Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026: what it would change across 28 Commonwealth Acts

The short answer

Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026: what it would change across 28 Commonwealth Acts

The Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026 is a Government bill from the Finance portfolio that proposes to amend 26 Acts (rising to 28 including repeals) across four schedules. If enacted, the changes would span the repeal of two obsolete corporations Acts, streamlined administrative processes for businesses and community organisations, expanded 'tell us once' data-sharing arrangements between government agencies, and a suite of technical amendments. Introduced in the House of Representatives on 13 May 2026, it passed that chamber and is now before the Senate in the 48th Parliament.

This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.

The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.

Evidence review

What the bill proposes at a glance

The Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026 (Bill No. 58/26) is a Government bill introduced by the Finance portfolio on 13 May 2026. It has passed the House of Representatives and is currently before the Senate. The bill's long title describes it as 'a Bill for an Act to repeal certain Acts and provisions of Acts and to make various amendments of the statute law of the Commonwealth, and for related purposes.'

In total the bill would touch 28 Commonwealth Acts across four schedules. If enacted, Schedule 1 would repeal two obsolete bodies-corporate Acts and make related transitional provisions. Schedule 2 would streamline administrative processes for businesses and community organisations. Schedule 3 would expand 'tell us once' arrangements so that information provided to one government agency could be lawfully shared with and used by others. Schedule 4 would make technical amendments to ensure that legislation operates as intended, including measures on ADF superannuation, WTO-consistent subsidy definitions, a 'slip rule' for customs merits review, and weighted-average methodology clarifications.

The bill is an omnibus measure, meaning it packages many discrete but related regulatory improvements into a single legislative vehicle. The Explanatory Memorandum states the bill would, if enacted, 'help lift productivity, reduce unnecessary regulatory burden and strengthen the efficiency of Commonwealth administration.' Commencement of the various parts would be staggered, with most provisions taking effect the day after Royal Assent, were the bill to pass, while some parts would be deferred by 6 to 12 months, and one part (Schedule 1, Part 7) is proposed to commence on 1 January 2027.

Evidence review

Schedule 1: Repeals of obsolete legislation and transitional arrangements

If enacted, Schedule 1 would repeal two Acts that have become redundant. The Commonwealth Funds Management Limited Act 1990 established what was originally the Commonwealth Funds Management Limited as a body corporate; that entity has long since been privatised, and the enabling Act serves no ongoing purpose. The Superannuation Benefits (Supervisory Mechanisms) Act 1990 was similarly tied to governance arrangements that are no longer operative.

Part 1 of Schedule 1 would also repeal spent or inoperative provisions within other Acts. The bill's Explanatory Memorandum notes that these repeals would form part of an ongoing program of legislative 'housekeeping' to remove provisions that are no longer required, reducing the size and complexity of the Commonwealth statute book.

Parts 2 through 7 of Schedule 1 would contain transitional and consequential provisions. Part 5 would address transitional arrangements for the cancelation of certain nominee arrangements, and Part 6 would deal with the timing for the cessation of specific trust structures originally tied to the repealed legislation.

Evidence review

Schedule 2: Streamlining administrative processes for businesses and community organisations

If enacted, Schedule 2 would make targeted amendments across a range of portfolio Acts to reduce administrative burden. Key changes would include removing requirements that serve little practical purpose, modernising procedural steps, and aligning compliance obligations with contemporary business practices.

Part 2 of Schedule 2 would amend the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 to remove the mandatory requirement that the Commission notify a person who is the subject of an adverse allegation in a discrimination complaint. The EM explains that individuals named in such allegations are not parties to the complaint, have no standing in the Commission's conciliatory complaints process, and the Commission does not determine rights or liabilities. The existing notification requirement was therefore considered to exceed what is necessary. Safeguards would remain: the Commission may still notify individuals where appropriate, and full procedural rights apply in any subsequent court proceedings.

Part 3 of Schedule 2 would make amendments to the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999, the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, and the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 to improve nominee arrangements and proof-of-life review processes. The EM notes these amendments would be intended to reduce unnecessary contact with welfare recipients while maintaining program integrity.

The human rights compatibility assessment in the EM addresses the removal of the adverse-allegation notification requirement against the right to privacy (Article 17 ICCPR), the right to a fair hearing (Article 14(1) ICCPR), the right to an effective remedy (Article 2(3) ICCPR), and equality before the law (Article 26 ICCPR). It concludes that any limitation on these rights would be 'reasonable, necessary and proportionate' given that affected individuals are not parties to the complaint process.

Evidence review

Schedule 3: Expanding 'tell us once' data-sharing arrangements

The EM describes Schedule 3 as removing 'barriers to providing more tell-us-once services across Government'. The concept of tell-us-once is that an individual or business that provides information to one Commonwealth agency should not need to re-supply the same information to another agency, where lawful and appropriate data-sharing arrangements exist.

Part 2 of Schedule 3 would make several amendments to the Healthcare Identifiers Act 2010. It would clarify that existing authorisations for health administration entities to handle healthcare identifiers and identifying information would also extend to the employees and contracted service providers of those entities. This would address a gap where health administration entities could lawfully handle identifiers, but their staff lacked explicit statutory authorisation to perform the same functions on the entity's behalf.

The bill would also explicitly authorise the Healthcare Identifiers service operator to provide date-of-death information regarding healthcare recipients to their healthcare providers or health administration entities. The EM explains that currently, when a person dies and their status becomes 'deceased' in the Healthcare Identifiers service, their identifier becomes unsearchable, creating difficulties for healthcare providers trying to close clinical records. Providers must then seek date-of-death information from alternative sources at cost or from grieving family members. The new authorisation would facilitate the closure of clinical records while respecting the privacy of deceased persons' families.

The EM's human rights assessment addresses the right to privacy (Article 17 ICCPR) and the right to health (Article 12(1) ICESCR). It argues the privacy impact would be low because all changes are enabling rather than mandatory, and the use of healthcare identifiers is 'privacy enhancing as it ensures the correct matching of health records to the right individuals across health and care settings without the need to transmit sensitive information or store it in multiple locations.'

Evidence review

Schedule 4: Technical and other amendments

Schedule 4 would cover four distinct sets of technical amendments. Part 1 would expand eligibility under the Superannuation Act 2005 to ensure that Australian Defence Force members receive equivalent retirement income support as civilian and industry scheme members. The amendment would be tied to a commencement date that aligns with the next quarterly superannuation cycle.

Part 2 would amend the Customs Act 1901 to align the definition of 'subsidy' with the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. This would be a technical adjustment to ensure Australia's anti-subsidy customs regime is consistent with its international trade obligations.

Part 3 would introduce a 'slip rule' for merits review under the Customs Act 1901. The provision would allow the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (or its successor body) to correct minor errors in its decisions without requiring a full rehearing. This is modelled on similar slip-rule provisions that exist in other Commonwealth statutes and in the civil procedure rules of Australian courts.

Part 4 would clarify the weighted average methodology used for certain customs valuation calculations under the Customs Act 1901. The amendment would address ambiguity in how weighted averages are to be calculated when determining customs duty, ensuring consistency in administrative practice.

Evidence review

Parliamentary status and what comes next

The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on 13 May 2026 and has passed that chamber. It is now before the Senate, where it was debated at second reading on 11 and 13 August 2026 with opposition amendment sheets (3953, 3924, 3948) circulated. As a Government bill with cross-portfolio reach, it could attract scrutiny from multiple Senate committees, including consideration of the privacy implications of the tell-us-once data-sharing provisions in Schedule 3 and the human rights compatibility of removing the adverse information test for director identification.

The staggered commencement provisions mean that even if the bill were to pass both Houses and receive Royal Assent, different parts would commence on different dates. Most provisions would commence the day after Royal Assent, but the nominee-arrangement changes in Part 3 of Schedule 1 would be deferred by 12 months, the proof-of-life review changes by 6 months, and one provision would be locked to 1 January 2027.

Evidence review

Chamber record cross-check — 11 August 2026 (Senate)

Senate Dynamic Red listed Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026 on 2026-08-11 as a government bill under second reading debate, with second reading amendments (Sheet 3953, Opposition) and committee of the whole amendments (Sheet 3948, Opposition) circulated. Dynamic Red is a same-sitting record and can change as proceedings continue; the corrected Hansard and current bill page control the final procedural account. This date-specific entry is a procedural snapshot rather than a final status.

Evidence review

Chamber record cross-check — 13 August 2026 (Senate)

Senate Dynamic Red listed Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026 on 2026-08-13 as a government bill under second reading debate, with second reading amendments (Sheet 3953, Opposition) and committee of the whole amendments (Sheets 3924 and 3948, Opposition) circulated. Dynamic Red is a same-sitting record and can change as proceedings continue; the corrected Hansard and current bill page control the final procedural account. This date-specific entry is a procedural snapshot rather than a final status.

Common questions

Before you rely on the answer