Ticket Scalping Regulations 2022

The regulations centre on a handful of tightly defined concepts that connect statutory prohibitions in the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 to day-to-day obligations and enforcement tools.

• Package deal, definition and scope (r 3). The regulations define “package deal, for an event” to mean the supply of any goods or services, including food, beverages, accommodation or transport, as part of a package that includes a ticket for admission to the event. That definition is forward-referencing: supplier and recipient are defined in section 9(1) of the Act, and the regulation treats “package deal” as the particular bundle of goods/services plus ticket.

• Prescribed agreement (r 4). Regulation 4 prescribes when an agreement to supply a ticket as part of a package deal counts as a “prescribed agreement” for the purpose of section 9(2)(b) of the Act. The key elements are: (a) the supplier provides to the recipient a description of each good or service included and the amount of consideration for each, and (b) the package deal is supplied in the ordinary course of the supplier’s business or undertaking. There is an express timing rule: the description and amounts must be provided before any amount in consideration for the package deal is paid by the recipient to the supplier (r 4(3)).

• Infringement notice mechanism (r 5 and Schedule 1). Regulation 5 identifies specific offences under the Act that are eligible for infringement notices under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2. Schedule 1 lists three Act offences and assigns a modified penalty of $2,000 to each: selling a ticket for an amount that exceeds the original ticket price by more than 10% (s 7), supplying a ticket contingent on payment for other goods or services (s 9(1)), and an owner of an advertising publication failing to prevent publication of a prohibited advertisement (s 11(1)). The regulations therefore convert some Act offences into summary, fixed-penalty enforcement options.

• Authorised and approved officers (r 6). The Commissioner may appoint persons or classes of persons to be authorised officers or approved officers for the purposes of issuing infringement notices under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2. The Commissioner must provide each authorised officer with a certificate, badge or identity card identifying them as authorised to issue infringement notices, and authorised officers may show that identification to alleged offenders (r 6(1)-(3)).

• Prescribed forms (r 7 and Schedule 2). The regulations prescribe the text and structure of Form 1 (Infringement notice) and Form 2 (Withdrawal of infringement notice) for the purposes of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2. The prescribed Form 1 text sets out the particulars an alleged offender is to be given, the 28 day payment window, and the consequences of non-payment, including reference to enforcement under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 with specified enforcement measures. Form 2 formalises withdrawal and refund processes.

Interlinkages between these concepts are deliberate. The “prescribed agreement” treatment in r 4 narrows or clarifies which package arrangements interact with the Act’s prohibition on conditional supply in s 9(1) and s 9(2)(b). The infringement notice pathway in r 5 and Schedule 1 links substantive Act provisions to the Criminal Procedure Act framework, and r 6 and r 7 supply the appointment and paperwork needed to operationalise fixed-penalty enforcement.

The regulations assign direct obligations and potential sanction exposure to a finite set of market actors and empower a class of government-appointed officers to enforce those obligations.

Primary affected parties named or implied in the instrument

• Suppliers of tickets bundled with goods or services. The regulations define “package deal” and, in r 4, prescribe when an agreement to supply a ticket as part of a package is a “prescribed agreement”. Suppliers who sell tickets bundled with food, beverage, accommodation, transport or other goods or services fall within the scope of that prescription when the bundle is supplied in the ordinary course of the supplier’s business and the supplier provides the itemised description and component pricing to the recipient prior to payment. The regulations therefore impose a disclosure timing obligation on suppliers of package deals (r 4(2)-(3)).

• Owners of advertising publications. Schedule 1 lists an offence under s 11(1) of the Act , the owner of an advertising publication failing to ensure that no prohibited advertisement is published , as an infringement-notice eligible offence with a $2,000 modified penalty. That directly affects publishers, owners of billboard space, online advertising platforms acting as owners or operators of “publications” as defined in the Act, and intermediaries that may be treated as owners under the Act’s definitions. The regulations do not define “advertising publication” or “prohibited advertisement”; those substantive definitions and scope are in the Act.

• Ticket sellers and resellers. Schedule 1 lists s 7 (selling a ticket for admission to an event for an amount that exceeds the original ticket price by more than 10%) as an infringement-notice eligible offence. That places primary retail sellers, secondary market resellers, and platforms facilitating resale within the enforcement perimeter, to the extent the Act’s provisions reach them.

• Recipients and consumers. The regulation requires disclosures to a “recipient”, a term whose definition is in s 9(1) of the Act. Recipients are the consumers to whom the supplier must give the itemised description and component pricing before payment for a prescribed package agreement. Recipients may also be the persons who receive infringement notices under the Criminal Procedure Act machinery set out in the forms.

• Authorised and approved officers. The Commissioner may appoint persons or classes of persons to be authorised officers or approved officers for purposes of issuing infringement notices (r 6(1)). Those appointees will be the front-line enforcers. The Commissioner must provide identifying documentation (r 6(2)), which the authorised officer may show to an alleged offender (r 6(3)).

Secondary or implied affected parties

• Event organisers and venues. While not mentioned by name, event organisers and venues are implicated through ticket sales practices and advertising, since selling above original face value, or conditional sales tied to other goods or services, and advertising for such sales are the subject of offences listed in Schedule 1.

• Platforms and marketplaces. Online ticketing platforms, resale marketplaces and listing services are implicated to the extent the Act treats their activities as those of suppliers or owners of advertising publications. The regulations do not specify platforms; they do, however, provide the procedural route for enforcement against whoever the Act designates in its definitions.

• Businesses bundling travel, accommodation or hospitality with event admission. The definition of package deal expressly lists transport and accommodation as included goods or services, signalling that tour operators, travel agents, hotels and hospitality businesses that sell admission bundled with their services will face the r 4 disclosure obligation and potential exposure under s 9(1)/(2) as reflected in Schedule 1.

Who pays, and who decides

• Payment of modified penalties falls to the alleged offender if an authorised officer issues an infringement notice under the Criminal Procedure Act process (Form 1). The modified penalty in Schedule 1 is $2,000 for each listed offence.

• The Commissioner decides who may act as authorised or approved officers by written appointment (r 6(1)). The Commissioner also supplies identities and is therefore the central decision point for granting enforcement authority.

The regulations therefore allocate duties and exposures across sellers, advertisers and package-bundling businesses, and they vest appointment and administrative control of enforcement officers in a Commissioner whose identity and appointment power are stated but not further defined in the regulations.

The Regulations create discrete compliance duties and set out enforcement rights and procedural protections available both to enforcers and alleged offenders.

Duties imposed on suppliers and advertisers

• Itemised disclosure for package deals, pre-payment (r 4(2)-(3)). A supplier who supplies a ticket as part of a package deal will trigger the regulation’s “prescribed agreement” treatment if the supplier provides to the recipient (i) a description of each good or service in the package and (ii) the amount of consideration for each good or service, and if the package is supplied in the ordinary course of the supplier’s business. Subregulation 4(3) imposes a timing rule: the details in 4(2)(a)(i) and (ii) must be provided before any amount in consideration for the package deal is paid by the recipient to the supplier. The duty to deliver component descriptions and component pricing before payment is thus a clear compliance obligation on suppliers of packages that fall within the ordinary course of business test.

• Advertising publication owner duty (Schedule 1, s 11(1) offence). Schedule 1 lists the offence under s 11(1) (owner of an advertising publication failing to ensure that no prohibited advertisement is published) as infringement-notice eligible. That places an obligation on publishing owners to take steps to ensure prohibited advertisements do not appear in their publication. The content of “prohibited advertisement” is a statutory term in the Act and is not defined in the regulations.

• Pricing cap on resale (Schedule 1, s 7 offence). The Act offence listed in Schedule 1 s 7 prohibits selling a ticket for more than 10% above the original ticket price. The regulations do not restate the prohibition but make it an infringement-notice eligible offence with a $2,000 modified penalty.

Rights and procedural matters for alleged offenders

• Infringement notice payment option (Form 1). An alleged offender served with the prescribed Form 1 may avoid prosecution by paying the modified penalty within 28 days of the date of the notice, as the form’s text clarifies. The Form 1 text explicitly states that paying the modified penalty will not be regarded as an admission for the purposes of any civil or criminal court case.

• Option to elect prosecution (Form 1). Form 1 allows the recipient to request that the matter be dealt with by prosecution in court by signing and returning the notice within 28 days.

• Withdrawal and refund process (Form 2). Form 2 is the prescribed instrument for withdrawing an infringement notice. The form requires the approved officer to record the withdrawal and offers a refund mechanism where the modified penalty has already been paid; the paid person is entitled to a refund and the prescribed logistics for claiming or enclosing refunds are set out in the form.

Enforcement rights and administrative obligations for authorities

• Appointment and identification of authorised officers (r 6). The Commissioner has the discretion to appoint authorised and approved officers and must issue each authorised officer with identification. An authorised officer may show that identification to an alleged offender in the course of issuing an infringement notice. That places an administrative obligation on the Commissioner to maintain appointment records and identification issuance.

• Use of Criminal Procedure Act Part 2. The regulations operate within the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2 pathway for infringement notices. Regulation 5(1) states that the offences specified in Schedule 1 are offences for which an infringement notice may be issued under that Part. Regulation 5(2) fixes the modified penalty in Schedule 1 as the section 5(3)(a) modified penalty for the Criminal Procedure Act. The procedural rights and obligations under that Part therefore apply, such as the formality of issuance and service, the period for payment, and the consequences of non-payment, as further specified in prescribed Form 1.

Ancillary requirements

• Timing and ordinary-course test. The “ordinary course of carrying on the supplier’s business or undertaking” test in r 4(2)(b) is an element of the prescribed agreement test. The regulation places a compliance burden on suppliers to determine whether their package deals are supplied in the ordinary course of business, and to document that characterisation where necessary.

• Cross-referencing to the Act for defined terms. The regulations repeatedly refer to terms whose meanings are in the Act, for example “recipient” and “supplier” in r 3 and section-based offences in Schedule 1. Suppliers, advertisers and enforcers must therefore consult the Act for precise definitions and the full substantive prohibitions that underpin the regulatory obligations.

The regulations establish a fixed-penalty, infringement-notice based enforcement option for specific Act offences, and prescribe the administrative chain and documentation for issuing and withdrawing such notices.

Infringement notice eligibility and modified penalties

• Schedule 1 designates three offences under the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 as offences for which an infringement notice may be issued under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2 (r 5(1) and Schedule 1). The three listed offences are: s 7 (selling a ticket for an amount that exceeds the original ticket price by more than 10%), s 9(1) (supplying a ticket for admission to an event that is contingent on payment for other goods or services), and s 11(1) (owner of an advertising publication failing to ensure that no prohibited advertisement is published).

• Regulation 5(2) fixes the modified penalty specified opposite an offence in Schedule 1 as the modified penalty for the purposes of section 5(3)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004. Schedule 1 sets a uniform modified penalty of $2,000 for each of the three offences.

Issuing authority and identification

• Appointment of authorised and approved officers. The Commissioner may appoint persons or classes of persons, in writing, as authorised officers or approved officers for the purpose of issuing infringement notices under the Criminal Procedure Act Part 2 (r 6(1)). The Commissioner therefore controls who may issue infringement notices by written appointment.

• Identity documentation and presentation. The Commissioner must issue to each authorised officer a certificate, badge or identity card identifying the officer as authorised to issue infringement notices (r 6(2)). An authorised officer may show that certificate, badge or identity card to an alleged offender as evidence of authority when issuing an infringement notice (r 6(3)). The regulations therefore create a documentary accountability mechanism for enforcement personnel.

Procedural content of the infringement notice and consequences

• Prescribed Form 1 content. Schedule 2 prescribes the text and layout of Form 1, which is an infringement notice. The prescribed form requires particulars such as alleged offender name and address, alleged offence particulars including date, time, place and details of the offence, the written law allegedly contravened, date of the notice, issuing officer particulars, the modified penalty amount, and a “TAKE NOTICE” block that explains the alleged offender’s options.

• Payment window and consequences. The Form 1 text gives the alleged offender 28 days from the date of the notice to pay the modified penalty to the Approved Officer to avoid prosecution. It also warns that if the modified penalty is not paid within 28 days the alleged offender may be prosecuted or enforcement action may be taken under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994. The form lists enforcement actions available under that Act, including suspension or cancellation of driver’s licence, suspension or cancellation of vehicle licence, disqualification from holding or obtaining licences, vehicle immobilisation or removal of number plates, publication of details, garnishing earnings or bank accounts, and seizure and sale of property.

• No admission by payment. The prescribed text explicitly states that paying the modified penalty will not be regarded as an admission for the purposes of any civil or criminal court case.

Withdrawal and refund procedure

• Prescribed Form 2 for withdrawal. Schedule 2 prescribes a Form 2 for withdrawal of infringement notices. The form records the withdrawal particulars and provides a refund mechanism where payment was already made. It instructs how an alleged offender can claim a refund if payment has been made but a refund is not enclosed with the withdrawal form.

Interaction with other enforcement statutes

• The regulations operate the infringement notice route under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2 (r 5). Non-payment triggers the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994 enforcement tools as set out in the prescribed Form 1. Consequently, the practical penalties available extend beyond the monetary modified penalty to administrative enforcement measures administered under the Fines Act where the person does not pay or successfully contest the notice.

Administrative discretion and enforcement capacity

• Commissioner discretion to appoint officers. The Commissioner’s written appointment power under r 6(1) gives latitude to determine classes of authorised and approved officers. The regulations do not limit the Commissioner’s choice of classes or require public disclosure of appointment criteria, but they require that identification be provided to each authorised officer (r 6(2)). That structure centralises enforcement appointment decisions with the Commissioner and places an administrative duty on that office to create and manage issuance and ID processes.

The regulations are explicitly framed to operate in conjunction with the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 and existing infringement and enforcement statutes. They do not operate in isolation.

Criminal Procedure Act 2004

• The regulations expressly make specified offences under the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 offences for which an infringement notice may be issued under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2 (r 5(1)). Regulation 5(2) also identifies the modified penalty in Schedule 1 as the modified penalty for the purposes of s 5(3)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The prescribed forms in Schedule 2 are therefore forms for the purposes of the Criminal Procedure Act Part 2. Practically, this binds the ticket scalping enforcement regime into the procedural conditions, timelines and appeal/contest options that underpin the Criminal Procedure Act’s infringement notice framework.

Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994

• Form 1 specifies that failure to pay a modified penalty within 28 days may result in prosecution or enforcement action under the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices Enforcement Act 1994, and lists enforcement measures that may be taken under that Act (Form 1 text in Schedule 2). This maps ticket scalping non-payment consequences to the suite of civil administrative enforcement tools, including licence suspensions, vehicle immobilisation, garnishment and seizure of property.

Ticket Scalping Act 2021

• The regulations repeatedly reference the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 and particular sections of it. Regulation 3 adopts the Act’s definitions for “recipient” and “supplier” by reference to s 9(1) of the Act. Regulation 4 is adopted for the purpose of section 9(2)(b) of the Act, and Schedule 1 lists specific Act offences (s 7, s 9(1), s 11(1)) as infringement-notice eligible. The regulations therefore function as subordinate instruments that operationalise selected aspects of the Act. The full substance of many obligations, including what constitutes a “prohibited advertisement”, the exact statutory definitions of “supplier” and “recipient”, and the core prohibitions in ss 7, 9 and 11, remain in the Act and must be read together with these regulations to determine overall compliance obligations.

Absence of cross-reference to consumer or competition statutes

• The regulations do not reference or modify state consumer protection statutes or the federal Competition and Consumer Act. They do not create or alter consumer remedies found in other statutes. The enforcement route adopted is the fixed penalty/infringement-notice pathway under the Criminal Procedure Act and subsequent enforcement under the Fines Act where applicable.

Administrative law and appointment powers

• The Commissioner’s power to appoint authorised and approved officers (r 6) will interact with general administrative law principles concerning lawful exercise of delegated powers, natural justice, and procedural fairness, where relevant. The regulations do not, however, spell out procedural protections or appointment criteria for authorised officers beyond the requirement to issue identification and to make appointments in writing.

Practical interaction summary

• Enforcement mechanics under the Criminal Procedure Act and collection/ enforcement mechanics under the Fines Act are the principal vehicles through which the ticket scalping offence regime will operate. The regulations do not displace the substantive definitions or prohibitions in the Ticket Scalping Act 2021; they only specify the conditions under which package deals are treated as prescribed agreements, which Act offences are eligible for infringement notices and the forms and identification processes to be used for such notices.

The regulations include a short, explicit compilation table and no other amendment entries. The compilation table records the originating instrument and commencement details.

• Originating instrument. The regulations were made as Ticket Scalping Regulations 2022, SL 2022/35, published 15 March 2022 (Compilation table).

• Commencement dates. Regulation 2 sets commencement dates: regulations 1 and 2 (the citation and commencement clauses) operate on the day of Gazette publication (15 March 2022), and the remainder of the regulations operate on the following day (16 March 2022) (r 2 and Compilation table).

• No further amendments recorded in the compilation. The Notes section reproduces a compilation table that lists only the original SL 2022/35 and its publication and commencement dates. The compilation table does not show any later amending instruments, and no amending entries are included in the regulations text provided.

• Defined terms list. The instrument contains a short “Defined terms” list at the end identifying rules of construction and the locations of certain definitions, but that list is explicitly noted as not being part of the law. It records that “package deal”, “recipient”, “section” and “supplier” are defined in regulation 3 or the Act as noted.

Implications of the amendment history

• The instrument appears to be a new, stand-alone subordinate instrument enacted to operationalise parts of the Ticket Scalping Act 2021. No revisions, corrections or later amending instruments are recorded in the copy supplied. Users should check an authoritative database for any later amending regulations or repeal instruments when relying on the instrument for compliance, because the compilation table included here contains only the original instrument details.

The text provided contains no decisions, judicial interpretations, or litigation history. The regulations are procedural and definitional subordinate instruments designed to work with the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 and existing enforcement statutes. The only litigation-relevant material in the regulations is procedural: the availability of infringement notices (under the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 Part 2), the modified penalty quantum, and the Form 1 text specifying election to be prosecuted.

Matters likely to generate litigation or contested proceedings, as implied by the regulations

• Interpretation of “package deal” boundaries. The regulations define “package deal” broadly to include goods and services such as food, beverages, accommodation or transport supplied as part of a package that includes a ticket (r 3). Disputes may arise in cases where sellers bundle marginal goods or make promotional offers that raise questions about whether an arrangement is a package deal for the purposes of r 4, and whether the ordinary-course-of-business test in r 4(2)(b) is satisfied. The regulations themselves do not settle those interpretive questions; the Act’s definitions of “supplier” and “recipient” in s 9(1) will be determinative and likely to feature in litigation if contested.

• Timing of pre-payment disclosure requirement. Regulation 4(3) requires that the description of components and component pricing be provided to the recipient before any amount in consideration for the package deal is paid. Litigation could focus on the precise meaning of “before any amount in consideration … is paid” in contexts where deposits, hold payments, pre-authorisations, or staged payments are used. The regulations do not define “amount in consideration” or “paid” further, leaving room for dispute.

• Ordinary course of business test. Regulation 4(2)(b) conditions the prescribed agreement treatment on the package deal being “supplied in the ordinary course of carrying on the supplier’s business or undertaking”. Determinations of what counts as ordinary course could be contested in enforcement proceedings.

• Definition and scope of prohibited advertisements. Schedule 1 includes an offence under s 11(1) for owner of an advertising publication failing to ensure that no prohibited advertisement is published. The regulations do not define “prohibited advertisement” or “advertising publication”; those definitions are in the Act. Contested cases are likely to involve the Act’s definitions and factual determinations as to whether an owner had the capacity or responsibility to prevent publication.

• Validity and sufficiency of authorised officer appointments. The Commissioner appoints authorised officers in writing (r 6(1)). Challenges could arise where persons contest the validity of an appointment, the adequacy of identification produced by an authorised officer, or whether the authorised officer complied with procedural norms when issuing a notice.

No recorded litigation in the instrument

• The Regulations themselves do not include a litigation history or references to any judicial decisions. The copy supplied is a compilation of the 2022 Regulations with the original instrument and commencement details only.

For practitioners

• Because the Regulations operate mainly by cross-reference to the Act and to the Criminal Procedure Act, litigation that interprets the Act’s substantive provisions will be directly relevant to enforcement under these Regulations. Carefully documenting compliance with r 4 pre-payment disclosure obligations, establishing ordinary-course-of-business rationale and maintaining records of publication approval processes for advertisements will be important to defend against infringement notices and potential prosecutions.

The Regulations are concise but raise several practical pitfalls and compliance traps for regulated parties and enforcers. The following items are grounded in the text and highlight interpretive and operational risk points.

Regulatory cross-references conceal substantive detail

• The Regulations reference several terms and offences whose definitions and elements are in the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 (for example “supplier”, “recipient”, “prohibited advertisement”, and the offences listed as s 7, s 9(1) and s 11(1)). The regulations do not restate the substantive elements of those offences. Practitioners should not treat the Regulations alone as a complete statement of obligations; the Act must be read to determine the full offence elements and definitions.

Strict timing requirement for package deals

• Regulation 4(3) requires that the description and component pricing be provided to the recipient before any amount in consideration for the package deal is paid. This creates a bright-line pre-payment duty. Common commercial payment practices such as taking deposits, holding fees, or running a two-stage payment model may inadvertently trigger non-compliance unless the supplier can prove the disclosure occurred prior to acceptance of any payment. The regulation does not clarify whether a nominal token payment or pre-authorisation is treated as “payment”.

Ordinary course of business qualification

• The prescribed agreement test in r 4(2)(b) requires that the package deal is supplied in the ordinary course of carrying on the supplier’s business or undertaking. This introduces an evidential and legal test that may be contested. A business that bundles tickets for promotional or ad-hoc offers may need to document why those packages are “in the ordinary course” if enforcement action follows.

Uniform modified penalty amount and enforcement escalation

• The Schedule fixes a $2,000 modified penalty for each listed offence (Schedule 1). While paying the modified penalty avoids prosecution, non-payment can trigger the Fines Act enforcement measures listed in the prescribed Form 1, which include licence suspensions, garnishee proceedings and seizure of property. The prescribed Form 1 language highlights that non-payment has consequences potentially far greater than the $2,000 amount, especially for small businesses or individuals with limited cash flow.

Broad potential impact on different business models

• The regulation’s inclusion of food, beverages, accommodation and transport in the “package deal” definition brings a wide range of hospitality, travel and entertainment sector arrangements within the regulation’s scope. Businesses that commonly sell bundled services with event admission should carefully audit their sales flows and disclosure practices.

Ambiguity about who “the Commissioner” is

• Regulation 6 repeatedly uses the term “the Commissioner” without further specification in the regulations. The regulations do not define which Commissioner or the appointment process. That leaves ambiguity about which office is responsible for appointing authorised/approved officers, and where to seek identification or appointment records. Practitioners will need to locate the relevant Commissioner in the Act or the administering department’s instrument to resolve that question.

Publisher liability risk

• Schedule 1 contains an infringement offence for the owner of an advertising publication failing to ensure that no prohibited advertisement is published (s 11(1)). The owner’s duty to ensure a publication does not include prohibited advertisements can be operationally difficult for owners who host user-generated content or work with intermediaries. The regulations do not limit vicarious liability or explain defences, placing the onus on owners to have robust approval practices.

Form-based procedural traps

• The prescribed Form 1 contains mandatory text including the 28 day payment window, options for electing prosecution and a warning about enforcement actions under the Fines Act. A person who fails to return Form 1 correctly, or who misses the 28 day window, risks enforcement actions. The withdrawal form also creates an administrative requirement to claim refunds. Timely procedures and central records are necessary to avoid procedural defaults.

No guidance on evidence or recordkeeping

• The regulations require disclosures and create duties but provide no express recordkeeping, audit or evidentiary standards. Suppliers should therefore adopt conservative recordkeeping practices to evidence compliance with r 4 and any steps taken to avoid prohibited advertisements.

The Regulations are procedural and therefore compliance is predominantly about adapting transactional practices, disclosure processes, advertising approval workflows, staff training and recordkeeping. The following is a practical compliance checklist grounded in the regulations’ requirements and forms.

1. Map activities against the Regulations and the Act

• Identify which products or services your organisation sells that bundle tickets with goods or services. The regulations define “package deal” to include food, beverages, accommodation or transport supplied as part of a package including a ticket (r 3). Map all bundled offers, promotions, packages, and combined bookings against this definition.
• Review the Ticket Scalping Act 2021 definitions of “supplier”, “recipient” and the substantive offences in ss 7, 9 and 11 to determine whether your business activity engages the statutory provisions referenced in Schedule 1. The Regulations repeatedly cross-reference those Act provisions.

2. Implement required pre-payment disclosures for package deals (r 4)

• For any package deal supplied in the ordinary course of the business (r 4(2)(b)), ensure you provide each recipient, before they pay anything, with:
  • a clear description of each good or service that is part of the package (r 4(2)(a)(i)); and
  • the amount of the consideration for each good or service that are part of the package (r 4(2)(a)(ii)).
• Design your point-of-sale flows, booking forms and online checkout sequences so that the component descriptions and component pricing are displayed and captured prior to any payment or deposit step. Consider proof-of-disclosure mechanisms such as an emailed booking confirmation reproducing the component descriptions and pricing with timestamps.

3. Document “ordinary course of business” rationale

• Because r 4(2)(b) requires the package to be supplied in the ordinary course of business to attract prescribed agreement treatment, maintain a written policy that explains how and why your package deals are part of the ordinary course. Keep contemporaneous records showing the regularity, marketing and operational context for packages to support that position if challenged.

4. Review pricing and resale controls

• Ensure resale prices do not contravene the Act’s s 7 prohibition on selling a ticket for more than 10% above the original ticket price, which Schedule 1 lists as an infringement-notice eligible offence with a $2,000 modified penalty. Where you operate or facilitate resale platforms, implement automated checks or terms of use that restrict listings above the permitted threshold, and retain records of original ticket prices for verification.

5. Review advertising publication processes

• Owners of advertising publications should establish approval workflows and monitoring to prevent publication of prohibited advertisements (Schedule 1, s 11(1) offence). The Regulations provide no defence or safe-harbour language; owners should therefore:
  • define roles and responsibilities for advertisement approval and engagement with advertisers; and
  • maintain written approval logs and a complaints escalation process to demonstrate proactive steps to prevent prohibited ads.

6. Train staff and agents

• Train sales, marketing, platform moderation and bookings staff on the pre-payment disclosure requirement in r 4(3), the cap on resale pricing in s 7 as listed in Schedule 1, and the risks flowing from publication of prohibited advertisements. Ensure that third-party agents and distribution partners are contractually required to follow the disclosure and advertising approval requirements.

7. Prepare for inspection and notice issuance

• Be aware that authorised officers appointed by the Commissioner may issue infringement notices (r 6). Ask the relevant administering department which office is “the Commissioner” for appointment purposes, and establish procedures to verify identification if approached by an enforcement officer. The Commissioner must issue identification to authorised officers, which they may show when issuing a notice (r 6(2)-(3)).

8. Establish an infringement notice response process

• Create a centralised procedure for receiving, logging and responding to infringement notices issued on the prescribed Form 1, including:
  • verifying the notice details, issuing officer identification and legal basis;
  • determining within 28 days whether to pay the $2,000 modified penalty, seek withdrawal, or elect to be prosecuted in court (Form 1 allows election for prosecution);
  • preserving all documentary evidence supporting compliance in case of contested proceedings; and
  • if seeking withdrawal, use the prescribed Form 2 process and preserve evidence of the refund claim logistics where a payment has been made.

9. Maintain documentary evidence of compliance

• Keep time-stamped records of pre-payment disclosures, itemised invoices and confirmations sent to recipients, advertisement approval logs, screenshots of online checkouts showing component pricing before payment, and copies of ads and listing content. Given the lack of explicit recordkeeping standards in the Regulations, proactive documentation will be the primary means to rebut allegations.

10. Liaise with counsel for edge cases

• For arrangements where it is unclear whether the package deal is supplied in the ordinary course of business, or for complex payment structures involving deposits and staged payments, consult legal counsel to determine whether additional procedural steps or contract drafting changes are necessary to ensure the pre-payment disclosure requirement is satisfied.

11. Check for updates and departmental guidance

• The Regulations themselves are succinct and draw heavily on the Act and the Criminal Procedure Act. Monitor the administering department for guidance on which office is “the Commissioner”, appointment protocols for authorised officers, and any published compliance guidelines or FAQs that might clarify ambiguous points in the Regulations.

Practical templates and process notes

• Electronic checkouts should include a mandatory “Package contents and pricing” box that must be acknowledged by the purchaser before any payment button is enabled. Store the acknowledgement timestamp and a copy of the displayed content.
• For phone bookings or in-person sales, use a standard script and a pre-payment disclosure form either printed or emailed to the purchaser, with a retained copy in the booking record.
• For advertising owners, implement a “prohibited content” checklist that adverts must pass before publication, and retain approval signatures or digital audit trails.

By mapping operational processes to the Regulations’ explicit requirements (r 4, r 6, r 7 and Schedule 1), and by documenting disclosures and approvals, affected businesses will be positioned to demonstrate compliance if an authorised officer issues an infringement notice.