Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 31 
 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(1) OVERVIEW  
1. Since its previous Trade Policy Review in 2007,  Australia has maintained the openness of its 
trade regime, which is to a large extent due to the exemplary transparency in trade and related policy.  
Australia has proceeded with some unilateral liberal ization in certain areas with a view to increasing 
the competitiveness of domestic firms and reducing anti-export bias.  However, some significant tariff 
and non-tariff barriers to trade and to efficient re -allocation of domestic resources remain.  Emphasis 
has been placed on better coordination of policy form ulation and implementation at central, state, and 
territory level in areas such as standards, sanitary  and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, and government 
procurement. 
2. The tariff remains one of Australia's main trade policy instruments, albeit a minor source of 
tax revenue.  As a result of unila teral reductions (on 1 January 2010) in tariffs applied to textiles, 
clothing, and footwear (TCF) as well as to passe nger motor vehicles (PMVs), the average applied 
MFN tariff rate dropped slightly, from 3.8% in 2006 to 3.1% in 2010, with further unilateral 
reductions expected by 2015.  The average applie d MFN tariff for industrial products is 3.4%, while 
that for agricultural imports is roughly 1.4%.  Some 96% of applied MFN tariff rates are currently in 
the range zero to 5%.  Notwithstanding the un ilateral cuts in tariffs, including peak ad valorem  rates, 
in line with long-standing sectoral support to TC F and PMVs products, the applied MFN tariff rates 
on the latter remain considerably higher than the aver age.  The tariff structure has been simplified and 
now involves seven rates (four ad valorem,  one specific, one compound, and one alternate).  
However, the tariff structure is also characterized by  tariff escalation, which means that effective rates 
of tariff protection can be considerably higher than  nominal rates.  Some 99.7% of tariff rates are 
ad valorem , which contributes to the transparency  of the tariff.  Nevertheless, non- ad valorem  rates 
tend to conceal relatively high tariff rates, particularly  those on used vehicles.  The fact that 96.5% of 
tariff lines are bound imparts a high degree of predicta bility to the tariff;  however, the simple average 
of bound MFN rates (10.1%) considerably exceed s the average applied MFN rate, providing the 
authorities with extensive scope for increasing applie d tariffs within bindings, though there has been 
no such increase during the period under review.  Al though tariff-rate quotas have remained in place 
for five cheese items and for non-manufactured t obacco, they are apparently applied in a 
flexible/liberal manner;  those on tobacco have neve r been applied.  Computerized customs clearance 
has facilitated virtually all imports and exports.   
3. Import prohibitions and restrictions in the form of stringent quarantine or technical 
requirements, which are considered by the Government  to be proportionate to Australia's appropriate 
level of protection (ALOP), have remained in place, in principle to preserve, inter alia,  human, animal 
or plant life or health, the environment, safety, or security.  Changes were made to ensure that all 
standards developers work together, avoid dupli cation, and work in harmony with international 
standards, as well as to centralize the Commonwea lth Government's power for introducing mandatory 
product safety and information standards.  The shar e of national standards that are identical or 
"modified adoptions" of international standards remains at 38%.  No new mutual recognition 
agreements (MRAs), a trade facilitation measure, were signed during the re view period.  Although 
Australia continues to maintain strict SPS measure s, it recognizes that zero-risk is unattainable and 
launched reforms for a shift from "quarantine to bi osecurity".  Whereas the "net benefit" to the 
community as a whole (including domestic consum ers) needs to be demonstrated in order for a 
standard to be adopted, SPS measures are taken with out such cost-benefit analysis including the trade 
effects of such measures for stakeholders along the supply chain, athough import-risk analyses are 
expected to address the issue of economic conseq uences for relevant stakeholders.  Recourse to WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 32 
 
 
anti-dumping and countervailing action has been steady , with most initiations and measures relating 
to items originating in Asia;  no safeguard measures were adopted during the period under review.   
4. Australia is an observer to the WTO Agreem ent on Government Procurement (GPA), but 
comprehensive chapters on government procurement in a number of its FTAs (Chapter II) oblige it to 
respect principles of transparency and non-di scrimination in the conduct of its government 
procurement.  Australia has continued to use govern ment procurement as an instrument of economic 
policy aimed at fostering industrial development in cer tain sensitive areas (e.g . real estate property or 
accommodation, R&D services, and motor vehicles) that are exempt from the mandatory procurement procedures applying to procurement above certain thr esholds.  The target of sourcing at least 10% of 
purchase value from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as preference margins for 
local suppliers and local-content requirements by certain state governments have been maintained 
and, in certain areas, reinforced but applied in line with FTA commitments.  
5. Export controls or quantitative restrictions ope rated by public sector entities affect certain 
primary and therapeutic goods to ensure, inter alia,  adequate domestic supply, and to enforce 
standards;  merino sheep exports have been libera lized.  State involvement in the economy has been 
maintained where benefits can be captured from pr omoting and/or regulating export trade in certain 
agricultural goods (e.g. wheat, barley, rice, sugar).  Nevertheless, the characte r of state involvement 
has changed in recent years with all statutory a rrangements terminated (i.e. for grains, wheat, and 
sugar) except for the NSW-state based Rice Marketing Board, which is currently the sole entity with 
export monopoly rights.  Export assistance, consisting of direct grants (e.g. through export market 
development grants) and tax concessions (e.g. Tradex),  has been maintained and revised.  In addition 
to local-content requirements, termed as "Australian activity", export finance is, inter alia,  conditional 
upon "national interest" criteria;  export credit terms seem to be in line with OECD guidelines. 
6. Support for domestic production and trade h as been provided through tax and non-tax 
incentives, with steady, albeit declining, emphasi s on R&D spending as well as regulatory restrictions 
on competition.  Some industry-specific programmes (e.g. dairy, automotive, pharmaceuticals) were 
ended or amended during the review period.  The ra te of the special Luxury Car Tax, which affects 
both domestic and foreign cars but seems to fall di sproportionately on imports, was raised from 25% 
to 33%.  The effective rate of combined assistance
1 (i.e. tariff, budgetary, agricultural pricing and/or 
regulatory assistance) remains relatively high for TCF,  PMVs, grain, sheep and beef cattle farming, 
and horticulture and fruit growing activities;  a ccording to the authorities, support to primary 
production depends on the effects of climate.  In addition to certain commodi ty export activities, the 
state is involved in the economy through government trading enterprises (GTEs) providing services in key infrastructure sectors (e.g. water, electricity, port s, rail, urban transport), though not always on a 
fully commercial basis. 
7. Australia has further strengthened protection of  intellectual property rights by expanding its 
international commitments.  The competition polic y framework, which remains characterized by a 
long list of special regimes and exemptions, including at state or territory level, has been updated in 
several areas with particular emphasis on cartel criminalization.  Newly passed legislation is aimed at strengthening consumer pr otection and enforcement at the national level. 
                                                     
 
 1 This Chapter refers to several indicators, including effective rate of combined  assistance, used by the 
Productivity Commission (Chapter II) for assessing support provided to different economic activities.  For details on the definition, methodology, and scope of  these indicators see Productivity Commission (2010b). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 33 
 
 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
(i) Registration and documentation requirements 
8. During the period under review the minimum documentation requirements have remained 
unchanged;  they include a full import declarati on (FID), which is required for most imports.2  Import 
permits are also required for certain goods subject to controls or restrictions (sections (v), (vi) and 
(vii) below).  An Integrated Cargo System (ICS), replacing all previous cargo declaration systems, has 
been in place since 2005.  The ICS is a single window for the vast majority of international 
trade-related transactions and pr ovides an interface for industry to connect electronically for 
coordinated customs and quarantine clearance.  So me transactions may require separate contact with 
permit-issuing agencies and some may require th e presentation of the permit in hard copy.  
Opportunities are continuing to be explored on a case-by-case basis for higher volume and higher risk 
permit management processes to facilitate electronic clearance.  Virtually all customs brokers are connected to the Customs electronic systems, while i ndividual importers are also able to connect via 
the Internet and obtain a digital certificate to en able secure communication with the system.  In 
2009/10, 99.3% (99.4% in 2004/05) of Customs entri es in Australia were processed electronically.  
Self-assessment of duty continues to be the norm,  with compliance addressed by post-audit regimes.  
9. The Enhanced Trade Solutions Program, Austra lia's trade facilitation programme, focuses on 
the ongoing preparation for paperless trading and other border-clearance improvements, and the 
development of an entity-based approach to risk management to supplement the existing 
transaction-based risk-assessment processes.
3  Australia first conducted a time release study (TRS) in 
2007, with further studies in 2008 and 2009;  the TRS is based on the World Customs Organization 
(WCO)-endorsed method for measuring import clearan ce performance.  The studies have shown and 
that Customs did not pose a significant impediment to the movement of cargo at the border and that Australia performed favourably against other economies.
4  They also found that ongoing measurement 
of trade facilitation performance contributes to im provement and reform by helping to inform 
decision-making by both government and industry.  The 2009 TRS showed that more than 85% of sea 
and air cargo is now fully risk assessed and unimped ed by the time it is physically available for 
delivery;  in 2007, the arrival to clearance ti mes for sea and air cargo were 1.8 and 0.3 days, 
respectively.  In 2009, Customs re leased the Enhanced Trade Solutions (ETS) 2015 paper, and a work 
programme focused on:  refining the cargo interv ention strategy;  improving risk management 
capabilities;  and continuing work with industry, ot her government agencies, and international forums 
to address business challenges and oppor tunities in the trade environment.5  The estimated 2010/11 
budget to cover trade facilitation activities is about $A 234 million. 
                                                      
 2 For further information see WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 , 1 May 2007, and Customs online information.  
Viewed at:  http://www .cargosupport.gov.au/site/page5954.asp. 
 3 Studies by the OECD show that the thinning of tr ade barriers increases domestic productivity.  In the 
trade facilitation context, Customs is required to deli ver effective border management that, with minimal 
disruption to legitimate trade and travel, prevents illegal movement across the border, raises revenue, and 
provides trade statistics.  For further details on trade facilitation in Australia see Australian Customs and Border 
Protection Service (2009a) and (2007). 
 4 For further details see Australian Customs an d Border Protection Service (2009a) and (2007). 
 5 Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (2009b). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 34 
 
 
(ii) Tariffs 
(a) Features 
10. Since January 2007, Australia's tariff classifi cation system has been based on the HS 2007 
nomenclature.6  It is applied at the HS eight-digit leve l and has 6,008 lines, 116 lines less than the 
previous (HS2002) customs tariff.  Australia con tinues to submit its customs tariff and trade data 
regularly to the WTO Integrated Data Base.7  The customs tariff comprises MFN and several 
preferential rates granted under bilateral and pl urilateral agreements and unilateral concession 
schemes (Chapter II and section (e) below). 
(b) Applied MFN tariff 
11. On average, Australia's applied MFN tariffs rema in relatively low.  On 1 January 2010, tariffs 
on apparel and certain finished textile articles we re reduced to 10% and those on other textiles, 
clothing, and footwear (TCF) goods, and motor vehicles and parts components to 5%.  As a result of these cuts Australia's average applied MFN tariff ra te dropped slightly, from 3.8% (2006) to 3.1% 
(2010) (Table III.1)
8;  tariffs on apparel and certain finished te xtile articles are to be further reduced to 
5% on 1 January 2015.  Around 1.9% of the Govern ment's total tax revenue (1.7% in 2005/06) was 
from customs tariffs in 2008/09 (Table III.5).9 
12. In accordance with the indexation provisions in  section 19 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995 
and section 6A of the Excise Tariff Act 1921, the ra tes of excise duties (section (4)(i)(a)) on certain 
spirits, beer and tobacco were last increased on 2 August 2010.10  
Structure 
13. During the review period, Australia simplified th e structure of its customs tariff.  In 2010, 
around 99.7% (5,992 lines) of the tariff lines were subject to four ad valorem  rates (zero, 4%, 5%, 
10%) down from six rates in 2006;  this ensures a high  degree of transparency of the tariff.  The peak 
                                                      
 6 Changes included mainly:  restructuring of tariff classifications for certain wood and paper products, 
certain automotive parts, information technology and consumer electronic  products to reflect changes in 
technology and trade;  cons olidating three headings for toys into a single heading, with fewer subheadings, to 
facilitate trade;  deleting tariff classifications in ar ound 200 six-digit subheadings due to low trade volumes 
across a broad range of commodities, including foods, chem icals, paper products, textile, clothing and footwear 
products, metals and machinery;  and inserting and splitting subheadings.  As a result there was, inter alia,  a rise 
of the tariff rate on plywood veneered panels consisting of layers of bamboo and certain tropical woods from duty free to 5% (Australian Customs Service online in formation.  Viewed at:  http://www.customs.gov. 
au/webdata/resources/files/hs2007_f aqs.pdf, and http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/HS2007_ 
ImpSeminar.ppt [25 March 2010]).  
7 WTO document G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.32, 6 October 2010. 
 8 As the calculation of import duty in Australia is based on the f.o.b. value, the actual tariff imposed is 
lower than in economies that calculate duty on the c.i.f. value. 
 9 Customs duties constituted around 99.8% of taxes on international trade;  export fees and charges on 
selected agricultural products acco unted for the remaining 0.2%. 
 10 The new rates of customs and excise duty listed are calculated by multiplying the previous rates by 
an indexation factor, which is calcu lated by dividing the most recent CP I number by the previous highest 
December or June Quarter number occurring after Dece mber 1983.  Accordingly,  the December 2009 index 
number (169.5) has been divided by the June 2009 index number (167.0) to establish an indexation factor of 
1.015.  As this factor is more than one, rates of customs and excise duty have been increased by the application 
of this factor (Australian Customs Notice No. 2010/05, 2 February 2010.  Viewed at:  http://www.customs.gov. 
au/webdata/resources/files/ACN_ 2010-05.pdf [20 April 2010]). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 35 
 
 
ad valorem  rate dropped from 17.5% to 10%.  Some 46.2% of tariff lines now carry a zero rate 
(Table III.I, Chart III.1), nearly half (49.8%) are subj ect to a rate of 5%, and 3.7% are at 10% (7.5% in 
2006). 
Table III.1 
Tariff structure, 2002, 2006, and 2010 
(%) 
  MFN applied 
    2002 2006 2010 Final bounda 
1. Bound tariff lines (% of all tariff lines) 96.7 96.7 96.5 96.5 
2. Simple average rate 4.5 3.8 3.1 10.1 
 Agricultural products (HS01-24) 1.4 1.4 1.4 3.6 
 Industrial products (HS25-97) 5.0 4.2 3.4 11.2 
 WTO agricultural products 1.5 1.5 1.6 4.1 
 WTO non-agricultural products 5.0 4.1 3.3 11.2 
 Textiles and clothi ng 12.4 12.1 5.4 24.0 
 Passenger motor vehicles 57.6 55.1 41.7 23.0 
 (excluding AVEs of non- ad valorem  rates) 8.2 6.6 5.0 23.0 
 ISIC 1 - Agriculture, hunting, and fishing 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.3 
 ISIC 2 – Mining 0.4 0.4 0.5 2.2 
 ISIC 3 – Manufacturing 4.8 4.1 3.3 10.8 
 Manufacturing excluding food processing 5.2 4.3 3.4 11.5 
 First stage of processing 0.5 0.5 0.4 1.5 
 Semi-processed products 4.2 3.5 2.9 10.1 
 Fully processed products 5.5 4.6 3.7 11.8 
3. Domestic tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)b 11.4 4.1 3.9 5.6 
4. International tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)c 4.1 4.1 0.2 13.7 
5. Overall standard deviation of tariff rates 9.9 8.9 6.5 10.9 
6. Coefficient of variation of  tariff rates 2.2 2.3 2.1 1.1 
7. Duty-free tariff lines (% of all tariff lines) 47.4 47.6 46.2 19.8 
8. Non- ad valorem  tariffs (% of all tariff lines) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 
9. Nuisance applied rates (% of all tariff lines)d 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 
a Based on 2010 tariff schedule.  Implementa tion of final bound rates was reached in 2000.  Calculations are based on 5,796 bou nd 
tariff lines, of which 5,771 are fully bound and 25 are partially bound. 
b Domestic tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding three times the overall simple average applied rate. 
c International tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding 15%. 
d Nuisance rates are those greater than zero, but less than or equal to 2%. 
Note: 2002 and 2006 tariffs are based on HS02 nomenclature consisti ng, respectivley, of 6,101 and 6,124 tariff lines;  the 2010  tariff is 
based on HS07 nomenclature consisting of 6,008 tariff lines.  Calculations incl ude AVEs provided by the authorities for 
non-ad valorem  rates. 
Source : WTO Secretariat calculations , based on data provided by the Australian authorities. 
14. A few (0.3%) tariff lines remain subject to non- ad valorem  rates, which tend to conceal 
relatively high tariff rates.  These involve a specifi c rate of $A 1.22/kg applied to five tariff lines 
(cheese and curd), an alternate rate of 5% or $A 0.45/kg, whichever is lower, applied to four tariff 
lines (fruit juices), and a compound rate of 5% (10%  in 2006) plus $A 12,0 00 per unit applied to 
eight items (used or second-hand vehicles), which has rarely been applied since 2006.11  Average 
                                                      
 11 Item 59 of Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff allows for the waiving of the $A 12,000 duty 
component on second-hand cars, provided the Department of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional 
Development has issued a Vehicle Import Approval (VIA).  A vehicle must have a VIA to be imported.   
Vehicles falling under this category include those imported under the Registered Automotive Workshop Scheme WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 36 
 
 
ad valorem equivalents (AVEs) for the period under revi ew ranged from 10.2% to 27.1% for specific 
rates, up to 5% for alternate rates, and from 89.5% to 215.4% for compound rates (including the 5 percentage points ad valorem  component).
12  These 13 AVEs are the highest applied tariff rates in 
place. 
3.9%7.5%
2.2%38.5%47.6%
0.2%3.7% 49.8%
0.2%46.2.%
05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,500
Duty free 4% 5% 7.5% 10% 17.5%
Percentages denote the share of total lines.  Calculations exclude specific rates and include the ad valorem  part of 
alternate and compound rates.  Figures for 2006 are based on HS02 nomenclature, and for 2010 on HS07.  Totals do not add to 100% due to the exclusion of specific rates, representing 0.1%, for both years.
WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data  provided by the Australian authorities.MFN 2006
MFN 2010Number of tariff linesChart III.1
Distribution of MFN tariff rates, 2006 and 2010
Tariff rates
Note:
Source : 
Tariff dispersion and escalation 
15. Despite a low overall average tariff rate and la rge share of duty-free items, tariff peaks in 
some sectors remain a potential distortion and thus a source of inefficiency.  In particular, while 
agriculture continues to face relatively low tariff ra tes (1.6%, under the WTO definition of agriculture, 
Table III.1), average rates for non-agriculture ite ms, notably textiles and clothing (5.4%) and 
passenger motor vehicles (PMVs)13 remain significantly higher despite recent unilateral reductions, 
thus reflecting sensitivities in these sectors.  Domestic  "tariff peaks" affect 3.9% of tariff lines (3.7% 
excluding AVEs);  their share has decreased since 2006. 
                                                                                                                                                                     
(RAWS), which caters for specialist and enthusiast used imported vehicles not available in Australia in full 
volumes by mainstream manufacturers ( Australian Customs and Border Protection Services online information .  
Viewed at:  http://www.customs .gov.au/site/page4371.asp#2ndHandV echicle [2 December 2010]). 
 12 The ad valorem  equivalents (AVEs) are computed on the basis of unit values for imports of the items 
concerned over the period 2006-08.   
 13 The rate on new cars is 5%, while the rate rises to 52.7% when duties on used cars form part of the 
calculation. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 37 
 
 
16. Overall, the tariff shows a tendency to escalate, with the average for unprocessed, 
semi-processed, and fully processed goods rising from 0.4% to 2.9% and 3.7% (Table III.1).  The 
outcome is that the level of effective protection increases as goods undergo further processing.14  The 
textiles and clothing sector shows more significant tariff escalation (Chart III.2);  since 2006, the 
average tariff for fully processed  textiles and clothing and leather products has declined from 10.4% 
to 6.3% but remains high compared with other produ ct categories, which range from 2.5% to 3.8%.  
The average tariff for semi-processed products has fall en from 3.5% to 2.9% during the period.  Tariff 
escalation is a potential impediment to the efficien t allocation of resources, it also constitutes an 
obstacle to local processing of primary and semi -finished goods produced in exporting countries, 
thereby impeding the industrialization of these deve loping countries whose exports are not eligible to 
preferential duty-free access to Australia's market.  
n.a.n.a.
012345678
Food, beverages
and tobaccoTextiles and
leatherWood and
furniturePaper printing
and publishingChemicals Non-metallic
mineral
productsBasic metals Fabricated
metal productsand machineryOther
manufacturingPer centChart III.2
Tariff escalation by 2-digit ISIC industry, 2010
Average applied rate in manufacturing
(3.3%)First stage of processing Semi-processed Fully processed
Not applicable.
Calculations include AVEs for non- ad valorem rates, provided by the authorities.
WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data  provided by the Australian authorities.n.a.
Note:
Source :
 
(c) Bound tariff 
17. Australia's tariff Schedule of Concessions has remained based on the Harmonized Commodity 
Description and Coding System 2002 but has not been certified (as at November 2010) (see below).  
According to its HS07 version supplied by the Austra lian authorities, 96.5% (96.7% in HS02 version) 
of tariff lines are bound;  bindings cover 100% of agricultural tariff lines and 96.2% of 
                                                      
 14 The effective rate of protection (ERP) measures the protection provided by the entire structure of 
tariffs, taking into account those levied on inputs as well as those on outputs.  It is defined as ERP = (V D – 
VW)/V W, where V D is the value added in the given sector at domestic prices, which includes tariffs, and V W is 
value added at world prices.  If the nominal tariff on the final product is t, the share of each imported input i in 
the total value of the final product is ai, and the nominal tariff on each imported input is ti, then the effective rate 
of protection can be written as:  ERP = ( t - Σaiti)/(1 - Σai).  Thus, if  t = 5%, ti  = 2.5% for all inputs, and Σai = 
0.6, the ERP is nearly 8.75%.   WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 38 
 
 
non-agricultural products (WTO defi nitions);  96% (95.9% in HS02 version) of the non-agricultural 
products are fully bound.15  Bound rates range from zero to 29% (processed potatoes) for agriculture, 
and from zero to 55% (clothing) for non-agricultu ral products.  Australia's bound rates currently 
exceed applied MFN rates by nearly seven percentage  points (Chart III.3);  maximum gaps of up to 
55 percentage points affect clothing items.  Diffe rences between bound and a pplied rates may provide 
scope to raise applied tariffs, especially in sensitive sectors, although this has not been the case during 
the period under review.  
0.02.55.07.510.012.515.017.520.022.525.0
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Calculations include AVEs for non- ad valorem  rates, provided by the authorities.  
Sections 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 are not fully bound.
WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the Australian authorities.Per centChart III.3                 
Average applied MFN and bound tariff rates, by HS section, 2006 and 2010
Note:
Source :01   Live animals & products        
02   Vegetable products03   Fats & oils      04   Prepared food, etc.05   Mineral products06   Chemicals & products07   Plastic & rubber
08   Hides & skins09   Wood & articles10   Pulp, paper, etc.11   Textiles & articles12   Footwear, headgear13   Articles of stones
14   Precious stones, etc.15   Base metals and products16   Machinery17   Transport equipment18   Precision instruments19   Arms & ammunition
20   Miscellaneous manuf.21   Works of art, etc.MFN 2006
MFN 2010 
Bound
Average applied rate 
2010  (3.2%)Average applied rate
 2006  (3.8%)Average bound rate
(10.1%)
 
18. Australia has remained covered by waiver s from Article II of GATT 1994 to implement 
domestically the HS2002 (since 2002) and HS2007 (since December 2006) changes, pending incorporation of such changes into its Schedule of Concessions.
16  By the time of completion of this 
report, neither the HS96 nor the HS2002 changes to Au stralia's WTO Schedule I had been certified.  
In a communication to the Committee on Market A ccess on 26 May 2010, Australia indicated that the 
domestic certification process of its HS02 changes was still ongoing and was to be completed as soon 
as possible.17  Concerning the process of incorpora ting HS07 changes to its WTO Schedule of 
                                                      
 15 The 212 eight-digit HS07 unbound lines include yarns, textiles, clothing, leather, rubber products, 
tools/articles of base metals, products of iron and st eel, ceramic products, glassw are, machinery, transport 
equipment, photographic equipment, and other electrical components and equipment. 
 16 WTO documents WT/L/786,  21 December 2009, WT/L/787,  21 December 2009, and 
G/MA/TAR/RS/154, 12 February 2010.  
17 WTO document G/MA/M/51, 26 May 2010. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 39 
 
 
Concessions, Australia was one of the two Members th at had submitted the relevant files within the 
agreed original deadline in 2007.  No progress has been made in any Member's work in this area 
because of its linkage with the ongoing NAMA negotiations.18 
(d) Tariff-rate quotas 
19. Tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) involving specific rate s apply to most types of cheese and curd 
imports19;  the TRQ on unmanufactured tobacco has never been implemented as the customs duty rate 
for this item is set at zero.  The out-of-quota (a bove 11,500 tonnes) and in-quota rates for cheese 
remain at $A 1,220 per tonne and $A 96 per tonn e, respectively.  Since 1995, quota allocation has 
been based on historical import performance within  the quota for the previous 23 months (excluding 
quota transfers);  the quota may be accorded upon application to the Customs.  New importers are 
able to obtain an allocation only on transfer from an existing holder of a tariff quota share.  Between 
2003/04 and 2005/06, tariff quota utilization varied from 92.4% to 97.4% but from 2006/07 to 
2008/09 its fill in ratio exceeded 99%20;  this is indicative of strong demand for cheese and curd as 
well as minimal impediments to accessing the quota.  
20. Future cheese and curd import arrangements are to  be considered in the context of the Doha 
Round negotiations on agriculture.  Preferential im ports from LDCs, partne rs covered by regional 
trade agreements (New Zealand, Singapore, Thaila nd, the United States, Chile, and ASEAN), and the 
South Pacific Forum island countries are exempt from this TRQ (see below).  Developing countries are subject to a reduced out-of quota tariff for the lin es covered by the cheese and curd tariff quota, at 
$A 1,220 per tonne less 5%. 
(e) Tariff preferences 
21. Australia maintains numerous unilateral pr eferential and regional trade agreements 
(Chapter II).  Duty- and TRQ-free access in partic ular is provided for goo ds originating in the 
50 LDCs, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, and Si ngapore.  However, bila teral tariff reductions 
resulting from recently signed RTAs lead to lower tariffs for some developed countries than those 
granted to around 90 developing countries (or econom ies) under Australia's Generalized System of 
Preferences (GSP) (Table III.2).  
Table III.2 
Summary analysis of preferential tariffs, 2010 
(Number and %)  
   Total  WTO agriculture  WTO non-agriculture 
  Number of 
preferential 
linesa  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%)  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%)  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%) 
MFN   3.1 53.8  1.6 29.1  3.3 57.3 
Canada (CANATA) 512  2.7 46.1  1.4 26.6  2.9 49.0 
Chile (ACIFTA) 2,672  0.6 9.2  0.0 0.3  0.7 10.5 
Malaysia (MATA) 801  2.8 50.7  1.3 26.2  3.1 54.2 
New Zealand (ANCZERT) 3,233  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0 
Papua New Guinea (PATCRA) 3,233  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0 
Singapore (SAFTA) 3,233  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0 
Thailand (TAFTA) 3,232  0.2 3.7  0.0 0.0  0.2 4.3 
United States (AUSFTA) 3,233  0.7 9.9  0.0 0.0  0.8 11.4 
SPARTECAb 3,207  0.2 0.1  0.0 0.0  0.2 0.2 
Table III.2 (cont'd) 
                                                      
 18 WTO document G/MA/M/50, 22 October 2009. 
 19 Camembert, brie, roquefort, stilton, and goat-milk cheeses are exempt from the quota scheme.   
 20 WTO documents G/AG/N/AUS/66, 28 August 2007, and G/AG/N/AUS/78, 13 August 2010. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 40 
 
 
   Total  WTO agriculture  WTO non-agriculture 
  Number of 
preferential 
linesa  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%)  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%)  Average 
(%) Dutiable 
rates (%) 
ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand FTA    
       
 Brunei Darussalam 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Burma 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Cambodia 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Laos 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 New Zealand 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Philippines 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Singapore 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Viet Nam 3,029  0.3 3.6  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.1 
 Indonesia 3,004  0.3 4.0  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.6 
 Malaysia 3,024  0.3 3.7  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.2 
 Thailand 3,004  0.3 4.0  0.0 0.3  0.4 4.6 
GSPc 3,129  0.5 5.6  0.1 0.7  0.5 6.3 
GSPd 797  2.8 50.8  1.3 26.2  3.1 54.3 
DCTe 176  3.0 51.2  1.4 26.2  3.2 54.8 
LDCs 3,233  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0  0.0 0.0 
a The number of preferential lines includes only lines on which th e rates are lower than the corresponding MFN applied rate.  T he 
2010 MFN tariff consists of 6,008 tariff lines of which 2,775 lines are duty free. 
b Forum Islands - South Pacific Regional Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement. 
c GSP for New Caledonia, Northern Mariana Islands, Wallis and Fut una Islands, Tokelau, Pitcairn, Namibia, Palau, Guam, French 
Polynesia, Botswana, and American Samoa. 
d GSP for around 90 developing countries. 
e Republic of Korea, Chinese Taipei, and Hong Kong, China. 
Source :  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on inform ation provided by the Australian authorities. 
(f) Duty concession schemes 
22. Australia has a number of tariff concession sch emes to support local industry.  Total duty 
forgone through these schemes has risen considerably si nce the previous Review (Table III.3);  this is 
due mainly to an increase in both the use of the Tariff Concession Scheme (TCS) and imports, 
including those of electronic consumable goods, and machinery destined for use by the mining sector.  
The drop in 2009/10, which was due to the global fina ncial crisis, should be re versed by the broader 
use of these concessions in a few very large projects. 
Table III.3 
Duty forgone through tariff concession arrangements, 2005-10 
($A million) 
Industry assistance measure 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 
Tariff Concession Scheme 1,073.5 1,300.1 1,456.8 1,624.7 1,471.5 
Textile Clothing and Footwear Po licy By-Law 13.5 13.8 11.9 11.5 7.3 
TRADEX 65.5 77.6 80.0 68.0 51.2 
Enhanced Project By-Law 33.2 64.6 53.6 131.2 132.9 
Cheese and Curd Quota Scheme 12.6 13.1 13.0 12.9 12.6 
Certain Inputs to Manufacture 2.6 2.1 5.1 2.2 2.0 
Other concessions 146.7 124.5 171.6 151.3 147.1 
Total 1,346.8 1,550.8 1,765.0 1,966.1 1,824.7 
Source: Data provided by the Australian authorities. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 41 
 
 
Duty deferral – customs warehouses 
23. The duty deferral facility allows imported goods to be stored in a customs licensed 
warehouse.  These goods (referred to as "under bond ") are under Customs control until the owner is 
ready to sell them for domestic consumption and pay the duty, or export them.21 
Tariff concessions 
24. Minor administrative changes (e.g. guidelines and application form) have been made to the 
TCS since 2007 to, inter alia,  better reflect the obligations of the applicants;  the TCS legislation and 
policy objectives remain unchanged.  In 2009, it wa s agreed to pursue a ra nge of additional reforms 
including tighter guidelines for the TCS.  Austra lia's TCS is available for imports for which 
substitutable goods were not produced in Austra lia at the time a Tariff Concession Order (TCO) 
application was lodged.22  Products that do not qualify for a TC O include foodstuffs, most textiles and 
clothing, certain motor vehicles and parts, jewellery, and furniture, as local industry produces these goods.  A local manufacturer may object to the granting of a TCO and may request revocation of an 
existing TCO.  A total of 431 TCOs were revoke d between January 2007 and June 2010 upon proof 
that the Australian-made goods concerned could be  substituted for imported goods;  in 2009/10, the 
most common types of goods covered by revoke d TCOs were steel products, plastics products, 
electrical, shelters and pre-fabricated buildings .  In June 2010, there were 13,500 active TCOs.  
25. In March 2010, the authorities initiated work on the rationalization and simplification of 
Schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995, which  provides tariff concessions for over 90 items 
covering a range of goods and industry sectors as well as circumstances;  in November 2010, work 
was still in progress.
23  The key objectives for tariff concession rationalization are:  to ensure that 
tariff concession arrangements reflect current mark et practices and government policy;  to remove 
obsolete items;  to reduce the regulatory burden on business and, more generally, to address the 
"significant monitoring and compliance costs for busin esses".  Reportedly, the list of concessions has 
grown over many years, becoming increasingly comp lex to administer and difficult for users to 
understand.  Some concessions have been in pl ace since 1901;  many items were introduced when 
general tariff rates were much higher than curre nt rates.  There are 14 government agencies with 
policy responsibility for various items.  Complex ities create burdens on business with costs being 
passed on to consumers;  they may also r esult in inappropriate use of concessions.   
Other duty concession schemes 
26. Other duty reduction or exemption arrangement s include:  the Enhanced Project By-Law 
Scheme (EPBS), the Automotive Competitiveness Invest ment Scheme (ACIS), the textiles, clothing 
and footwear policy by-laws, the Trade and Export Concession Scheme (TRADEX) (section (3)(iv)(b)), the Certain Inputs to Manufact ure (CIM) programme (section (3)(iv)(d)), and the 
Space Concession programme.
24  
                                                      
 21 Australian Customs factsheet.  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/ 
fscustomswarehousedeferduty.pdf [20 April 2010]. 
 22 In respect of goods that are the subject of a TC O application or of a TCO, substitutable goods are 
Australian-made goods that have a use that corresponds with the use (including a design use) of the goods that 
are the subject of the application or of the TC O (Australian Customs factsheet.  Viewed at:  
http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resourc es/files/commer01.pdf [20 April 2010]). 
 23 Department of Finance and Deregulation (undated). 
 24 For further details on these schemes, see WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007, as 
well as AusIndustry online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.ausindustry.gov.au/ImportandExport/ 
Pages/home.aspx and http://www.ausindustry.gov.a u/Manufacturing/Pages/home.aspx [20 April 2010]. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 42 
 
 
27. The EPBS provides duty-free entry for eligible goods (capital equipment and machinery) for 
projects in agriculture, food processing, food pack aging, manufacturing, mining, resource processing, 
gas supply, power supply, and water supply indust ries.  These goods must not be produced in 
Australia, or the imports need to be more advan ced, more efficient or more productive than those 
made in Australia.  Total expend iture on capital goods for eligible projects must be no less than 
$A 10 million.  In addition, an EPBS applicant mu st develop and implement an Australian Industry 
Participation plan (AIP), which outlines how the a pplicant will provide "full", "fair", and "reasonable" 
opportunity for Australian industry to participate in the project; in this way, Australian industry is 
provided the same opportunities as gl obal suppliers in all aspects of the project, it is treated on an 
equal and transparent basis, and tenders are not structured in a way that might rule out the Australian 
industry.25  The authorities indicated that these requirements are not compulsory.  Since 2006, 
approximately 200 EPBS AIP plans have been prepared and the total tariff concession benefit from the EPBS amounted to around $A 380 million.   
28. Under the ACIS, scheduled to end on 31 December 2010, import duty credits are issued 
quarterly to eligible participants, to encourag e new investment and innovation in the automotive 
industry.  These credits can be used to discharge  customs duty on subsequent eligible automotive 
imports;  the credits can also be sold or transfe rred.  Although most textiles, clothing, footwear, and 
headwear products are exempted from the tariff concession system, some can be imported duty free under various by-laws (Table III.3).   
(iii) Other charges affecting imports 
29. In addition to fees for cargo handling, cust oms clearance, and post-clearance compliance 
activities, last amended in 2006, imported and domestic goods are subject to indirect taxes 
(section (4)(i)(a)).  Customs fees and charges rema in set on a cost-recovery basis rather than on 
import values.  Fees relating to quarantine pro cesses were last amended in July 2009.   
(iv) Customs valuation and rules of origin 
(a) Customs valuation 
30. Australia has implemented the GATT/WTO Ag reement on Customs Valuation since 1981.  
Goods are valued under nine different methods of valuation in a sequence established in the domestic 
legislation
26;  the most common is the transaction value method, which is used for around 98% of 
imports.  Australian valuation legislation allows fo r the inclusion of royalties and commissions in line 
with requirements under Article 8 of the WTO Agre ement, and foreign inland freight and foreign 
inland insurance in the dutiable value of goods;  the au thorities consider that this practice is permitted 
under the WTO Agreement.  The total understa ted revenue (under-invoicing) for 2009/10 was 
$A 128.9 million.  
(b) Rules of origin  
31. Australia's approach to non-preferential rul es of origin (ROOs) remains unchanged since its 
last Review;  on the other hand, changes were made to preferential ROOs in its bilateral and regional 
free-trade agreements (FTAs).  The most common rules in these FTAs are those of:  wholly obtained;  
change in tariff classification (CTC);  regional value content (RVC);  and the process rule 
                                                      
 25 AusIndustry (2010). 
 26 These valuation methods are:  the transaction value;  the identical goods value;  the similar goods 
value;  the deductive goods value (consisting of the contemporary sales, later sales, and derived sales methods);  the computed goods value;  and the fall-back method. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 43 
 
 
(chemicals).27  The ROOs in Australia's bilateral FTA with  Singapore are based on an RVC measure, 
while the ROOs in its FTAs with New Zealand, th e United States, Thailand, and Chile are essentially 
based on the CTC methodology, reinforced and enha nced where necessary with  RVC and process rule 
requirements or options.  In the regional FTA with ASEAN and New Zealand, "alternative and 
co-equal" product-specific rules exist for most tariff lines, offering exporters the choice of a 
CTC-based rule or an RVC-based equivalent.  Around 83% of tariff lines are covered by these "alternative and co-equal" rules, while approximate ly 11% of lines offer only one pathway – either a 
CTC-based or RVC rule.  The remaining lines ar e covered by wholly obtained requirements for 
agricultural goods and special rules for waste a nd scrap goods.  Other provi sions relating to ROOs 
include final process of manufacture requirements, rules governing consignment, and de minimis 
provisions.  The objective of the different types of ROOs is to properly limit preferential rates of duty 
to goods that either wholly originate in the pr eference-receiving country, or that have undergone 
substantial transformation in that country. 
(v) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing 
32. Import prohibitions or restricti ons may be applied for various reasons, including public health 
or safety concerns, animal and plant life, enviro nmental conservation, security, and international 
commitments.  No automatic import licensing has been imposed.  Non-automatic licensing 
requirements have been in place to enforce import prohi bitions, restrictions, and controls (Table III.4);  
non-automatic import permits may be given on an ad-hoc or defined- period basis.  Prohibition or 
stringent quarantine/permit/inspection procedures ( section (vii)(b)) currently apply on more than 
150 agricultural/livestock products (e.g. cereals, fres h fruit, vegetables, meat, poultry products) and 
other items (e.g. used machinery) considered to have the potential to introduce contamination or 
disease.  Australia's last submission to the WT O of its Replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures was in October 2006
28;  in November 2010, Australia was in the process of 
developing a revised submission to reflect recent limited changes. 
Table III.4 
Main import prohibitions, restrictions, and controls, 2010 
Goods Reason Policy agenc y/permit issuing agency 
Prohibited    
Dogs - dangerous breeds, and related advertising 
matter Public health or safety concerns  
Suicide devices Community protection   
Diamonds - from Côte d'Ivoire  International commitment   
Restricted   
Anabolic and androgenic substances  and ketamine Public health or safety concer ns Department of Health and Ageing, the Office 
of Chemical Safety and Environmental 
Health 
Asbestos Public health or safety concerns  National Occupational Health and Safety 
Commission 
Therapeutic substances and goods (antibiotics) Public health or  safety concerns Therapeutic Goods Association, Department 
of Health and Ageing, the Office of Chemical 
Safety and Environmental Health 
ANZAC, and related advertising materials National symbol Depa rtment for Veterans' Affairs 
Australian flag and coats of arms National symbol  Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet;  
Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Table III.4 (cont'd)
                                                      
 27 For further details on these rules, see WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007, and 
Australian Customs and Border Protection, "Service Prac tice Statement", 27 February 2009.  Viewed at:  
http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata /resources/files/PS200913-Rules_Of_Origin.pdf [21 April 2010]. 
 28 WTO document  G/LIC/N/3/AUS/3, 23 October 2006. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 44 
 
 
Goods Reason Policy agenc y/permit issuing agency 
Hazardous and health-related goods (glucomannan in 
tablet form, seat-belt accessories, autotrend sun filters, 
victim toys, smokeless tobacco products, diveman underwater breathing apparatus, "quickie" line release 
system, gas masks contai ning asbestos, cigarette 
lighters) Public health or safety concerns  Australian Competition and Consumer 
Commission 
Cat and dog fur products Animal welfare Au stralian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Glazed ceramic warea Public health or safety concerns Au stralian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoise s) Environmental conservation Depart ment of the Environment, Water, 
Heritage and the Arts 
Chemical weapons  In ternational commitment 
(Convention on the Prohibition 
of the Development, Production, 
Stockpiling and Use of Chemical 
Weapons and their Destruction 
(CWC)) Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation 
Office in the Department of Foreign Affairs 
and Trade 
Cosmetics – toxic materials Public health or safety  concerns Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Credit cards – counterfeit  Community  protection Australian Federal Police 
Crowd control equipment Community protecti on Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Papua New Guinea cultural items International comm itments Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Diamonds – Kimberley Process International commitm ents Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
Dog collars – electronic and protrusion Animal we lfare Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry 
Drugs and narcotics Public health or safety concerns, 
International commitments 
(Single Convention on Narcotic 
Drugs 1961, the Convention on 
Psychotropic Substances 1971, and the Convention Against 
Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs 
and Psychotropic Substances 
1988) Department of Health and Ageing, the Office 
of Chemical Safety and Environmental 
Health 
Endangered species of wild fauna and flora International commitment 
(Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)) Department of the Environment, Water, 
Heritage and the Arts 
Erasers resembling food in scent or appearance Public health or safety concerns Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Explosives, plastic  Community protection Attorney-General's Department 
Fish/toothfish Environmental conservation Au stralian Fisheries Ma nagement Authority 
Fly swatters/mosquito bats – electronic  Public health or safety concerns Australian Competition and Consumer 
Commission 
Marked fuels (duty-free fuel marked to signify that it is 
not for use in internal combustion engines) Domestic regulation Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Growth hormones and substances of human or animal origin Public health or safety concerns Therapeutic Goods Administration, 
Department of Health and Ageing 
Hazardous waste International commitments 
(Basel Convention, OECD Council Decision C(92)39) Department of the Environment, Water, 
Heritage and the Arts 
Incandescent lamps Energy saving Depart ment of Climate Change and Energy 
Efficiency 
Certain industrial chemicals Public  health or safety concerns, 
environmental conservation Department of the Environment, Water, 
Heritage and the Arts 
Kava Public health or safety concerns Therapeutic Goods Administration, 
Department of Health and Ageing, the Office 
of Chemical Safety and Environmental 
Health 
Table III.4 (cont'd)Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 45 
 
 
Goods Reason Policy agenc y/permit issuing agency 
Knives and daggers Community protection Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Laser pointers Community protection Aust ralian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Logs and timber products – from Li beria International commitment (UN 
Security Council Resolutions) Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 
Goods coated with or c ontaining unsuitable mineral 
compounds (toys, cosmetics, money boxes, pencils) Public health or safety concerns Au stralian Customs and Border Protection 
Service 
Ozone-depleting substances Environmental 
conservation/International 
commitment (Ozone Protection 
and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act 1989) Department of the Environment, Water, 
Heritage and the Arts 
Organochlorine chemicals (pesticides) P ublic health or safety concerns, 
environmental conservation Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry 
Objectionable material Community prot ection Attorney General's Department 
Radioactive substances Community protection, 
international commitments Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear 
Safety Agency;  Depart ment of Health and 
Ageing 
Steroids Public health or safety concerns Therapeutic Goods Administration, 
Department for Health and Ageing 
Tablet presses Public health or safety concerns Attorney-General's Department 
Therapeutic drugs and substances Public health or safety concerns Therapeutic Goods Administration, 
Department of Health and Ageing 
Tobacco leaf Domestic regulation Australian Taxation Office 
Viable material for human embryo clone s Public health and safety concerns National Health and Medical Research 
Council, Department of Health and Ageing 
Weapons, firearms, and parts of firearms Community protection Australian Customs and Border Protection 
Service, Firearms and Weapons Section 
Woolpacks and woolpack caps Domestic regulati on Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry 
a No permit is needed for importation.  However, a testing cer tificate is required from the Australian Government Analytical 
Laboratory or a testing agency a pproved by the National Association of Testing Authorities Australia.  
Source:  Customs online information.  Viewed at:  http ://www.customs.gov.au/site/page4369.asp [14 July 2010]. 
33. Since 12 January 2009, a Post Import Permission Scheme has allowed permission to be 
granted after importation, at the discretion of Customs, in respect of certain classes of controlled goods including specific drugs, chemicals, consumer  items, firearms and knives, asbestos products, 
and items bearing Australian national symbols.  If th e post import permission is not sought or it is not 
granted within 30 days of application, then Customs seize the goods in question.
29  The system allows 
flexibility to Customs in dealing with importers wh o were genuinely unaware of the need for, or 
unable to obtain import permission prior to importation. 
(vi) Contingency measures 
(a) Anti-dumping and countervailing measures 
34. No changes have been made to the legislativ e, institutional or procedural framework on anti-
dumping and countervailing measures during the review period30;  these measures continue to be 
subject to a five-year sunset clause, but their dura tion may be extended.  Investigations are conducted 
by Customs;  and parties may appeal Customs decisions.  In light of the unique convergence in business practices and bilateral application of competition legislation between Australia and 
New Zealand, imports from New Zealand cove red by the ANZCERTA remain excluded from 
                                                     
 
29 Australian Customs Notice No. 2009/03, 16 January 2009.  Viewed at: http://www.customs.gov.au/ 
webdata/resources/notices/acn 0903.pdf [20 April 2010]. 
 30 For further details on these matters, see WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 46 
 
 
anti-dumping actions and are dealt with under competition laws31;  competition legislation has never 
been exercised in this regard.  
35. With 221 cases initiated between 1995 and 2010, Au stralia was one of the world's major user 
of anti-dumping measures (sixth in 2008).32  Between 1 July 2007 and 31 October 2010, Australia 
initiated 25 anti-dumping investigations;  30% con cerned items originating in China.  As of 
October 2010, 21 anti-dumping measures were in fo rce on 18 products, mainly pineapple fruit 
(5 cases), several steel items (3 cases), and polyvinyl chloride (2 cases).  Nine of these measures were 
extensions of existing measures beyond their five-year  sunset period.  Action affected mostly products 
originating in Asia (15, mainly China (7) a nd Thailand (3)), but also the EU (3) and the 
United States (2).33  Between 2006 and October 2010, Au stralia initiated six countervailing 
investigations;  these included brandy from France, mobile garbage bins from Thailand, toilet paper, 
hollow structural sections and aluminium extr usions from China, and biodiesel from the 
United States.  Definitive countervailing duties we re levied on certain brandy from France and 
aluminium extrusions from China.  At end-Oc tober 2010, the counterva iling investigation on 
biodiesel from the United States was still under way.34  
36. A 2009 Productivity Commission report recommended retaining the anti-dumping and 
countervailing system, on the basis that it provides leve rage for broader trade reforms.  However, it, 
inter alia,  notes that the current system has a number of significant deficiencies which, if not 
addressed, will continue to impose a net cost on the economy.35  The Commonwealth Government's 
response to the review will be consid ered in the 2011/12 Budget process. 
(b) Safeguards 
37. Australia has no specific legislation for the imposition of safeguard measures and there has 
been no development in this regard during the review period.36  The Productivity Commission 
remains the investigating authority.  Following consideration by the Australian Government, the 
Treasurer may refer matters to the Productivity Co mmission for inquiry.  An investigation on 
increased imports of frozen pig meat was initiated in  October 2007 and was terminated in April 2008 
without the adoption of any safeguard measures.37  
38. Bilateral free-trade agreements (such as, fo r example, the Thailand-Australia Free Trade 
Agreement) may have additional safeguard pro cesses covering preferential trade where the injury 
caused by increased imports is due to the tari ff reductions under the particular FTA;  these 
                                                      
 31 Under the ANZCERTA, both countries have precl uded anti-dumping action against goods that are 
the produce or manufacture of the other.  However, actions may be taken in cases of alleged dumping by a 
third country whose exports were dumped into Australia or  New Zealand and are causing or threatening to cause 
material injury to industry.  
32 WTO online information.  Viewed at:  http ://www.wto.org/english/trat op_e/adp_e/adp_e.htm 
[23 April 2010]. 
 33 WTO document G/ADP/N/195/AUS, 23 March 2010. 
 34 WTO online information.  Viewed at:  http ://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/scm_e.htm 
[23 April 2010];  and WTO document G/SCM/N/203/AUS, 24 March 2010.  
35 The Productivity Commission's concerns with the curre nt system focus on:  th e lack of consideration 
of wider impacts;  maintaining the currency of measures ;  extensions of measures;  appeal arrangements;  
alignment of the subsidies provisions with the Subsid ies and Countervailing Agreement;  and transparency in 
the decision-making process and outcomes (Productivity Commission, 2009b). 
 36 Procedures for safeguard investigations are contained in Gazette  No. S297 of 25 June 1998.  Also see 
WTO documents G/SG/N/1/AUS/2, 2 July 1998, an d G/SG/N/1/AUS/2/Suppl.1, 16 December 2005. 
 37 WTO document G/SG/N/9/AUS/2, 10 April 2008. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 47 
 
 
"transitional safeguards" or "bilateral safeguards" are not global safeguards.38  The process for these 
safeguards is essentially the same as for WTO safegua rds;  no safeguards of this type were used 
during the review period.   No safeguard measures apply to pr oducts originating from Singapore, 
New Zealand, Thailand, the United States or fro m developing country WTO Members, provided 
certain conditions are met.39   
(vii) Standards and other technical requirements 
(a) Standards, testing, and certification 
39. Under the Commonwealth system, the legislative, executive, and judicial powers relating to 
technical regulations (mandatory standards) remain shared between the Commonwealth (the 
Australian Central Government) and the c onstituent state and territory governments.40  A 1992 
Commonwealth/State Agreement on Mutual Recognition allows a product that is in conformity with 
requirements of at least one State or Territory (i.e . legally saleable) to be sold throughout Australia.41  
While this broad standards-setting and enforcemen t framework remains in place, there has been 
significant reform since Australia's last Review to improve national coordi nation and uniformity of 
implementation across the Commonwealth.  In par ticular, the Council of Australian Government 
(COAG) adopted a best practice regulation guide in 2007 designed to promote efficient regulation 
among jurisdictions.  In December 2007, the COAG established the Business Regulation and 
Competition Working Group with the aim of reduci ng the regulatory burden on business, including by 
improving regulation-making and review processes.  The COAG has also commenced initiatives to 
increase regulatory consistency and harmonizati on between jurisdictions through the National 
Partnership Agreement to Deliver a Seamless Nati onal Economy (Chapter II).  Further, a national 
product safety system where the Commonwealth and st ate and territory agencies will administer the 
same set of uniform product standards became  operational on 1 January 2011.  The single law 
multiple regulator (SLMR) model of Australian product safety regulation commencing on 1 January 2011 set the Australian Competition an d Consumer Commission (ACCC) as the agency 
responsible for product safety policy development for Au stralia.  The state and territory agencies, with 
the ACCC, will be responsible for the enforcement of  those mandatory product safety regulations.   
40. The institutional framework for standards and c onformity assessment remains unchanged.  It 
consists of four main bodies:  Standards Aust ralia, a not-for-profit company responsible for the 
                                                     
 
 38 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade online in formation.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/ 
trade/negotiations/trade_remedies.html [26 April 2010].  For further details on TAFTA safeguards see WTO 
document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007. 
 39 Under the SAFTA, products determined to be of Singapore origin are excluded from safeguard 
inquiry;  the two c ountries agreed not to apply safeguard meas ures against each other's products.  Under 
AUSFTA imports of U.S. origin are exem pt when they are not a substantial cause of serious injury or threat 
thereof;  under TAFTA imports of Thai origin that are no t a cause of serious injury or threat thereof, nor of 
serious damage or actual threat may be excluded (WTO document G/SG/N/1/AUS/2/Suppl.1, 16 December 2005). 
 
40 Commonwealth and national regulators have responsibility for making technical regulations in 
pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and therapeutic goods (T herapeutic Goods Administ ration (TGA)), food (e.g. 
Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA)), occupa tional health and safety, product safety, agricultural 
and veterinary chemicals, telecommunications and radi o communications, aviation, marine and road safety 
(Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government), measurement, and 
building codes.  State and territory regulators are respons ible for making technical regulations in areas such as 
food, power, water, public health, occupational health an d safety, road transport and the environment.  For more 
information see WTO documents G/TBT/2/Add.8/Rev.1, 29 May 2001 and WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007. 
 41 According to the Productivity Commission, mutual recognition has led to lower regulatory 
compliance costs for firms set in areas having jurisdictiona l differences;  it seems that this has contributed to the 
expansion of interstate and trans-Tasman trade (Productivity Commission, 2009f). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 48 
 
 
formulation of standards;  the National Associa tion of Testing Authorities (NATA), and the Joint 
Accreditation System of Australia and New Zeal and (JAS-ANZ), the two main accreditation bodies42;  
and the National Measurement Institute (NMI), th e physical, chemical, and biological measurement 
and metrology government body.  Since 1 July 2010,  NMI has been responsible for administering the 
new national trade measurement system, which replaces the previous state-based arrangements with a 
single, nationally applicable framework, funded and administered by the Australian Government. 
41. Standards Australia International (SAI) or Standards Australia, the top non-governmental 
standards writing body, is responsible for the fo rmulation and publication of  voluntary standards (see 
below);  it represents by far the largest single body of formal standards being produced for Australian 
use.  On 30 May 2008, the Department of Inno vation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR), on 
behalf of the Commonwealth Government, si gned a new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), 
largely the continuation of the previous MOU, with  Standards Australia.  The new MOU is subject to 
performance reviews at intervals not exceeding five  years and remains in force until varied or 
terminated by the parties.43  The new MOU requires, inter alia,  Standards Australia to report annually 
on its progress in the implementation of a range of matters;  and the development of new or amended 
standards and setting of priorities to be transp arent and well-founded, and ensuring the primary 
decision criterion is of net benefit to the community as a whole.44  The Accreditation Board for 
Standards Development Organisations (ABSDO) accr edits other standards development organizations 
to make Australian standards;  five organizations other than Standards Australia are now accredited to 
write Australian standards.45  
Mandatory standards 
42. Voluntary standards are often made mandatory (or regulatory) by reference in technical 
regulations.46  By November 2010, Standards Australia had published 6,953 standards (6,850 in 
2007), of which approximately one third (2,400 in 20 07) have become mandato ry;  35% of Standards 
Australia's catalogue are joint Au stralian/New Zealand Standards.  
43. Since 1 January 2011, only the Commonwealth Government has had the power to introduce 
mandatory product safety standards and information sta ndards.  To ensure cons istency of regulations 
operating throughout Australia, the ACCC and all st ate and territory agencies have committed to 
introduce the same set of product safety regulations prior to the date marking the introduction of the 
new Australian product safety system.47  In respect of Commonwealth regulations, mandatory 
                                                      
 42 Another regulatory body, the Australian Quar antine and Inspection Service (AQIS), provides 
inspection and certification services for food imports. 
 43 Standards Australia online information.  View ed at:  http://www.standards.org.au/downloads/ 
SAI-MoU-2008.pdf and http://www.standards.org.au/downloads/080825_SA_Signs_MOU_with_Common wealth.pdf [28 April 2010].   
 
44 Net benefit takes into account the costs and benefits related to:  public health and safety;  social and 
community impact;  environmental impact;  competition;  and economic impact.  Standards Australia online information, Guide to Net Benefit , last revised on  9 March 2010.  Viewed at:  http://www.standards.org.au/ 
LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=0cfqGeR1arU% 3d&tabid=75 [2 December 2010]. 
 
45 ABSDO online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.absdo.org.au/Home.aspx. 
 46 By making compliance compulsory or optional (if the target is met through some alternative 
approach), mandatory (or regulatory) standards te nd to be more targeted, as they are aimed at, inter alia , 
protecting the health or safety of persons, or the environment. 
 47 Previously, Commonwealth and state and territory government ministers could issue mandatory 
safety and information standards.  This had led to some differences in regulations between governments.  The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed that Australia would have a new single national system of 
consumer product safety laws by January 2 011 (ACCC online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.productsafety.go v.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/970773 and http://www.productsafety.gov.au/ 
content/index.phtml/itemId/970467 [26 April 2010]). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 49 
 
 
consumer product  safety and information standards are still en forced by the ACCC.  At the state and 
territory level, these regulations are enforced by government departments or agencies with portfolio responsibility for consumer affairs and fair trad ing.  In April 2010, mandatory product safety 
standards affected 41 consumer items (including some on labelling)
48, and 24 unsafe goods were 
banned49;  these requirements do not necessarily apply to the entire Commonwealth territory.  
44. The ACCC conducts regular bi-annual product safety surveillance activities to monitor 
compliance levels with mandatory standards and bans, and to remedy identified breaches.  Since 
2007, the ACCC has conducted surveillance acti vities on 28 mandatory product safety and 
information standards, and on six banned goods.  Since 2007, 431 breaches of mandatory standards 
have been identified;  non-compliance ranged fro m very low technical breaches to serious breaches 
involving significant hazards to consumers.  These breaches resulted in a range of remedial measures 
(including product recall, withdrawal from sale, product modification, re-labelling, etc.) or 
enforcement measures (prosecutions, injuncti ons, court orders, enforceable undertakings, 
administrative actions).  
National, international and aligned standards 
45. Australia's policy remains that standards should be  compatible with relevant international or 
internationally accepted standards or practices, with a view to minimizing impediments to trade.  In 
particular, mandatory standards s hould be consistent with Australia 's international obligations.  
However, in the absence of a suitable international standard, national standards are developed, with 
transparency and consensus being two key require ments.  At end-November 2010, 38% of national 
standards were identical or modified adoptions of international standards (40% in 2007);  however, it 
is estimated that 97% of applied standards are iden tical or modified adoptions  where an international 
standard exists.  Internationa l equivalence remains high in, inter alia , electronic and IT products.  In 
2010, 70% (over 60% 2004) of motor vehicle safety, anti-theft and emission standards were aligned 
with the United Nations Economic Commission fo r Europe (UNECE) 1958 Agreement on technical 
standards for automotives and parts regulations;  a further 10% were modified for adoption, while 
20%, comprising 14 standards, are not aligned. Australian standards for which there are no 
international standards exist for soils, aggregates, babies' cots, nightwear, children's swimming aids.  
Accreditation and quality management standards 
46. The MOU between the National Association of Testing Authorities and the Australian 
Government was renewed in Marc h 2008.  Covering a period of five years, the MOU recognizes 
NATA as the national authority (except for most therapeutic goods) for accreditation of testing and 
calibration laboratories, suppliers of certified refe rence materials, and inspection bodies.  However, 
the Australian Government is now no longer co mmitted to using NATA accredited facilities for its 
own testing needs as "a matter of course".50  In November 2010,  there were 2,961 NATA-accredited 
laboratories and facilities.51  
47. JAS-ANZ accredits certification bodies for the certification of management systems (e.g. 
quality, environmental, occupati onal health and safety, and HACCP-based food safety), products, and 
personnel in line with interna tional and national standards, such as the ISO 9001, ISO 14001, 
                                                      
 48 For the full list of products covered by mandatory general consumer product safety standards 
requirements, see ACCC online inform ation.  Viewed at: h ttp://www.productsafety.gov .au/content/in dex.phtml/ 
itemId/970773 [26 April 2010].  
49 For a full list of the banned items, see ACCC online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.productsafety.gov. au/content/index.phtml/itemId/970715 [26 April 2010]. 
 50 NATA (2008). 
 51 NATA (2009). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 50 
 
 
AS/NZS 4801 and ISO 22000, and HACCP (Hazard As sessment Critical Control Point) food safety 
standards.  In the absence of an internationa l standard, JAS-ANZ may accredit certification or 
inspection bodies to certify the use of a regulatory or industry standard, including the Department of 
Foreign Affairs and Trade's Certificate of Origin Scheme, which relies on free-trade agreements to 
identify the specified requirements or standards.  In May 2010, there were 45 certification bodies 
accredited to issue certificates in Australia.  The u se of quality management system standards such as 
ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 has been increasing:  be tween 2007 and 2010, the number of Australian 
companies with ISO 9001 certification increased fro m 9,201 to 9,312;  and companies certified to 
ISO 14001 increased from 979 to 1,629. 
International cooperation  
48. Since its last Review, Australia has not signed any new mutual recognition 
agreements (MRAs), which contribute to trade facilita tion.  In addition to the non-treaty 1996 Trans 
Tasman Mutual Recognition Agreement (in force since May 1998) and the Mutual Recognition 
Arrangement for measurement standards of the International Committee for Weights and Measures 
(CIPM MRA) (October 1999), it maintains treaty-status MRAs on Conformity Assessment with the EU (1998), the EFTA (2000), Singapore (2001), and Canada (2006), as well as a voluntary MRA with 
Thailand (2000).
52  In the context of APEC, Australia is a party to the MRAs on Conformity 
Assessment of Telecommunications Equipment (1999), Conformity Assessment of Electrical and 
Electronic Equipment (1999) and Conformity A ssessment of Foods and Food Products (1997).  
NATA and JAS-ANZ have developed an extensive network of agreements (MLA)/MRAs through 
international and regional fora;  NATA th rough the International Laboratory Accreditation 
Cooperation (ILAC) and the Asia-Pacific Labor atory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC), and 
JAS-ANZ through the International Accreditati on Forum (IAF) and the Pacific Accreditation 
Cooperation (PAC)).  In the area of legal metrology, as well as the CIPM MRA, NMI is helping to 
establish mutual confidence within the global lega l metrology environment through participation in 
the OIML Mutual Acceptance Agreement (MAA) fo r pattern approval of measuring instruments.  
Australia has bilateral MRAs of type approval test  reports with equivalent bodies in the Netherlands, 
New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.   
Transparency 
49. Notices of technical regulations are generally published in the Commonwealth of Australia  
Gazette  as well as on the websites of bodies such as th e Australia New Zealand Food Authority 
(ANZFA).  Additionally, standa rds and conformity assessment procedures are notified widely in 
national newspapers, in-house journals  and other relevant Australian, state, and territory government 
publications.  Notices on voluntary standards are also  published in the journal of Standards Australia, 
The Australian Standard , while information on conformity asse ssment procedures are published in the 
quarterly NATA newsletter, NATA News .  
50. Between 2007 and May 2010, Australia made te n notifications (including on genetically 
modified agricultural and food products) under th e WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade 
(TBT).  In most cases the timeliness of submission allowed for a comment period of 45-59 days.53 
(b) Sanitary and phytosanitary regulations  
51. Australia is a major exporter of agricultural commodities and agri-food products and, has 
maintained its strict sanitary and phytosanitary  (SPS) regime, which the authorities consider 
                                                      
 52 For more information on MRAs in force see D IISR.  Viewed at:  http://www.innovation.gov.au/ 
Section/Industry/Pages/OverviewforIndustry.aspx.  
53 WTO documents G/TBT/25, 4 March 2009 and G/TBT/23, 20 February 2008. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 51 
 
 
proportionate and matching their a ppropriate level of protection (ALOP, see below).  The authorities 
maintain that SPS measures are based on science a nd aim to reduce the risk of exotic pests and 
diseases to a very low level acceptable to Australia (but not zero).54  Nevertheless, Australia has been 
criticized by certain trading partners on the groun ds that they are unduly stringent and therefore 
protectionist;  during the review period, complaints  were related to quaran tine procedures and apple 
imports.55  Since 2004,  an Eminent Scientists Group (ESG), a high level review group independent of 
Biosecurity Australia (see below), has been ta sked with providing external scientific and 
economic scrutiny of significant import risk analy ses.  Its role was strengthened in September 2007, 
and again in July 2009, to take account of relevant  new information brought to its attention, including 
assessing conflicting scientific views provided to it.56  However, it appears that so far no unified 
analytical framework has been u sed to assess the costs and benefits of SPS measures for stakeholders 
along the supply chain, such as domestic consumers,  producers and governments, or foreign suppliers, 
or, where relevant, foreign consumers and governments.57  Trade effects are part of the assessment, as 
measures have an impact on trade as conduit of the externality, but trade effects are not the sole 
focus.58  The authorities consider that the WTO SP S Agreement provisions do not require such 
analysis, and that the only direction as to relevant  economic consequences to be taken into account in 
a risk assessment is found in Article 5.3 of the Ag reement.  Australia's risk import assessments (see 
below) address the issue of economic c onsequences to relevant stakeholders.59  
                                                      
 54 Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Fo restry online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.daff.gov.au/marke t-access-trade/sps [9 May 2010].  See al so WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 
1 May 2007. 
 55 At end-December 2009, 4 out of 15 WTO panels established to examine SPS-related dispute cases 
were on complaints against Australia.  The cases involved complaints by:  Canada and the United States against 
Australia's restrictions on imports of fresh, chilled or frozen salmon (mutually agreed solution, 2000);  the 
Philippines against Australia's restrictions on fresh fruits  and vegetables, including bananas (panel established in 
2003);  the EU against Australia's quarantine procedur es (mutually agreed solutio n, 2007);  and New Zealand 
against Australia's restrictions on apples (Chapter II) (WTO document G/SPS/53, 3 May 2010). 
 56 As a result of the Beale Review (2008), the member ship of the ESG was expanded in 2009 to include 
an eminent economist;  until then its membership consisted of scientists.  So far the ESG has issued reports on 
apples from New Zealand (Octob er 2006), chicken meat (May 2008), bananas from the Philippines 
(October 2008), prawns and prawn products (June 2009), and apples from China (November 2009).  Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry online information.   Viewed at:  http://www.daff.gov.au/about/contactus/ 
corp-policy/eminent_scientists_group/esg_terms_of_reference [12 November 2010]. 
 
57 In quarantine as in other policy areas, cost benefit principles are always relevant.  Even the quest for 
disease-free status must pass such a te st, as there would be no rationale in maintaining a barrier as extreme as 
this if it were to impose more economic costs on Australia than benefits.  According to a 2010 study, Australian 
quarantine arrangements effectively tran sfer the costs of an extreme dis ease control regime from growers to 
domestic consumers, and recent official quarantine reviews have been unduly limited.  The ban on imports of 
apples from New Zealand was estimated to be the equiva lent of consumers directly paying growers $A 2 billion 
over six years.  The cost of controlling an outbreak of fire blight would be minimal - no more than $A 10 million and most likely about $A 3 million.  Given that Australia was due to raise quarantine spending it 
could easily afford any mishaps (Bos worth and Cutbush, 2010);  and The National  "Aussies just keep biting 
back over Kiwi apples", 15 May 2010.  Viewed at: http://www.thenational.ae/business/economy/ aussies-just-
keep-biting-back-over-kiwi-apples. 
 
58 According to an OECD published study, this anal ytical framework allows comparison of alternative 
ways to design measures and discerns their trade and welfare effects.  An import ban (or prohibitive standard) to 
keep the domestic market free of some undesired product characteristic can be compared to allowing trade under 
the condition that the foreign product be clearly identifia ble (e.g. through labelling) (Van Tongeren et al, 2009). 
 59 Article 5.3 of the SPS Agreement allows for cost-effectiveness  analysis to be applied to evaluating 
alternative measures to reducing pest and disease risk to  the appropriate level of protection (ALOP) in line with 
the objective of minimizing negative trad e effects.  Cost-effectiveness analys is involves an evaluation of the 
costs of different measures in addressi ng a particular benefit.  A measure is chosen on the basis that it involves WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 52 
 
 
Food standards setting 
52. Since its previous Review, Australia has ma intained many quarantine controls and food 
standards that are stricter than relevant sta ndards promulgated by international bodies (e.g. 
CODEX Alimentarius Commission).  Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), a bi-national 
independent statutory authority, develops food sta ndards, and if appropriate , joint codes of practice 
with industry, covering the content and labelin g of food sold in Australia and New Zealand 
(section (c) below).  All domestic  and imported food products marketed in Australia must comply 
with relevant food standards as regulated in the F ood Standards Code (the C ode), which is developed 
and maintained by FSANZ.  From 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2010, 62 applica tions and proposals were 
gazetted in the Code.  FSANZ is required to take account of international standards, including those 
set by Codex, when developing standards.  Wh ere FSANZ has developed standards that are not 
consistent with international standards, it has no tified the WTO through the appropriate mechanisms.  
Maximum residue limits (MRLs) for a number of agricultural and veterinary chemicals were revised on several occasions during the review period.   
53. The Code also regulates food derived from GM plants, animals or micro-organisms, as well 
as the labelling of GM foods.  Impor ted foods using biotechnology may be  sold in Australia only after 
assessment and approval by FSANZ.  In Novemb er 2010, FSANZ had completed assessments of 
45 commodities produced from gene technology and approved all of them;  it is currently assessing a further 6 commodities.  FSANZ has also assessed and approved numerous en zymes sourced from GM 
micro-organisms.  Imports of live and viable genetically modified or ganisms (GMOs) requires 
authorization from the Gene Technology Regulator, an independent statutory office holder, in charge 
of regulating all GMO issues.  All dealings with  GMOs must be licensed by the Regulator, unless 
otherwise authorized under the legislation.  A ll licence applications are subject to case-by-case 
scientific risk assessment and risk  management.  As of 20 August 2010, the Regulator had authorized 
the unrestricted "commercial" release of 25 GMOs (varieties of cotton, canola, carnations, roses, and 
two vaccines). 
Biosecurity 
54. Since 2009, Australia's biosecurity system has been undergoing institutional reform in line 
with the recommendations of a 2008 independent review.
60  The review, inter alia,  recognized that 
zero-risk is unattainable and undesired and suggest ed a shift from the largely negative-defensive 
quarantine to the pro-active biosecurity.  Many of  the review's recommendations are dependent on the 
commencement of new biosecurity legislation.  A draf t of this legislation would be released for public 
comment prior to its scheduled introduction into Parliament.  A number of institutional reforms 
entered into effect on 1 July 2009 to strengthen the governance of the biosecurity system, including the appointment of the interim Inspector General of Biosecurity to conduct independent audits of 
Australia's biosecurity system.  A Biosecurity  Services Group was established within the DAFF, 
drawing together all biosecurity activities (incl uding those of Biosecurity Australia) and AQIS, 
reflecting the recommendations made in the independent review.
61  A Biosecurity Advisory Council 
                                                                                                                                                                     
the least aggregated cost.  Although falling short of cost-benefit analysis, the application by regulators of 
cost-effectiveness analysis can at leas t facilitate the selection of measures that are consistent with achieving a 
desired risk target at low cost (Binder, 2002). 
 60 The Government agreed in principle with the 84 recommended reforms.  Other key 
recommendations included better coordination of states, territories, industry and the Commonwealth to monitor biosecurity risks before and after goods enter the country (WTO documents G/SPS/R/54, 28 April 2009 and 
G/SPS/R/56, 28 January 2010;  and Co mmonwealth of Au stralia, 2008b). 
 
61 WTO document G/SPS/R/55, 23 September 2009;  and DAFF online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.daff.gov.au/bsg/biosecur ity-services-group [10 May 2010]. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 53 
 
 
was established on 1 January 2010 to provide advice to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry.   
Import risk analyses (IRAs) 
55. During the review period, Australia conducte d science-based risk assessments, including 
import risk analyses (IRAs) under a regulated process, and developed recommendations on import 
conditions that would meet Australia's appropriate level of protection (ALOP).62  I R A s  c o m p l e t e d  
during the review period included apples from New Z ealand, bananas from the Philippines, capsicums 
from Korea, mangoes from India, unshu mandarins from Japan, apples from China, stonefruit from 
the United States, horse meat from approved co untries, chicken meat, and prawns and prawn 
products.63  In April 2010, Biosecurity Australia commen ced concurrent IRAs to assess the animal 
quarantine risks from the importation of beef and be ef products from the United States, Canada, and 
Japan.64  Following a change to the 2001 policy on Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), as 
from 1 March 2010 countries that have had one or mo re cases of BSE have been allowed to apply for 
assessment for possible access to th e Australian market;  countries with existing access will have to 
apply for assessment under the new policy by 30 June 2011.65  However, this new BSE policy is still 
not in line with the relevant World Organi zation for Animal Health (OIE) standard.66  New IRA 
arrangements entered into effect on 5 Septembe r 2007 setting specific timeframes for completion of 
IRAs within either 24 months or 30 months.67  Two trading partners expressed concern that this new 
policy would still allow for long delays in the risk assessment process.68  The authorities indicated that 
the existing backlog may continue because of delays relating to the prioritization of processing of past 
market-access requests. 
Quarantine 
56. Due to differences in the status of animal and plant health across Australia, different 
quarantine measures may be imposed within the co untry.  The quarantine system is regulated by 
Commonwealth, state and territory laws69;  it applies to all humans, plants, animals, and associated 
products, including food products.  Quarantine activiti es are pre-border, border, and post-border.  
AQIS is responsible for administering quarantine legislation on behalf of the Commonwealth;  its 
quarantine functions include issu ing import permits, inspections, directions for treatment, and 
clearances.  The Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) performs risk assessments on all 
                                                      
 62 For more information on Australia's procedures  see Department of Ag riculture, Fisheries and 
Forestry (2009a). 
 63 Biosecurity Australia online information.  Viewed  at:  http://www.daff.gov. au/ba/ira/current-plant 
[15 July 2010].  
64 Biosecurity Australia Advice (BAA) 2010/10, 8 April 2010.  Viewed at:  http://www.daff.gov. 
au/ba/ira/current-animal/beef_and_beef_products_for_human_consumption/commencement_of_iras_for_the_ 
importation_of_beef_and_beef_products_from_the_united_states,_canada_and_japan [14 July 2010].  
65 WTO document G/SPS/R/56, 28 January 2010. 
 66 WTO document G/SPS/N/AUS/239, 26 October 2009. 
 67 WTO document G/SPS/R/46, 2 January 2008. 
 68 WTO document G/SPS/R/44, 30 May 2007. 
 69 Australia also has inter- and intra-state barriers in the form of quarantine restrictions.  Under the 
Constitution, the Commonwealth Government does not have exclusive power to make laws relating to 
quarantine;  thus Commonwealth and state laws coexist.  However, the Constitution states that, if a state law is 
inconsistent with a Commonwealth law, the Commonwealth law prevails, and the state law is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.  A 1995 MOU on animal and plant quarantine matters between the Commonwealth 
and states governments remains in place.  Australia  has many pest- and disease-free zones, which are 
maintained through second-tier domestic quarantine meas ures affecting inter-state and local movement of 
products.   WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 54 
 
 
biological materials that are of human quarantin e concern, and provides advice to AQIS before an 
import permit is issued.  In moving away from "m andatory intervention" targets (i.e. high risk 
containers entering Australia) to a "risk-return" approach (i.e. resour ces targeted to secure the biggest 
possible reduction in the risks posed by pests and disease), AQIS no longer collects data on quarantine 
inspection operated at airports, seaports, and mail.   
57. During the review period, Australia eradicated  equine influenza (December 2008) and citrus 
canker (January 2009);  the authorities consider th ese as examples of the effectiveness of Australia's 
well developed disease and pest contro l capability and regulatory processes.70  
Transparency and technical assistance 
58. Between 2007 and 20 May 2010, Au stralia submitted 58 notifica tions to the WTO relating to 
Article 7 and Annex B of the SPS Agreement.  Draft IRA reports, as well as outcomes of the IRA 
process are also notified to the WTO.  Australi a is also active in the three standard-setting 
organizations under the SPS Agreement:  FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission, World Organization for Animal Health, and Internationa l Plant Protection Convention.  Australia has 
continued to assist developing countries, par ticularly APEC members, to build quarantine 
infrastructure and risk analysis capacity, and to im prove awareness of international standards on SPS 
issues in general.
71  
(c) Labelling and packaging 
59. Food labelling is also regulated under the Food Standards Code (see above);  all foods sold in 
Australia, including imported foods, must comply with  the relevant regulations.  In October 2009, the 
Council of Australian Governments (COAG) and th e Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation 
Ministerial Council agreed to undertake a comprehens ive review of food labelling law and policy;  its 
final report was to be submitted to the Ministerial Council by the end of 2010.72 
60. Mandatory product information standards, in cluding care labelling for clothing and textile 
products, as well as for a range of other consum er products including sunglasses, cosmetics and 
toiletries, and tobacco products, remain in force (section (a) above).  Mandatory energy consumption 
labelling requirements affect appliances such as refrigerators, freezers, clothes washers/dryers, 
dishwashers, room air conditioners, mains-pressure el ectric-storage water heaters, and motor vehicles.  
National, state, and territory information standards were to be rationalized and replaced with a single 
national set of standards by 1 January 2011 as part of the implementation of the Australian Consumer 
Law (section (4)(iii)(b)).  
(viii) Government procurement 
61. Despite participating in the work of the WTO Working Group on Transparency in 
Government Procurement and following negotiations on the revised GPA, Australia has remained one 
of five OECD members that is not a signatory to the Plurilateral WTO Agreement on Government 
Procurement (GPA) with no intention of becoming a party to it.73  Nevertheless, Australia is bound by 
principles and rules on transparency and non-discrimina tion in this area in the context of its FTAs (see 
                                                      
 70 WTO document G/SPS/R/54, 28 April 2009. 
 71 WTO documents G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.1, 11 October 2007, and G/SPS/GEN/717/Add.2, 
6 July 2010. 
 72 Online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.foodlabe llingreview.gov.au/inte rnet/foodlabelling/ 
publishing.nsf/content/home [14 July 2010].  
73 Australia has maintained its observer status in the WTO Committee on Government Procurement. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 55 
 
 
below and Chapter II);  the authoriti es insist that these commitments are  extended to all its trading 
partners.  Furthermore, Australia considers the GPA to be largely inconsistent with its approach of 
low regulation in the public sector;  nevertheless, it is closely following negotiations on the Revised GPA. 
62. The Commonwealth government procurement market for goods and services is estimated at 
2.6% of GDP (2008/09) (Table I.1).  Betwee n 2005/06 and 2008/09, Commonwealth government 
contracts for the purchase of goods and services (inc luding expenditure by agencies covered by the 
Financial Management & Accountability (FMA ) Act 1997 and Commonwealth Authorities and 
Companies Act (CAC), see below) ranged from about  $A 26.4 billion (2007/ 08) to $A 32.9 billion 
(2008/09).  In 2008/09, ten agencies were responsible for 83.7% of the total amount;  56% of this was 
defence-related expenditure.
74  In 2007/08, domestically produced  goods and services were estimated 
at 69% of the total amount spent;  when procuremen t by the Department of Defence is excluded, the 
domestically produced share of contracts is 89% of the total value of contracts awarded.75  The bulk of 
imports were for goods and services that are not  made in Australia, such as photocopiers and 
specialist military equipment.  These amounts do not cover procurement spending by state and 
territory governments, which is seemingly hi gher than Commonwealth government spending.76  
Reportedly, in many instances government trading enterprises (GTEs) (sections (3)(iii) and (4)(iv)(b)) 
at central, state, and territory government level ha ve dominated the provision of infrastructure works, 
instead of opening up the provision of infrastruct ure and related service to competition, including to 
efficient private market entities.77 
63. The core principle of Australia's procurement framework remains value for money, which is 
supported by open competition, non-discrimination78, efficiency, effectiveness, and use of resources 
in an ethical manner.79  At the Commonwealth level, the overall government procurement policy 
framework consists of three key elements:  the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines (CPGs), 
which form the basis of Commonwealth procuremen t policy and are issued by the Finance Minister80;  
finance circulars, which provide advice on key chan ges and developments of  procurement policy and 
are issued by the Department of Finance and Dere gulation (Department of Finance);  and financial 
management guidance documents developed by the Department of Finance to help agencies to 
implement the Government's procurement policy.  In 2008, the CPGs were amended to include a new 
text describing coordinated procur ement arrangements, a revised statement on the approach to risk 
allocation in contracts, a clarification of the de finition and scope of proc urement, requirements for 
contractors to give details of subcontractors, requi rements excluding suppliers with a judicial decision 
against them, a reordering of the mandatory pr ocurement procedures, and an exemption for 
procurement of property or services from an exis ting business providing services to disabled persons. 
                                                      
 74 Department of Finance and Deregulation online in formation.  Viewed at: http://www.finance.gov.au/ 
publications/statistics-on-commonwealth-purchasing-contracts/index.html [11 May 2010]. 
 75 Australian Government (2009b). 
 76 In 2008/09, procurement by the Australian Capital Territory, the Northern Territory, Western 
Australia, South Australia, and Tasmania was $A 1.1 billio n, $A 1.7 billion, $A 11.5 billion, $A 3.4 billion and 
$A 1 billion, respectively.   
 77 Infrastructure Australia (2008). 
 78 The authorities indicated that exceptions to this non-discrimination principle are specific policies to 
assist small and medium-size enterprises and, in limited circumstances, policies to assist indigenous Australians.  
79 For further details see WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007 as well as Department of 
Finance and Deregulation online information.  Vi ewed at:  http://www.fin ance.gov.au/procurement/ 
procurement-policy-and-guidance/procurement-policy-faqs.html [11 May 2010].  
80 The latest CPGs were issued by the Finance Mi nister in December 2008.  For further details see 
WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007, and Department of Finance and Deregulation 
online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.finan ce.gov.au/publications/fmg-series/docs/CPGs-2008.pdf 
[11 May 2010].   WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 56 
 
 
64. As in the case of standards and SPS (section (a) above), each of Australia's three levels of 
government (Commonwealth, state and territory, an d local) has its own proc urement framework and 
policies.  Under the Financial Management a nd Accountability Act 1997 (FMA 1997) and relevant 
regulations, each Commonwealth agency is in ch arge of its own procurement.  When conducting 
procurement above certain thresholds, all agenci es are required to follow mandatory procurement 
procedures81, which provide for open tendering, sel ect tendering, and direct sourcing.82  H o w e v e r ,  
procurement of, inter alia , real estate property or accommodation, R&D services, and motor 
vehicles83 are exempt from mandatory procurement procedures.84  Under the Public Works Committee 
Act 2009, the limit above which public works must  be referred to the Parliamentary Standing 
Committee on Public Works was increased to $A 5 m illion (previously $A 2 million) in June 2009.  
AusTender provides multiple functions for searchi ng data online (see below) including the breakdown 
of contracts (numbers of contracts and th eir values) under various procurement methods.85  In 
2008/09, direct sourcing represented 48.8% of to tal procurement value while open and select 
tendering accounted for 30.7% and 20.5%, respectively.86  
65. All bidders are expected to meet require ments under the 2009 Fair Work Act, which  includes 
obligations regarding legislated minimum standards, rights of freedom of association, and access to 
dispute resolution processes.87  As from 1 January 2010, the Fair Work Principles have required 
Commonwealth entities to obtain information from tenderers about their compliance with their 
obligation to ensure fair, coope rative, and productive workplaces.88  The authorities indicated that 
similarly to the AIPs (see belo w) these are broad legal requirements rather than aspects of the 
government procurement framework. 
66. AusTender provides a single portal to adverti se business opportunities and to report the award 
of government procurement contracts.  Agencies ar e required to publish contracts or standing offers 
                                                      
 81 These thresholds remain unchanged at $A 80, 000 for procurement by FMA agencies (government 
entities), other than construction services;  $A 400, 000 for procurements by relevant CAC Act bodies 
(government enterprises), other than construction services:  In 2008, the threshold for procurement of 
construction services was raised from $A 6 million to $A 9 million.  For more information on the mandatory 
procedures see Department of Finance and Deregulation online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.finance.gov.au/publications /fmg-series/docs/CPGs-2008.pdf [11 May 2010];  and WTO document 
WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007. 
 
82 Open tendering involves publishing a request for tender, and accepting submissions from any 
potential suppliers who satisfy conditions for participation.   Under the select tender process, an invitation to 
tender is issued to selected potential suppliers, such as suppliers granted a licence.  Di rect sourcing is conducted 
when no submission was received, or no submission or potential supplier satisfies conditions of the tender.  It may also be conducted in extremely urgent situations, or exceptionally advantageous conditions. 
 
83 For example, in early 2010 the Department of Finance and Deregulation requested governmental 
agencies to consider the selection of the Australian-made Toyota Hybrid  Camry car in preference to imported 
vehicles where it represents an oper ationally suitable alternative.  At the same time it recalled that the 
Government's Green Car Challenge stipulated that by 2020, 50% of the Government fleet passenger vehicles 
would be Australian-made "value for money environmentally friendly" cars (Department of Finance and 
Deregulation online information.  Viewed at:  http ://www.finance.gov.au/procure ment/previous_news.html 
[21 May 2010]).  
84 Exemptions are listed in Appendix A of the 2008 Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines.  Viewed 
at:  http://www.finance.gov.au/ publications/f mg-series/docs/CPGs-2008.pdf [11 May 2010]. 
 85 AusTender online information.  Viewed at:  https://www.tenders.gov.au/?event=public.reports. 
CN.procurementMethod.form. 
 86 AusTender online information.  Viewed at:  https://tenders.gov.au. 
 87 Australian Government (2009b). 
 88 Department of Educatio n, Employment and Workpl ace Relations (2010).   Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 57 
 
 
with a value of $A 10,000 or more on AusTender.   Links to the procurement operations of State 
Governments can be accessed via AusTender.89 
67. Australia has maintained its target of sourci ng at least 10% of purchases by value from small 
or medium-size enterprises (SMEs).90  In addition, for major procurement of information and 
communication technology (ICT) products and services with an expected contract value of 
$A 20 million or more, government agencies must ensure that tenders meet the minimum SME participation levels set at 10% of contract va lue for hardware, and 20% of contract value for 
software/services.  Between 2005/06 and 2008/09, the share of SMEs, in terms of the value of 
contracts, dropped from 35.8% to 29.1%.
91  No data on main product/services/project categories 
supplied by SMEs are collected by the authorities.   
68. Australia's bilateral free-trad e agreements with Chile (as of 2009), Singapore, and the 
United States all include specific government proc urement commitments with respect to national 
treatment.  Amentments to the Australia Ne w Zealand Government Procurement Agreement 
(ANZGPA) in 2007 consisted of refinements an d did not change any fundamental principles.92  
Australia effectively extends to all suppliers the same treatment to which it has committed in its 
existing FTAs with government procurement commitmen ts.  No data on the share of goods, services, 
or public works procured by suppliers from New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, and the United States 
were available from the authorities.   
69. While various states incorporate "buy local" a nd/or price preferences for local goods in their 
procurement policies, they maintain that they im plement those preferences in a manner consistent 
with Australia's international gove rnment procurement commitments.93  In addition to their Buy Local 
Policy (see below), certain states maintain a 10% preference (e.g. Western Australia, Tasmania and Northern Territory) or 20% preference (New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia), in the 
form of a nominal increase on tendered price,  for procurement of dom estic or New Zealand  or U.S. 
goods and related services, to uphold industry de velopment, social or economic objectives.  
Preference margins are not applied to purchases of services alone (i.e. unrelated to goods contracts).   
70. During the review period, Australia has undertaken  further steps in helping domestic suppliers 
to raise their participation in government procurem ent contracts.  As from July 2009, the Boosting 
Australian Industry Participation (AIP, see below)  policy has required tenderers for government 
works to outline their use of Australian or overseas suppliers in every bid.  As from 1 January 2010, 
companies bidding for large Commonwealth procurem ent projects (generally above $A 20 million) 
have been required to prepare and implement AIP plans.
94  These plans must set out how suppliers 
                                                      
 89 AusTender online information.  Viewed a t:  https://www.tenders.gov.au/?event=public. 
relatedlink.list [21 May 2010]. 
 90 An SME is a domestic or New Zealand firm with fewer than 200 full-time employees.   
 91 Department of Finance and Deregulation online in formation.  Viewed at:  http://www.finance.gov. 
au/publications/statistics-on-commonwealth-purch asing-contracts/index.html [21 May 2010]. 
 92 Australia and New Zealand Government Procurement Agreement Revised 2007.  Viewed at:  
http://www.apcc.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Tgeh zkiMiNw%3d&tabid=144&mid=489 [21 May 2010]. 
 93 For example the Government of Western Australia maintains a long-standing Buy Local Policy, 
which was last revised in December 2009 to reflect latest commitments under bilateral FTAs (State Supply Commission of Western Australia online information, "Addendum to the Buy Local Policy December 2009 – 
Agreements affecting the operation of the Buy Local  Policy".  Viewed at:  http://www.ssc.wa.gov.au/ 
files/guidelines/Buy%20Local%20P olicy%20Addendum%20(December%20200 9).pdf [21 May 2010]).  The 
New South Wales Local Jobs First Plan provides pr ice preference for Australian and New Zealand SME's 
content. 
 
94 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research online information "Australian Industry 
Participation Plans (AIP Plans) in Commonwealth Government Procurement", January 2010.  Viewed at:  WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 58 
 
 
give SMEs full, fair, and reasonable opportunity  to supply goods and services.  The Australian 
Industry Participation (A IP) National Framework95, which encourages the Commonwealth, state and 
territory governments to adopt a consistent national approach to maximizing domestic-industry 
participation in major projects in Australia and overseas, was  strengthened and extended by new 
initiatives costing $A 19.1 million over four years as from 2009.  These initiatives, inter alia,  aim to 
ensure that tender specifications are not designed in  a way that has the effect of excluding Australian 
suppliers, as well as to maximize the ability of Aust ralian industry to win work at home and abroad.  
An amount of $A 8.5 million over four years w ill be provided to the Industry Capability Network 
(ICN)96 for increasing opportunities for local business,  with an emphasis on connecting domestic 
suppliers to Commonwealth-funded infrastructure pr ojects.  The Government will appoint supplier 
advocates with specialized industry knowledge w ithin the Department of Innovation, Industry, 
Science and Research at a cost of $A 8.2 million ove r four years to help domestic SMEs market their 
capabilities to government buyers in Australia.  
71. Buy Local procurement policies have also been strengthened recently at state level.97  From 
June 2009, under its Local Jobs First plan (LJFP)  the Government of New South Wales reinforced 
measures giving local industry incr eased preference in major projects by expanding the definition of 
SME to businesses with up to 500 workers, compared w ith 200 workers previously and in the rest of 
the country (see above);  every tender over $A 4 mi llion also requires a local industry participation 
plan.  Under the July 2009 Victorian Industry Pa rticipation Policy, local-content rules aimed at 
encouraging SME participation in government procurement may apply to projects designated 
strategically significant by Victoria's Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development.  
According to the authorities, both the New South Wales LJFP and the Victorian VIP have been designed to comply with Australia's exis ting commitments on government procurement. 
72. As foreshadowed in July 2009 a Procurement Coordinator has been established to:  provide 
external parties with an understanding of the Co mmonwealth procurement framework;  review and 
advise on procurement practices across government on an ongoing basis;  handle complaints from 
suppliers and interested external parties;  review  complaints regarding contract administration;  
aggregate information about Commonwealth procur ement across all procurement categories;  and 
submit an annual report on procurement matters to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation.
98  The 
Procurement Coordinator seeks input on how gover nment procurement can be enhanced from a 
procurement consultation committee comprising indu stry, union, and community stakeholders.   
73. The Trade Practices Amendment (Cartel Conduc t and Other Measures) Act 2009 introduced 
criminal liability for cartel conduct, including arrangements between competitors involving bid rigging (section (4)(iii)(a)).  Major construction c ontracts are identified as vulnerable to misconduct 
by suppliers.  In July 2007, penalties of more th an $A 9.1 million were imposed on 11 companies and 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 
http://www.innovation.gov.au/Section/Industry/Pages/Aus tralianIndustryParticipationPlansforCommonwealth 
GovernmentProcurement.aspx [23 August 2010].   
 95 The AIP National Framework's strategic approaches consist of:  encouraging industry to meet world 
best practices through capability building;  early identification of opportunities for Australian industry participation in Australia and overseas;  promoting Au stralian capability and integrating industry into global 
supply chains;  and enhancing project facilitation and Au stralian industry participation (Australian Government, 
2009b).  
96 The ICN operates in Australia and New Zealand and assists businesses to maximize the opportunities 
that arise from purchasing requirements from  both the government and private sectors. 
 97 United States Trade Representative (2010). 
 98 Australian Government (2009b). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 59 
 
 
18 individuals for a series of bid-rigging and pri ce-fixing cartels in commercial air conditioning after 
ACCC Federal Court action.99  
(ix) Local-content requirements 
74. Local-content requirements remain in place in government procurement arrangements for 
motor vehicles (see above)100, in export finance, guarantees, a nd insurance provided by the Export 
Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC) (section (3)(iv)(f)), and in foreign investment requirements 
in the broadcasting services sector.  The authoriti es clarified that EFIC requirements relate to 
"local/Australian activity". 
75. During the period under review, Australia has not made any notifications of TRIMs under the 
WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measu res, thereby indicating the absence of such 
measures. 
(3) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS  
(i) Registration and documentation 
76. All goods intended for export must be registered with Customs, unless exempted.101  M os t  
export declarations are submitted through the Integrated Cargo System (ICS), the electronic cargo 
reporting tool.  Customs may undertake compliance examinations on behalf of permit-issuing 
agencies.  
(ii) Export prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing 
77. Exports of acetic anhydride to Afghanistan remain prohibited102, as are exports of certain 
cultural and heritage goods, and su icide devices.  Exports of some other goods are restricted in 
compliance with, inter alia,  international commitments, unless permission or a licence is granted.103  
In the light of Australia's reliance on agri-food ex ports, export controls on certain agricultural and 
food products are operated by certain public-sector entities with a view to, inter alia,  ensuring 
importing country requirements are met (e.g. volume limitations, trade and product descriptions), and 
                                                      
 99 ACCC online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.accc.gov.au /content/index.phtml/itemId/793552/ 
fromItemId/2332 [1 November 2010]. 
 100 As indicated earlier (section on government procurement) under the Australian Government's fleet 
arrangements, government-procured motor vehicles must be either made in Australia by manufacturers that have 
a local operation in vehicle assembly or component production (Ford, Holden, Toyota, Nissan), or imported 
passenger motor vehicles marketed by an Australian-based manufacturer (Department of Finance and Deregulation online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.finance.gov.au/vehicle-leasing-and-fleet-
management/fleet-guidance-and-related-material.html [25 May 2010]). 
 
101 Exempted goods include:  personal or household effects (including motor vehicles and pets) of 
passengers or crew members;  a consignment by post, ship or aircraft from one person to another that has an 
f.o.b. value not exceeding $A 2,000, except those requiring permits;  du tiable (imported) good s on which duty is 
unpaid, excisable goods on which excise duty is unpaid, and/or goods for which a person intends to claim a 
drawback of customs duty or excise duty;  containers, whether loaded or unloaded, that are the property of 
persons doing business in Australia and that are to be temporarily exported prior to re-import;  and certain ship 
or aircraft stores (except under-bond stores). 
 102 This chemical is used, inter alia,  for the synthesis of heroin. 
 103 The list of restricted items has remained unchanged since the previous Review of Australia (see 
Australian Customs online information.  Viewed a t:  http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page4381.asp 
[22 May 2010];  and WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 60 
 
 
to maintain food safety and quality standards.104  Export controls on wood and woodchips are for the 
purpose of protecting environmental and heritage values.  As from 1 January 2010, no restrictions 
have applied on merino sheep exports;  previous  export quotas on merino sheep were set at a 
maximum of 800 rams, with an additional 100 stud rams placed on an export donor register (for trade 
in genetic material).   
78. Export licensing to manage access-related import quotas has occurred for agricultural 
products that are not  subject to single-desk arrangements.  For example, access to the EU dairy quota 
for cheddar cheese, and for varietal cheeses to the United States requires the issuance of export 
licences;  similarly a quota allocation affects the meat industry's access to the EU and U.S. beef 
quotas.   
(iii) State trading 
79. According to Australia's latest WTO notificati on on state trading in 2010, five state-trading 
entities operated in Australia during the review peri od, with activities largely focused on exports in 
bulk of:  barley from the State of South Australia, by Australian Barley Board (ABB) Grain Export Limited;  wheat, by Australian Wheat Board (AWB) (International) Limited;  barley, lupins, and 
canola from Western Australia, by Grain Pool Pty Lt d;  sugar from Queensland, by Queensland Sugar 
Limited (QSL);  and rice from New South Wales, by its Rice Marketing Board.
105  The sole exporter 
or single-desk (i.e. monopoly) rights of ABB Grai n Export Limited and AWB (International) Limited 
were terminated in July 2007 and July 2008, resp ectively.  Those affecting the export of barley, 
canola, and lupins were terminated in Octobe r 2009, and those relating to the QSL expired in 
September 2009.  The Rice Marketing Board is the only notified entity with export monopoly rights 
still in place.  Nevertheless, there are still a relativ ely large number of public entities, with or without 
monopoly or exclusive trading rights in goods and serv ices, at Commonwealth, state or territory level 
(section (4)(iv)(b)).106  In 2008/09, the entities discussed in this section accounted for 91%, 39.6%, 
and 65.7% of total exports of wheat, barley, and canol a, respectively.  No data on exports of raw cane 
sugar and rice by the relevant state-trading entities were available.  
(iv) Export assistance 
(a) Export Market Development Grants (EMDG) scheme 
80. The EMDG scheme remains Australia's main  financial assistance programme targeting 
mainly small but also medium-sized ente rprises across all sectors of the economy.107  Grants partially 
reimburse expenditure (up to 50% above a threshol d) on specific export promotion activities to any 
overseas market except New Zealand, Iraq, and the De mocratic People's Republic of Korea.  Changes 
                                                      
 104 For example, AQIS grants expor t licences for meat, dairy products , eggs, animals, fish, grain, 
vegetables, and fruit;  and the TGA, under the Department  of Health and Ageing, grants export licences for 
certain drugs and goods containing those drugs, as well as certain animal and human products.  In addition, the 
Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation issues export licences for wine and brandy, and Horticulture Australia 
Ltd grants export licences for horticultural products (cur rently applicable to oranges, dried grapes, apples and 
pears) (Australian Customs Service, 2007). 
 105 WTO documents G/STR/N/12/AUS, 2 July 2008 , and G/STR/N/13/AUS, 13 September 2010. 
 106 For more information on the extent of past government involvement in the Australian economy see 
WTO document WT/TPR/S/104, 26 August 2002. 
 107 In 2007/08, 80% of the beneficiaries were small businesses with a turnover of less than 
$A 5 million.  The EMDG also applies to services and to intellectual property or know-how that resulted mainly from work in Australia, but excludes legal, migration, and real estate purchasing services (Austrade, 2008). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 61 
 
 
were made to the EMDG scheme affecting expenditu re incurred from 1 July 2008 and 1 July 2010.108  
Key changes in 2008 included:  increasing the maximu m grant by $A 50,000 to $A 200,000;  raising 
the maximum turnover limit of recipients from $A 30 million to $A 50 million;  reducing the 
minimum expenditure threshold by $A 5,000 to $A  10,000;  allowing costs of patenting products 
overseas to be eligible for EMDG support;  making the scheme more accessible to services exporters;  
allowing state, territory, and regional economic  development and industry bodies to access the 
scheme;  and introducing an EMDG payments assessme nt measure tied to two alternative tests (export 
performance test, Australian Net Benefit Requirements)  for applicants who have already received two 
grants.  Key changes in 2010 included:  increasi ng the minimum required level of export-promotion 
expenditure from $A 10,000 to $A 20,000;  reducing the maximum number of grants an applicant can 
receive from 8 to 7;  reducing the maximum grant payable from $A 200,000 to $A 150,000;  capping 
the maximum amount claimable for intellectual prope rty expenses at $A 50,000;  and extending the 
scheme for five years to the 2015/16 grant year (2016/17 financial year). 
81. Administered by Austrade, the EMDG distributed grants worth $A 198.1 million to 
4,675 exporters in 2009/10, an increase of 13.9% in grant numbers and 6.6% in grant payments 
compared with 2008/09.  This was on top of an increase of 23.7% in grant payments in 2008/09, 
which was largely the result of increasing the 200 8/09 budget appropriation from $A 150.4 million to 
$A 200.4 million to meet a shortfall in funding  for claims.  Budgeted funding for the EMDG for 
2009/10 was also $A 200.4 million, but for 2010/11 reverted to $A 150.4 million.   
82. According to an independent (Mortimer) 2008 Re view, the EMDG scheme is both effective 
and efficient in supporting the development of Australia's exports.109  Research undertaken by Lateral 
Economics and KPMG Econtech found, inter alia,  that:  for each EMDG recipient an additional 
2.4 companies benefit from following the EMDG recipi ents into offshore markets;  EMDG recipients 
are estimated to have a 13.2% increase in labour pr oductivity as a result of the grant;  and compared 
to other relevant grant programmes, e.g. the St rategic Investment Program and R&D programmes, 
EMDG has a benefit/cost ratio equal to or bette r than these other widely accepted programmes.  
Moreover, the proportion of export marketing expenditu re is higher for EMDG recipients than for 
comparable non-recipient firms, and the inciden ce of firms developing into new exporters and 
becoming regular exporters is higher for EMDG reci pients.  Modelling indicates that each dollar of 
EMDG generates some $A 13.5 to $A 27 of exports.110  The majority of EMDG exports were to 
traditional markets (United States, United Kingdom).  The main products exported by EMDG 
participants were tourism, education, culture, in formation technology, and food and beverages.  The 
majority of new EMDG applicants firms were relativ ely new to exports and used the scheme's funding 
to offset their cost of entry into new mark ets.  The 2008 independent Review recommended, 
inter alia,  to preserve EMDG as a capped programme, tighten the scheme's provisions by reducing the 
number of grants from eight to five per recipient per year and increase the minimum threshold to 
$A 30,000 so as to resolve funding uncertainty, ar ising from demand exceeding the funding available.  
The 2008 Review replaced the EMDG review scheduled  for 2010;  the next review may take place 
within 2-3 years.  
(b) Trade and Export Concession Scheme (TRADEX)  
83. During the review period, Australia has mainta ined its up-front duty and GST exemptions for 
imported goods intended for direct export or used, lost, or wasted in the processing of exports under 
                                                      
 108 Austrade online information.  Viewed at:  http ://www.austrade.gov.au/defau lt.aspx?FolderID= 1436 
[30 May 2010]. 
 109 Austrade (2008);  and Productivity Commission (2009g) and (2010b). 
 110 Austrade (2008);  and Productivity Commission (2009g) and (2010b). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 62 
 
 
the Tradex scheme.111  Between 2006/07 and 2008/09, the operation of the scheme, which is 
administered by AusIndustry, resulted in total forgone duty estimated at $A 225.6 million;  the amount of duty forgone in 2008/09 dropped by about 18% compared to 2007/08, a peak year (Table III.3), and in 2009/10 it declined further to $A 51.2 million, a reduction of about 24%.  These 
reductions were due to the impact of the global financial crisis on fo reign trade as well as to the tariff 
reductions for the motor vehicle, textile, clothing, a nd footwear industries, and the entry in force of 
the FTA with ASEAN countries (Chapter II).  Th e main beneficiaries of the scheme were the 
automotive industry, mining, and electrical/scien tific/electronic equipment manufacturers.  An 
amendment to the Tradex Scheme Act in Octobe r 2008 ensured that the scheme could stand alone 
without reference to duty drawback legislation;  other minor administrative changes were also 
introduced to improve the efficiency of the scheme.  Further minor changes to clarify the eligibility of 
partnerships in the Tradex Scheme and remove re dundant provisions of the Act were expected in 
2010.   
(c) Duty drawback scheme 
84. A legislative amendment was made to the duty drawback scheme in May 2010 to facilitate 
electronic lodgement of drawbacks claims.  Du ty drawbacks are process ed on the basis of 
self-assessment.  The amount of duty drawback must  be calculated by the claimant using one of the 
three calculation methods available.
112  In all methods the amount of a claim for drawback of import 
duty must not exceed the amount of import duty paid on the goods.  Exporters may obtain a refund of 
customs duties (not GST) paid on imported goods if these goods were treated, processed, or 
incorporated into other goods for export, or are exported unused after import.113  A total of 
$A 110.1 million was refunded to drawback claima nts in 2007/08, $A 118.4 million in 2008/09, and 
$A 94.6 million in 2009/10;  the drop in 2009/10 w as for the same reasons as the fall in Tradex 
benefits (section (b) above).  No data on the expor t value involved was available from the authorities.  
The main beneficiaries have been  the automotive, tobacco, alcohol, and heavy machinery industries.  
(d) Other schemes 
85. The Certain Inputs to Manufacture (CIM) scheme provides duty-free entry for raw materials 
and intermediate chemicals, plastic and paper g oods, and metal minerals used in manufacturing 
directed towards "import replacement" and export enhancement.114  CIM remains unchanged but may 
be subject to review in the next five years.   Duty forgone from CIM since 2007 has been around 
$A 9 million and the main beneficiaries have been the chemicals and plastics sectors. 
                                                      
 111 AusIndustry online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.ausindustry.gov.au/importandexport/ 
tradexscheme/Pages/TradexScheme.aspx [21 May 2010].  
112 The three calculation methods are:  shipment-by-shipment basis method (when imports directly 
relate to exports);  representative or averaging shipment  basis method (for high volume low value goods), where 
a representative shipment for a period is picked as a sample of the values  of identical items, the averaging of 
shipments is costed over time and must not result in an overclaim;  imputation method  (when import documents 
are generally unavailable), where the basis on which to calculate duty drawback can be 30% of the purchase 
price of the goods whenever these goods are fully imported and have been purchased in Australia by the 
exporter (Australian Customs Service online information.  Viewed at: http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/ 
resources/files/FS_Export-Concessions-Duty-Drawback-Scheme.pdf [2 August 2010]).  
113 Australian Customs and border Protection Se rvice online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.customs.gov.au/site/p age4382.asp [21 May 2010]. 
 114 According to the authorities "import replacement" means that certain eligible goods can be imported 
duty free, if their use as inputs has a substantial and demonstrable performance advantage over substitutable 
domestic goods.  For more details about the scheme see AusIndustry online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.ausindustry.gov.au/ImportandExport/Certa inInputstoManufactureCIM/Documents/CIM%20Dec08.
pdf [21 May 2010]. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 63 
 
 
86. The manufacture-in-bond scheme (MiB) was terminated on 5 June 2009.115  Under the MiB 
goods could be manufactured in a warehouse licen sed by Customs using imported components on 
which duty and GST had not been paid;  the schem e was never used as it was an interim measure 
while legislative amendments were put in place to  enact Tradex, a more cost-effective option for 
deferring the payment of duty and GST. 
(e) New exporters 
87. In April 2009, the New Exporter Developmen t Program (NEDP), which was confined to 
SMEs, was phased out and replaced by the Getting into Export Program, which provides, inter alia,  
advisory and training support to all new exporters.  TradeStart, a coaching and action learning 
programme, which was scheduled to conclude at the end of the 2009/10, was extended for four years.  
During this period the authorities plan to invest a to tal of $A 14.4 million to assist SMEs, particularly 
those located in rural Australia, and industries that have high growth potential to commence 
exporting, and to convert irregular exporters to sustainable export activity.  
(f) Export finance, guarantees, and insurance  
88. The Export Finance and Insurance Corporation ( EFIC), is a self-funding statutory authority 
operating in accordance with commercial principles.  It provides various finance, insurance, and 
guarantee facilities to support Australian compani es exporting or investing overseas.  EFIC's support 
includes:  direct loans (to buyers);  export fi nance guarantees (to banks financing contracts with 
buyers);  documentary credit guarantees (to banks confirming letters of credit);  and payments 
insurance (against non-payment by the buyer).  The terms and conditions of su ch products are subject 
to the OECD guidelines.116  The level of official support depends on the degree of local content 
("Australian activity" or "Australian content") involv ed:  export contracts with over 50% local content 
may receive support for up to 85% of the eligible  contract value (ECV) (sum of the imported 
components into the buyer's country, i.e. Australian plus third country activities plus the local cost 
which must be the lower of 30% of ECV or the lo cal cost amount).  Where the "Australian activity" 
involved is less than 50%, the level of support would normally be limited to the degree of "Australian 
activity".  Although permitted by the EFIC Act, th e EFIC does not normally provide credit insurance.  
Other means of support that are not subject to OECD guidelines include:  contract bonds (to buyers to cover advance payment, seller's perfor mance and warranty of products sold) , working capital 
guarantees (to banks), and political risk insurance (to banks and/or Australian companies investing 
abroad) .  The Minister for Trade can direct or approve th e EFIC's entry into transactions considered to 
be in the "national interest" (e.g. automotive)
117;  the Government is responsible for the financial 
consequences of national interest transactions.118  EFIC's obligations to third parties are guaranteed by 
the Government;  although this gua rantee has never been used, it is potentially an additional element 
of assistance for exporters.  
                                                      
 115 Customs Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1), 4 June 2009. 
 116 The OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits is, inter alia,  aimed at preserving a 
level playing field in officially supported export products.  
117 National interest transactions usually occur wher e the transaction size or risk exceeds the EFIC's 
commercial parameters, and where the Mi nister for Trade considers them to be in the national interest.  For 
example, on the National Interest Account, in 2008/09 EFIC provided a working capital line of credit to GM Holden Limited to support its export of motor vehicles, parts, and engineering services while the Australian 
manufacturer established stronger market links under the newly created General Motors Company (EFIC, 2009). 
 
118 As a result of exchange rates movements, the national interest account recorded a loss of 
$A 0.2 million in 2008/09, compared with a prof it in 2007/08 of $A 4.8 million (EFIC, 2009). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 64 
 
 
89. During 2009/10, the EFIC supporte d exports and overseas investme nt totalling $A 5.9 billion, 
well above the previous year's performance ($A 1. 3 billion);  this was the result of continuing 
economic and financial uncertainty and constrained access to credit.119  These figures cover both the 
commercial account and the national interest acc ount.  In 2009/10, the mining sector was the main 
sector supported, accounting for 41.1% of total EFI C signings, followed by construction (40.8%) and 
manufacturing (15.4%).  The 2009/10 commercial account profit of $A 38.3 million was up from 
$A 33.6 million in 2008/09. 
(4) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(i) Taxation 
90. Australia remains a relatively low-tax OECD c ountry relying on direct taxes for around 64% 
of its tax revenues (Table III.5).120  The value-added tax (Goods and Services Tax) is the main indirect 
tax component, followed by excise taxes;  taxes on international trade contributed a mere 1.9% to 
total tax revenues in 2008/09, and customs du ties constituted around 99.8% of these taxes on 
international trade (section (2)(ii)(a)).  
Tabel III.5 
Structure of tax revenue, 2005-09 
(% and $A million)  
  2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 
Total tax revenues ($A million) 297,760  319,752  348,330  338,878  
  (Percentage share) 
Direct taxes 63.6 63.7 64.4 64.4 
Taxes on income 59.2 59.2 59.9 59.4 
 Income taxes levied on i ndividuals 39.8 37.4 36.7 37.7 
 Income taxes levied on enterprisesa 18.9 21.2 22.6 21.2 
 Income taxes levied on non-residents 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 
Employers payroll taxes 4.4 4.5 4.6 5.0 
 General taxes (payroll tax) 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.8 
 Other employers labour force taxes 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
Indirect taxes 36.4 36.3 35.6 35.6 
Taxes on provision of goods and services 25.5 25.0 24.4 25.0 
 General taxes (sales tax) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Goods and services tax (GST) 13.1 12.9 12.7 12.6 
 Excises and levies 7.7 7.4 7.0 7.4 
 Taxes on international trade 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.9 
 Taxes on gambling 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 
 Taxes on insurance 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 
Taxes on property 8.6 9.2 8.9 8.2 
 Taxes on immovable property 4.5 4.6 4.5 5.2 
 Taxes on financial and capital transactions 4.2 4.5 4.5 3.0 
Taxes on the use of goods and perfor mance of activities 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.4 
 Motor vehicle taxes 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 
 Franchise taxes 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 
 Other 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
a Includes petroleum resource rent taxes.  
Source : Australian Bureau of Statistics, Taxation Statistics 2008-09, 5506.0, Canberra. 
                                                      
 119 EFIC (2010). 
 120 In 2007, Australia's total tax revenue as a percen tage of GDP was 30.8% while the average total tax 
burden for OECD countries was over 35.8% (OECD, 2010). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 65 
 
 
(a) Indirect taxation 
91. During the review period Australia's reliance on i ndirect taxes has remained lower than other 
OECD countries.121  Since 2007, Australia has increased the rates of the luxury car tax (LCT), and of 
the excises and "excise-equivalent" customs dut y rate on ready-to-drink beverages and tobacco, 
cigarettes, cigars, and snuff.  Non-fuel excise rate s are indexed according to the Consumer Price Index 
in February and August each year to ensure that th ey are not eroded by inflation;  the luxury car tax 
threshold is indexed each income year, and exci se on petrol and diesel has remained fixed since 
March 2001.  Australia currently levies the following indirect taxes:  
- a 10% GST on the value added at each point in the production and distribution chain 
for most goods and services (as from July 2000)122; 
- an additional Luxury Car Tax (LCT) of 33% (previously 25%) on vehicles with a 
retail value above a GST-inclusive and CPI-linked threshold equal to the car 
depreciation limit ($A 57,466 for 2010/11, $A 57,180 for 2008/09 and 2009/10, fuel-efficient cars (fuel consumption up to 7 litres per 100 km) above $A 75,375 for 
2010/11, $A 75,000 for 2009/10)
123; 
- a 29% Wine Equalisation Tax (WET) on gr ape wine, fruit wine, vegetable wine, 
perry, mead, sake, cider, and grape wine products including vermouth, marsala, wine 
cocktails and creams (since July 2000)124;  and 
- excise taxes on the production/manufacture, import, sale or distribution of petroleum 
and other fuel products, certain alcohol , tobacco, and crude oil (Table III.6).125   
                                                      
 121 In 2007, the GDP share of Australia's revenue from taxes on goods and services was 8.2%, while the 
OECD average was 10.9% (OECD, 2010).  
122 The valuation basis for the GST on imported goods is the c.i.f. value plus customs duties and any 
wine tax.  The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) operates  a scheme that provides for the deferral of GST on 
imported goods.  Most educational, eligible childcare and health services, as well as medical appliances, cars for certain disabled people, basic foodstuff (meat, fruit, and vegetables), imports under certain customs concessions, 
and exports are among the items exempt from GST (Australian Customs Service online information.  Viewed at: 
http://www.customs.gov.au/site/p age5343.asp [25 May 2010]). 
 
123 No data on the sales of domestic or foreign lu xury cars were available from the authorities.  
Australian Taxation Office online information, "Luxury Ca r tax - how to complete your activity statement".  
Viewed at:  http://www.ato.gov.au/content/downloads/bus27796n7391082009.pdf [26 May 2010];  and Australian Customs Notice No. 2008/50, 15 October 2008.   Viewed at:  http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/ 
resources/notices/ACN0850.pdf [21 April 2010];  Austra lian Taxation Office online info rmation.  Viewed at:  
http://www.ato.gov.au/taxprofessi onals/content.asp?doc=/content/ 00144892.htm [14 July 2010]. 
 
124 Wine Equalisation Tax Ruling WETR 2009/1.  Vi ewed at: http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view.htm? 
Docid=WTR/WT20091/NAT/ATO/00001 [29 May 2010]. 
 125 As of 26 April 2008, the excise applying to certain spirit-based ready-to-drink (RTD) pre-mixed 
drinks ('other excisable beverages' having an alcoholic strength by volu me not exceeding 10%) increased from 
$A 39.36 per litre of alcohol to $A 66.67 per litre of alcohol.  Special Notice Nos 87 and 88 in the Australian 
Commonwealth Government Gazette  published the Government's intention to increase the excise and customs 
rates, respectively.  Viewed at:  http://www.ag.gov .au/portal/govgazonline.nsf/(custom-spcnot-pub-view)! 
OpenView&Start=567 [20 August  2010].  As of 30 April 2010, the ex cise on tobacco products increased from 
$A 0.26220 to $A 0.32775 per stick of tobacco for cigarettes, a nd from $A 327.77 to $A 409.71 per kg of 
tobacco content for other tobacco (loose leaf to bacco).  Special Notice Nos 63 and 62 in the Australian 
Commonwealth Government  Gazette  published the Government's intention to increase the excise and customs 
rates, respectively.  Viewed at:  http://www.ag.gov .au/portal/govgazonline.nsf/(custom-spcnot-pub-view)! 
OpenView&Start=73 [20 August 2010].  Th e latest increases in excise rates took place on 2 August 2010.  ATO 
online information.  Viewed at:  http://law.ato.gov.a u/atolaw/view.htm?Docid=PAC/BL030002/1&PiT=999912 
31235958 [2 December 2010]. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 66 
 
 
Table III.6 
Excise rates, as at 16 March 2011  
($A) 
Commodity Rates applying from          
1 February 2006 Current rates                
1 February 2011 
Petroleum and other fuel products (per litre)   
Petroleum condensate .. 0.38143a 
Stabilized crude petroleum oil .. 0.38143a 
Topped crude petroleum oil .. 0.38143a 
Gasoline (other than for us e as fuel in aircraft) 0.38143 0.38143a 
Aviation gasoline 0.02854 0.03556a 
Aviation kerosene 0.02854 0.03556a 
Fuel oil 0.07557 0.38143a 
Heating oil and kerosene (for burner use) 0.07557 0.38143a 
Fuel ethanol 0.38143 0.38143a 
Diesel (other than biodiesel) 0.38143 0.38143a 
Biodiesel 0.38143 0.38143a 
Liquid aromatic hydrocarbons consisting principally of benzene, 
toluene or xylene or mixtures of them .. 0.38143a 
Mineral turpentine .. 0.38143a 
White spirit .. 0.38143a 
Petroleum products (other than blends) not elsewhere included .. 0.38143a 
Greases (per kg) 0.05449 0.05449a 
Oils and lubricants, excluding greases (per litre) 0.05449 0.05449a 
Beer (per litre)b   
Individual container <48 litres   
Low strength 31.73 36.71c 
Mid strength 36.98 42.78c 
High strength 36.98 42.78c 
Individual container >48 litres   
Low strength 6.33 7.33c 
Mid strength 19.89 23.01c 
High strength 26.03 30.11c 
Other beer (produced for non-commercial purposes using 
commercial facilities or equipment)b   
Low strength  .. 2.58c 
High strength .. 2.98c 
Other beverages, not exceedi ng 10% alcohol content 36.98 72.46c 
Brandy 58.48 67.66c 
Other spirits, exceeding 10% alcohol content 62.64 72.46c 
Cigarettes, cigars, and tobacco (per stick)d 0.23259 0.33633e 
Tobacco products (per kg) 290.74 420.43e 
.. Not available. 
a Rates applying from 1 July 2006. 
b Rate applied per litre of alcohol  on the amount by which the alcohol content (by volume) exceeds 1.15%. 
c Rates applying from 1 July 2010. d Rate applied per stick to cigarettes, cigars and tobaccos with tobacco content of 0.8 grams or less. 
e Rates applying from 1 February 2011. 
Source: Treasury (2006), Pocket Guide to the Australian Tax System , Canberra;  and Australian Government (2011), 
Australian Taxation Office, Excise Tariff Working Pages , 16 March.  Viewed at:  http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/ 
view.htm?Docid=PAC/BL030002/1&PiT=99991231235958. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 67 
 
 
(b) Direct taxation 
92. Since 2007, no major changes have been made to  Australia's direct tax system, except for 
those relating to legislated changes to rates and th resholds, and to the implementation of reforms in 
taxation of financial arrangements .  The progressive personal income tax rates currently range from 
zero to 45% for taxable income over $A 180,000 (plus a 1.5% Medicare levy).126  Currently, a flat rate 
of 30% applies to corporate income taxes;  alt hough the rate is higher than for some neighbouring 
countries, it is not out of line with rates in OECD countries.127  A 46.5% Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) is 
levied on the value of certain fringe benefits employers provide to their employees, such as a right (including a property right), privilege, service or  facility (e.g. the provision of company cars, 
subsidized accommodation and travel, entertainment, and the like).
128  In July 2010, new resource tax 
arrangements were announced, including a Mineral Resource Rent Tax.  A 30% Mineral Resources 
Rent Tax for iron ore and coal is to be introduced and the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax of 40% is to 
be extended to include all onshore and offshor e projects involving both oil and gas production.129   
(c) Tax incentives appraisal 
93. Australia's 2009 annual Tax Expenditures Statement identifies 337 (about 270 in 2005) tax 
expenditures provided in 2009 by the Commonwealth Government to benefit a specified activity or 
class of taxpayer:  110 pertain directly to business income, 21 to commodities (e.g. fuel, alcohol, beer, 
wine, tobacco), 4 to natural resources, 23 to GST,  and 5 (as from 1 July 2011) to the Carbon Pollution 
Reduction Scheme, whose introduction was deferred un til after the end of the current Kyoto Period in 
2012 and when certain intern ational conditions are met.130  The main business-income-related tax 
incentives include the small business and genera l business tax break (13 December 2008 to end 
December 2009)131, and the accelerated and simplified depreciation for small business (as from 2007).  
In November 2010, an R&D tax credit, originally scheduled to replace, as from 1 July 2010, the 125% 
R&D Tax Concession, the Tax Offset, the 175% Prem ium, and the International Premium, was under 
                                                      
 126 Medicare is Australia's health care scheme, which is funded by revenue collected through this levy 
based on taxable income (The Treasury, 2009b). 
 127 Australian Taxation Office online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.ato.gov.au/businesses/ 
content.asp?doc=/content/44266.htm&pc=001/0 03/019/001/006&mnu=42573&mfp=001&st=&cy=1  
[23 May 2010]. 
 128 Australian Taxation Office online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.ato.gov.au/businesses/ 
content.asp?doc=/content/76140.htm&pc=001/0 03/019/001/007&mnu=42573&mfp=001&st=&cy=1 
[23 May 2010]. 
 129 The Government's compromise over the mining tax deal was expected to unlock a stalled pipeline of 
an estimated $A 3.3 billion mergers and acquisitions in the booming resources sector ( Businessinsider.com , 
"Australian Miners' Tax Victory Is Horrible News For Commodity Bulls", 2 July 2010.  Viewed at:  
http://www.businessinsider.com/australia-mining- tax-change-2010-7 [2 August 2010];  and Reuters  "Australia 
mining tax deal seen unlocking M&A", 2 July 2010.  Viewed at:  http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6611 
TM20100702 [2 August 2010]). 
 130 The Tax Expenditures Statement provides details of  concessions, benefits, incentives and charges 
provided through the tax system (termed as tax expenditures) to taxpayers by the Australian Government (The 
Treasury, 2010e).  
131 The Small Business and General Business Tax Brea k was announced in December 2008 as part of 
the Nation Building Package response to the global financial crisis and further enhanced in February 2009 as 
part of the Nation Building and Jobs.  It provides a tax deduction for investing in new tangible depreciating assets.  The tax break varies in percentage terms.  In the May 2009 Budget, it was increased from 30% to 50% 
solely for small businesses that:  have a turnover of less than $A 2 million a year;  acquire assets costing at least 
$A 1,000 per asset from 13 December 2008 until 31 Decemb er 2009;  and installed t hose assets or had them 
ready for use by 31 December 2010 (Productivity Co mmission, 2010c). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 68 
 
 
consideration.132  These measures are available to domestic and foreign firms.  During the review 
period, the estimated GDP share of total tax expenditures dropped from 10.4% (2006/07) to 8.5% (2008/09), and is expected to decline further;  th is decline mainly reflects the impact of lower 
marginal rates of personal income tax, which reduce the value of many tax concessions, and the 
impact of the global financial crisis.   In 2008/09, assistance to all functions (economic and 
non-economic activities) in the form of various  tax incentives was $A 102.4 billion, an amount 
equivalent to less than a third of total direct  expenditures (e.g. grants), which amounted to 
$A 324.6 billion;  very few tax e xpenditures relate directly to pro duction and/or trade of goods and/or 
services.  Tax expenditure for agriculture, forestry and fishing was forecast to rise drastically as from 
2011, due to the (now deferred) CPRS implementati on, while tax expenditures for fuel and energy are 
to decline progressively as a result of the phasing-in of an excise on alternative fuels from 1 July 2011 
and the abolition of the exemption from crude oil excise of condensate as of 13 May 2008.   The 
largest positive consumption tax expenditure relates to  the GST (the main indirect tax), while negative 
tax expenditure is involved for commodity taxes and customs duties.
133  The capital gains taxpayers 
are the main recipients of tax expenditures, although the amounts involved dropped considerably 
between 2007/08 and 2008/09. 
(ii) Production assistance 
94. Since its previous Review, Australia has c ontinued to provide wide-ranging assistance to 
production, not just in the form of tariff conces sions and other tax incentives (sections (2)(ii)(f), 
(3)(iv)(c) and (4)(i)(c)), but also in form of gran ts and concessional loans, which are not generally 
included in its assistance estimates, and regulatory restrictions on competition in certain activities 
(section (4)(iii)(a)).  No information was availa ble from the authorities on assistance programmes 
containing concessional loans and their budgetary cost .  Assistance generally benefits the industry 
receiving it, but can come at a cost to other i ndustries, taxpayers, consumers, and competitors.134  
95. Australia's latest notification to the WTO Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (October 2009) listed 30 federal programmes in support of sugar, dairy, forestry, passenger 
motor vehicles (PMV), textiles/clothing/footwear (TCF), pharmaceuticals, regional development, 
innovation and environmental protec tion activities, as well as 25 programmes at state and territory 
level (Table AIII.1).135  Australia maintains sunset clauses fo r several incentives notified to the WTO;  
                                                      
 132 According to a KPMG report,  the planned R&D Tax Credit incentive (Table AIII.1) was rated the 
best out of 10 other national systems in terms of low total tax index ratings systems (i.e. total taxes paid by corporations as a percentage of total taxes paid by corporations in the United States) (KPGM, 2010).  The 
planned R&D Tax Credit would double the rate of government support for R&D conducted by firms turning 
over less than $A 20 million, from 7.5 cents under the  previous scheme to 15 cents.  These firms now benefit from a 45% refundable tax credit.  Larger businesses turning over $A 20 million or more also receive more 
assistance as they are eligible for a 40% non-refundable tax credit, whic h raises government assistance from 
7.5 cents to 10 cents (AusIndustry Program Summary.  Viewed at:  http://www.ausindustry.gov.au/ AboutAusIndustry/Documents/2009-AI%20Program%20Summary/Program%20Summary.pdf [2 June 2010];  
and http://minister.innovation.gov.au/Carr/Pages/ RDTAXCREDITBESTINWORLD.a spx [2 June 2010]). 
 
133 Negative tax expenditure occurs when these arrange ments impose an additional charge rather than a 
benefit. 
 134 Productivity Commission (2010c). 
 135 WTO document G/SCM/N/186/AUS, 19 October 2009.  In addition to WTO-notified subsidies, the 
Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research has several other programmes, including the 
Insulation Industry Assistance Packag e (IIAP), Green Building Fund (GBF), Re-tooling for Climate Change, 
Ethanol Production Grants (EPG), Renewable Energy Equity Fund (REEF), Innovation Investment Fund (IIF), 
the Pooled Development Funds (PDF), Venture Capital Limited Partnerships (VCLP), Commercialising 
Emerging Technologies (COMET) and TQUAL (tourism) Grants (Chapter IV), some of which may have expired by the time of finalization of this report.  For example, as from 2009 Commercialisation Australia, Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 69 
 
 
some of these programmes are to terminate on a sp ecific date or were e nded during the period under 
review, e.g. the Dairy Industry Adjustment Packag e (payments until April 2008, adjustment levy until 
February 2009), the ACIS (until end 2010), and th e Pharmaceuticals Partnerships Programmes (until 
late 2009).  Support under the notified schemes is main ly delivered by means of grants to eligible 
firms;  other forms of assistance include duty concessions, tax exemptions, relief payments, and 
counselling services.   
96. According to the Productivity Commission, in 2008/09 assistance to domestic production of 
goods and services was $A 17.2 billion, in gross  terms, comprising:  $A 9. 5 billion in tariff assistance 
on output, $A 3.7 billion of budgetary outla ys, and about $A 4 billion in tax concessions.136  Total 
budgetary outlays to domestic produc tion peaked at $A 4.4 billion in 2007/08, while tax-concessions-
related support continued to rise.  Support became less focused on R&D, i.e. 29% of total budgetary 
assistance in 2008/09 compared with 42% in 2004/05 , as support for small business increased from 
9% (2003/04) to 21% (2008/09);  in addition, the share of industry-specific support was reduced 
considerably.137  In 2008/09, budgetary assistance (i.e. outlays  plus tax incentives) benefited mostly 
the services sector (45%), and to a lesser extent manufacturing (23%) and the primary sector;  this is 
in contrast with the situation in 2007/08 when assistance was allocated almost evenly between the 
primary and services sectors (27% per sector), w ith a lower share for manufacturing (22%), due to 
severe drought conditions.138  In 2008/09, the estimated budgetary  assistance was higher for:  grain, 
sheep and beef cattle farming  (12% of total), mainly in the form of drought assistance payments and 
R&D support;  property and business services (9.7%);  finance and insurance (8%);  and motor 
vehicles and parts (7.5%), mainly through the Automotive Competitiveness and Investment Scheme 
(ACIS).139  In 2008/09, the effective rate (of combin ed) assistance (ERA) re mained high for TCF 
(14.5%), PMV (11.8%), grain, sheep and beef cattle farming (6.3%) a nd horticulture and fruit 
growing (5.6%).140  Australia has kept its domestic support e xpenditure as measured by the Aggregate 
Measurement of Support (AMS) well below its fina l bound total commitment level;  its final bound 
total AMS ceiling has been $A 471.86 million since 2 000, and its level of support, as measured by the 
current total AMS, dropped during the review period, from $A 206.74 million (2007/08) to zero 
(2008/09).141  Nevertheless, in 2008/09, Australia provided trade-distorting domestic support, albeit 
below the de minimis  levels, for milk ($A 0.17 million), sugar ($A 0.01 million), wheat 
($A 0.41 million), and cattle ($A 0.08 million), as well as non-product-specific support mainly for 
irrigation grants ($A 161.72 million) mostly in the form of irrigation management grants.  The vast 
                                                                                                                                                                     
which replaced COMET, assists innov ative SMEs with the commerciali zation of promising research and 
innovation;  the May 2009 Budget provided $A 196.1 million over four years for Commercialisation Australia and $A 82 million per annum thereafter to provide skills and knowledge grants, experienced executives grants, 
proof of concept grants, and early-stage commercialization repayable grants.  For extensive information on the 
ongoing programmes see AusIndustry Program Summary  online.  Viewed at:  http://www.ausindustry.gov.au/ 
AboutAusIndustry/Documents/2009-AI%20Program%20Summary/Program%20Summary.pdf [2 June 2010];  
and Productivity Commission (2010c). 
 
136 Productivity Commission (2010c). 
 137 In 2008/09, industry-specific assistance for the automotive, biotechnology, and textile, clothing, and 
footwear industries accounted for 15% (27% in 2004/05) of tota l budgetary assistance, and export promotion for 
8% (14% in 2004/05) (Productivity Commission, 2010c). 
 138 The main reason for the increase of the services sector share is the inclusion in calculations of 
various small business tax concessions, a large proportion of which primarily benefit the services sector (Productivity Commission, 2010b and 2009g). 
 
139 Productivity Commission (2010c). 
 140 The ERA measures the net subsidy equivalent (NSE) of combined tariff, budgetary, and agricultural 
pricing and/or regulatory assistance to a particular indust ry in proportion to that industry's unassisted net output 
(or unassisted value added).  It can provide an indication of  the extent to which assistance to an industry allows 
it to attract and hold economic resources (Productivity Commission, 2010c).  
141 WTO documents G/AG/N/AUS/73, 13 July 2009 and G/AG/N/AUS/76, 13 July 2010. WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 70 
 
 
majority of Australia's domestic support to agricult ure is in form of "Green Box" programmes, i.e. 
support that has minimal trade-distorting effects or effects on production.  
97. Between 2006 and 2009, fuel exci se credits of more than $A 3 million per year were available 
to businesses that are large energy users, on the condition that they joined the Greenhouse Challenge 
Plus Programme, which ceased on 30 June 2009.142   
(iii) Competition and consumer policy 
(a) Competition policy143 
General framework 
98. Reportedly, Australia's competition regime has served well the economy, consumers, and 
business during the recent global economic crisis, whic h has been seemingly used by vested interests 
both domestically and abroad as a justification for applying pressure to relax competition law as well 
as regulation and enforcement.144  Australia's National Competition Policy (NCP) framework 
explicitly recognizes that competitive markets genera lly serve the interests of consumers and the 
community, by providing strong incentives for suppliers  to operate efficiently, be price competitive, 
and innovative.  A key principle is  that arrangements that detract from competition should be retained 
only if shown to be of public interest.  As pa rt of the NCP, under the Competition Principles 
Agreement (CPA), Commonwealth, state and territory  governments undertake to review and reform 
legislation that restricts competition.  The C ouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) Reform 
Council has monitored progress of reforms since 2007,  and assessed the costs and benefits of these 
reforms in several areas (e.g. standards, electricity, transport, infrastructure).  
99. The institutional setting for competition matters  remained unchanged during the review 
period.  National competition policy is the responsibilit y of the Department of the Treasury within the 
Commonwealth Government as well as the Premier's Department in each State and the Chief Minister's Department in each Territory.  Th e Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 
(ACCC), an independent statutory authority, is charged with, inter alia,  administering the 
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) (see below);  the ACCC and the Australian Energy 
Regulator (AER) are responsible for regulating the electricity, gas, telecommunications, and transport 
sectors.
145  The National Competition Council (NCC), also  an independent authority, assesses whether 
third-party access should be granted to major infrastructure under the CCA access provisions, with subsequent regulation of that access conducted by the ACCC or other state-based regulators.  The 
Australian Competition Tribunal (ACT) may re-hear or re-consider these matters;  it may affirm, set 
aside or vary the original decision.
146  
Legislative framework 
100. Competition (and consumer protection) legisl ation is contained in the Competition and 
Consumer Act 2010 (CCA), which in January 2011 replaced the Trade Practices Act 1974 (TPA), and 
                                                      
 142 For more details about this facility see WTO document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007.   
 143 For more information about Australia's competition law and policy developments see 
http://www.australiancompetitionlaw.org/news.html;  WT O document WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007;  and 
OECD (2010c).  
144 ACCC (2009a). 
 145 As of 1 July 2008, the AER is responsible for regulating revenues for gas transmission and 
distribution networks.  
146 For more details about the ACT and its activ ities see http://www.competitiontribunal.gov.au/. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 71 
 
 
is intended to promote and preserve fair and fr ee competition in the domestic market.  During the 
review period, legislative amendments enhanced the ability of the ACCC to share information with 
other regulators (2007), affected misuse of market power and unconscionable conduct (2007), 
information sharing (2007), water trading (2007), mi suse of market power – predatory pricing (2008), 
and cartel criminalization (24 July 2009) and search-warrant powers (2009).147  New laws were passed 
in 2010, including a new Australian Consumer Law  (ACL) (section (b) below), and the CCA dealing 
with provisions on mergers and acquisitions as we ll as with those on unconscionable conduct was 
with the Parliament; this Bill is to insert all r ecent amendments into the TPA (including the ACL).  
101. The CCA prohibits cartel conduct by way of price fixing, output restrictions, bid rigging, and 
allocating customers, suppliers or territories as well as other anti-competitive conduct such as 
boycotts, misuse of market power, exclusive dealin g, resale price maintenance, and agreements or 
mergers substantially lessening competition.  To foster more effective compliance with the CCA, 
four mandatory industry codes of conduct are in pl ace:  the 1998 Franchising Code of Conduct, the 
2007 Oilcode, the 2007 Horticulture Code, and the 2009 Unit Pricing Code.148  Conduct that may raise 
competition concerns (see below) may be authorized on a case-by-case basis through an 
administrative process managed by the ACCC, and on cond ition that it is in the public interest.  In this 
regard, the ACCC has authorized voluntary indust ry codes, including the air conditioning and 
mechanical contractors code, the fruit juice industr y code, the Indigenous Australian art trader code, 
the jewellery trading code, the Medicines Australia's  code of conduct, the pallet-hire industry code 
and the scanning code of practice.  
CCA exemptions 
102. The CCA covers virtually all business activities, including government business149;  
nevertheless, despite a ten-year programme of review  and revision, a long list of special regimes and 
exemptions derogating the CCA is maintained.150  Many of these exemptions are narrow and 
technical.  Most arise at state and territorial levels of government where they seem difficult to 
reform.151  They include specific postal mail delivery services and overseas cargo liner shipping, at the 
national level, and agricultural marketing boards, taxi services or pharmacies, at state or territory 
level.  Several deal with marketing arrangements fo r agricultural products, by authorizing either the 
operation of monopolies (e.g. exports of rice grown in New South Wales) or joint action ostensibly to 
equalize bargaining power between producers and pro cessors.  As of 1 July 2008, the Wheat Export 
Marketing Act 2008 abolished a monopol y over bulk wheat exports by  establishing a scheme for 
accrediting exporters of bulk wheat and Wheat Exports Australia (WEA) to administer it.152  
                                                      
 147 ACCC (2010a). 
 148 The Oilcode regulates the conduct of suppliers, distributors, and retailers in the downstream 
petroleum industry, while the Horticulture Code deals wi th the conduct of growers and traders of horticulture 
produce. 
 149 It also includes telecommunication-specific competition rules. 
 150 OECD (2010c). 
 151 Some 10 Commonwealth and 70 state and territory Acts permit conduct that would normally 
contravene the TPA.  Such conduct may be permitted if it is specifically authorized under those Acts, which, 
inter alia,  cover farm produce, poultry meat, sugar industry, grain marketing, rice marketing, tobacco products, 
wine grapes marketing, liquor, coal industry, gas industry, electricity, financial, banking, gambling, health,  insurance, postal, transport, water supply, and state- owned enterprises activities.  The ACCC publishes the list 
of these enactments on its website and in its annual report (ACCC, 2009a;  and OECD, 2010c). 
 
152 To gain accreditation, wheat exporters that own or  operate port terminal facilities must provide fair 
and transparent access to their facilitie s to other accredited wheat exporters.   From October 2009, accreditation 
requires formal access undertakings under Part IIIA of the TPA, assessed by the ACCC, or a state or territory 
access regime that is certified as effective after reco mmendation by the National Competition Council (OECD, 
2010c;  and Productivity Commission, 2010d). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 72 
 
 
Following recommendations by a 2005 Productivity Commission review, the authorities decided to 
retain CCA provisions (Part X) on international car go liner shipping conferences, but to amend them 
to clarify objectives, remove discussion agreements  from their scope, protect individual confidential 
service contracts between carriers and shippers, and introduce a range of penalties for breaches of its 
procedural provisions.153  The relevant legislative amendments  have not yet been implemented.  
Conditions in agreements licensing patents, design copyrights, and trade marks are also exempt from 
CCA provisions as long as they are limited to permitted topics.154  
103. Certain prohibited anti-competitive practice in industries and professions can be authorized 
when public benefits are deemed to exceed detrim ents.  Businesses may obtain immunity by applying 
for an authorization or submitting notifications of exclusive dealing and collective bargaining to the 
ACCC.  In 2008/09, 64 notifications covering 7 groups, included collectiv e bargaining by:  retailers of 
paint and related products with supp liers;  operators of clubs in Ne w South Wales with suppliers of 
wagering and broadcast services;  and the owners of  independent record labels with licensees in 
respect of the public performance and transmission of  music videos.  It granted authorization to 
35 arrangements covering a wide range of industr ies, including recycling programmes aimed at 
reducing waste from agricultural and veterinary chem icals, and a capacity balancing system at the 
Port of Newcastle.  In 2009/10, the ACCC assessed 74 coll ective bargaining notifications.  It issued 
37 authorizations including on collective bargaini ng by vegetable growers in Tasmania, joint 
marketing of gas produced by the Gorgon gas project, a long-term solution to the capacity constraints in the Hunter Valley coal chain, a Virgin Blue-De lta Air Lines joint venture, and a liquor accord in 
the Northern Territory. 
104. The National Access Regime provides a legislative framework for third-party access to 
certain services provided by essential infrastructure f acilities, such as electricity networks, rail tracks, 
natural-gas pipelines, water, communications, port term inals, and airports.  Its purpose is to promote 
economically efficient infrastructure use and invest ment, including promoting competition in markets 
upstream and downstream from the service, as well as to  encourage new entrants into markets that 
rely on monopoly services (i.e. limited competition).
155  To achieve this objective, much of the 
ACCC/AER role in relation to access regulation may include:  determining prices and access terms and conditions;  monitoring and enforcing industr y-specific pro-competition laws for bulk water, 
energy, and communications;  and monitoring and repor ting on prices and service quality of particular 
goods and services in the areas concerned.  In 2 010, the National Access Re gime was amended to 
improve regulatory certainty and streamline administrative processes, including by introducing 
binding time limits and limiting merits review.   
Mergers and acquisitions 
105. The CCA prohibits acquisitions that would be likely to substantially lessen competition.  
Revised guidelines were issued by the ACCC in  late 2008 outlining the general principles 
underpinning its merger analysis, with increased emphasis on the competitive theories of harm and the 
effect of constraints.  Despite volatile economic  conditions, merger activity was strong and showing 
no sign of significant change in the foreseeable  future.  Between 2004/05 and 2008/09, merger and 
joint ventures reviews more than doubled;  they  rose from 189 to 412 reviews, of which 239 were 
conducted confidentially and 173 we re reviews of public mergers.
156  Some of the more substantial 
mergers considered recently fell within the banking, retail, and energy sectors.  In 2008/09, substantial 
competition concerns were identified in 16 merger matters and resulted in ACCC decisions to oppose 
                                                      
 153 OECD (2010c). 
 154 OECD (2010c). 
 155 OECD (2010c);  and ACCC (2009a). 
 156 ACCC (2009a). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 73 
 
 
the merger or resolve it through an enforceable  undertaking.  In 2009/10, the ACCC considered 
321 matters for compliance with the merger and acqui sitions section of the TPA including the merger 
of two major pharmaceutical companies and the pr oposed sale of an oil company's retail assets to 
another oil company, which the ACCC opposed.  F our mergers were allowed to proceed following 
acceptance of undertakings to address competition concerns.  All publicly reviewed and decided 
mergers were published on the ACCC website. 
106. To deal with "creeping acquisitions"157, by January 2010, the authorities intended to amend 
the TPA in order to ensure ACCC's power to re ject acquisitions that would substantially lessen 
competition in any local, regional or national market.158   
Cartel conduct 
107. Following the increase of pecuniary penalties ag ainst those found to have engaged in anti-
competitive conduct in January 2007, criminal offe nces for cartel conduct commenced in July 2009;  
this significant change allowed for a range of mo re effective responses, including financial and 
criminal sanctions in line with those in othe r OECD countries, including the United States and 
Canada.159  For individuals, cartel conduct is punishable by imprisonment of up to ten years and/or 
fines up to $A 220,000 per contravention or under pa rallel civil prohibition fines up to $A 500,000 per 
contravention.160  Corporations found guilty of such conduc t may be fined up to $A 10 million, three 
times the value of the illegal benefit or, where the benefit cannot be calculated, 10% of the corporate 
group's annual turnover (whichever is greater).  In  addition to the ACCC, which is responsible for 
investigating allegations of car tel conduct and arranging civil proceedings, now the Commonwealth 
Director of Public prosecutions (DPP), the genera l centralized prosecutions agency, has responsibility 
for prosecutions of all indictable  federal offences in Australia.161  The cartel will be prosecuted on 
civil or criminal grounds depending on the facts of each case.162  This dual criminal-civil sanctions 
regime could spur a significant upward trend in  Australia's penalties;  those for breaching the 
prohibitions on anti-competitive conduct have been  considered low by international standards.163  
Reportedly, there are potentially substantial benefits for objectivity and independence in 
decision-making as a result of the separation of inv estigatory and prosecutorial functions between the 
ACCC and DPP.   
                                                      
 157 "Creeping acquisitions" refer to a series of small acquisitions that individually do not substantially 
lessen competition in a market so as to breach section 50 of the Trade Practices Act 1974  (Commonwealth), but 
collectively may have that effect. 
 158 Dr. Craig Emerson Media release, "Government to secure powers to deal with creeping 
acquisitions".  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.craigemersonmp.com/files/012110%20Creeping%20acquisitions%20 
media%20release%20.pdf. 
 159 According to ACCC's Chairman "the financial pena lties in Australia don’t reflect the true damage 
done by anti-competitive conduct, and this reflects both the level of penalties that have been sought by the ACCC and those that have been awarded by the courts".  In the recent past, there have been "cases where the 
profit from the conduct for the comp any far outstripped the reach of th e penalties being sought by the ACCC 
and being awarded by the courts - which, ..., made anti-competitive conduct fair ly good business" (ACCC, 
2010a, and 2009a;  and Trade Practices Amendmen t (Cartel Conduct and Other Measures) Act 2009, 
24 July 2009.  Viewed at: http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml ?itemId=779417&nodeId=feda740e 
39f8ef706f88f67626945aeb&fn=Important%20Notice_Trade%20Practices%20Amendment%20Act%202009%
E2%80%94long%20notice.pdf [11 June 2010]). 
 
160 ACCC (2009a). 
 161 OECD (2010c). 
 162 See ACCC (2009b). 
 163 The TPA also offers a range of other forms of penalty or remedy such as community service orders, 
adverse publicity orders, and disqualification from management (OECD, 2010c). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 74 
 
 
108. In 2009, a record year for cartel litigation, pro ceedings were instituted in 13 cartel matters and 
secured over $A 20 million in fines.  These included action against the air cargo cartel and the marine 
hose cartel, an alleged cartel involving electric cab le manufacturers.  Of the cartel proceedings 
instituted in 2009, seven have been concluded so far, with fines totalling $A 26.3 million.164  In 
2009/10, the ACCC instituted ten proceedings for cartel conduct, of which seven related to its 
extensive investigation into alleged cartel activity in the provision of air cargo services;  the ACCC 
has obtained penalties of over $A 41 million to da te in air cargo cases alone.  Other cartel matters 
finalized in 2009/10 relate to marine hose companies and air conditioning companies.   
Enforcement 
109. Most of the investigations instituted under TPA  (CCA) provisions concern mergers and, to a 
much lesser extent, unfair competition and consum er protection, horizontal agreements, vertical 
agreements, and abuse of dominance.165  The main industries subject to complaints and inquiries 
under TPA provisions (including those relating to co nsumer protection, section (b) below) in 2008/09 
and 2009/10 covered:  auxiliary finance and investment services;  non-store retailing;  electrical, 
electronic and gas appliance retailing;  car retailing;   computer and computer peripheral retailing;  
wired telecommunications network;  lottery operation;  automotive fuel retailing;  credit reporting and 
debt collection services;  and supermarket and grocery stores.166  During the same period, the most 
common contraventions to the TPA provisions rela ting to mainly effective competition and informed 
markets were exclusive dealing and misuse of market  power.  Contraventions to the TPA provisions 
on predominantly fair trading and consumer protection related to misleading or deceptive conduct and 
retail warranties.  Most TPA-related inquiries and co mplaints originate in New South Wales, Victoria, 
and Queensland.  Litigations concluded in 200 8/09 and relating to TPA provisions on lawful 
competition and informed markets involved:  air car go (price fixing in relation to fuel surcharges);  
baby clothing, sport compression garments, and wa ter craft (resale price maintenance);  and taxis 
(roster arrangement). 
Price surveillance 
110. Price surveillance is provided for in the CCA .  Three forms of price surveillance are 
available:  price inquiries, directed to the ACCC by portfolio ministers to undertake a public inquiry;  
price notification, where the portfolio minister requires specific companies to notify the ACCC of a 
proposed price increase;  and price monitoring, wh ere the portfolio minister directs the ACCC to 
monitor the prices, costs, and profits of compan ies and government agencies relating to specific goods 
and services.  Price surveillance may be conducted in formally or formally.  Under the formal price 
surveillance system, penalties may be applied fo r non-compliance actions.  As indicated, the ACCC 
conducts formal price surveillance on aviation and airport services and facilities, fuel, electricity, 
telecommunications, postal services, and container st evedoring.  During the review period, the ACCC 
undertook price monitoring of petrol and airport car parking services as well as an inquiry into the 
prices, costs, and profits of cont ainer terminal operator companies. 
(b) Consumer protection policy 
111. Consumer protection legislati on is contained in the new single Australian Consumer Law 
(ACL), which entered into force in two steps.167  A Trade Practices Amendment (Australian 
                                                      
 164 ACCC (2010a). 
 165 OECD (2010c). 
 166 ACCC (2009a). 
 167 According to the Productivity Commission, by 2008 the division of responsibility for the consumer 
policy framework between the Australian and state and territory governments led to variable outcomes for Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 75 
 
 
Consumer Law) Act (No. 1) 2010 was enacted on 14 April 2010168;  it amended the TPA to establish 
the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) as a schedule to the TPA.  This framework legislation introduced provisions regulating unfair  consumer contract terms (in effect as of 1 July 2010) as well 
as new penalties, enforcement powers and consumer redress options (in force as of 15 April 2010).  A 
Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Consumer Law) Act (No. 2) 2010, which completes the 
ACL, was enacted on 13 July 2010 and has been in effect since January 2011
169;  it harmonized the 
consumer protection provisions of the TPA and the state and territory fair trading laws.  The second 
ACL Act also introduced a new national law fo r consumer product safety and a new system of 
consumer guarantees replacing existi ng laws on conditions and warranties.170  Responsibility for 
consumer protection enforcement at the Commonwea lth level is with the ACCC and the Australian 
Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), which remains the primary regulatory agency responsible for consumer protec tion for financial services.  During 2010, the ACCC and ASIC were 
given additional enforcement powers for consumer protection and fair trading, including the ability to 
issue public warnings, infringement notices and s ubstantiation notices, and to seek orders for the 
payment of civil pecuniary penalties, non-party re dress and the disqualification of directors and 
officers where there has been a breach of the law.  Each state and territory has its own enforcement 
agency for consumer protection, and this will continue under the ACL, subject to a cooperative 
agreement between all Australian agencies responsib le for consumer law enforcement.  From 1 
January 2011, all Australian consumer agencies w ill share common powers for the enforcement of the 
ACL.  
112. Since 2007, the main possible contraventions to the TPA provisions relating to fair trading 
and consumer protection have been:  misleading or deceptive conduct;  retail warranties;  accepting 
payment non-supply;  misrepresentation of price;  harassment and coercion;  misrepresentation of 
performance characteristics, accessories , uses or benefits;  product safety;  assert right to payment of 
unsolicited services;  assert right to payment of unsolicited goods;  and misrep resentation of warranty, 
guarantee.
171  In 2008/09, the ACCC initiated litigation in 27 consumer protection matters and 
accepted 62 undertakings, which include acti ons to ensure product safety compliance 
(section (2)(vii)(a)).  Increasingly, the ACCC is using market and trend analysis as a means of facilitating identification of important problems where ac tion needs to be taken;  in this context, in 
2008/09 outstanding debt collection, scams proliferat ion, and telecommunicati ons-related fields were 
dealt with.  In 2009/10, the ACCC commenced litiga tion in 21 consumer prot ection and fair trading 
matters and accepted 45 undertakings concerning c onsumer protection and fair trading matters. 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 
consumers, added costs for businesses and a lack of responsiveness in policy making;  there were gaps and 
inconsistencies in the policy and enforcement provisions , and weaknesses in redress mechanisms for consumers 
(Productivity Commission, 2008d). 
 168 Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Consum er Law) Act (No. 1) 2010.  Viewed at:  
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/Ac t1.nsf/0/843C26B5CBBAB553CA25770A0023F5A9? 
OpenDocument [15 July 2010].  More specifically, this first tranche of the ACL introduced national prohibitions 
on unfair contract terms, made companies that engage in unconscionable conduct or make false or misleading 
representations liable to fines of up to $A 1.1 million, and inserted a new Part IX into the TPA to facilitate the 
application of the ACL across the Commonwealth.  Middletons online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.middletons.com.au/news/ne ws.asp?id=292 [28 June 2010]. 
 
169 The Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Cons umer Law) Bill (No. 2) 2010.  Viewed at:  
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/Bills1.nsf/bills/bytitle/4A2EDC3EC8F77819CA2576EA0002 5C24?OpenDocument [15 July 2010]. 
 
170 The Treasury online information.  Viewed a t:  http://www.treasury.gov.au/content/consumer_ 
affairs.asp?ContentID=270 [28 June 2010].  
171 ACCC (2009a). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 76 
 
 
(iv) Corporate governance 
(a) Private sector 
113. Australia's corporate governance framework consists of parts of the Corporations Act 2001 
(Corporations Act);  accounting standards (which have  the force of law);  various market operating 
rules, including the Australian securities Exchange (A SX) Listing Rules and Operating Rules, and the 
ASX Corporate Governance Council's "Principles of  Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice 
Recommendations";  together with voluntary sel f-regulatory codes of practice.  The Australian 
Securities and Investments Commission also plays an important role in supervising corporate governance requirements set out in the Corporations Act, as does the Australian Prudential Regulatory 
Authority in relation to financial institutions.  Legislative and non-legislative changes since 2007 
concern the executive remuneration framework, requir ements for disclosure to shareholders, mutual 
director disqualification with other countries, th e short selling regulatory regime, supervision of 
domestic licensed financial markets, the Australia n Accounting Standards, and corporate governance 
principles, as well as the enactment of legislation to  facilitate cross-border insolvency procedures.   
(b) Government trading enterprises 
114. Government trading enterprises (GTEs) remain, often as monopolies, engaged in the 
production of goods and services;  they are required to substantially or fully cover their costs.
172  
GTEs established as companies are subject to the Corporations Act.  However, most GTEs are 
established as statutory entities and may have pol icy objectives that place competing pressures on 
their commercial functions.  The Government 's ownership is generally represented by 
two "shareholder ministers", the portfolio minister (the  Minister in charge of the portfolio in which the 
GTE is involved), and the Finance Minister.  Th e Government may impose price controls on GTEs 
providing goods and services in a monopolistic market, or specify other targets such as community service obligations (CSOs).  
115. In 2006/07, there were 86 government trad ing enterprises (GTEs) providing essential 
infrastructure services (section (4)(iii)(a)) in key sectors of the economy, including water (24), 
electricity (23), ports (19), forestry (6), rail (6), and urban transport (5).
173  The 11 largest GTEs 
accounted for around 50% of the total assets of these companies.  These GTEs controlled about 2.8% 
of Australia's non-household assets and accounted fo r around 1.7% of GDP.  Between 2005/06 and 
2006/07, the profitability of GTEs increased by 36%, sp ecifically it increased in the electricity, urban 
transport, and ports sectors, largely due to the performance of a single GTE in these sectors, but 
declined in the rail, water, and forestry sectors.   In 2006/07, 12 GTEs failed to achieve a positive 
return on their assets.  According to the Productiv ity Commission, the poor financial performance of 
many GTEs underscores a long-term failure to op erate these businesses on a fully commercial basis, 
in accordance with Competition Poli cy Agreements (section (4)(iii)(a)).  A number of GTEs rely 
heavily on government funding in order to sustain operations, and their investments are funded from 
taxpayers and customers.174  Funding from governments can be either direct, through grants, asset 
contributions or equity injections, or indirect, via contracts with a GTE or through the provision of loans at below-market interest rates.  No recent data on the performance of GTEs are available from 
the authorities.  
                                                     
 
 172 GTEs are also commonly referred to as government business enterprises (GBEs);  government-
owned corporations (GOCs);  public trading enterprises (P TEs);  public corporations;  state-owned corporations 
(SOCs);  state-owned enterprises (SOEs);  or territo ry-owned corporations (TOCs) (Productivity Commission, 
2008b).  Further information on the GTEs regime is available at WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1, 1 May 2007. 
 173 Productivity Commission (2008b). 
 174 Productivity Commission (2008b). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 77 
 
 
(v) Intellectual property rights  
(a) Overview 
116. Australia has continued to provide strong inte llectual property rights (IPRs) protection and 
enforcement.  During the review period, it expa nded its commitments on the protection of IPRs by 
becoming a party to the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and 
Phonograms Treaties, in force as of July 2007, a nd the Patent Law Treaty and the Singapore Treaty on 
the Law of Trademarks, as of March 2009.175  Thus, it now participates in 17 out of 24 treaties 
administered by the WIPO.176  For a broad range of reasons re flecting domestic and international 
policy, Australia is not a contracting party to several WIPO treaties.177  In February 2008, Australia 
announced its participation in negotiations for the establishment of an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade 
Agreement (ACTA) setting international standard s on IPR enforcement;  the final round of these 
negotiations, which were to conclude in 2010, was held in October 2010 in Tokyo.178   
117. To, inter alia,  implement its new WIPO treaties-related commitments and/or to reflect new 
policy between 2007 and 2010 (November) Australia passed or amended legislation on:  patents, 
industrial designs, trade names, trade marks, plan t varieties, integrated circuits, geographical 
indications, domain names, copyright, and enforcement.179  Following the release of a public 
consultation paper on 22 April 201 0 outlining the proposed model for implementing the WTO TRIPS 
Protocol in Australia, a public c onsultation was launched on its implementation;  responses to this 
paper were under review in November 2010.180 
                                                      
 175 The Singapore Treaty and the Patent Law Treaty harmonize and simplify pr ocedural requirements 
for the administration of patents and trade marks, making them more user-friendly, more consistent between 
countries, less time-consuming and less expensive (Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, 
2008).  
176 For more details on Australia's participation in WIPO Treaties see WIPO online information.  
Viewed at:  http://www.wipo.in t/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?search_what=C&country_id=10C. 
 177 These are:  the Madrid Agreement (Indications of  Source);  the Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of 
the Olympic Symbols;  the Washington Treaty on the Protection of Integrated Circuits;  the Hague Agreement 
Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs;  the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of 
Appellations of Origin and their International Registratio n;  the Madrid Agreement C oncerning the International 
Registration of Marks;  the Locarno Agreement Establis hing an International Clas sification for Industrial 
Designs;  and the Vienna Agreement Establishing an International Classification of the Figurative Elements of 
Marks.  
178 By October 2010, participants in the negotiations had resolved nearly all substantive issues and 
produced a consolidated and largely finalized text of the proposed agreement, which was to be submitted 
ad referendum to their respective authorities.  Other countries participating in the negotiations are:  Canada, 
the EU, Japan, Korea (Rep. of), Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzer land, and the United States 
(Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade online informati on.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/ 
[14 July 2010];   and European Commission Presss release, "Anti counterfeiting Tokyo - Japan, 
2nd October 2010 - Joint statement from all the Negotiating parties to ACTA".  Viewed at:  
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/inde x.cfm?id=623 [8 November 2010]). 
 179 See IP Australia Official Notices.  Viewed a t:  http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/;  and WIPO online 
information.  Viewed at:  http://www.w ipo.int/clea/en/search.jsp?cntryorg_id=6. 
 180 The TRIPS Protocol enables least developed and developing countries deal with health crises such 
as an HIV/AIDS, malaria or influenza epidemic by pe rmitting WTO Members to issu e compulsory licences to 
manufacturers to produce patented pharmaceutical products exclusively for export to ad dress the relevant health 
need (IP Australia online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/resources/news_new.shtml#24  [12 July 2010];  and IP Australia, 2010).   WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 78 
 
 
Institutional and registration issues  
118. IP Australia, under the Department of Innova tion, Industry, Science and Research, is 
responsible for the administration of patents, trad e marks, designs, and plant breeders' rights;  IP 
Australia recovers more than 95% of its costs by charging fees for its IPRs services.  IP Australia 
provides input to FTA negotiations (Chapter II) so as to lock in transparent, high-standard protection 
for IPRs.181  The Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) and the Plant Breeders' Rights 
Advisory Committee advise the Minister for Innovation,  Industry, Science and R esearch, as well as IP 
Australia, on matters relating to IP policy and the strategic administration of IP Australia.182  T h e  
Attorney-General's Department h as responsibility for administration and policy in relation to the 
Copyright Act 1968 and the Circuit Layouts Act 1989.  
119. In 2008/09, as a result of the global financial crisis, firms around the world scaled back 
investment, and the number of applications for IPRs dropped.183  In 2009, the average interval 
between the lodging and acceptance of applications fo r industrial property rights was:  4 months for 
trade marks;  46  months for designs;  and 35 months for plant breeders' rights.  The average interval 
between a patent applicant's request for examination and the issue date of the first examination report 
is 13 months.  The average time taken to determ ine a wine's geographical indication depends on the 
application.  No clear difference exists in averag e times between domestic and foreign applications for 
protection.  
(b) Industrial property 
Patents 
120. The Patents Act 1990, last amended in 2010, pr ovides protection for standard patents and 
innovation patents, with terms of 20 (up to 25 for eligible pharmaceuticals) and 8 years, 
respectively.184  The Act and the Patent Regulations 1991 have been amended on a number of 
occasions since 2007.  Most of the amendments are of a minor technical nature and consist of updating the relevant rules implem enting the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), aligning the various 
requirements for declarations in the designs, patents,  and trade marks legislati on, and consistency with 
amendments made to other Australian legislation, and removing the obligation for patents applicants 
to inform the Commissioner of Patents of the r esults of documentary searches conducted by foreign 
patent offices.
185  During 2008/09, in line with the relevant PCT provisions, IP Australia signed 
international search authority and international prel iminary examination authority agreements with the 
United States Patents and Trade Marks Office (USPTO ), and the Korean Intellectual Property Office 
(KIPO), which came into effect on 1 November 2008 and 30 January 2009, respectively.186 
121. Since 2008/09, reforms have been proposed to the Patents Act and Regulations to, inter alia,  
raise patent thresholds;  improve certainty about the validity of granted patents;  introduce a statutory 
exemption from infringement for experimental activiti es;  reduce delays in the resolution of patent 
                                                      
 181 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2008). 
 182 IP Australia online information.  Viewed a t:  http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/resources/news_ 
new.shtml#24 [12 July 2010]. 
 183 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). 
 184 The innovation patent, is intended to stimulate innovation in SMEs by providing them with easier 
access to, but a shorter term of, protection for inventions;  it covers the same subject matters as the standard 
patent, with the exception of animals and plants, and biological processes for the generation of animals and plants.   
 
185 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2008). 
 186 These arrangements offer applicants the choice of wh ich patent office to work with to achieve patent 
grants in both countries (Department of Inn ovation, Industry, Science and Research, 2009a). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 79 
 
 
applications;  and streamline and moderni ze aspects of the patent application process.187  Reforms are 
also proposed to improve the operations of the pate nt and trade mark attorney professions.  Public 
consultations on the reforms was undertaken during 2 009 and 2010.  In February 2010, the Advisory 
Council on Intellectual Property reported to the Gove rnment on its review of post-grant enforcement 
strategies.188 
122. As from April 2008, IP Australia has operate d its new web-based patent search system 
(AusPat); in 2007/08, IP Australia adopted the European Patent Office Query (EPOQUE) search 
system as the main fac ility for patent examiners.189  Patents applications originate mostly in the 
United States, the EU, and Australia.190  During the review period, the number of certified innovation 
patents ranged from 243 (2007)  to 235 (2009), and standard patents sealed increased from 
11,070 (2007) to 12,410 (2009).  
123. A Commonwealth, state or territory court may order the granting of a compulsory licence if it 
is satisfied that the reasonable requirements of the public have not been met in relation to the 
invention, and the patentee has not given a satisfact ory reason for failing to exploit the invention.  
Trade marks 
124. The Trade Marks Act 1995, amended in 2009 and 2010, provides for the registration of trade 
marks, collective trade marks, certification trade ma rks, and defensive trade marks.  Under the Act, 
registered trade marks are protected for ten years and can be renewed indefinitely, upon request and 
payment of the appropriate fee.  Since 2007,  the Act and the  Trade Marks Regulations 1995 have been 
amended on a number of occasions.  Amendments that  entered into effect in March 2007 included:  
allowing collective marks to be owned by incorpor ated associations;  introducing new provisions for 
divisional applications and series applications;  cl arifying amendment provisions;  providing for more 
flexibility for the Registrar to correct clerical erro rs or obvious mistakes;  reducing the period within 
which a trade mark registration may be renewed;  and amending customs provisions in relation to 
cash security.  Other amendments were of a minor tec hnical nature and related to aligning the various 
requirements for declarations in the designs, patents,  and trade marks legislati on, and consistency with 
amendments made to other legislation.  
125. Upon a 2008 IP Australia proposal, public consu ltations were held in February 2009 on the 
amendment of the Trade Marks Act to:  raise the penalties for indictable criminal offences (i.e. 
maximum imprisonment period from two years to five years);  introduce summary offences with lower fault requirements than those for indictab le offences;  and introduce additional damages 
provisions for civil actions.
191  In November 2010, a Bill was being drafted in this area.  Further 
legislative changes were proposed to reduce delays  in the resolution of trade mark oppositions and 
public consultations we re held in 2009/10.   
126. During the review period, trade mark registrations rose from 26,715 (2008) to 42,306 (2009);  
in 2009, trade mark registrations consisted of 22 certification trade marks, 15 collective trade marks, 
8 defensive trade marks and 42,261 standard trade ma rks.  Trade mark applications originate mostly 
from Australia. 
                                                      
 187 Cutler (2008);  and Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). 
 188 Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (2010b). 
 189 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2008). 
 190 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). 
 191 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 80 
 
 
Industrial designs 
127. The Designs Act 2003 provides for an initial registration for five years from the filing date of 
the application, and for a single renewal for a further five years, i.e. a maximum term of ten years.  
However, design applications filed under the Designs  Act 1906 (i.e. prior to 2003) continue to have a 
possible maximum term of 16 years.  Most applicati ons originated in Australia (approximately half), 
the United States, and the EU.192  Since 2007, the Act and the Designs Regulations 2004 have been 
amended on a number of occasions.   Most of these amendments are of a minor technical nature.  The 
number of registered designs rose from 5,207 in 2007 to 6,097 in 2008. 
Protection of plant varieties 
128. Under the Plant Breeders' Rights (PBR) Act 1994, amended in 2007 and 2010, unauthorized 
use of protected plant varieties, and different kinds  of false representation regarding plant varieties, 
are criminal offences.  PBRs registration lasts up to 25 years for trees and vines, and 20 years for other species.  The PBR Act was amended in 2007 and 2010;  the amendments relate mainly to minor 
technical issues relating to consistency with amen dments to other legislation.  In July 2008, a 
framework was approved that set criteria for assessing requests to extend the duration of PBRs beyond the current maximums under the Act.
193  In January 2010, the Advisory Council on 
Intellectual Property submitted its review of enfo rcement of PBR rights for the Government to 
respond.194  Enforcement of PBRs is generally the resp onsibility of holders of the rights through civil 
procedures, and the Customs has no seizure powers at the border (section (d) below).  Between 2007 
and 2009, 727 PBR titles were issued (332 from domestic  applicants).  Approximately half of plant 
breeders' rights applications originate in Australia, while the majority of other applications originate 
in New Zealand, the United States, and the EU. 
Geographical indications (GIs)  
129. GIs are protected through the Trade Marks Act 1995,  which allows for the registration of GIs 
as certification trade marks, provided that certain criteria are met;  and the Trade Practices Act 1974, 
which prevents misleading conduct.  In addition, the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code 
contains prohibitions on infringement of GIs of sp irits.  Protection is also provided through labelling 
legislation, such as the Commerce Trade Descriptions  Act 1905, which prohibits the use of false trade 
descriptions on labelling.  GIs for wine are prot ected through the Australian Wine and Brandy 
Corporation Act 1980, which establishes a Register of Protected Names for the protection of 
geographical indications of Australian and fo reign wine.  A new wine agreement, the  
Australia-European Community Agreem ent on Trade in Wine, was signed  in December 2008 and 
entered into force on 1 September 2010;  as a resu lt, the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation 
(AWBC) Act and Regulations 1981 have  been revised to provide a clear and transparent process for 
the determination of foreign GIs.  The Geographi cal Indications Committee of the Australian Wine 
and Brandy Corporation determines GIs for wine.  Since 2006, eight Australian wine GIs have been 
determined and entered on the Register of Protected  Names;  no applications for foreign GIs were 
received during this period.  
                                                      
 192 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). 
 193 Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (2009a). 
 194 Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (2010a). Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 81 
 
 
Other 
130. No changes were made to the law in relation to undisclosed information and trade secrets, 
which are protected under the common law and by equity.195  
(c) Copyright and related rights 
Copyright 
131. The Copyright Act 1968, amended in 2007, 2008,  and 2010, protects all original literary, 
dramatic, musical, and artistic works.  The duration of a copyright varies according to the nature of 
the work and whether it has been published.  Depending on the material, copyright for literary, 
dramatic, musical and artistic works generally lasts for the author's life plus 70 years from the year of 
the author's death or from the year of first publicatio n after the author's death.  Copyright for films and 
sound recordings lasts 70 years from their publication, and the term for broadcasts is 70 years from the year in which they were made.
196  Unlike for patents, trade marks, designs, and PBRs, where 
registration is a precondition for protection, copyri ght (including of circuit layouts) is granted 
automatically where the substantiv e requirements are fulfilled.   
132. The 2004 amendments to the Copyright Act 1968 implemented obligations under the 
Australia-United States Free Trad e Agreement concerning technological protection measures, rights 
management information, and encoded broadcasts;  these are now applied to all trading partners. 
Parallel imports 
133. Some parallel imports are allowed under the Copyright Act 1968 and, in certain 
circumstances, under the Trade Marks Act 1995.  The Copyright Amendment (Parallel Importation) 
Act 2003 (PI Act) extends parallel importation and subsequent commercial distribution to computer 
software, electronic books, electronic journals, and el ectronic sheet music, with the notable exception 
of films (digital video discs (DVDs));  the use of  trade marks on these goods should not prevent their 
parallel importation.  Parallel importation of liquor, branded foods, clothing, IT items (e.g. Australian 
computer games including their hardware) from third parties (i.e. bypassing the local licensees of the products) is common practice for some wholesale and/or retail stockists.
197  A 2009 Productivity 
Commission report recommended that legislation be extended to legalize the parallel importation of 
books, with three years notice for publishers;  accord ing to the Productivity Commission, restrictions 
on parallel imports result in higher local book prices.198  In November 2009,  the authorities decided 
not to change the parallel importation regulatory regime for books.199   
                                                      
 195 For more details, see WT/TPR/S/104, 26 August 2002. 
 196 The Copyright Act 1968 protects subject matter other than works (cinematograph films, sound 
recordings, broadcasts, and published editions), fo r 70, 50, or 25 years (Part IV, Division 4). 
 197 The Age  online information, "Retailers rock the boat with parallel imports", 15 January 2010.  
Viewed at:  http://www.theage.com.au/business/reta ilers-rock-the-boat-with-p arallel-imports-20100114-
ma5h.html [14 July 2010]. 
 198 Australia's Copyright Act currently forbids parallel importation of books if an Australian publisher 
releases the book within 30 days of its first release elsewh ere.  This enables rights ho lders to charge prices (or 
obtain royalties) in the Australian market with the certainty that they cannot be undercut by commercial 
quantities of imports of the same titles.  The average price of an Australian book was found to be 35% higher than in the United States.  The PC concluded that permitting bookstores to stock copies of books imported from 
outside Australia would encourage lower prices (Productivity Commission, 2009e). 
 
199 Australian book printing and publishing is under strong competitive pressure from international 
online booksellers, and the Government has formed the view that this pressure is likely to intensify.  In addition, WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 82 
 
 
Circuit layout 
134. The Circuit Layouts Act 1989 remains the major le gislation for protection of layout designs 
(topographies) of integrated circuits (also referre d to as computer chip designs or semi-conductor 
chips).  A layout design is protected for 10 years from its first commercial exploitation, and if not 
exploited, 10 years from when it was made, i.e. ma ximum protection of 20 years.  The Circuit Layout 
Amendment Regulations 2003 contain the list of e ligible countries to which Australia extends 
reciprocal protection of circuit layouts designs;  they were last amended in 2008 to ensure that eligible 
foreign countries are Members of the WTO.  This mechanism enables the Regul ations to self-update 
each time a new Member joins the WTO.   
(d) Enforcement  
135. The negative impact of IPRs infringement ma y include adverse effects on business, the 
national economy, and consumer health and safety.  IPRs holders may enforce their IPRs by civil 
action against infringers, both at the federal and th e state level.  The Australian Federal Police and 
state and territory police agencies have the aut hority to undertake criminal investigations, with 
prosecutions conducted by the relevant state or Commonwealth or State/Territory office of the 
Director of Public Prosecutions.  Penalties fo r offences relating to IPRs include fines and 
imprisonment.  For copyright offences, the maximum pe nalty is a fine of up to $A 93,500 together 
with imprisonment of up to five years.  For trade mark offences, penalties may take the form of fines 
of up to $A 55,000, and/or imprisonment for up to two years for individuals;  monetary penalties for a 
company can be up to five times the penalty for individuals.  Upon acceptance of a Notice of 
Objection lodged by the IPR owner, Customs may seize and hold imported goods infringing 
copyrights or trade marks law;  by July 2010, 4 53 Notices of Objection had been lodged for a wide 
variety of items;  392 concerned trade marks and 60 copyrights and 1 concerned protected Olympic expressions.
200  Customs does not have similar seizure powers in relation to patents or PBRs;  in 2009 
some stakeholders argued that the lack of Cust oms seizure provisions in the PBR Act was a major 
obstacle to effective enforcement.201  Between 2007 and 2009, Customs made 9,023 seizures of about 
2.3 million items of a total retail value exceedin g $A 74.3 million, mainly originating in Asia;  
clothing, textiles, and accessories have consistently made up the largest category, with a significant 
increase in seizures of food and beverage items in  recent years. A number of forums facilitate 
discussion and improve coordination of IPRs  enforcement issues among stakeholders.  
136. According to a 2008 study by the Australian Ins titute of Criminology, while there is no 
suggestion that piracy and counterfeiting is non-existe nt in Australia, there is a lack of verifiable 
empirical evidence on the extent of the problem.202  In 2008, IPRs violations in Australia consisted 
mainly of:  the importation on a separate component basis of counterfeit goods such as clothing, luxury goods, and footwear, from South-East Asia
203;  and the domestic manufacture of goods that 
                                                                                                                                                                     
the technology of electronic books (e-books) will continue to improve, with further innovations and price 
reductions expected.  Changing the regulations governing book imports is unlikely to have any material effect 
on the availability of books in Australia (Dr. Craig Emerson Media release "Regulatory regime for books to 
remain unchanged", 11 November 2009. Viewed at:  http://www.craigemersonmp.com/files/Nov%2011% 
2009%20Regulatory%20regime%20for%20books%20to%20remain%20unchanged.pdf).  
200 Australian Customs Notices.  Viewed at:  http ://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/miniSites/ipData/ 
[18 July 2010]. 
 201 Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (2010a). 
 202 Australian Institute of Criminology (2008). 
 203 For example, counterfeit shoes may be imported in one shipment, while items bearing the 
counterfeit trade mark may be in a separate shipment, with the trade mark being affixed to the shoes in Australia. Australia WT/TPR/S/244/Rev.1 
 Page 83 
 
 
infringe copyright, such as films, music, games, an d software.  According to industry statistics, in 
2009, Australia recorded the fifth lowest software pi racy rate in the world, after the United States 
(20%), Japan (21%), Luxembourg (21%), and New Zealand (22%).204  From 2005 to 2009, 
installations of unlicensed software on personal com puters (PC) in Australia fell by four percentage 
points to 25%;  in 2009 the commercial value of Australia's illegal software amounted to 
US$550 million.  Those involved in IPRs infringement  range from members of the general public to 
more professionally organi zed criminal networks.205  As it appears that a significant proportion of 
pirated and counterfeit material is produced locally  rather than imported, border control and related 
Commonwealth law enforcement activity is unlikely to  detect this category of infringements.  In 
2008, in general, representatives of key industri es viewed civil proceedings as time-consuming and 
costly, with losses frequently not recovere d even when proceedings were successful.206  Reportedly, 
very few IPRs crimes are pursued at a federal level and less well-resourced victims of IPRs infringement tend not to pursue either civil or criminal remedies.
207 
 
                                                      
 204 Business Software Alliance online information.   Viewed at:  http ://www.bsa.org/country/ 
News%20and%20Events/News%20Archives/global/05112010-globalpiracystudy.aspx [14 July 2010]. 
 205 Australian Institute of Criminology (2008);  Australian Crime Commission (2009);  and The Allen 
Consulting Group (2009). 
 206 Specific statistics are not maintained on civil cases of copyright infringement. 
 207 These include individual creators/artists (including indigenous creators/artists), small companies and 
sole traders, and unincorporated businesses and associations.