This bill became law on Jul 6th, 2026.
Budget, tax & economy
Consumers are protected from business conduct that manipulates their choices or causes harm by unfairly shaping how they decide.
The government said current consumer law did not always reach tactics that pressure, confuse or trap people without clearly misleading them. More than half of reported consumer problems involved online purchases. One in 10 people reported manipulated choices, while more than a quarter encountered unexpected late charges. Government-cited research also estimated unwanted subscriptions cost Australian consumers $971 million each year.
Australia already had the Australian Consumer LawNational rules protecting people who buy goods and services., but Treasury consultations in 2023 and 2024 and a December 2025 policy decision identified gaps as online shopping exposed consumers to manipulative sales tactics, hidden transaction fees and subscriptions that were difficult to cancel. The government responded with a bill introduced by Andrew Leigh MP to ban harmful unfair trading, make added charges and subscription terms clearer, and require easier cancellation; Parliament passed it in July 2026, Royal Assent followed on 6 July, and the rules are due to start on 1 July 2027.
Kevin Hogan (National Party) argued the broad ban would leave businesses legally uncertain and lead to years of costly court cases. He said the rules would cost more than $124 million each year, including more than $100 million for small businesses. Nick McKim (Australian Greens) argued the protections should also cover financial products and services, warning that leaving them out created a gap.
Andrew Leigh MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 06 July 2026
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
7 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
96 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Consumers are protected from business conduct that manipulates their choices or causes harm by unfairly shaping how they decide.
Shoppers must see any compulsory transaction feeA compulsory charge paid with the main purchase price. beside the advertised price. The amount, or how it is calculated, must be clear.
People considering a subscription must be told its cost, length, renewal terms and cancellation process before signing up.
Subscribers can receive clear reminders at times set by later regulations, such as before renewals or trial periods end.
Subscribers must have an easy-to-find and straightforward way to cancel. An online cancellation option is required when sign-up is available online.
Small businesses receive the subscription protections when using standard contracts and employing fewer than 100 people or earning under $10 million yearly.
Consumers and businesses come under the new rules from 1 July 2027. Subscription rules also cover later renewals or changes to older contracts.
7 At the end of Chapter 2 of Schedule 2 28B Unfair trading practices towards consumers (1) A person must not, in trade or commerce, engage in unfair trading practices. Note: A pecuniary penalty may be imposed for a contravention of this subsection. (2) A person engages in unfair trading practices if, and only if, in connection with supply of, or an offer to supply, goods or services to a consumer, the person engages in conduct that: (a) does or is likely to do either or both of the following: (i) manipulate the consumer; (ii) unreasonably distort the environment in which the consumer maCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
15 At the end of Division 4 of Part 3‑1 of Schedule 2 48A Transaction based charges to be displayed in certain circumstances Requirement to display (1) This section applies in relation to goods or services of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use or consumption. (2) A person who, in trade or commerce, in offering to supply goods or services to another person, displays a base price for any of the goods or services must display in accordance with subsection (3) the following information for any transaction based charge for the supply: (i) if the amount of the trCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
Subdivision B—Information requirements 48D Statement and information that must be disclosed when offering goods or services under a subscription contract (1) This section applies if: (a) a person (the supplier), in trade or commerce, offers to supply, under a contract, goods or services; and (b) if the contract were entered, the contract would be a subscription contract. Requirement to disclose (2) The supplier must, when making the offer, disclose, in accordance with subsection (3): (a) a statement that, if entered, the contract would be a subscription contract; and (b) information abCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
48E Information to be given in relation to subscription contracts in effect Requirement to give information (a) a person, in trade or commerce, supplies goods or services under a subscription contract prescribed for the purposes of this subsection; and (b) the contract meets the consumer requirement or meets the small business requirement; the person must, while the contract is in effect, give the subscriber, in accordance with subsection (2), the information prescribed for the purposes of this subsection at each time prescribed for the purposes of this subsection. Note: A pecuniary penalCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
Subdivision C—Ending subscription contracts 48F Exit method Requirement to provide a way to end the contract (1) A person (the supplier) who, in trade or commerce, supplies goods or services under a subscription contract that meets the consumer requirement or meets the small business requirement must: (a) provide a way for the subscriber to end the contract; and (b) ensure that each way the supplier provides for the subscriber to end the contract: (i) is easy to find; and (ii) is straightforward; and (iii) requires the subscriber to take only steps that are reasonably necessary to endCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
48G Meeting the consumer requirement or the small business requirement Meeting the consumer requirement (1) A contract meets the consumer requirement if it is a contract for supply of goods or services under which an individual acquires the goods or services wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic or household use or consumption. Meeting the small business requirement (2) A contract meets the small business requirement if: (a) it is a standard form contract for supply of goods or services; and (b) the subscriber satisfies either or both of the following conditions: (i) the subscrCompetition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
2 Commencement (1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms. Commencement information Commencement Date/Details 1. The whole of this Act 1 July 2027. Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally enacted. It will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this Act.Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) as-passed text
Context
Australia already had the Australian Consumer LawNational rules protecting people who buy goods and services., but Treasury consultations in 2023 and 2024 and a December 2025 policy decision identified gaps as online shopping exposed consumers to manipulative sales tactics, hidden transaction fees and subscriptions that were difficult to cancel. The government responded with a bill introduced by Andrew Leigh MP to ban harmful unfair trading, make added charges and subscription terms clearer, and require easier cancellation; Parliament passed it in July 2026, Royal Assent followed on 6 July, and the rules are due to start on 1 July 2027.
Treasury consults on unfair trading practices
The consultation examined whether Australian Consumer LawNational rules protecting people who buy goods and services. needed stronger protection against unfair conduct affecting consumers.
Treasury ↗Treasury consults on proposed unfair-trading rules
The supplementary consultation sought views on a general prohibition and targeted rules for practices such as hidden fees and subscription traps.
Treasury ↗Consumer ministers agree unfair-trading reforms
Consumer ministers agreed to improve protections through a general ban, subscription safeguards and better disclosure of hidden fees, with Treasury publishing its decision statement in December.
Treasury ↗Andrew Leigh MP introduces the bill
The bill was introduced to address manipulative online sales tactics, compulsory checkout charges and subscription arrangements that made cancellation difficult.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary approval of the consumer-law reforms.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal Assent turns the bill into an Act
The Governor-General gave Royal Assent, allowing the reforms to take effect from their scheduled commencement date.
Parliamentary timeline ↗New unfair-trading rules commence
The general unfair-trading ban and targeted pricing and subscription protections are scheduled to start applying to businesses and consumers.
Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 ↗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
Considered by scrutiny committee (06/05/2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026
Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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 agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Referred to Committee (14/05/2026): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (25/06/2026)
Report tabled 25 Jun 2026
APH bill page notesThe 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 bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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
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
Kevin Hogan (National Party) argued the broad ban would leave businesses legally uncertain and lead to years of costly court cases. He said the rules would cost more than $124 million each year, including more than $100 million for small businesses. Nick McKim (Australian Greens) argued the protections should also cover financial products and services, warning that leaving them out created a gap.
Tim Ayres (Labor) said the broad wording was intentional so the law could cover new harmful practices, with courts clarifying it over time. He also said the government would first consider extending the protections to small businesses and franchisees, then consider financial services.
Legal uncertainty and small-business costs
Critics warned that the broad prohibition could make lawful conduct difficult to predict, forcing businesses to spend more on legal advice and compliance, with costs potentially passed to consumers. They sought further Senate scrutiny and stronger protection for small businesses.
Too narrow and delayed
The bill was criticised for starting too late and addressing particular consumer practices without doing enough about broader cost-of-living pressure or concentrated market power.
Reliance on costly court cases
The general prohibition may depend on courts gradually defining what counts as unfair, making timely and affordable enforcement difficult for small businesses unless a simpler avenue for resolving claims is provided.
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.
Recorded amendment and procedural votes grouped by chamber. Expand a vote to see the party breakdown.
House
Defeated 40 to 95. Support came from Liberal, Nationals, and One Nation. Opposition came from Labor and Greens. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The House rejected the statement 40 votes to 95, then agreed to the bill's second reading.
Did not vote: Liberal Party, LNP, Nationals
Senate
Defeated 20 to 30. Support came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, and UAP. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
The proposed change was not agreed.
Defeated 21 to 31. Support came from Liberal, One Nation, and Nationals. Opposition came from Labor, Greens, and minor parties and independents.
The Senate rejected the changes 21 votes to 31, leaving the bill's broader tests unchanged.
Defeated 11 to 30. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal, One Nation, and Nationals.
The Senate rejected the changes 11 votes to 30, so lead generation was not expressly added to the bill's examples.
Defeated 11 to 25. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal, and Nationals.
The Senate rejected the changes 11 votes to 25, leaving financial products and services outside this proposed extension.
Defeated 24 to 31. Support came from Liberal, One Nation, Nationals, UAP, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor and Greens.
The Senate rejected the delay 24 votes to 31, retaining the bill's existing commencement arrangements for small businesses.
Defeated 11 to 22. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal, and Nationals.
The Senate rejected the package 11 votes to 22, and the bill was then reported without amendment.
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
Leigh supports the bill as a proportionate response to consumer harm, arguing it will ban manipulative trading practices, expose mandatory fees upfront and make subscriptions easier to understand and cancel.
Read in Hansard ↗Webster opposes the bill as a broadly drafted and costly regulatory burden that she says will create legal uncertainty, raise consumer prices and threaten small businesses, particularly in regional Australia.
Read in Hansard ↗Canavan says the Liberal and National parties will support the bill, while seeking amendments to delay its application to small businesses and tighten key definitions to reduce compliance costs and legal uncertainty.
Read in Hansard ↗Monique Ryan supports the bill because its protections against unfair trading practices are better than the status quo, but says the reforms are too narrow, delayed and incomplete to meaningfully address household financial pressure or concentrated market power.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
16 speakers · 18 contributions · 16 support
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Tim Ayres, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Moved amendment
Ayres supports the bill as a timely, evidence-based response to consumer harm, arguing that banning unfair trading practices, exposing mandatory fees and simplifying subscription cancellation will protect consumers and promote fair competition.
“In presenting this Bill, we reaffirm a basic principle: markets work best when they're fair. When consumers are respected rather than worn down. When design helps people make informed choices rather than steering them into unwanted ones. When transparency is rewarded and hidden fees are not.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ayres urges the Senate to pass the bill, saying its ban on unfair trading practices and targeted action on subscription traps and drip pricingCompulsory fees revealed after an initial price is shown. will protect consumers and stop honest businesses being undercut, while allowing the framework to adapt as practices evolve.
“These reforms will not only protect consumers but also promote better functioning markets where good and honest businesses are not undercut by competitors who rely on tracks, manipulation and unnecessary complexity. I commend the bill to the Senate.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Andrew Leigh, including an amendment-moving contribution. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Moved amendment
Leigh supports the bill as a proportionate response to consumer harm, arguing it will ban manipulative trading practices, expose mandatory fees upfront and make subscriptions easier to understand and cancel.
“This bill is a principled, proportionate and timely response to real harms identified through genuine consultation, backed by evidence, and aligned with Australians' sense of fairness.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Andrew Leigh supports the bill, arguing it will close gaps in consumer law by banning manipulative trading practices, subscription traps and hidden pricing while keeping compliance costs proportionate for businesses.
“The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 strengthens the Australian Consumer Law in three important ways: by banning unfair trading practices, by addressing subscription traps and by strengthening drip pricing protections. Together, the bill ensures that consumers are treated fairly and that honest businesses, including small businesses, aren't disadvantaged by competitors who rely on tricks and complexity rather than value and service.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“That is why this bill, the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026, is important. It restores fairness to everyday purchases by ensuring people know the true price before committing, understand the conditions of something before they agree to it and can leave a service without being endlessly redirected. It also supports the many businesses that already are honest and respectful to customers. Australians shouldn't have to be experts in the small print to be able to be treated well.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 strengthens the Australian Consumer Law in three important ways. It introduces a general prohibition on unfair trading practices, it addresses subscription traps and it strengthens protections against drip pricing. Together, these reforms ensure consumers are treated fairly and that honest businesses, including small businesses, are not disadvantaged by competitors who rely on tricks, complexity and confusion rather than genuine value and service.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Like I said earlier, it is about keeping alive the neighbourhoods our grandparents built and the neighbourhoods we still want to live in today. Australians should not need to navigate hidden traps, confusing interfaces or concealed fees simply to participate in everyday economy and commerce. Consumers deserve transparency. They deserve fairness. Businesses that do the right thing deserve a marketplace where integrity is rewarded rather than undermined. That is why this bill is about restoring and reinforcing trust in fair competition and trust that Australians will be treated honestly when they spend their hard-earned money. That is good for consumers, good for businesses and good for the Australian economy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, I support this bill because banning unfair trading practices, cracking down on drip pricing and cleaning up subscriptions will strengthen protections for Australian consumers and support better functioning markets. These reforms will help make Australia a market where good businesses thrive by doing the right thing. They will also restore confidence that online markets can work on straightforward terms where prices are what they seem and leaving a service is as simple as joining it. They will protect consumers not only from outright deception but also from the kinds of subtle, cumulative influences that can undermine genuine choice. For all these reasons, I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The reforms in this bill—banning unfair trading practices, cracking down on drip pricing and cleaning up subscriptions—will help Australians make properly informed purchase decisions. It'll help them manage their household budgets, not to mention saving them time and frustration. They will also help businesses across our economies. This bill is about fairness, and it's about doing the right thing. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026. At its core, this bill is about fairness. It's about whether people can trust the prices they see, whether they can leave a subscription as easily as they joined it, whether businesses compete by offering a better product or by wearing people down through confusion, pressure and manipulation.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is part of the Albanese Labor government's drive to support consumers, to increase transparency in the marketplace and to boost competition. It's all part of this government's No. 1 priority area: supporting Australians with the cost of living. Stronger competition plays a critical role in this and helps to deliver better outcomes for households.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a principled, proportionate and timely response to real harms and frustrations being experienced by the Australian consumer. It does not paralyse business. On the contrary, it recognises the right of a business to grow, to innovate, to make money and to increase productivity but within a marketplace that is fair to the Australian consumer in the rapidly changing way we do business. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise in support of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026. In doing so, I too commend the work of the assistant minister in the lead-up to and preparation of this bill and also for the way that he has handled this bill through the parliament and through the Labor Party processes as well. I don't think the community could ask for a better assistant minister at this time than the assistant minister we have. He's somebody who lives and breathes this sort of work. It's a privilege to be able to serve in this parliament alongside him. I also pay due credit to the leader of our economic team and my neighbour, the Treasurer, who is leading an economic policy focused on the cost of living. The competition policy sits very much within that general approach to tackling the cost of living.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is practical reform that responds to our ever-evolving modern economy, and it is reform that will make a real difference to Australians trying to get ahead and challenging this cost-of-living period. For families in my community and right across the country, these laws will help restore confidence that the system works fairly and removes the frustrations that many feel. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise today in support of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026. This legislation is an important milestone in our nation's journey towards a fairer and more transparent market. At its core, this is a bill about the basic integrity of the daily interactions between Australians and the businesses they rely on. It is about the fundamental principle of fairness in the everyday decisions Australians make when they buy a ticket online, compare prices, start a free trial, sign up to a service or try to cancel something they no longer use. In all of those moments, Australians should be able to rely on a basic standard of honesty and clarity. They should not have to navigate a maze of fine print. They should not need to reach the final step of a digital checkout, only to be hit with extra compulsory fees that were never disclosed at the start. And they should not have to battle a deliberately confusing website just to stop paying for a service they no longer want.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I support this bill, the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026, because it's an important piece of legislation to make transacting out there in the real world better and fairer for consumers. We have a simple, unwritten rule here in Australia that underpins our entire society, and that's the fair go. It's a concept that says: if you work hard you get ahead, and if you spend your hard-earned money you get what you pay for. We know that's under pressure right now, and it's important for every government to make sure they take steps to enshrine the fair go into everything that we do. No matter what you're buying, whether it be a coffee, petrol at the bowser—I think we'll need to update that saying to 'electricity from an EV charger'—or a room in a hotel, you deserve to be treated with basic honesty. For too long there's been a great gaping hole in our laws, a gap that's allowed some businesses to exploit, manipulate and trap Australians when they transact in basic, everyday transactions. Today this legislation seeks to plug that hole.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Through national competition policy reforms, the government is working with states and territories to remove barriers that stop new businesses entering the market. We want new entrants to enter the market. We talk about the haves and the have-nots. There's another battle that's being played out, and it's the fight between new entrants and incumbents. The incumbents will do everything they can to keep new entrants out. But that is really bad for the economy, it is really bad for competition and it's bad for consumers. This bill will help address some of that. This bill gives consumers something that they have been missing for a long time, and that is confidence—confidence that they can shop, book a service, enter a subscription or compare prices without being pushed into choices they did not intend to make; confidence that regulators can act when conduct is unfair, not only when it is technically misleading; and confidence that honest businesses will not be undercut by those who profit from this kind of confusion. I commend this bill to the Senate.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In Hasluck, people are doing the hard work—balancing budgets, making decisions and managing rising costs—and they deserve a system that is honest with them. This bill helps to deliver that. It reflects a growing international recognition that fairness must extend to the way choices are designed, not just the words on the page. It addresses real harm, it supports honest businesses and it restores fairness to the marketplace.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
6 speakers · 5 support · 1 oppose
“In closing, again I'd like to commend all members of the department who were involved in this process. There has been extensive consultation, which gives considerable comfort. The opposition has proposed some reasonable amendments which I think should be considered and which are logical and coherent. I'm happy to say, subject to a few reservations, I'm happy to support the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I often feel it in this chamber; there's an old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. There are some things about this bill, which I will go into in a minute, where I think the intention is warranted and good. But, as I mentioned in the amendment, we're concerned that in this bill there will also be a new legal test about what is unfair trading. This will create a lot of uncertainty in the business sector, especially in the small business sector, around what will be considered fair or unfair trading, which I think will be a lawyer's picnic. We're not convinced that this is needed, given we already have the consumer laws. As the amendment mentions, there's $100 million a year in red tape that this is predicted to put onto small business. We know and you know, Deputy Speaker, the pressures that are already on small businesses. Of course, they will pass it onto consumers. While the coalition won't oppose this in the House, we are sceptical of this bill, which is why we want to refer it to a Senate inquiry.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We will support this bill, but, in the interests of small business and Australians, the government and the crossbench should accept our amendments. Labor's hallmark is more legislation, more bureaucracy and more power concentrated in the hands of government, and bills that protect and preserve the union movement. The coalition will instead stand for consumers, small businesses, clear laws and common sense, so the economy can thrive and provide a benefit to all Australians, including small-business owners and workers who deserve a government that backs them—not one that buries them in red tape and walks away and protects its union masters, not one who gives the unions special treatment at the expense of all others. That's not the way you preserve a fair go. That's not the way you leave no-one behind. None of that applies when you apply legislation to businesses and don't apply it to the unions.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is a bill that needs a lot more work and a lot of scrutiny in the Senate. I commend the shadow minister, the member for Page, and the coalition ministry team for the important work they have done on holding this government accountable for a badly drafted law that imposes crippling costs on businesses, particularly small businesses, when they can least afford it.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is where this bill raises serious concerns, because, while the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 contains some targeted reforms addressing genuine consumer frustrations, it also introduces a broad and uncertain new prohibition on so-called unfair trading practices that risks creating massive legal uncertainty for Australian businesses. Let me be clear. The coalition will not oppose this bill in this House. However, we will move a second reading amendment and support referring this legislation to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for proper scrutiny, because legislation of this size and consequence deserves proper consultation, proper scrutiny and clear legal drafting, not rushed lawmaking, which we continue to see under this chaotic Labor government. That makes for bad laws.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“The Greens will support the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 because it does improve protections for consumers, but I have to say this is a classic Labor piece of legislation: do the bare minimum necessary to address an issue and leave a whole bunch of reforms that should urgently be implemented on the table, leave them behind and kick them off into the never-never. I listened closely to Senator Darmanin's speech and I agree with the overwhelming majority of what Senator Darmanin said—but, goodness me, there's an elephant in the room here, colleagues, isn't there? It's a giant elephant that nobody wants to talk about.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“One Nation supports strong consumer protections. We welcome the parts of the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 that provide clear legislative rules for business and outlaw subscription traps and drip pricing. As we've already heard, there are few things more frustrating than trying to find the unsubscribe button when it's hidden under three different menus, then needing to email someone else and, by the time you get there, paying for another month or going to buy something online where the price seems reasonable but, by the time you get through the check-out and they've added a booking fee, a delivery fee, a ticket fee and a service surcharge, finding it's three times the price. These practices add nothing to the consumer experience and are deliberately designed to frustrate people into paying for something they may no longer want. These parts of the bill are positive reform for consumers, and, as such, we will be supporting the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“(i) the protections under this bill to guard consumers against unfair trading practices in relation to drip pricing and subscription traps are good, prescriptive reforms,”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“I support this bill because the protections that it introduces are preferable to the status quo. Consumers will be better protected with these reforms than they would be without them. But I will not join the government in presenting this legislation as meaningful, significant consumer protection legislation. This is modest reform, in a narrow area of consumer law. The problems it leaves unresolved are larger, more consequential and much more urgent than the problems that it addresses.”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 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 · 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 debate
Committee of the Whole debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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.
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 Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026
Considered by scrutiny committee (6 May 2026): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026
APH bill page notesSenate Economics Legislation Committee
Report tabled 25 Jun 2026
Referred to Committee (14 May 2026): Senate Economics Legislation Committee; Committee report (25 June 2026)
APH bill page notes
