|
Agency responsible |
New Zealand Customs Service |
|
Portfolio |
Customs |
|
Date finalised |
16 July 2026 |
|
Identification Number |
1994 |
Good law-making: 9(i)
|
The importance of consulting, to the extent that is reasonably practicable, the persons or representatives of the persons who will be directly and materially affected by the legislation |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
New Zealand Customs Service (Customs) held a workshop and undertook targeted consultation with stakeholders (key excise manufacturers and importers of excisable goods), the industry associations that represent the excise sector and the large accounting firms that often act on behalf of the excise sector in relation to excise-related changes. It is excise manufacturers who will be directly and materially affected by the legislation. The sector supported the minor, technical and non-contentious nature of the amendments. In relation to the timing of the December payment for alcohol excise manufacturers who are required to pay excise monthly, written consultation and feedback on a range of options discussed during the workshop were undertaken. There was support for the proposal to provide for alcohol excise payments due in December to be due on 15 January. This change aligns the excise payment date with the GST payment date for the taxable period ending 30 November and reduces cash-flow pressures for alcohol manufacturers who pay in December. The affected businesses pay the majority of alcohol excise. The revocation of regulation 51ZZ(2) reflects changes to business practices that mean the Certificate of Origin provision is no longer necessary in the New Zealand–Hong Kong, China Closer Economic Partnership. Hong Kong has asked New Zealand to remove this provision. The changes to regulation 51ZF reflect updates to the New Zealand–China Free Trade Agreement that have been negotiated and agreed with China. Given the minor and technical nature of the amendments, most changes have no direct and material impacts on affected parties, with effects largely limited to clarifying or aligning existing requirements. In this context, broader public consultation would not be practicable or proportionate, as the limited materiality and operational focus of the changes mean that targeted engagement is sufficient and consistent with good practice. Overall, consultation was undertaken to the extent reasonably practicable, and no inconsistency with this principle is identified. |
|
Good law-making: 9(j)
|
The importance of carefully evaluating—
· who is likely to benefit, and who is likely to suffer a detriment, from the legislation |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
Customs identified specific issues with outdated, inconsistent, and inefficient provisions in the Regulations, and assessed that maintaining the status quo would not adequately address these problems. A proportionate options assessment supports targeted regulatory amendments as the most effective response, with limited scope for non-legislative solutions given the nature of the issues. The changes are justified in the public interest of maintaining a clear, modern, and efficient regulatory framework. Impacts are narrow and predominantly beneficial, reducing compliance burdens for affected parties (such as importers, exporters, and alcohol manufacturers), with no material detriment identified. |
|
Good law-making: 9(k)
|
The importance of the responsible agency identifying and developing effective arrangements for implementing the legislation |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
Customs has identified practical and proportionate implementation arrangements appropriate to the minor and technical nature of the amendments. Many changes formalise existing practices (for example, modern record-keeping and payment methods), meaning implementation risks are low. In relation to December excise payments, Customs has aligned the due date with that for goods and services tax (GST). Implementation will be supported through stakeholder and relevant industry association communication, updates to guidance, and minor operational/system adjustments, which are standard and sufficient for this type of change. Targeted consultation, particularly with affected industry stakeholders, further supports effective implementation. Overall, arrangements are fit for purpose, with no gaps that would undermine effective operation of the legislation. |
|
Good law-making: 9(l)
|
Legislation should be expected to produce benefits that exceed the costs of the legislation to the public or persons |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments are expected to produce benefits that outweigh their costs. Benefits include improved regulatory clarity, reduced compliance burden, alignment with modern business practices, and better coherence with the Customs and Excise Act 2018 (which enables these regulations) and international obligations. The fiscal impact of the proposed amendments is minimal and limited, primarily consisting of a small use-of-money cost from delaying December excise payments (estimated at $200,000 per annum) and minor implementation adjustments. These costs fall on the state. Given the targeted, low cost nature of the changes and their cumulative efficiency gains, the legislation is expected to deliver a net public benefit, consistent with this principle. |
|
Good law-making: 9(m)
|
Legislation should be the most effective, efficient, and proportionate response to the issue concerned that is available |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments represent a targeted and proportionate legislative response to clearly identified issues with outdated, inconsistent, or inefficient regulatory provisions. Customs assessed that maintaining the status quo would not address these issues, while broader reform would be unnecessarily complex, costly for the scale of the problems identified and not proportionate to the issues. The amendments repeal a prescribed licence form, which will be replaced with an internal Customs form. This removes unnecessary regulatory prescription, while still meeting the statutory requirements set out in the Act. This results in a more proportionate approach by relying on primary legislation for core requirements and enabling more practical, up-to-date administrative processes. Given that many issues arise from misalignment within existing regulations or between regulations and the Act, legislative amendment is the only mechanism available, with no scope for non-legislative solutions. The chosen approach minimises disruption while improving clarity, efficiency, and alignment with modern practices and international obligations. Overall, the proposals constitute an effective, efficient, and proportionate response, consistent with this principle. |
|
Rule of Law: 9(a)(i)
|
The law should be clear and accessible |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments improve the clarity and accessibility of the law by removing outdated provisions, aligning regulatory language with the Customs and Excise Act 2018, and updating terminology to reflect current practices. For example, replacing undefined or outdated references (such as “JBMS”) with defined statutory terms, and modernising forms and processes, reduces ambiguity and makes requirements easier to understand. The amendments also simplify compliance obligations (for example, aligning record-keeping provisions and definitions of specified alcoholic products), which enhances accessibility for regulated parties. Given the technical nature of the changes and their focus on improving coherence and usability, the proposals are consistent with this principle. |
|
Rule of Law: 9(a)(ii)
|
The law should not adversely affect rights and liberties, or impose obligations, retrospectively |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments do not operate retrospectively and do not impose obligations in respect of past conduct. All changes apply prospectively from commencement and relate to ongoing regulatory requirements (for example, record-keeping, forms, and payment timing). The amendments also do not adversely affect rights and liberties, as they are technical and administrative in nature, and largely clarify or update existing requirements rather than introducing new obligations. In some cases, they reduce burdens or improve usability (for example, simplified processes and updated forms). Overall, the proposals are consistent with this principle, with no retrospective effects or unjustified impacts on rights identified. |
|
Rule of Law: 9(a)(iii)
|
Every person is equal before the law |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments are neutral in their application and operate uniformly across all regulated parties, such as importers, exporters, licensees, and their agents. They do not introduce differential treatment between groups but instead clarify and align existing obligations so that they are applied consistently (for example, by extending record-keeping requirements to all “specified persons” as defined in the Act). Overall, the amendments support consistent and even application of the law, and no inconsistency with the principle of equality before the law has been identified. |
|
Rule of Law: 9(a)(iv)
|
There should be an independent impartial judiciary |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Rule of Law: 9(a)(v)
|
Issues of legal right and liability should be resolved by the application of law, rather than the exercise of administrative discretion |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Liberties: 9(b)
|
Legislation should not unduly diminish a person’s liberty, personal security, freedom of choice or action, or rights to own, use, and dispose of property, except as is necessary to provide for, or protect, any such liberty, freedom, or right of another person |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments do not unduly diminish individual liberties, freedom of action, or property rights. They are primarily technical and administrative in nature, clarifying or updating existing regulatory requirements rather than imposing new constraints. In some cases, the amendments reduce regulatory burden (for example, simplifying compliance processes or aligning requirements with modern business practices), thereby supporting rather than limiting freedom of action. Any obligations maintained (such as record-keeping or excise payment requirements) are already established under the existing legislative framework and are necessary to support revenue collection and the integrity of the border system. Overall, the proposals are proportionate and consistent with this principle. |
|
Taking of property: 9(c)
|
Legislation should not take or severely impair, or authorise the taking or severe impairment of, property without the consent of the owner unless-
|
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Taxes, fees and levies: 9(d)
|
The importance of maintaining consistency with section 22(a) of the Constitution Act 1996 (Parliamentary control of taxation) |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NO |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
The proposed amendments do not impose or alter taxes, fees, or levies in a way that engages parliamentary control of taxation under section 22(a) of the Constitution Act 1996. They operate within the existing statutory framework for excise duties established by the Customs and Excise Act 2018, and do not create new taxing powers. The only relevant change adjusts the timing of an existing excise payment obligation, without affecting the rate, base, or imposition of the duty itself. Accordingly, the proposals are consistent with the principle of Parliamentary control of taxation, and no inconsistency is identified. |
|
Taxes, fees and levies: 9(e)
|
Legislation should impose, or authorise the imposition of, a fee for goods or services only if the amount of the fee bears a proper relation to the cost of providing the good or service to which it relates |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Taxes, fees and levies: 9(f)
|
Legislation should impose, or authorise the imposition of, a levy to fund an objective or a function only if the amount of the levy is reasonable in relation to both—
|
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Role of courts: 9(g)
|
Legislation should preserve the courts’ constitutional role of ascertaining the meaning of legislation |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Role of courts: 9(h)
|
Legislation should make rights and liberties, or obligations, dependent on administrative power only if the power is sufficiently defined and subject to appropriate review |
|
|
Inconsistency identified? |
NOT APPLICABLE |
|
Summary of agency analysis |
|
|
|
|
Additional information
|
Relevant publicly available inquiry, review, or evaluation reports |
|
|
New Zealand Customs Service, Revenue Regulatory System – Stewardship Review and Maturity Assessment (February 2024): https://www.customs.govt.nz/media/njslxqnq/revenue-system-regulatory-report-feb-2024-final.pdf
|
|
|
Relevant international treaties, standards and obligations |
|
|
New Zealand–Hong Kong, China Closer
Economic Partnership (CEP) New Zealand–China Free Trade Agreement and
2022 Upgrade
|
|
|
Departures from the Legislation Guidelines |
|
|
|
|
None.
|
Other unusual provisions or features |
|
|
None.