In this article
Kooky
Builder of Shaka, the payment router that pays every agent their commission on closing date.
About Kooky and Shaka →Australia's ban on card payment surcharges began on 1 October 2026. On the same day the Real Estate Institute of New South Wales (REINSW) published a media release, titled "Government exempts itself from electronic payment fees", asking the state's Minister for Better Regulation to respond on a different payment cost: a fee of A$0.99 that, according to the institute, an agent or landlord pays each time a tenant's rent arrives through Centrepay.
The two subjects are separate in law. One is a national change to what businesses may add to a card payment. The other is a state rental rule about which payment methods a tenant must be offered. REINSW has put them side by side, and this article sets out what each source says about each of them, a week after the date they share. It does not weigh one way of paying against another, and at the time of writing the material available records the institute's request, not a reply to it.
REINSW media release, 1 October 2026; Australian Competition and Consumer Commission card surcharge guidance, page dated 2 October 2026.
What REINSW has asked the minister
The request is narrow. In its release of 1 October, REINSW says that an agent in New South Wales, or the landlord where no agent is involved, must offer Centrepay as a way to pay rent, and that not offering it carries a fine of A$5,500. It then says that each rent payment made through Centrepay costs the agent or landlord A$0.99, and that this amount is charged by the NSW Government.
From there the institute draws a comparison with the national change that started the same morning. Businesses across the country may no longer add a surcharge when a customer pays by card. In REINSW's reading, a government that requires a payment method to be offered and collects a fee on each payment made through it is in an apparent contradiction with that policy. The institute has asked the Minister for Better Regulation to respond to that point.
Related readTasmania's Residential Parks Act 2026 is in force: the notice periodsThe release quotes the institute's chief executive officer, Tim McKibbin. "How, exactly, is this helping to address the rental crisis?" he asks in it. He also asks whether Government is using its power to legislate in order to improve its position in the market, and he describes the arrangement as a likely example of what he calls third line forcing. He adds that, because the Australian Consumer Law does not apply to Government, REINSW will not pursue that question.
REINSW describes itself in the release as established in 1910 and as representing more than 2,000 agencies. The figures for the fee and the fine are given here as the institute states them. They come from its release alone, and the statement that the fee is charged by the NSW Government is the institute's own.
How the Centrepay rule sits in NSW rental law
The requirement itself is set out by NSW Fair Trading on its page about changes to the state's rental laws, last updated on 21 September 2026. According to that page, Centrepay must be offered to tenants from 2 March 2026. The page also says that landlords and agents must offer a free way to pay rent, by bank transfer or by Centrepay, and it lists EFT, direct debit and BPAY as forms of bank transfer.
The rule is written from the tenant's side: a tenant must have access to a way of paying rent that costs them nothing. REINSW's release is written from the other side of the same transaction. The cost it describes does not fall on the tenant; it falls on the agent or the landlord who receives the payment.
Related readUS Fair Housing Act: what it bans, who is exempt, how to complainThat difference in viewpoint explains much of the exchange. Fair Trading's page describes what a tenant is entitled to be offered. The institute's release describes what, on its account, the party collecting the rent pays when the tenant chooses one of those options. Neither source disputes the other's point, because they are not describing the same side of the payment.
The requirement had been in place for seven months when the surcharge ban began. The institute's release of 1 October is tied to the start of the ban, not to a change in the Centrepay rule.
The institute's estimate, and what it rests on
REINSW supports its request with a calculation, and it is worth reading as the institute presents it: an illustration built on an assumption, not a count of payments.
The starting point is about 950,000 rental properties in New South Wales. The institute then supposes that 20 per cent of them use Centrepay, which gives 190,000 properties. It assumes rent is paid fortnightly, so 26 payments a year for each property, or 4,940,000 payments in all. At A$0.99 each, that comes to A$4,890,600 a year.
The annual total is an illustration, not a measured figure
The A$4,890,600 a year in REINSW's release follows from supposing that 20 per cent of about 950,000 NSW rental properties pay through Centrepay, fortnightly. The release does not give the actual number of tenancies that use it.
Every step of the arithmetic holds, and the result moves in direct proportion to the assumption. Half the take-up would give half the total; a different payment cycle would change the number of payments. The release does not say what share of tenancies in the state pays rent through Centrepay today, and none of the other sources used for this article gives that figure either.
For a single tenancy, the same assumptions give a smaller sum. A property whose rent arrives through Centrepay every fortnight would, at A$0.99 a payment, carry A$25.74 a year in fees for the agent or landlord, which is 26 payments multiplied by the fee. That per-property figure is derived here from the institute's numbers and is illustrative in the same way.
Related readUnited States: HUD opens Fair Housing Act probe into Wells Fargo schemeWhat the national surcharge ban covers
The national change is described by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) on its card surcharges page, dated 2 October 2026. From 1 October 2026, the page says, businesses can no longer add a surcharge when a customer pays with a Visa, Mastercard, American Express or eftpos card, whether it is a credit, debit or prepaid card. The earlier arrangement, a cap on excessive surcharges, ended on the same date.
REINSW's own update, published on 21 September 2026, explains how the change arrives. From 1 October, it says, Visa, Mastercard and eftpos introduce "no surcharge" rules, and American Express also prohibits surcharging from that date. The update adds that the Reserve Bank of Australia updated its payment standards and that the ACCC issued guidance.
Enforcement is shared, according to the ACCC page. The card networks and payment providers enforce the no-surcharge rules themselves. The ACCC and the state and territory agencies enforce the Australian Consumer Law where a claim about price is misleading.
The page gives a plain example of what has ended: a A$60 haircut with a 1.0 per cent surcharge became A$60.60 at the till. It also sets out what remains allowed. A business may offer a discount to customers who pay in cash or by PayID, provided the full price is shown no less prominently than the discounted one. And a business may build its payment costs into its overall prices.
What changes inside a real estate agency
For agencies, the national ban is the part of this story with a direct effect on daily practice, and REINSW's September update deals with it in the trade's own terms. Agents generally cannot impose or pass on a card surcharge, the institute says, and it gives three situations where the question comes up.
Related readUS telemarketing rules for real estate agents: calls, texts and AI| Payment | Who pays by card | Surcharge on top |
|---|---|---|
| Management fees | A landlord | Generally not permitted |
| Marketing charges | A vendor | Generally not permitted |
| Buyers' agent fee | A buyer | Generally not permitted |
REINSW update, 21 September 2026. General description; the update is not advice on an individual agency's position.
The update is explicit on two further points. Calling the amount a fee instead of a surcharge does not make it permissible, and neither does writing it into an agency agreement. The ACCC's guidance makes the related point that relabelling a surcharge may amount to misleading conduct. What both sources leave open is the route the ACCC describes for every business: the cost of accepting cards can be built into overall prices.
How an individual agency sets its fees is a matter for that agency and its own advisers. The sources describe the general rule, and they describe it in the same way.
A second government payment change in property
One more dated change belongs in the picture, because it also concerns how a property-related payment may be made. In a notice dated 11 September 2026, Treasury's foreign investment website said that credit and debit cards would no longer be accepted for foreign investment application fees from 19 September 2026. BPAY, direct deposit and international transfer remain available, according to the notice.
That is a federal matter and a different kind of payment: an application fee paid to government, not rent paid between a tenant and a landlord. It is not mentioned in REINSW's release and it is not part of the institute's request to the NSW minister. It is recorded here because three separate rules now touch the way money moves in Australian property: one for foreign investment applications since September, one for card payments to every business since October, and one, in force since March, for rent in New South Wales.
- 2 MarchCentrepay must be offered to NSW tenants, according to NSW Fair Trading.
- 19 SeptemberTreasury stops accepting cards for foreign investment application fees.
- 21 SeptemberREINSW says in an update that agents generally cannot pass on card surcharges.
- 1 OctoberThe national surcharge ban begins. REINSW publishes its release on the Centrepay fee.
- 2 OctoberDate shown on the ACCC's card surcharge guidance page.
What is known and what is still open
A week after the release, the position is this. The national ban is in force and its terms are published by the ACCC. The NSW requirement to offer Centrepay is in force and is described by NSW Fair Trading. REINSW has put a question to the Minister for Better Regulation, and it has said that it will not pursue the third line forcing question.
Several things are not established by the sources used here. They do not include a response from the minister or from the NSW Government. They do not give the number of NSW tenancies that pay rent through Centrepay, so the scale of the fee in practice is not known beyond the institute's illustration. And the description of the A$0.99 fee, including who charges it, rests on REINSW's release alone.
For agents and landlords in New South Wales, the practical position on 8 October is unchanged by the release: the obligation to offer Centrepay stands as Fair Trading describes it, and the surcharge ban applies to card payments as the ACCC describes it. Any answer from the minister would be the next dated step in this story.
Kooky, from Shaka
Kooky edits Agents Estate and builds Shaka, the payment router he made for real estate professionals. One payment comes in, and every agent, agency and party in the deal receives their signed share on closing date.
