Journalists carrying out public interest journalism face the prospect of being effectively licensed by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) in order to access company data, which is essential for corporate investigations, Crikey has learnt.
The data, which includes a company director’s date of birth and their residential address, is currently publicly available through registries held by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). Such details confirm the identity of company directors and are vital for journalists who are following a company director’s trail.
The plan to insert a new layer of bureaucracy and potentially extend government control over access to information has put the ATO into conflict with the journalists union, the MEAA, which opposes in principle the state licensing of journalists.
The ATO is taking over responsibility for corporate registries currently held by ASIC under a federal government scheme to modernise registry services.
As part of the change, the ATO plans to introduce a tiered system of access to corporate data. The ATO’s plan would restrict public access to personal information on directors. The move to limit access to data has been pushed by the Governance Institute of Australia which, according to its website, represents the interests of “governance and risk management professionals from the listed, unlisted and not-for-profit sector”.
Journalists could still be given access to directors’ full details, as is currently the case with ASIC registries. However, Crikey understands the ATO plans to restrict access to only those journalists who are licensed by the ATO.
An MEAA briefing note obtained by Crikey says the ATO’s plan to “accredit” journalists amounted to licensing journalists and was “contrary to long-standing MEAA policy”. The licensing plan, it said, introduced a “significant practical hurdle” for occasional users and overseas media.
The note said the ATO had been told it was “not their role to decide who is and is not a journalist”.
The ATO has been famously hostile to the public disclosure of information. Three years ago it prosecuted whistleblower Richard Boyle, a one-time ATO debt collection officer who revealed the ATO’s targeting of vulnerable individuals and small businesses in a joint ABC-Fairfax (now Nine) investigation.
Boyle’s home was raided by ATO and Federal Police officers after he spoke to Four Corners. He was charged with 66 criminal offences, subsequently reduced to 24.
Australia drops in press freedom ratings
News of the ATO move has emerged as Australia records a significant fall in press freedom rankings. The 2022 World Press Freedom Index, published by Reporters Without Borders this week, shows Australia has slipped from 25th to 39th place internationally.
“Governments must respect and honour press freedom, put accountability and transparency at the heart of our democracy, and answer the questions asked of them; not the questions they want to answer,” said Karen Percy, federal president of the MEAA Media Section.
“Freedom of Information processes should not be shackled, court cases should not be secret, and elected representatives should not spread disinformation and hide behind claims of fake news.
“Quality, honest and transparent journalism — centred on ethics and the public interest — is the best shot our industry has in restoring our critical role in a democratic society.”
The MEAA has also submitted a list of priority areas to the major political parties. These include:
• Restoring adequate funding to public broadcasters the ABC and SBS, with greater certainty over a five-year funding cycle.
• Implementing reforms to protect whistleblowers who disclose confidential information to media in the public interest.
• Conducting an urgent review of Australia’s security laws to remove impediments and sanctions against public interest journalism.
UPDATE: An ATO spokesperson said in a statement to Crikey following the publication of this story that the tax office was currently running “a number of consultation processes, including with journalists, to ensure proposed changes will meet stakeholders’ needs.”
“These consultation processes are ongoing and still in early stages,” it said.
“The ATO understands the importance of transparency, and is considering a variety of options to balance the need for transparency against privacy requirements and public expectations. No decisions have been made and all options will be considered.”
