Bill
Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026
passed, as at 2026-03-27. Treasury portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Treasury
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2026-03-25
- second reading — 2026-03-25
- second reading — 2026-03-26
- second reading — 2026-03-26
- third reading — 2026-03-26
- introduced — 2026-03-26
- second reading — 2026-03-26
- second reading — 2026-03-26
- second reading — 2026-03-26
- committee — 2026-03-26
- third reading — 2026-03-26
- passed — 2026-03-26
- royal assent — 2026-03-27
Divisions
- Tim Wilson We're very happy to see that this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026, is being debated, though we're very disappointed that the government has gone through a shambled process, to introduce the Fair Work Amendment (Fairer Fuel) Bill 2026 this morning. They have tried to force it through the parliament before anyone in the entire country has read it. The Leader of the House understands full well the scale of the legislation he is trying to introduce, and he is now trying to ram it through the parliament on the basis that he has no interest in the opposition or anyone outside this parliament scrutinising it. It's a very dangerous precedent. This is in comparison to the schedules that are being updated in the context of the Competition and Consumer Act which are focused very squarely on making sure penalties are imposed on those who seek to price gouge or harm Australians. It's a straightforward exercise that they have dawdled on every step of the way. The response from the minister has been to not bring the legislation to the House, to bring it to a vote to resolve the matter and to up the penalties, but instead he has allowed time to drift. We are simply asking that that matter, which is simple, straightforward and clear, be resolved. Instead, what the government is now doing is a shambolic process to try and shut down parliamentary scrutiny and parliamentary accountability. I'll remind the House this Fair Work legislation was introduced this morning. A copy has not even, as far as I am aware, been made available to the opposition—or, if it has, we certainly haven't had the chance to read it yet. When you're making such substantial changes to industrial relations legislation—and I know the Labor Party works for the trade union movement; it doesn't work for Australians—at some point you actually have to factor Australians into the conversation. We hope and pray sanity prevails and that the government — 2026-03-26, House of Representatives: negative, ayes 43, noes 93
- Katy Gallagher I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in _Hansard_. Leave granted. _The speech read as follows—_ Today, I introduce the Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026. This bill amends the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 to double maximum penalties for misconduct under competition law and the Australian Consumer Law, from $50 million to $100 million. These laws help tackle price gouging at its source, outlawing: The even stronger penalties we are introducing will empower the ACCC to throw the book at any companies who illegally and unfairly increase their prices. Since the start of the war, we have seen much higher prices for petrol and diesel across the country. It has put more pressure on motorists and families already doing it tough. Our message to petrol retailers has been clear: you are on notice; do not use the conflict to take advantage of Australians. Now they'll face penalties up to $100 million per offence if they do. These penalties apply across the economy. This will help ensure all retailers and suppliers, from fuel companies to supermarkets and the entire supply chain in between, do not use the war in the Middle East as an excuse for illegal and unfair pricing. The states and territories share the Albanese government's sense of urgency. Reforms to the Australian Consumer Law require agreement of the states and territories, and I want to thank every one of them for swiftly confirming their agreement to support these reforms. The ACCC has been clear they won't hesitate to take action to protect consumers and markets, and they'll seek the highest penalties appropriate in any case they take to court. This bill is an important way we are protecting consumers and securing Australia's fuel security, but it's not the only way. We have already: The bill also brings Australia's competition law penalties into closer alignment with comparable econo — 2026-03-26, Senate: negative, ayes 10, noes 25
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr7456_amend_8a68fb97-c4c9-4976-adec-df30f2f30977%22;rec=0) introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Nick McKim](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/nick_mckim) (Greens), which means it was unsuccessful. ### Amendment text > *Page 6 (after line 9), at the end of the Bill, add:* > > *Schedule 2 — Price gouging* > > *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* > > *1 Subsection 4(1)* > >> *Insert:* >> >>> *competitive price has the meaning given by subsection 46(2B).* > > *2 Before subsection 46(1)* > >> *Insert:* >> >>> *Substantially lessening competition* > > *3 After subsection 46(1)* > >> *Insert:* >> >>> *Price gouging* >>> >>> *(2) A corporation that has a substantial degree of power in a market must not engage in conduct that results, or is likely to result, in:* >>> >>>> *(a) a good or service being acquired by another person, or supplied to another person, at a price that is excessive; or* >>>> >>>> *(b) an offer being made to another person for the other person to acquire a good or service, or for the other person to be supplied a good or service, at a price that is excessive; or* >>>> >>>> *(c) an agreement being entered into by another person for the other person to acquire a good or service, or for the other person to be supplied a good or service, at a price that is excessive.* >>> >>> *(2A) For the purposes of subsection (2), in determining whether a price for the acquisition or supply of a good or service is excessive, regard must be had to the competitive price for the good or service.* >>> >>> *(2B) The competitive price , for a good or service, is the price at which the good or service would have been acquired by, or supplied to, the other person if the corporation did not have a substantial degree of power in that market.* >>> >>> *(2C) Subsection (2) does not apply i — 2026-03-26, Senate: negative, ayes 11, noes 26
Plain-language summary
No machine-written summary in this export.
Sources
em
billhome
frl act