-
Posted by Tom Jensen
- |
-
19 Oct, 2026
HIGH and rapidly escalating landside charges at Australia’s container terminals and empty container parks dominated discussion at the Australia & New Zealand Shipping & Logistics Conference held in Sydney on 27–28 August, hosted by Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA), the Australian Peak Shippers Association (APSA) and the New Zealand Cargo Owners Council (NZCOC). Aligned to the concerns raised throughout the conference, the issue has been formally escalated to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC), with industry leaders calling for decisive regulatory intervention to restore competitive discipline and pricing accountability across the container supply chain.
In a detailed submission to the ACCC, FTA/APSA warn that stevedore‑imposed Terminal Access Charges (TACs) and similar fees applied by empty container parks have grown far beyond their original purpose as minor cost‑recovery mechanisms. Instead, they have become substantial revenue streams imposed on transport operators who neither select nor contract for the services being provided. These costs ultimately flow through to importers, exporters, Australian businesses, regional communities and consumers.
The organisations argue that the current charging model has become structurally flawed, enabling essential supply chain infrastructure providers to recover fees from parties with limited commercial leverage. This, they say, has eroded competitive discipline and inflated costs throughout the supply chain.
“The rapid escalation of landside charges has transformed what was once a relatively minor cost recovery mechanism into a substantial source of revenue,” the submission states, noting that these charges are “unavoidable for transport operators” and “ultimately borne throughout the supply chain.”
A structural problem extending beyond terminals
FTA/APSA highlight that the pricing principles originally developed by stevedores have now been adopted by empty container parks, creating a broader industry practice where fees are imposed on transport operators who have no ability to negotiate service or pricing outcomes. This mirrors the structural deficiencies identified by the Productivity Commission in its 2022 review of container port productivity.
The spread of these charging practices across multiple segments of the container logistics chain, the organisations argue, reinforces the need for regulatory reform that restores pricing accountability to the commercial parties that actually contract for and benefit from stevedoring and ECP services.
Voluntary pricing protocol has not delivered price restraint
The Productivity Commission’s final report in December 2022 recommended allowing more time to assess the effectiveness of voluntary pricing protocols introduced in Victoria and by the National Transport Commission. More than three and a half years later, FTA/APSA said the results are clear: transparency has improved, but price restraint has not.
The submission cites correspondence from the Victorian Minister for Ports and Freight, acknowledging that while the Voluntary Pricing Protocol (VPP) improved notification processes, it “had not been effective in maintaining landside access charge increases at reasonable levels.”
The Minister also confirmed the matter had been raised with the Commonwealth, including reference to the Productivity Commission’s recommendation for a mandatory pricing code administered by the ACCC.
FTA/APSA argue that the continued escalation of TACs, combined with the Victorian Government’s acknowledgement of the voluntary regime’s limitations, provides compelling evidence that stronger regulatory intervention is now required.
FTA/APSA acknowledge ongoing efforts by the NTC to improve transparency through the VPP framework, with a final proposed version of updated national Guidelines recently submitted to Australia's Transport Ministers for consideration ahead of an anticipated national rollout from 1 January 2027. While the revised Guidelines are expected to enhance consistency and transparency in the notification and calculation of landside charges, FTA/APSA maintain that transparency alone will not address the fundamental concern. The central issue remains the continued escalation of charges and the absence of effective mechanisms to constrain pricing outcomes or restore genuine commercial accountability.
Mandatory pricing code: necessary but insufficient
The Productivity Commission recommended consideration of a mandatory industry code with ACCC oversight, including:
- limiting fee changes to once per year
- requiring simultaneous notification of proposed increases
- empowering the ACCC to reject unjustified increases
- prohibiting resubmission of alternative increases for the same period
- enabling the ACCC to collect relevant revenue and performance data
- requiring annual reporting to transport ministers and the Treasurer
- establishing penalties to support compliance
FTA/APSA support these safeguards but warn that regulating future increases alone will not address the inflated cost base already embedded in the system.
“A mandatory code based solely on current charging structures risks regulating future increases from an already elevated and potentially unjustified cost base,” the submission states.
Revenue capping: a serious option
The organisations urge the ACCC to consider revenue‑capping models similar to those previously applied in sectors with constrained competition and high pricing power. Such a model would not prevent stevedores from earning appropriate returns but would establish reasonable boundaries around pricing behaviour and ensure charges more accurately reflect efficient costs.
FTA/APSA argue that less intrusive measures have failed to restore competitive discipline, and that revenue capping may be necessary to protect Australian importers, exporters and consumers from unjustified cost increases.
Returning charges to commercial parties: the core reform
Despite acknowledging the value of mandatory codes and revenue caps, FTA/APSA reaffirm their long‑standing position that the most effective and enduring solution remains the Productivity Commission’s Draft Recommendation 6.2:
“Terminal access charges and other fixed fees… should be regulated so that they can only be charged to shipping lines and not to transport operators.”
By requiring stevedores and ECPs to recover costs directly from shipping lines—the parties that select and contract for terminal services—pricing decisions would be subject to genuine negotiation, scrutiny and competitive pressure. This would restore commercial accountability and align Australia’s container supply chain with internationally recognised commercial norms.
A call for national reform
FTA/APSA conclude by welcoming continued engagement with the ACCC and government to develop a regulatory framework that improves transparency, restores competitive discipline and supports a more efficient and internationally competitive supply chain.
The message from industry is clear: voluntary measures have failed, costs continue to rise and structural reform is now essential to protect Australia’s trade competitiveness.
