The Telecommunications Infrastructure in New Developments (TIND) policy was released in December 2014 under Minister for Communications Malcolm Turnbull and took effect on 1 April 2016 [1][2].
The policy established two main charges:
- **$300 end-user contribution**: A one-time fee paid by the homeowner for the first NBN connection at premises in newly developed areas [3][4]
- **$600 deployment contribution**: Charged to developers per lot/premises for in-estate infrastructure, which developers could pass on to homebuyers [1][5]
The total potential cost to new homebuyers was therefore $900.
This means it did not apply to all new houses (e.g., knockdown-rebuilds on existing land with infrastructure), but specifically to greenfield developments.
Policy Rationale**: The government's stated purpose was to "promote competition, which in turn will foster long-term efficiency and innovation in the telecommunications market" [1].
The policy shifted costs to "parties that use or benefit from them" rather than spreading infrastructure costs across all NBN users nationwide [7].
**2.
The policy was not repealed by the subsequent Labor government elected in 2022, suggesting bipartisan acceptance of the cost-recovery model [3][9].
**4.
However, the link appears to be non-functional (File 442), suggesting the claim originates from an outdated or relocated government document [10].
该 gāi 声明 shēng míng 本身 běn shēn 似乎 sì hū 源自 yuán zì 2014 2014 年 nián 12 12 月 yuè Labor Labor 议员 yì yuán Jason Jason Clare Clare 的 de 媒体 méi tǐ 发布 fā bù , , 其中 qí zhōng 将 jiāng 该 gāi 政策 zhèng cè 描述 miáo shù 为 wèi " " Tony Tony Abbott Abbott 的 de 新 xīn NBN NBN 税 shuì " " [ [ 6 6 ] ] 。 。
The claim itself appears to draw from a December 2014 media release by Labor MP Jason Clare, which framed the policy as "Tony Abbott's new NBN Tax" [6].
This framing comes from a clearly partisan source (opposition MP), though the underlying figures ($300 + $600 = $900) are factually accurate based on the official policy document [1].
**Did Labor do something similar?**
The Rudd/Gillard Labor governments (2009-2013) did not have equivalent new development charges.
* * * *
Their original NBN policy was structured differently:
- Labor's NBN was funded through a combination of government investment ($30.4 billion) and private investment, with the expectation of commercial returns through subscriber payments over time [11][12]
- Labor's approach did not include upfront charges for new developments; infrastructure costs were meant to be recovered through ongoing service revenue
- The Coalition's TIND policy represented a shift toward user-pays/cost-recovery for new developments specifically
However, it is worth noting that the subsequent Labor government (elected 2022) has not repealed these charges, suggesting they accept the cost-recovery rationale.
In 2025, Labor announced additional NBN funding to improve speeds but did not address these new development charges [13].
他们 tā men 最初 zuì chū 的 de NBN NBN 政策 zhèng cè 结构 jié gòu 不同 bù tóng : :
The TIND policy represents a point of difference between the parties' approaches to NBN funding - Coalition favored direct cost recovery from beneficiaries, while Labor favored broader public investment with longer-term commercial returns.
However, the government's justification included several legitimate policy arguments:
1. **Cost Allocation Fairness**: Rather than spreading the cost of new development infrastructure across all NBN subscribers (including those in established areas), the policy targeted costs to those directly benefiting from new infrastructure [1][7].
2. **Competition Promotion**: The policy was designed to foster competition in telecommunications infrastructure provision, potentially leading to better long-term outcomes for consumers [1].
3. **Industry Standard**: Cost recovery for infrastructure in new developments is common across utilities (electricity, water, gas), making the NBN approach consistent with established practice [8].
The policy was not unique to the Coalition - it reflected a broader shift toward infrastructure cost recovery from direct beneficiaries rather than general taxation or cross-subsidization.
The fact that subsequent Labor governments have maintained the charges (from 2022 onward) suggests the policy rationale has bipartisan acceptance in practice, even if not in origin.
**Key context:** This was a Coalition-specific policy implementation, not a continuation of Labor policy.
However, the underlying principle of cost recovery for new infrastructure is standard practice across Australian utilities and has been maintained by subsequent governments.
The Coalition government did introduce charges totaling $900 ($300 end-user + $600 developer contribution) for NBN connections in new developments, effective April 1, 2016.
该 gāi 声明 shēng míng 准确 zhǔn què 反映 fǎn yìng 了 le TIND TIND 政策 zhèng cè 确立 què lì 的 de 收费 shōu fèi 结构 jié gòu 。 。
The claim accurately reflects the fee structure established in the TIND policy.
However, the framing as a fee for "all new houses" is misleading because the charge only applied to greenfield developments (new estates), not all new house construction.
Additionally, while the Coalition introduced these specific charges, the broader principle of infrastructure cost recovery is standard practice and has been maintained by subsequent Labor governments, suggesting the policy rationale has broader acceptance than partisan criticism implies.
The Coalition government did introduce charges totaling $900 ($300 end-user + $600 developer contribution) for NBN connections in new developments, effective April 1, 2016.
该 gāi 声明 shēng míng 准确 zhǔn què 反映 fǎn yìng 了 le TIND TIND 政策 zhèng cè 确立 què lì 的 de 收费 shōu fèi 结构 jié gòu 。 。
The claim accurately reflects the fee structure established in the TIND policy.
However, the framing as a fee for "all new houses" is misleading because the charge only applied to greenfield developments (new estates), not all new house construction.
Additionally, while the Coalition introduced these specific charges, the broader principle of infrastructure cost recovery is standard practice and has been maintained by subsequent Labor governments, suggesting the policy rationale has broader acceptance than partisan criticism implies.