This bill is currently before Parliament.
Welfare & housing
People receiving eligible social security, Family Tax Benefit or Mobility AllowanceA payment assisting eligible people with disability, illness or injury who cannot use public transport. payments could apply for an advance online, by phone or in person.
The government said the bill would give a clear legal basis to existing practices, make payments and child support assessments faster and more accurate, and resolve historical legal and compliance problems. About 2.7 million advance payments were granted in 2024–25. The government said early tax-office income data matches the final assessed income in 99.8 per cent of cases and helps preserve the collection of about $41 million in unpaid child support from tax refunds each year. Services Australia also calculates about one million temporary child support income estimates annually, 92 per cent of them automatically.
Before the bill was introduced, Australia already relied on large-scale advance payments, early tax-office income data and automated child-support estimates, but legislation did not fully match those administrative practices, creating legal uncertainty and risks around past decisions, recalculations and debt recovery. The government response, introduced by Hon Tanya Plibersek MP, was to give those processes a clearer legal basis, validate specified earlier calculations and simplify access and review rules; the House passed the bill on 9 September 2026 and Senate consideration began five days later.
Zali Steggall (Community Strong Australia) supported the practical changes but argued that automated decisions must retain human oversight where a case is complex or could cause harm. She said the bill did not fix deeper problems in child support, including financial abuse, delayed tax returns and debts imposed on carers for child support they never received. She cited about $2 billion in unpaid child support owed by roughly 229,000 parents and argued that victims-survivors and carers whose debts arose from unpaid child support should receive explicit protection.
Hon Tanya Plibersek MP introduced this bill. Supportive speeches so far have come from Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Community Strong Australia, some crossbench members.
Did it become law?
Not yet
Final passage
No final vote yet
The bill has not yet completed passage through Parliament.
Days since introduction
97 days
Updated 06 Oct 2026.
Meaning
People receiving eligible social security, Family Tax Benefit or Mobility AllowanceA payment assisting eligible people with disability, illness or injury who cannot use public transport. payments could apply for an advance online, by phone or in person. The bill removes financial-hardship checks that currently stand in the way of automated decisions, lets people ask to repay a social security advance faster without another hardship assessment, and simplifies requests for lower repayments during hardship. It also removes the requirement that a Mobility AllowanceA payment assisting eligible people with disability, illness or injury who cannot use public transport. recipient be expected to remain eligible for at least 26 weeks after receiving an advance, and allows recovery of the advance if their eligibility ends.
Some Family Tax Benefit decisions could be updated while they are before the Administrative Review TribunalThe independent body that reviews certain government decisions. if new or previously overlooked information changes a person's entitlement. This is intended to let the tribunal review the current decision without requiring the person's consent to every beneficial update.
Services Australia could use income information supplied by the Australian Taxation Office just before a final tax assessment to work out Family Tax Benefit and the Single Income Family Supplement. A further Family Tax Benefit calculation would be mandatory when the tax office later supplies a different income amount, and qualifying reviews started by the Social Services Secretary would no longer face a limit on how far back Family Tax Benefit arrears can be paid. For the Single Income Family Supplement, amounts released through the First Home Super Saver scheme would be excluded from the income test.
Earlier Family Tax Benefit calculations made with this early tax-office data would be treated as legally valid, along with related actions such as historical debt decisions. The bill also validates certain later review decisions that used an incorrect start date. People retain normal review rights and access to debt waivers or write-offs, while rights and liabilities from court cases finally decided before commencement are not changed.
For Child Care Subsidy recipients who must lodge a tax return, the first mandatory end-of-year check would generally be triggered when the return is lodged, rather than when the final tax assessment is issued. This timing matters because missing the first deadline can affect entitlement. Services Australia could use the early tax-office income data, must recalculate the subsidy if later income information changes the result, and would have its earlier calculations using that data validated.
A person who does not have to lodge a tax return could lose Family Tax Benefit for the relevant year if they fail to declare their income within 12 months, or within an extended period of up to 24 months in special circumstances. Entitlement could be restored after the declaration is made. Under parallel rules for the Single Income Family Supplement, a claimant who does not report the required income by the deadline would have their claim treated as never made and could not be paid the supplement.
Child support assessments could use the same early tax-office income information while a final tax assessment is pending. The bill also authorises automated estimates of a parent's income, requires a specified order of calculation methods, validates earlier automated estimates and early-data assessments, and requires recalculation when the final income differs.
People could seek review when their tax refund is used to repay a Family Tax Benefit debt, or when a Family Tax Benefit top-up is used against a tax debt. The Social Services Secretary could also exclude specified groups from these offsets, including groups identified as experiencing hardship.
Superannuation on government-funded paid parental leave would be calculated from the parental leave pay the person was actually entitled to receive. For the year beginning 1 July 2025, the calculation uses a 12 per cent rate plus a nominal interest amount. The bill also clarifies that an employer owes the Commonwealth only when it received more parental-leave funding than it had to pass on to the employee.
After a person is granted their 10th urgent payment within 90 days, they could not request another one until they contact Services Australia to discuss their circumstances or the 90-day period passes. After that conversation, they could continue receiving urgent payments if needed. An urgent payment counts when Services Australia decides to pay it, even if bank processing is delayed. The bill also clarifies review rights under the Income Apportionment Resolution SchemeA scheme providing payments for certain debts affected by the former income-apportionment method., corrects an outdated granny-flat reference, and expands child care subsidy funding agreements to entities and bodies, including partnerships, acting through an authorised representative.
Both the Social Security Act and the FA Administration Act provide a mechanism for persons to apply for an ‘advance payment’ of their social security entitlement (see Parts 2.21 and 2.22 of the Social Security Act) or FTB (see Division 2 of Part 3 of the FA Administration Act). In brief terms, an advance payment under either regime functions to provide the person with an immediate payment, which will then be repaid by either recurring deductions from their future social security instalments, or by a reduction in their future FTB Part A rate. Advances of social security and FTB payments have loSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
provide the Secretary the power to alter certain social services decisions that go to the ART for review to ensure the ART is reviewing the most up-to-date version of a decision; permit the Secretary to alter certain social services decisions only where new information, or information not previously considered amounts to a change in circumstances affecting a person’s entitlement to family assistance; permit certain social services decisions to be altered by Secretary to give effect to the family assistance law and specific statutory requirements; establish the criteria and conditions underSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
If the PIID amount is different to the tax-assessed amount, Services Australia receives updated income information and conducts a new reconciliation to ensure that it has accounted for the most accurate and up-to-date income information to work out an individual’s entitlement to FTB for an income year. FTB reconciliations generally occur on an automated basis and will continue to do so under these amendments. These amendments will better support this practice of reconciliation using PIID. Without them, Services Australia would be prevented from conducting a FTB reconciliation until after theSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
106 Validation of pre‑issue income data use (1) This item applies in relation to a review under section 105 of the Admin Act decided before the commencement time if: (a) the review is of a decision of the Secretary to make or vary a section 16 or 17 determination that results in an individual (the first individual) being entitled to be paid family tax benefit in respect of a period that consists of, or is included in, a particular income year (the relevant income year); and (b) the review was not required by subsection 105A(2); and (c) in relation to any of the following individuals (eachSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) introduced text
The FA Administration Act currently requires CCS reconciliation to be undertaken when the individual meets the ‘CCS reconciliation conditions’ for the relevant income year by the first deadline (which is usually the end of the income year following the relevant income year). Under current section 103A, for persons required to lodge an income tax return, an individual meets the CCS reconciliation conditions ‘if the Commissioner of Taxation has made an assessment of the taxable income of the person for the relevant income year’. Having regard to the ITA Act 1936, the Commissioner is considered nSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Item 90 After Subsection 65KI(3) Current subsection 65KI(1) provides that a claim for SIFS made by an individual is taken never to have been made if all of certain conditions apply. One of those conditions is currently if either or both of current subsections 65KI(2) and (3) apply however subsection 65KI(1) is being amended so that one of the conditions is if any of subsections 65KI(2), (3) and (3A) apply. This item inserts new subsection 65KI(3A) which relates to where a claimant has not notified taxable income component. New subsection 65KI(3A) applies if: any of the following (each a reSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
allow Services Australia to use PIID to determine a parent’s ATI in more circumstances when making or updating a child support assessment (‘Pre-issue Income Data – Child Support’); allow Services Australia to use automation for the determination of provisional incomes used in child support assessments (‘Provisional Incomes’); allow the Secretary to authorise another person to arrange for the publication of certain indexed child support figures under s 155 of the CSA Act (‘Publication of Certain Indexed Child Support Figures’); and validate historical administrative assessments that relied oSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Allow merits review of decisions to offset income tax returns against FTB debts, and FTB entitlements against a tax liability;Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
The PPL superannuation contribution provides recipients of Government-funded PPL with an additional annual payment to their superannuation fund. This comprises an amount equivalent to the total parental leave pay paid for a person in a year multiplied by the applicable superannuation guarantee charge percentage for that year (12 percent in the year commencing 1 July 2025) and an additional nominal interest rate amount. In addition, Schedule 7 will amend the provisions that specify when an employer has a debt to the Commonwealth, to clarify that a debt will arise only where the employer has beSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Item 10 of Schedule 2 to the Technical Changes No. 1 Act 2026 inserted new section 43A into the Social Security Administration Act, which precludes individuals from being paid more than 10 urgent payments in a 90-day period. New subsection 43(3DB) will operate subject to section 43A. However, as currently drafted, this preclusion commences when a person requests a further urgent payment, after having been paid 10 urgent payments in 90 days. The amendments in Schedule 8 make minor changes to confirm the intended operation of the urgent payment provisions. New section 43A is amended to ensure tSocial Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Context
Before the bill was introduced, Australia already relied on large-scale advance payments, early tax-office income data and automated child-support estimates, but legislation did not fully match those administrative practices, creating legal uncertainty and risks around past decisions, recalculations and debt recovery. The government response, introduced by Hon Tanya Plibersek MP, was to give those processes a clearer legal basis, validate specified earlier calculations and simplify access and review rules; the House passed the bill on 9 September 2026 and Senate consideration began five days later.
Advance payments and automated assessments were already used at scale
About 2.7 million advance payments were granted, while early tax data and automated child-support estimates supported high-volume payment and assessment work.
Government's stated rationale ↗Tanya Plibersek introduces the bill
The government said the amendments would align the law with established administrative practices and resolve historical legal and compliance problems.
Hansard ↗House passes the bill
After agreeing to the second reading and one government amendment, the House completed its consideration of the bill.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Senate consideration begins
The bill was introduced in the Senate and its second reading was moved, beginning consideration in the second chamber.
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 (02/07/2026): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (28/07/2026)
Report tabled 28 Jul 2026
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The 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 considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
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
Key criticism
Zali Steggall (Community Strong Australia) supported the practical changes but argued that automated decisions must retain human oversight where a case is complex or could cause harm. She said the bill did not fix deeper problems in child support, including financial abuse, delayed tax returns and debts imposed on carers for child support they never received. She cited about $2 billion in unpaid child support owed by roughly 229,000 parents and argued that victims-survivors and carers whose debts arose from unpaid child support should receive explicit protection.
Steggall welcomed faster assessments, more accurate decisions and clearer review rights. The government said final income information would replace early data through recalculations or automatic adjustments, and that the changes would deliver more accurate payments sooner while reducing underpayments and overpayment debts.
Further sources
Votes
These amendments were agreed on the voices without a counted division.
House
This amendment would allow child care subsidy funding agreements to be made with entities or bodies, including partnerships, and require recipients to comply with them.
This amendment would allow child care subsidy funding agreements to be made with entities or bodies, including partnerships, and require recipients to comply with them.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment without a counted vote — the presiding officer judged the ayes louder than the noes, and no member called for a division.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Plibersek supports the bill as a technical update that will give legal certainty, improve the fair and efficient administration of social security and child support, and help deliver more accurate and timely payments.
Read in Hansard ↗Zali Steggall supports the bill's practical changes to improve the speed, accuracy and review of social security and child support decisions, but argues that the government must go further by overhauling the child support system to prevent financial abuse and enforce unpaid obligations.
Read in Hansard ↗Kate Chaney does not oppose the bill, recognising that automation can speed up social security payments, but criticises the government for proceeding without safeguards recommended after Robodebt.
Read in Hansard ↗Ayres supports the bill as a set of technical amendments that will give legal clarity, improve administration and help the social security, family payment and child support systems operate fairly and as intended.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
8 speakers · 10 contributions · 8 support
“This is a largely technical Bill, reflecting the need for regular updates to ensure legislation remains up to date. It enables efficient and fair administration for the benefit of people who are supported by the social security and child support systems.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill, like those before, it, does not fix everything, and our government is not pretending otherwise. It does not repay the sleep lost by women who opened a letter they did not understand and had no-one to ring. It does not undo what was done to 433,000 people, and nothing that this parliament passes ever will. What it does is make sure a mother waiting on child support gets the assessment built on what the other parent actually earned this year, not next year. It means a family that does not easily deal in English gets the payment that is right the first time. Instead of a letter that ruins a fortnight. And it means that, when the system automatically takes a household tax refund, the household can finally ask a real human being to look at it again. None of this is complicated. Get the law right, and the system does what the parliament always meant it to do. Get it wrong, and people who can least afford it wear the difference? Our government is determined to get it right. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I prepared for this debate, I found myself thinking again about those two constituents, the older Australian who had recently lost his wife and was waiting for certainty about a pension application and the constituent who spent a long time waiting for the outcome of a review before finally receiving the support they were entitled to receive. Neither contacted my office asking for legislation reform. Neither contacted my office asking for technical amendments. They contacted my office because they needed a system that worked, a system that was fair, a system that was accessible, a system that was accurate and a system they could trust. Ultimately, that is what this bill is about. Behind every schedule in this bill are real Australians—people raising children, people caring for family members, people living with disabilities looking for work and people relying on child support. They deserve systems that operate as parliament intended and deliver support when it is needed. This bill helps ensure that happens, and for that reason I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Tanya Plibersek on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Minister's second reading speech
Plibersek supports the bill as a technical update that will give legal certainty, improve the fair and efficient administration of social security and child support, and help deliver more accurate and timely payments.
“This is a largely technical bill, reflecting the need for regular updates to ensure legislation remains up to date. It enables efficient and fair administration for the benefit of people who are supported by the social security and child support systems.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Plibersek supports the bill as a set of technical updates that will improve the fair and efficient administration of social security, family payments, paid parental leave and child support.
“This bill is part of our routine efforts to ensure the technical elements of our systems are up to date and working effectively. It aims to give Australians confidence in the integrity of our social security system and the supports they rely on. It is a technical bill reflecting the need for regular updates to ensure legislation remains up to date. It enables the efficient and fair administration of payments for the benefit of people who are supported by our systems through a number of measures.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“These amendments build on the Albanese government's commitment to strengthening Australia's social security system, a social security system with improved access and better support; a fairer, more transparent and more efficient system; a robust system with integrity; a social security system that works for Australians and not against them; and a system that reinforces Australia's social guarantee: when you fall on hard times, we will be there to help you get back on your feet. We're there for each other and we back each other. I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I would like to support this bill and to speak in favour of the practical, careful and necessary work it represents in strengthening Australia's social security, family payments and child support systems. At its heart, this legislation is about something very simple but very important: trust—trust that when Australians fall on hard times, the system will be there for them; trust that when families need support, it will be delivered fairly and on time; and trust that the rules governing that support are clear, consistent and applied with integrity. Without that trust, even the most well-funded system loses its legitimacy in the eyes of the people it is designed to serve. We know that trust was deeply shaken in years past. We saw what happens when systems drift away from fairness and accountability—when automation overrides common sense and when people are treated as problems to be managed, rather than Australians to be supported.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“At first glance, this bill might appear to deal with matters best left to lawyers, administrators and policy experts. But for the people I represent in Dunkley, these changes have practical consequences. They are about whether a parent can get help when their car needs registering, whether a family can manage back-to-school costs, whether a person experiencing hardship can have their circumstances properly considered when a debt is being recovered and whether someone who needs urgent assistance can access access it without unnecessary barriers. Fundamentally, these amendments are about ensuring Australians can have confidence that the social security and family support systems they rely on are lawful, fair and fit for purpose. That is why I am pleased to support this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Ash Ambihaipahar on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Ambihaipahar supports the bill as necessary to fix longstanding legal and compliance problems in social security, family payments and child support, arguing that reliable administration is essential to protecting vulnerable people and restoring trust in the safety net.
“The bill resolves a series of legacy legal and compliance issues that have built up over time in our social security family payment and child support systems, many of them stretching back well before this government came to office. It is the fifth piece of legislation in about two years addressing these historical issues. This is exactly the kind of work that really restores trust in the foundation upon which the whole safety net rests. Without it, people will stop believing the system is there for them and they will stop reaching out for help when they actually need it the most.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Ambihaipahar supports the bill, arguing that its technical changes will make social security, family payments and review processes faster, fairer and more responsive to hardship.
“None of these schedules will make the front page of the news, but in the electorate of Barton, home to one of the most multicultural communities in the country, where families are often supporting each other across generations, across borders, where a shiftworker in Rockdale might also be caring for an elderly parent and raising two kids on family payments, these technical fixes are the support that keeps the family net standing. When the support works, nobody notices. Where it doesn't, people fall through the cracks.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“This is good legislation. The coalition are supporting it, and we commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“As I said at the outset, this bill is technical in nature, and the coalition will support the passage of this legislation through the parliament.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“The bill can make assessments faster, some decisions more accurate and review rights clearer. They're all worthwhile reforms, but the child support system is decades old. It was not designed for the modern environment, in particular with the recognition of coercive control and financial abuse. When that is front of mind, this system is antiquated and dangerous.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That is why I'm moving a second reading amendment to this bill, as circulated in my name, that would encourage the parliament to actually pass a bill to incorporate this sort of mandatory framework that was recommended by the royal commission:”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 · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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 · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendments agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
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 Community Affairs Legislation Committee
Report tabled 28 Jul 2026
Referred to Committee (2 July 2026): Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee; Committee report (28 July 2026)
APH bill page notes
