8-10). The Rules do not amend the Act’s substantive notification or enforcement provisions; they determine whether those provisions apply in particular cases.

• Repeal of prior instrument: Schedule 1 repeals the Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Rule 2015 in its entirety. That repeal centralises the new treatment of land and water interests under the 2017 Rules, and any transitional arrangements from the earlier rule must be determined from the text of the repeal and the commencement clause (Schedule 1).

Practical implications of these interactions. The instrument’s legal effect depends on the continuing text of the instruments it references. If definitions or conditions in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act, its Regulation, or the Water Act change, the set of land and water interests excluded under the Rules will change automatically. Similarly, the precise scope of s 6’s rainwater exclusion depends on the content of State and Territory laws. This creates a moving target for compliance and enforcement because the Register Act’s coverage is shaped not only by the Rules but by the current state of those other instruments.

The Rules contain a concise amendment record within the instrument itself. The key items are:

• Making and commencement: the instrument was made on 28 June 2017 by Michael Sven Sukkar, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer, and it commenced on 1 July 2017 (opening preamble and s 2). The authority for making the instrument is s 35(1) of the Register of Foreign Ownership of Water or Agricultural Land Act 2015 (s 3).

• Repeal of earlier rules: Schedule 1 of the instrument repeals the Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Rule 2015 in its entirety. The Schedule reads: "Repeal the instrument" and indicates that the whole of the 2015 instrument is repealed (Schedule 1). This is a complete replacement rather than a partial amendment of the earlier instrument.

• No textual amendments or later variations recorded in this instrument: the text provided contains no further amending provisions, no transitional provision apart from the explicit temporal application clauses in ss 7(4), 8(2) and 9(2) which confirm the exemptions apply whether the person started to hold the right before, on or after the commencement of the section. There are no other schedules, saving clauses or amendment entries in the Rules text provided.

• Dependency on external instruments: although there are no further internal amendments, the Rules’ effective content is dependent upon external instruments which may be amended independently. For example, the Rules adopt definitions and conditions from the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 and the Water Act 2007 (s 4). Therefore, while the Rules themselves show a single decisive event (the 2017 replacement and the repeal of the 2015 instrument), their operative scope is susceptible to change if the other statutes or regulations they cross-reference are amended.

• No internal amendment powers or review clause: the instrument does not include any clause that delegates amendment powers beyond the statutory authority under s 35(1) nor does it set out a periodic review timetable or sunset provision. Changes must therefore be made by subsequent legislative or rule-making action.

Practitioners should note that the instrument’s repeal of the 2015 Rules replaced the prior textual framework in a single act. However, because many substantive definitions are drawn from other instruments, amendment activity in those other instruments will alter how the 2017 Rules apply without changing the 2017 Rules’ text.

The Rules text contains no judicial decisions, tribunal determinations or references to litigation. The instrument itself records no past litigation, no appeals and no settled case law. Given the absence of litigation material in the instrument, the following observations are textual and predictive rather than descriptive of recorded cases.

Potential litigation vectors arising from the Rules’ text include:

• Characterisation disputes: litigants or administrators may contest whether a particular right is within an exclusion. Example points of contention that arise from the text include whether a right is a registrable water entitlement or a private harvestable rainwater right under State or Territory law (s 6), whether an irrigation infrastructure operator’s right is a conveyance water right as defined in s 7(3) or is otherwise excluded under s 7(1), and whether any residual rights retained by an irrigation infrastructure operator after applying s 7(1) and s 7(2) are registrable (s 7 note). Such disputes would require interpretation of both the Rules and the source instruments (Water Act 2007; State/Territory statutes).

• Proof of the moneylending/security nexus: ss 8 and 9 hinge on a security being "held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement" and on the identity of the acquirer being the first person who entered the moneylending agreement, their subsidiary or their holding entity. Litigation could centre on the meaning of "solely" in commercial lending structures and whether complex security arrangements, multiple secured creditors, or securitisation arrangements satisfy the "solely for the purposes" criterion. The Rules import the definition of "moneylending agreement" from the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 (s 4), so disputes may require interpretation of that Regulation as well.

• Application of subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015: s 10 conditions exempt foreign persons where that subsection is satisfied. Disputes may arise over whether the factual and legal thresholds in 41A(2) have been met in particular custodian-corporation arrangements. Because s 10 makes the exemption contingent on the satisfaction of that external subsection, litigation may require cross-instrument interpretation.

• Temporal questions and prospective versus retrospective relief: the Rules state that certain exemptions apply whether the person started to hold the right before, on or after commencement (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)). Litigation could therefore arise where administrative action was taken before the Rules commenced, or where penalties were imposed for non-notification prior to 1 July 2017. Courts may be asked to resolve whether retrospective relief applies and to what extent enforcement action undertaken prior to the Rules’ commencement is affected.

Because the Rules themselves do not provide remedial or appellate procedures, any litigation would take place within the dispute-resolution, judicial review and enforcement contexts established by the Act and the broader administrative law regime. The Rules’ heavy reliance on definitions and tests in other statutes means that litigation could also implicate interpretation of those source instruments.

Given that the instrument does not record any cases, practitioners should search court and tribunal databases and administrative records for post-2017 decisions addressing these issues. The Rules’ particular phrasing and cross-references suggest that initial disputes would most likely be factually driven and revolve around definitional boundaries imported from other instruments.

The Rules create several specific textual and operational hazards for practitioners and clients. These are practical pitfalls grounded in the instrument’s language and its cross-references:

• Reliance on external definitions: the Rules import multiple definitions from external instruments (s 4). This means that a change to the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 or the Water Act 2007 will alter the Rules’ practical effect without any change to the Rules themselves. Practitioners must monitor amendments to those instruments because the Rules’ exclusions and exemptions are contingent on them.

• Ordinary-language traps in "solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement": ss 8(1)(a) and 9(1)(a) require that the security be "held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement." Many commercial security arrangements involve multiple purposes, cross-collateralisation and multi-creditor structures. The presence of any secondary purpose could risk negating the exemption. The Rules do not define "solely", and give no examples, so legal characterisation of each security will be critical.

• Identity of acquirer test: the exemption in ss 8 and 9 applies only where the person who acquires the right by enforcement is "the person (the first person) who entered the moneylending agreement" or that person’s "subsidiary or holding entity" (ss 8(1)(b)(i)-(ii), 9(1)(b)(i)-(ii)). Where enforcement results in transfer to a third party, a special servicer, or a newly constituted entity not clearly a subsidiary or holding entity, the exemption will not apply. That can convert what parties assumed was an exempt transfer into a transaction that triggers notice obligations under the Act.

• Residual registrability for irrigation infrastructure operators: s 7(1) and s 7(2) carve out certain irrigation infrastructure operator rights, but s 7 contains a note that any rights retained after applying those subsections may still be registrable. This requires a granular, rights-by-rights assessment. Practitioners must not assume that an operator’s entire portfolio is excluded simply because some conveyance or user-rights are excluded.

• State and Territory variation for rainwater rights: s 6 excludes private harvestable rainwater rights that are conferred by State or Territory law for stock and domestic purposes. Because the scope and mechanics of such rights vary between jurisdictions, a right that is excluded in one State or Territory may not be excluded in another. Practitioners must examine local legislation to confirm exclusion.

• Temporal wording and pre-commencement conduct: the Rules state that the exemptions apply whether the person began to hold the right before, on or after the commencement of the relevant section (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)). This wording can be beneficial for acquirers of old interests, but it also creates ambiguity about the application to enforcement actions or notices issued prior to commencement. Parties previously subject to notice obligations should reassess exposure, but must document the factual basis for any retrospective relief.

• Cross-instrument evidence and proof burden: s 10 makes an exemption contingent on the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015. The Rules leave the evidentiary burden and form of proof unspecified. Practitioners should expect administrative or evidentiary debate about what documents or attestations satisfy those conditions.

• Complete repeal of the 2015 instrument: Schedule 1 repeals the whole of the 2015 Rules. If any practitioners relied upon transitional wording or protective provisions in the earlier instrument, those are now removed. Review of client positions that were structured under the 2015 instrument is necessary.

• No procedural guidance: the Rules alter obligations but provide no form, process, or administrative instruction for claiming an exemption. Practitioners should be prepared to produce documentary evidence and to make submissions to the relevant administrative body under the Act to establish that an exemption applies.

In short, the Rule’s operational risk centres on definitional dependencies, identity tests for acquirers under enforcement, residual registrability for complex water-rights portfolios, and the absence of procedural detail about how to claim or discharge the burden of proof for exemptions.

The instrument reduces notification obligations in specified circumstances but creates a need for careful fact-based analysis and record-keeping to establish entitlement to an exemption. The following compliance checklist is grounded in the instrument’s text and headings and cites the relevant sections to guide practical steps:

1. Map applicable interests against the Rules:

   • Identify all land interests that could be treated as agricultural land under the Act. Apply s 5: land that is not agricultural land for the purposes of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 because of its Regulation 2015 is not agricultural land for the Register Act (s 5). Cross-check the land’s status under the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act and Regulation.
   • Inventory all water rights and entitlements. Determine whether any are private harvestable rainwater rights conferred by State or Territory law for stock and domestic purposes, which are excluded from registrable water entitlements (s 6).
   • For irrigation infrastructure operators, classify rights into (a) rights that are tied to other persons’ irrigation rights (s 7(1)), (b) conveyance water as defined in s 7(3), and (c) any residual rights that may remain registrable (s 7 note).

2. For rights acquired by enforcement of securities:

   • Confirm whether the security was held solely for the purposes of a moneylending agreement. The definition of moneylending agreement is in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015; ensure the security documents and lending records support the "solely" criterion (ss 8(1)(a), 9(1)(a)).
   • Document identity: verify the acquirer is the first person who entered the moneylending agreement, or that acquirer is a subsidiary or holding entity of that first person as defined in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (s 4, ss 8(1)(b), 9(1)(b)). Maintain corporate control records, shareholding structures and constitutional documents to substantiate subsidiary or holding entity status.
   • Retain contemporaneous enforcement documents, receivership or foreclosure evidence, transfer instruments and valuations to demonstrate the enforcement pathway and the relationship between the security and the moneylending agreement (ss 8-9).

3. For foreign custodian-corporation arrangements:

   • If claiming exemption under s 10, assemble evidence that the conditions in subsection 41A(2) of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 are satisfied. The Rules do not specify the proof format; therefore collate custodial agreements, trust instruments, declarations and any regulatory approvals that demonstrate compliance with subsection 41A(2) (s 10).

4. Record-keeping and retention:

   • Because the Rules apply whether the person started to hold the relevant right before, on or after commencement (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)), retain historical documents that show the date and manner of acquisition. This includes loan agreements, security instruments, enforcement notices, transfer documents, and any State or Territory instruments that confer harvesting rights (s 6).
   • Keep clear water-rights maps and schedules separating conveyance water from user entitlements so you can demonstrate which components are excluded under s 7 and which may remain registrable (s 7(2)-(3)).

5. Administrative engagement and submissions:

   • The instrument gives no procedural detail for asserting an exemption. Prepare written submissions that cite the relevant Rules sections and the supporting documents required to prove the facts that trigger the exemptions. Anticipate questions about mixed-purpose securities, multi-party security arrangements, securitisation structures and custodial arrangements.

6. Jurisdictional checks:

   • For rainwater rights (s 6), check the specific State or Territory law under which the right is conferred to ensure it meets the instrument’s stock and domestic limitation. State variation is a material compliance factor.
   • For irrigation and water rights, confirm how the Water Act 2007 defines irrigation infrastructure operator and irrigation right and whether local water planning instruments affect whether water is conveyance water (s 4, s 7).

7. Update monitoring process:

   • Monitor amendments to the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Regulation 2015 and the Water Act 2007. Because the Rules import definitions and conditions from those instruments (s 4, ss 5, 10), changes to them can alter exemption eligibility without amendment to the Rules.

8. Seek formal clarification where necessary:

   • If the factual record is ambiguous or the legal characterisation is uncertain , for example, regarding whether a security was held "solely" for a moneylending agreement or whether a right is conveyance water , consider seeking a written administrative ruling or legal advice before proceeding.

9. Client communication:

   • If advising foreign clients, explain that these Rules change when the Register Act’s notice obligations apply (ss 8-10). Make clear that exemptions depend on documentary proof and characterisation under other statutes and that failing to establish the exemption may expose the client to the Act’s reporting consequences.

10. Transitional matters:

• For holdings acquired before 1 July 2017, ensure historical compliance steps are reviewed because the Rules explicitly cover acquisitions before, on and after commencement for the relevant exemptions (ss 7(4), 8(2), 9(2)).

In sum, compliance under the Rules involves two linked processes. First, determine whether the land or water interest falls into the instrument’s exclusions. Second, if an exemption under ss 8-10 is asserted, assemble documentary proof that the specific textual conditions are satisfied. Because the Rules do not set procedural templates for claiming exemptions, robust record-keeping and legal submissions are the primary compliance tools.