Tax Alert - Will credit card surcharges be banned?

Lowe Lippmann Chartered Accountants

Will credit card surcharges be banned?


If credit card surcharges are banned in other countries, why not Australia? This alert looks at the surcharge debate and the payment system complexity that has brought us to this point.


In the United Kingdom, consumer credit and debit card surcharges have been banned since 2018. In Europe, all except American Express and Diners Club consumer surcharges are banned.


And in Australia, there is a push to follow suit. But is the issue as simple as it seems?


The push for change


The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) launched a review in October 2024 of Merchant Card Payment Costs and Surcharging. The review explores whether existing regulatory frameworks are still fit for purpose given the rate of technological change and complexity, and if there is a need for greater transparency – surcharges, transaction fees, and the way in which payments are regulated, are all up for review.  Ultimately, the review is about reducing costs to merchants and consumers.


In general, customers dislike surcharges and would be happy to see them go – they represent a personal loss of value in much the same way a discount is seen as a personal gain.  And, they have support for a ban from the large credit card providers and financial institutions with the Australian Banking Association’s (ABA) submission to the RBA review saying, “The current surcharging framework is clearly not working and requires targeted reform. Consumers should never be surcharged for bundled costs like POS systems, business software products or other business incentives.”


The reference to “business incentives” is where a higher fee is charged by the payment service provider to provide the merchant with reward points and other incentives.


The push for a ban accelerated when the government announced that it would ban debit card surcharges from 1 January 2026, subject to the outcome of the RBA review later this year.


If surcharges are banned for some or all payment methods, businesses currently charging surcharges will need to either absorb the cost of merchant fees or increase prices.  The issue for many businesses is not whether to charge a fee, but the costs of accepting what is now the most common payment method – cash is free to transact, cards are a facility to transact legal tender, not legal tender in and of themselves.


Small business pays 3 times more


While the average card payment fee in Australia is lower than the United States (which is close to double Australia’s rates), we pay a higher rate than in some other jurisdictions such as Europe.  The RBA have flagged there might be room to improve this by capping interchange fees and/or introducing competition into how debit card payments are routed (allowing systems to default to the ‘least cost’ option available).


In Australia, it is not a level playing field when it comes to card transaction fees with a large disparity between fees paid by small and large merchants – small merchants pay around three times the average per transaction fee than larger merchants (large merchants are able to secure wholesale fees or utilise ‘strategic’ interchange rates).


But even within the small business sector, fees vary dramatically with the cost of accepting card payments ranging from less than 1.0% to well over 2.0% of the transaction value.



How we use cards and digital transactions


The RBA are generally in favour of allowing surcharges, pointing out that they signal to consumers which payment methods offer better value and enable market forces to determine the dominant payment providers.


This might be true for large purchases, but do we really notice when we’re tapping our phones or watches to grab that morning coffee?


Cards (including debit, prepaid, credit and charge cards) are the most frequently used payment method in Australia, accounting for three-quarters of all consumer payments in 2022.


According to the Australian Banking Association:

  • Contactless payments now account for 95% of in-person card transactions, compared to less than 8.0% in 2010.
  • Online payments, as a share of retail payments, have grown from 7.0% in 2010 to 18% in 2022.
  • Mobile wallet (Apple Pay, Google Pay, etc.,) usage has grown from 1.0% of point-of-sale payments in 2016 to 44% in October 2024.
  • Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) services, virtually unknown 8 years ago, are now used by nearly a third of Australians.

When are surcharges allowed


In the days before the RBA’s surcharge standard, it was not uncommon for businesses to apply a flat 3.0% surcharge.


The surcharge rules enable merchants to surcharge consumers for the “reasonable cost of accepting card payments”.


This means:

  • A business can only charge a surcharge for paying by card/digital wallet, but the surcharge must not be more than what it costs the business to use that payment type.  These costs, measured over a 12-month period, can include gateway costs, terminal costs paid to a provider, and fraud prevention etc., if they relate directly to the card type being surcharged.
  • Payment suppliers must provide merchants with a statement at least every 12 months that includes the business’s average percentage cost of accepting each payment type.
  • If a business charges a payment surcharge, it must be able to justify how the surcharge fee was calculated.
  • If the surcharge applies to all payment types regardless of type, it must not be more than the lowest surcharge set for a single payment type.
  • If there is no way for a customer to pay without incurring a surcharge, the business must include the surcharge in the displayed price. That is, if your customer cannot use cash or another payment method that does not incur a surcharge, then the price displayed must include the surcharge.


The RBA estimates that, on average, card fees cost:

Card Type Fee
Eftpos less than 0.5%
Visa and Mastercard debit between 0.5% and 1.0%
Visa and Mastercard credit between 1.0% and 1.5%

Excessive surcharging is banned on eftpos, Debit Mastercard, Mastercard Credit, Visa Debit and Visa Credit.


The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) reportedly stated that excessive surcharge complaints increased to close to 2,500 in the 18 months from the start of 2023.


Tax on surcharges


If your business charges goods and services tax (GST) on goods or services, then GST should also apply to any surcharge payments made.



Please do not hesitate to contact your Lowe Lippmann Relationship Partner if you wish to discuss any of these matters further.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation


September 2, 2026
Discretionary trusts and the proposed 30% minimum tax Discretionary trusts, often referred to as family trusts, have been a popular structure for Australian families and businesses for many decades. They are commonly used to operate family businesses, hold investments and assist with succession planning. Their flexibility, together with asset protection and estate planning benefits, has made them an attractive option for many groups. In the 2026–27 Federal Budget, the Government announced a significant proposed change. From 1 July 2028 , trustees of discretionary trusts would generally be required to pay a minimum tax of 30% on the trust's taxable income . According to the Government, the proposal is intended to better align the tax paid on trust income with that paid by salary and wage earners, while reducing opportunities to split income between family members. However, the announcement has generated considerable debate. Professional bodies, business groups and tax advisers have expressed concerns that the changes could increase complexity and compliance costs for many genuine family businesses and investment structures. How the proposal is expected to work Under the proposal, the trustee would generally pay the minimum 30% tax on the trust's taxable income. Where trust income is distributed to individual beneficiaries or certain other non-corporate beneficiaries , those beneficiaries would generally receive a non-refundable tax offset recognising the tax already paid by the trustee. This is intended to reduce the risk of the same income being taxed twice, but while maintaining the impact of the 30% minimum tax rate. Importantly, the minimum tax would not apply to every trust . The Government has indicated that a number of trusts would be excluded, including fixed trusts, widely held trusts, complying superannuation funds, charitable trusts, deceased estates, special disability trusts and genuine testamentary trusts. Primary production income and certain income relating to vulnerable minors would also be excluded. The Government has also stated that more than 90% of small businesses are not expected to be affected. While that may be reassuring for some taxpayers, there are still some important issues that could affect family groups using discretionary trusts. What could this mean in practice? One area likely to receive close attention is the use of companies as beneficiaries of family trusts. Many family groups have historically distributed some trust income to a company. This can provide flexibility in managing cash flow, retaining profits within the business and funding future growth. Under the proposed rules, however, the corporate beneficiary would not receive a tax offset for the tax already paid by the trustee . In many cases this will mean that income distributed from a discretionary trust to a company would be subject to double taxation. Another practical impact of the proposed change is that some family groups may find it more difficult to fully utilise existing tax losses. While the impact will depend on each group's circumstances, the proposed minimum tax is likely to reduce some of the flexibility that currently exists when managing taxable income across a family structure within many groups. The Government has also proposed a temporary three-year rollover period, commencing from 1 July 2027, to help restructure into alternative business structures , such as companies or fixed trusts, without triggering immediate income tax or capital gains tax consequences. While this may assist some groups, restructuring is rarely straightforward. Depending on the circumstances, it might be necessary to consider things like stamp duty, loan approvals, financing arrangements, contract changes, licensing requirements and professional advice. Even relatively simple restructures can involve significant time and cost, so careful planning will be important. The rules are not yet final At this stage, the proposal remains subject to consultation . Treasury released a consultation paper in July 2026 seeking feedback on a range of design issues, including how the new rules would operate in different situations. Final legislation has not yet been introduced , meaning aspects of the proposal could still change before the rules become law. For this reason, most groups utilising discretionary trust structures should avoid making major structural decisions based solely on the announcement. Instead, it is sensible to monitor developments while considering whether existing structures are likely to remain appropriate if the proposal proceeds. What should you do now? For many families, discretionary trusts are about much more than tax. They can continue to provide valuable asset protection, succession planning and business flexibility. The proposed changes do not remove those benefits, nor do they prevent discretionary trusts from continuing to be used. However, the proposal does have the potential to change the tax outcomes for some family groups, particularly those with more complex structures or those that regularly distribute income to companies. With the proposed start date still some time away, there is an opportunity to pause and carefully understand how the changes may affect your circumstances and consider whether any planning or restructuring might be appropriate. As the legislation develops, we can help you assess the impact on your business or investment structure and determine whether any action is warranted.
August 4, 2026
Government to permanently extend $20,000 instant asset write-off The Government has recently introduced legislation that would make the $20,000 instant asset write-off permanent for small businesses (as announced in the 2026 Federal Budget). If enacted, the changes would: permanently set the instant asset write-off threshold at $20,000 (instead of $1,000) for eligible depreciating assets first used, or installed ready for use, for a taxable purpose from 1 July 2026; and permanently set the general small business pool threshold at $20,000 from 1 July 2026. The changes would also further suspend the 'lock-out rule' until 30 June 2027. This rule otherwise prevents a business that has chosen not to use the simplified depreciation rules from re-entering the regime for five years.
July 7, 2026
High Court decision and ATO statement on Bendel’s Case The High Court recently handed down its decision in Bendel’s Case, confirming that an unpaid present entitlement (or UPE) between a discretionary trust and a beneficiary company does not fall within the extended definition of a “loan” for Division 7A purposes. The Australian Taxation Office released a Decision Impact Statement in response to the High Court findings, concluding the High Court's reasoning makes it clear that where a beneficiary company is entitled to a share of trust income that remains unpaid (a UPE) and the company takes no positive actions to call for payment of the entitlement, this will not fall within the expanded definition of a "loan" for Division 7A purposes. This is in contradiction to the ATO’s historical position that treated UPEs as "loans".
More Posts