Background to the proposed firearms and weapons amendments to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956

Background to the proposed firearms and weapons
amendments to the Customs (Prohibited Imports)
Regulations 1956
This paper contains background information on the following proposed firearms and weapons amendments
to the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (the Regulations) and is in addition to the exposure
draft of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Amendment (Firearms and Weapons) Regulations 2021, and the
accompanying explanatory material.
In Australia, responsibility for firearm-related matters is shared between the Commonwealth and state and
territory governments. The Australian Government is responsible for matters relating to the import of
firearms. State and territory governments have responsibility for all matters relating to firearms classification,
licensing, possession and use of firearms in their own jurisdictions.

1. Simplify the ownership arrangements that must be satisfied for firearms and
   weapons to be imported under the official purposes test and include additional
   circumstances to allow importation by subcontractors to primary contractors or
   tenderers
Current Settings

Under the official purposes test, the importation of an article (being a firearm, non-firearm weapon, or their
accessory or part) to which the test relates is prohibited unless the Minister is satisfied that the article is to be
imported for a government of the Commonwealth, a State or Territory, and that the government will retain
ownership of the article.

For example, articles imported for supply for government under a contract must either:
       be owned by government at the time of importation, or
       government must intend to acquire ownership of the article within a time period specified in the
        import permission.
Issue

The current ownership arrangements are too prescriptive and do not reflect contemporary practices by which
a government engages with contractors who may use subcontractors to provide necessary articles to enable
the primary contractor to fulfil its contractual obligations with a government.

Further, there is a need to update the Regulations to ensure that domestic manufacturers can participate in
open market solicitation, and fulfil contractual obligations. The Department of Defence uses a new supplier
engagement model, which engages domestic suppliers more than international suppliers. This model
includes naming ‘primary contractors’ or ‘primary tenderers’ who are responsible for managing and engaging
sub-contractors to either fulfil a contract or show or demonstrate an article to government as part of a tender
process.

Proposed amendment

Amend the ownership arrangements to provide industry with flexibility to respond to open market solicitations
by removing the requirement that government either ‘own the article at the time of importation’ or ‘intend to
acquire ownership of the article’.

For example:
              Blue Company has a contract with Defence to provide maintenance and repairs for articles
              owned by Defence. This means Blue Company must import the replacement parts and hold
              them at their premises until required for use in maintaining or repairing. Not all parts will be
              consumed or owned by Defence.
              The proposed amendments would allow import permission to be granted to Blue Company for
              these spare parts, while the Minister would continue to condition the permit such as by requiring
              exportation or destruction of the spare parts within a certain timeframe.

Further, it is proposed to enable new supplier engagement models being used by Defence by specifying that
an article may be imported for the purpose of:
    1. supplying the article to another person to enable that person to supply the article under a
       government contract.
               For example:
               Blue Company has a contract with Defence, but Blue Company has a sub-contract with Orange
               Company to provide parts to enable Blue Company to meet their contract with Defence.
               Orange Company needs to import these parts but would not currently be granted import
               permission as they would not be supplying the goods directly to a government under a contract.
               Currently, only Blue Company can be granted import permission as it has the contract with
               Defence.
               The proposed amendments would allow import permission to be granted to Orange Company.
    2. supplying an article to another person to enable that person to show or demonstrate the article to
       government under a contract or as part of a tender process.
              For example:
              Blue Company is a primary tenderer to Defence and Orange Company is a sub-contractor to
              Blue Company.
              Orange Company wishes to import articles that will be provided in whole to Blue Company. Blue
              Company may demonstrate the capability of the whole article to Defence in response to a tender
              process.
              Orange Company needs to import these articles but would not currently be granted import
              permission, as they would not be showing the goods directly to a government. Currently, only
              Blue Company can be granted import permission.
              The proposed amendments would allow import permission to be granted to Orange Company.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                    Page 2 of 8

2. Encourage innovation by expanding the circumstances under which a person
   can import a firearm or weapon for research and development purposes under
   the specified purposes test
Current Settings

Under the specified purposes test for the importation of articles for research and development purposes, the
Minister must be satisfied, among other requirements, that the importer has a proven history of developing or
producing firearms or non-firearm weapons technology or other defence and law enforcement related
products for government.

Issue

The requirement to demonstrate a proven history of conducting research and development for a government
of the Commonwealth, a State or Territory may impact entry into the Australian market for potential new
competitors.

Proposed amendment

Amend the existing criteria to remove the requirement that importers demonstrate that they have a proven
history of researching and developing firearms and non-firearm weapons technology for government.

Applicants will need to satisfy the Minister that they meet other eligibility criteria, including a new requirement
that the project or tender must involve a government of the Commonwealth, a State or Territory.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                    Page 3 of 8

3. Removing the duplicative requirements for importers of mixed consignments to
   obtain certification from State and Territory police as well as import permission
   from the Commonwealth when consignments contain both firearms and firearm
   parts
Current Settings

Under the Regulations, the import tests administered by the Commonwealth are typically for highly controlled
firearms and firearm-related articles. State and Territory police administer the certification of lower-controlled
articles through the police certification test.

Currently, where importers have mixed consignments of both firearms and firearms-parts, they may need to
obtain import permission from the Commonwealth and certification from State or Territory police.

Issue
This is an unnecessary regulatory burden and can cause significant delay and unnecessary costs for
importers.
Proposed amendment
Amend the existing requirements under table item 2B and table item 17 of Part 2 of Schedule 6 of the
Regulations to allow the existing stricter import tests to be used to import lower-controlled firearm parts and
firearm magazines where importers have consignments of both highly and lower-controlled articles.
Importers would submit a single application to the Commonwealth when it is necessary to import both types
of articles, which will reduce the regulatory burden on importers.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                   Page 4 of 8

4. Reduce the risk of illicit domestic manufacture of semi-automatic firearms by
   controlling the importation of barrel extensions
Current Settings
Under the Regulations, barrel extensions are not currently controlled on import.
Issue
The easy procurement of barrel extensions facilitates the illicit domestic manufacture of some types of
semi-automatic firearms, and the barrel extensions that fit those firearms.
Proposed amendment
The intention of this amendment is to define barrel extensions as firearm parts. This means import
permission will be required to import barrel extensions.
Amend subregulation 4F(4) of the Regulations to insert a definition of a barrel extension, which means:
a metal projection:
     a) Which extends rearward from the breech end of a firearm barrel; and
     b) Into which the breech locks while the firearm is in battery or firing position.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                Page 5 of 8

5. Ensure that self-ejecting manual-loading repeating action shotguns are
   appropriately classified and controlled for import purposes in line with other
   comparable shotguns
Current Settings
Under the Regulations, self-ejecting manual-loading repeating action shotguns are more highly controlled
than other comparable shotguns.
Issue
Manual-loading repeating action shotguns that are not lever action, pump action or bolt action are not
explicitly classified under the Regulations. This means they fall to the ‘catch all’ classification of item 12 of
Part 2 of Schedule 6. Item 12 articles are highly controlled and generally not available to civilians.
This classification means that self-ejecting manual-loading repeating action shotguns are more highly
controlled on import than other comparable shotguns.
Proposed amendment
Amend Schedule 6 of the Regulations to control self-ejecting manual-loading repeating action shotguns
under item 3 and item 6 of Part 2 of Schedule 6, depending on magazine capacity. This will bring the
controls in line with those applied to semi-automatic shotguns and pump action shotguns.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                     Page 6 of 8

6. Consolidate the import requirements for paintball-related articles
Current Settings
The importation of paintball markers and their parts is controlled under item 14A of Part 2 of Schedule 6 of
the Regulations and may be imported provided the importer comply with the police certification test.
Ammunition for paintball markers (paintballs) and paintball marker magazines are currently controlled under
various other items in Part 2 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations.
Issue
The current import requirements for paintball markers and paintball-related articles require simplification and
streamlining.
Proposed amendment
Amend item 14A of Part 2 of Schedule 6 of the Regulations to specify a single classification for articles
designed exclusively for use in paintball, namely paintball markers, parts for paintball markers, paintballs,
and paintball magazines.
This will not amend the current controls applied to paintball markers.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                                  Page 7 of 8

7. Clarify the import requirements for electro-shock cartridges
Current Settings
Under Schedule 6 of the Regulations, electro-shock cartridges are controlled as firearm ammunition.
Electro-shock cartridges are designed to be discharged from a firearm and deliver an electric shock on
impact.
There is currently an allowance under Schedule 13 (weapons) of the Regulations for the importation of
hand-held electric devices designed to administer an electric shock on contact (commonly known as tasers).
Issue
The language used in the Regulations is ambiguous and often confuses importers regarding what type of
import permission they are required to obtain.
Proposed amendment
Amend subregulation 4F(4) of the Regulations and Part 2 of Schedule 13 of the Regulations to reduce
ambiguity around the importation requirements for electro-shock cartridges for hand-held electric devices, by
adding to the list of things that are not a firearm, and therefore ensuring these items are captured as
weapons.
This will not amend the current controls applied to electro-shock cartridges or tasers.

Background to the proposed firearms and
weapons amendments to the Customs
(Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956                                                               Page 8 of 8