Land Transport (Revenue) Amendment Bill

2.1. Are there any publicly available inquiry, review or evaluation reports that have informed, or are relevant to, the policy to be given effect by this Bill?

YES

The Ministry of Transport’s 2022 document, “Driving change: reviewing the road user charges system”, consulted on proposals to remove the RUC licence display requirements and update the requirements for electronic distance recorders. The document is available at https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/RUCDD-2022.pdf

2.2. Does this Bill seek to give effect to New Zealand action in relation to an international treaty?

NO

2.3. Were any regulatory impact statements provided to inform the policy decisions that led to this Bill?

YES

Two regulatory impact statements informed the policy decisions:

·       Regulatory Impact Statement: Tolling Legislative Reform, Ministry of Transport, 28 November 2024, available at www.regulation.govt.nz/assets/RIS-Documents/Regulatory-Impact-Statement-Tolling-Legislative-Reform.pdf. Note: some content is withheld on grounds consistent with the Official Information Act 1982.

·       Regulatory Impact Statement: RUC Retail Market – Enabling Reforms, Ministry of Transport, July 2025, available at www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/RUC-RIS-updated.pdf.

2.3.1. If so, did the Ministry for Regulation provide an independent opinion on the quality of any of these regulatory impact statements?

NO

Neither RIS met the threshold to require an independent opinion on the quality from the Ministry for Regulation.

2.3.2. Are there aspects of the policy to be given effect by this Bill that were not addressed by, or that now vary materially from, the policy options analysed in these regulatory impact statements?

YES

The policy decision to restrict heavy vehicles from certain alternative routes was addressed broadly in issue 2, option 4 of the Tolling Legislative Reform RIS, however this did not explicitly cover the impact analysis of the proposed infringement offence in the Bill and its associated $150 infringement fee.

Automatic CPI adjustments were addressed in issue 3, option 3 of the Tolling Legislative Reform RIS, including the relative impacts of including this power in primary and secondary legislation. However, this did not explicitly mention the impacts of annual increases, rounding up tolls to the next ten cents or exempting schemes from CPI adjustments when they are established within twelve months of an adjustment date.

The Bill enables the Land Transport Management Act’s delegation and leasing powers to be extended to roads that link toll roads where those toll roads will be part of the same concession arrangement. This was not explicitly covered in Issue 4A of the Tolling Legislative Reform RIS which addressed the expansion of delegation and leasing powers.

2.4. Has further impact analysis become available for any aspects of the policy to be given effect by this Bill?

NO

2.5. For the policy to be given effect by this Bill, is there analysis available on:

(a)   the size of the potential costs and benefits?

YES

(b)   the potential for any group of persons to suffer a substantial unavoidable loss of income or wealth?

NO

Analysis of the potential costs and benefits is available in the regulatory impact statements linked in section 2.3 to the extent impacts can be reliably monetised. The RUC Retail Market RIS does, however, identify potential negative impacts for existing technology suppliers. Current products may face challenges as the new standards are reformed to allow a wider range of technology solutions to be used.

2.6. For the policy to be given effect by this Bill, are the potential costs or benefits likely to be impacted by:

(a)   the level of effective compliance or non-compliance with applicable obligations or standards?

YES

(b)   the nature and level of regulator effort put into encouraging or securing compliance?

YES

The costs and benefits of the Bill’s reformed tolling provisions (as noted in the pages above) will likely be affected by road users’ level of compliance with the requirement to pay tolls, as is the case under the current tolling framework, and the level of compliance heavy vehicles demonstrate when there is a restriction on an alternative route. Similarly, costs and benefits will be affected by the level of toll operator compliance with the new legislation, such as their compliance with automatic inflation adjustments to toll rates.

Compliance with restrictions on alternative routes and requirements to pay tolls may also be affected by the level of effort that is placed on enforcement by the enforcement agency.

Costs and benefits of the road user charges provisions will be affected by a) the extent to which the new market structure succeeds in reducing barriers to compliance for users and b) the level of regulator effort to ensure ease of access to digital RUC licence information for users and enforcement officers. Regulator effort is also required. The benefit of removing display and carry requirements for physical RUC licences depends on regulator effort to implement a robust digital alternative, including NZTA system changes and Police access to the RUC database for roadside enforcement.

3.1. What steps have been taken to determine whether the policy to be given effect by this Bill is consistent with New Zealand’s international obligations?

No specific issues were identified that may have implications for New Zealand’s international obligations.

3.2. What steps have been taken to determine whether the policy to be given effect by this Bill is consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi?

Officials assessed the Bill for consistency with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. For the tolling provisions, consideration was given to how changes to alternative route requirements and concession arrangements could affect access to taonga and existing treaty settlements, in accordance with the Treaty principle of protection. Ultimately, the policy changes to the alternative route requirement and concession arrangements that may have interacted with this principle did not proceed.

For the RUC provisions, officials consider that the proposals are unlikely to engage any relevant Treaty principles. The changes are largely technical focusing on removing licence display requirements, updating definitions for electronic distance recorders, and clarifying the roles in the existing system.

3.3. Has advice been provided to the Attorney-General on whether any provisions of this Bill appear to limit any of the rights and freedoms affirmed in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990?

YES

The Ministry of Justice is undertaking an assessment of whether the Bill is consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Advice provided to the Attorney-General by the Ministry of Justice, or a section 7 report of the Attorney-General, is generally expected to be available on the Ministry of Justice's website upon introduction of a Bill.

3.4. Does this Bill create, amend, or remove:

(a)   offences or penalties (including infringement offences or penalties and civil pecuniary penalty regimes)?

YES

(b)   the jurisdiction of a court or tribunal (including rights to judicial review or rights of appeal)?

YES

Clause 12 of the Bill creates an offence in the Land Transport Management Act 2003 for a person to operate any heavy motor vehicle on an alternative route in breach of a notice referred to in section 46D, being a notice by the Minister. Clauses 16 to 19 of the Bill amend the Land Transport Act 1998 and the Land Transport (Offences and Penalties) Regulations 1999 to make the new offence a toll offence and empower the setting of an infringement fee for the new offence which is set at $150.

Clause 37 of the Bill inserts new section 47D into the Road User Charges Act 2012 which extends the application of an existing offence of failure to report tampering with an electronic system to the RUC collector or knowingly providing false information to the RUC collector. Previously this offence applied to an electronic system provider but the Bill extends this to RUC providers.

Clause 37 of the Bill also inserts new section 47A which provides a RUC provider with a right of appeal to the District Court against decisions by the RUC collector relating to approval as a RUC provider.

3.4.1. Was the Ministry of Justice consulted about these provisions?

YES

The Ministry of Justice was consulted about the new infringement offence restricting heavy vehicles on alternative routes and outlined no concerns.

The Ministry of Justice Offences and Penalties team was also consulted on the Bill and did not raise any issues.

3.5. Does this Bill create, amend or remove any provisions relating to the collection, storage, access to, correction of, use or disclosure of personal information?

YES

Clause 6 inserts new section 46A which carries over the existing ability for a road tolling scheme order to authorise an enforcement authority to access law information under the Privacy Act 2020 and set out terms and conditions governing that access. 

Clause 43 amends the regulation-making power in section 89(m) of the Road User Charges Act to expand an existing power to regulate collection, storage, use or disclosure of information by an electronic system provider so that such regulations may apply to all RUC providers.

3.5.1. Was the Privacy Commissioner consulted about these provisions?

YES

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner has been consulted on the Bill and recommended inserting an additional power to regulate for RUC providers to have a strategy for compliance with the Privacy Act.

3.6. Has there been any external consultation on the policy to be given effect by this Bill, or on a draft of this Bill?

YES

The Ministry consulted key government agencies and external stakeholders on the policy given effect to by the Bill and on the draft Bill.

External consultation on the RUC reforms included several other groups:

·       In 2022, the Ministry of Transport released the “Driving change” discussion document, seeking public feedback on technical proposals, including the removal of licence display requirements.

·       The Ministry conducted a market sounding exercise in late 2024, which identified interest from 25 potential RUC retailers.

·       The Land Transport Revenue Stakeholder Reference Group, which includes representatives of system users, was consulted road user charges policy proposals in the Bill

·       The Ministry engaged with the Infrastructure Commission during the early stages of the tolling reform policy work and on the RUC policy proposals

3.7. Have the policy details to be given effect by this Bill been otherwise tested or assessed in any way to ensure the Bill’s provisions are workable and complete?

YES

We have consulted with NZTA as current tolling operator and RUC collector on implementation to test the workability of the Bill’s provisions. This included to understand the readiness of NZTA to make system and policy adjustments, including to enable digital verification of RUC end distances by the Police.

4.1. Does this Bill contain any provisions that could result in the compulsory acquisition of private property?

NO

4.2. Does this Bill create or amend a power to impose a fee, levy or charge in the nature of a tax?

NO

4.3. Does this Bill affect rights, freedoms, or impose obligations, retrospectively?

NO

4.4. Does this Bill:

(a)   create or amend a strict or absolute liability offence?

YES

(b)   reverse or modify the usual burden of proof for an offence or a civil pecuniary penalty proceeding?

NO

Clause 12 creates a new offence for a person to operate a heavy motor vehicle on an alternative route in breach of a notice. This is a strict liability offence but has appropriate safeguards in that the power of a Minister to make a notice restricting use of an alternative route provides exceptions if the person uses the alternative route for the purpose of delivery or collection of goods or passengers to or from locations directly accessible only from a road forming part of the alternative route, or if the alternative route is used to return the vehicle to the place of business where it is based. This provision is necessary to enforce Cabinet’s policy intention to allow restrictions on toll road alternative routes.

4.5. Does this Bill create or amend a civil or criminal immunity for any person?

NO

4.6. Does this Bill create or amend a decision-making power to make a determination about a person’s rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law, and that could have a significant impact on those rights, obligations, or interests?

YES

The Bill creates a new role of "RUC provider" and empowers the RUC collector to approve a RUC Provider in accordance with requirements under regulations. The decision to approve or not approve a RUC provider, based on criteria in regulations, which could impact an entity's right to participate in the RUC retail market.  Accordingly, the Bill provides a RUC provider with a right of appeal to the District Court against the RUC collector's decisions relating to their approval.

4.7. Does this Bill create or amend a power to make delegated legislation that could amend an Act, define the meaning of a term in an Act, or grant an exemption from an Act or delegated legislation?

NO

4.8. Does this Bill create or amend any other powers to make delegated legislation?

YES

Clause 6 of the Bill amends the existing powers in the Land Transport Management Act to establish a road tolling scheme by Order in Council. All policy changes to the tolling provisions in this Bill will be empowered in tolling schemes through an Order. Before an Order is made for a new tolling scheme, the Minister of Transport must be satisfied that the scheme meets the statutory criteria outlined in the amended section 48 of the Land Transport Management Act.

An Order establishing a road tolling scheme may authorise the toll operator to set tolls or grant exemptions, and the Bill provides that an instrument exercising that power is secondary legislation.

The Bill also empowers the Minister, by notice and where the relevant Order authorises it, to restrict the use of toll road alternative routes by heavy vehicles. This power is outlined in new section 46D in the Bill and is secondary legislation. The Bill also gives the power to specify any exemption to this restriction in the same notice.

The Bill also amends section 89 of the Road User Charges Act 2012 to add powers to make regulations for several new purposes, including:

·       Prescribing criteria for the approval of RUC Retailers.

·       Specifying requirements for, and creating, alternative payment schemes.

·       Prescribing criteria for the approval of electronic distance recorders to meet the new outcome-based standards.

4.9. Does this Bill contain any provisions (other than those noted above) that are unusual or call for special comment?

NO