This bill became law on Jun 23rd, 2023.
Budget, tax & economy
Companies that develop eligible digital games in Australia can claim a refundable tax offsetA tax benefit that can reduce tax to zero and still pay money back if the offset is larger than the tax owed. worth 30% of qualifying Australian development spending, with a yearly cap applying across related companies.
Gaps in tax and energy law left digital game developers, small businesses, employers and clean-energy financing without promised support, and created uncertainty about how cryptocurrencies should be taxed. The bill responds by creating and expanding targeted tax breaks, simplifying some FBTThe tax on certain non-cash benefits employers give staff, which this bill lets some employers document with approved alternative records. record-keeping, clarifying crypto is not foreign currencyThe tax category the bill says digital currency like bitcoin does not fall into for Australian income tax purposes., and widening CEFCA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. funding powers.
The bill pulled together a set of measures that ministers and MPs described as already-promised budget initiatives, including support for digital game development, extra training deductions for small business and broader clean-energy financing powers, while also clarifying that digital currency would keep its existing tax treatment rather than be treated as foreign currencyThe tax category the bill says digital currency like bitcoin does not fall into for Australian income tax purposes.. After being introduced in late 2022, it was debated across both houses, amended in the Senate, passed in June 2023 and became law on 23 June 2023.
The strongest criticism was that the bill bundled major clean energy funding and Clean Energy Finance CorporationA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. changes into a wider tax package, which critics said weakened parliamentary scrutiny, safeguards and business certainty. That case was raised mainly by Coalition speakers and amendment attempts, while other objections such as crypto sequencing, loot boxes and remaining veteran anomalies were narrower and mostly conditional.
Stephen Jones MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 23 June 2023
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
1 recorded amendment or procedural vote was found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
212 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Companies that develop eligible digital games in Australia can claim a refundable tax offsetA tax benefit that can reduce tax to zero and still pay money back if the offset is larger than the tax owed. worth 30% of qualifying Australian development spending, with a yearly cap applying across related companies.
Bitcoin and similar digital currencies are not treated as foreign currencyThe tax category the bill says digital currency like bitcoin does not fall into for Australian income tax purposes. for Australian income tax, even if another country adopts them as legal tender.
Employers can use alternative records approved by the Commissioner of TaxationThe head of the Australian Taxation Office, who can approve the alternative records used for some fringe benefits tax claims. instead of separate fringe benefits taxThe tax on certain non-cash benefits employers give staff, which this bill lets some employers document with approved alternative records. declaration forms for some benefits.
Small businesses with turnover under $50 million can claim an extra 20% tax deduction on eligible outside training costs for employees.
The Act changes the Clean Energy Finance CorporationA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. so it can receive extra funds for Rewiring the Nation, set up the Powering Australia Technology Fund, and get future top-ups more easily.
The offset is 30% of a company’s total qualifying Australian development expenditure incurred on developing new or existing digital games, including porting a digital game in Australia. The amount of the company’s qualifying Australian development expenditure on the game is determined by the Arts Minister.[Schedule 1, item 2, section 378-15 of the ITAA 1997]Treasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) explanatory memorandum
The amendments to the ITAA 1997 and the GST Act are intended to maintain the status quo prior to the El Salvador decree and clarify that bitcoin and similar digital currencies continue not to be treated as foreign currency, even if they are adopted as a legal tender by a foreign jurisdiction.Treasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) explanatory memorandum
giving the Commissioner power to make legislative instruments determining the kinds of adequate alternative records which may be kept and retained by employers in lieu of statutory evidentiary documents for specified fringe benefits, for FBT record keeping purposes; andTreasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) explanatory memorandum
This Schedule allows small businesses with an aggregated annual turnover of less than $50 million to deduct 20% in addition to an existing available deduction for eligible expenditure incurred on external training for employees.Treasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) explanatory memorandum
The CEFC Act (in conjunction with other legislation such as the PGPA Act) sets out the governance and regulatory frameworks applicable to the agency. This Schedule modifies the CEFC Act to enable the CEFC to receive additional funds to implement Rewiring the Nation, establish the Powering Australia Technology Fund and streamline the ability of the government to provide the CEFC with additional funds in the future. The Schedule also clarifies the CEFC’s governance arrangements in specifying its nominated Minister.Treasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) explanatory memorandum
Context
The bill pulled together a set of measures that ministers and MPs described as already-promised budget initiatives, including support for digital game development, extra training deductions for small business and broader clean-energy financing powers, while also clarifying that digital currency would keep its existing tax treatment rather than be treated as foreign currencyThe tax category the bill says digital currency like bitcoin does not fall into for Australian income tax purposes.. After being introduced in late 2022, it was debated across both houses, amended in the Senate, passed in June 2023 and became law on 23 June 2023.
Government introduces a package of promised tax and energy measures
The second reading speech presented the bill as a single package delivering support for digital games, employee training, simpler FBTThe tax on certain non-cash benefits employers give staff, which this bill lets some employers document with approved alternative records. records, crypto tax certainty and expanded CEFCA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. funding powers.
Hansard ↗House debate says most measures came from earlier budget commitments
Speakers in the House said much of the bill implemented policies and decisions announced in recent budgets, especially incentives for digital games, business training and red-tape reduction.
Hansard ↗Senate debate backs keeping digital currency on its existing tax footing
During the Senate debate, supporters said the bill would preserve the status quo for digital currency tax treatment while also carrying business incentive measures they broadly backed.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses agreed on the final text after the House accepted Senate amendments, completing the bill's parliamentary passage.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal Assent turns the package into law
Royal Assent enacted the measures so the new offsets, deductions, record-keeping changes and CEFCA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. funding provisions could operate under statute.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (24/11/2022): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (03/03/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The strongest criticism was that the bill bundled major clean energy funding and Clean Energy Finance CorporationA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. changes into a wider tax package, which critics said weakened parliamentary scrutiny, safeguards and business certainty. That case was raised mainly by Coalition speakers and amendment attempts, while other objections such as crypto sequencing, loot boxes and remaining veteran anomalies were narrower and mostly conditional.
Most criticism targeted particular schedules and safeguards, not the bill’s overall policy package.
Energy funding changes weakened scrutiny
Critics argued the bill should not have used a broad Treasury package to push through major clean energy funding and CEFCA government-backed financier that the bill gives more room to fund major clean energy projects and related programs. changes, because that reduced proper parliamentary scrutiny over large spending decisions and future top-ups.
Independent safeguards and business certainty were said to be weaker
Opponents of schedule 8 said it gave the government too much freedom to make major clean energy funding changes with fewer independent checks, creating uncertainty for businesses that rely on stable rules and clear safeguards.
Some senators said crypto tax law was being changed in the wrong order
Andrew Bragg argued the digital currency schedule was premature because it singled out one tax issue before broader crypto regulation was settled, which he said could create regulatory risk and should wait for the Board of TaxationAn advisory body that reviews tax settings, mentioned here because critics said the digital currency change should have waited for its review. review.
Residual policy gaps remained in games and veterans measures
More limited critics said the digital games tax offsetA refundable tax offset for eligible game developers, designed to lower the cost of making games in Australia. should not subsidise games with loot boxes because of gambling harm, and that the veteran tax fix still left some affected groups without equal treatment.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senate
Moved by Andrew Bragg (Liberal Party). Defeated 29 to 30. Support came from Liberal Party, Nationals, Jacqui Lambie Network, One Nation, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor. One cross-floor vote was recorded: Penny Allman-Payne (Greens) voted aye. Greens had split recorded votes. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The amendment was defeated 29 to 30, so the bill’s training deduction rules stayed unchanged.
Senator Rice’s committee-stage amendment would have added paid loot-box games to the exclusion list for the digital games tax offsetA refundable tax offset for eligible game developers, designed to lower the cost of making games in Australia.. The Senate defeated it on voices.
Defeated on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to the government PZ104 package, which omitted the commencement item and removed Schedule 7’s deductible gift recipient changes.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
These are amendment votes, not the final passage vote on the bill itself. The bill passed both chambers on the voices.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Jones supports the bill and says it strengthens transparency, accountability and economic growth through measures for superannuation reporting, digital games, small business and veterans.
Read in Hansard ↗Bragg says the Liberal Party will oppose this part of the bill by moving to remove the digital currency schedule, because he thinks the government is cherry-picking one tax change without a broader regulatory reform agenda.
Read in Hansard ↗Fletcher says the opposition will support the bill because it delivers measures his side had already developed, especially the digital games tax offsetA refundable tax offset for eligible game developers, designed to lower the cost of making games in Australia. and the technology investment boost.
Read in Hansard ↗Pike says the coalition will not block the bill in the House and supports many of its measures, especially the coalition-originated ones, but he criticises schedule 8 as a politically contentious grab for extra powers and funding.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
3 speakers · 4 contributions · 3 support
“This Bill begins that process by embracing transparency and accountability.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Stephen Jones on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Jones supports the bill and says it strengthens transparency, accountability and economic growth through measures for superannuation reporting, digital games, small business and veterans. He presents it as a practical package that delivers on the government's commitments.
“We should always look for ways to strengthen it, and this bill achieves that by embracing transparency and accountability.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Stephen Jones supports the bill and says it delivers useful measures for business, tax administration, superannuation transparency and energy investment. He argues the opposition's amendment is wrong and says the House should pass the bill.
“In closing, I encourage members opposite, when they are asked to come in here and speak on a Treasury law amendment bill, and they are given a set of speaking notes from the shadow Treasurer, the member for Hume—when they are sent in here to read something that he's asked them to read, the default position is: just say no, because it's probably wrong. This is in black and white, in his second reading amendment to the bill before the House, which we will be opposing. If you want to protect your reputation and your standing in this place over many years, and if the member for Hume recommends that you come in here and say something, the default position is: just do the opposite. I commend the bill to the House.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“The Albanese government is committed to ensuring that no-one is held back and no-one is left behind. That is particularly important when speaking about our defence personnel and veteran community. We are committed to ensuring that veterans and their families receive the support they need but also that they frankly deserve, and I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
8 speakers · 6 support · 1 oppose · 1 mixed
“It's a matter of regret that the current government has been rather leisurely in its approach to this. It's taken them quite a long time to bring this bill before the House, but I'm not going to take a political approach to this. I'm going to celebrate the fact that they finally got around to bringing this bill forward, and I do welcome what's contained in the two schedules I've discussed.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“To conclude: at a time when the government should be delivering certainty to business, the government has stapled a number of politically contentious measures into this bill. There's a lot in here that we support. There's a lot in here that the coalition government came up with, and certainly we applaud the fact that the new government has decided to take these things forward. But this is a time when business needs certainty, and unfortunately, with the two contentious schedules that I mentioned, the government is playing games. While we won't delay the bill's passage through this House, the coalition will be using the Senate to scrutinise these extraordinary powers that Labor are trying to sneak through.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition supports most of the measures in the bill, as they replicate the policy we took to the last election. I wish to just focus on one of those because it is important to know that it relates to a very important industry for Australia. It's a small but growing industry in my home state of Western Australia, and that is the digital games industry. Of course, I'm talking about schedule 1 of this bill, the digital games tax offset.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Whilst we don't want to delay, and we won't delay, the bill's passage through this House, we will use the Senate to scrutinise these extraordinary powers that the government is sneaking through.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, we will be moving amendments to remove this schedule from the bill, not because we think it's necessarily a terrible idea but because our view is that this is the wrong sequence. We haven't seen what the Board of Taxation are recommending and we don't want to introduce regulatory risk here, given that we are competing for global capital.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition has concerns about this schedule. This means, in practice, that Minister Bowen, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, will be able to sneak in changes without consulting parliament. At a time when businesses need certainty, this is a Labor government playing games, and businesses will pay the price for this. Therefore, while we support many of the schedules in this bill, the opposition will be moving amendments to remove schedule 8.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These are the good things in this box of chocolates; these are the hazelnut whirls to me! These are the things in this bill which are important. But, as Senator McGrath pointed out, the turkish delight is there as well: billions of dollars for infrastructure and transmission lines, and the billion-dollar fund for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. All that is in there, and it's not right. This is a bill that, as Senator McGrath said, we will try to amend—to improve, we would say. As Senator Shoebridge said, there's scope to look at further things in schedule 9, and we would like to change schedule 8. This government has picked up the digital gaming tax offset bill of the previous government. It is needed, it is wanted and it will lead to massive investment and good employment. I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So I support many of the comments of my friend Senator Shoebridge in this regard. I commend the minister on his engagement with respect to this. I think this needs further engagement, further clarity and further simplification, and I think we need to do better than this. We need to do better than this for our veteran communities. Whilst I will support the bill, there does need to be some reflection on this, because I don't think it's entirely satisfactory, to be frank.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 2 support · 1 mixed
“The Greens will support the bill because, as the government has noted, it ensures that veterans affected by the Douglas decision—the great bulk of them—will not face worse income tax outcomes as a result of the court's decision. But it doesn't answer all of the concerns.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This amendment would address this issue at the very least. It is the very smallest of actions that we could take to address the problems of gambling harm in this country. At the very least we should not be facilitating and supporting games that include loot boxes, which as I said, are just normalising gambling. We know that we need to do more to address loot boxes.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Greens support the Treasury Law Amendment (2022 Measures No. 4) Bill 2022. I particularly want to address schedule 2 of the bill. It's the part of the legislation that Senator Bragg was just speaking about. This schedule seeks to clarify the tax treatment of digital currencies and to maintain the status quo. This is ostensibly in response to the decision that Senator Bragg referred to—the decision by El Salvador to treat bitcoin as legal tender, which would give it foreign currency status in terms of its tax status. As I said, we support the bill, including schedule 2, but this was a pretty close-run thing for us.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail debate
Consideration in detail
The chamber considered the bill in detail and dealt with amendments before the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Senate · Committee of the Whole debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (03/03/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (24 Nov 2022): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (3 Mar 2023)
APH bill page notes
