RGC REGRAT: August 2025 Edition
- Owen Rayner

- Sep 3
- 4 min read
Updated: Oct 28
In focus this edition: We catch up on ASX and ASIC’s continuous disclosure and offer interventions, take a look at what’s changing with Modern Slavery Statements and do a deep dive on what's new in Payment Times Reporting.
IPO Activity Remains Muted, but Signals Persist
The subdued IPO trend continued through July and August, with only four offers looking to enter the ASX. Notably, three of these were dual-listed offers:
TSX-listed Orezone Gold expanded to the ASX with a $75 million offer
AIM-listed Ariana Resources targeted a $15 million raise, ultimately securing $11 million
CSE-listed Temas Resources launched an $11 million offer
The only local debut came from Golden Globe Resources, which revived its undersubscribed 2023 offer to test the market once more. It remains to be seen whether this second attempt will gain more traction.
ASIC’s involvement was minimal, surfacing only in clarifications and expending some disclosures in Ariana Resources’ offer. For now, the corporate regulator remains largely in the background.
ASX Maintains Pressure on Disclosure Discipline
Reporting season brought the usual friction between earnings guidance and results, prompting a flurry of ASX Aware letters. James Hardie, AGL Energy, and Digico were among those asked to explain discrepancies between market expectations and reported earnings.
Across July and August, ASX issued 23 Aware letters. A breakdown of these shows a clear focus:
18 letters addressed timing concerns under Listing Rule 3.1
3 focused on earnings guidance
1 questioned the sensitivity tagging of announcements
1 dealt with financial treatment reconciliation
The message for advisers and company secretaries is clear: Listing Rule 3.1 needs to be front of mind. If there’s any delay in releasing market-sensitive information, expect scrutiny. Knowing the exceptions under Rule 3.1A and when they apply is essential.
Modern Slavery Compliance: A Wake-Up Call
Australia is tightening its stance on corporate accountability under the Modern Slavery Act 2018. In a recent letter-writing campaign to industry and law firms, the Anti-Slavery Commissioner highlighted the troubling number of entities failing to submit mandatory modern slavery statements. Hundreds, or potentially more than a thousand, remain non-compliant.
On 1 September 2025, the Attorney-General’s Department concluded its consultation on proposed reforms to the Modern Slavery Act. The changes aim to sharpen reporting and due diligence obligations, underpinned by a more rigorous compliance and enforcement framework. If adopted, the reforms would formalise mandatory disclosures through new rules, potentially expanding them to include grievance mechanisms, remediation processes, and reporting year-on-year changes.
The proposed updates are far from minor and technical changes—they represent a substantial overhaul that gives the scheme real regulatory teeth. Modern slavery compliance is no longer a box-ticking exercise. Soon, ignorance will no longer be a viable defence, and failure to act could carry serious consequences.
Payment Times Reform: Transparency Meets Enforcement
The July 2025 update from the Payment Times Reporting Regulator marks a turning point in Australia’s push for timely payments to small businesses. This update was the Regulator’s first with data collected under the reformed reporting requirements, and the changes are significant.
For a summary of what the new data tells us—and what you can learn about payment practices of large businesses—we recommend our example comparing Coles and Woolworths.
If you want to see who is leading the pack or how a specific entity is stacking up under the new criteria, you can also visit RGC’s Payment Times inFOCUS, a free tool to help you find, rank and compare payment times information.

The Regulator Shifts Its Focus
Not only has reporting created a new era of transparency for payment times, the Regulator also appears to be shifting gears—moving from passive data collection to active enforcement.
Under the new reporting framework, large businesses must now disclose not only their payment terms but also how reliably they adhere to them. The Regulator is actively reviewing submitted data for accuracy and consistency, and will begin identifying entities that fall short. Those found to have significant errors or signs of non-compliance may face pressure to remediate—or risk formal enforcement action.
This shift was reinforced at the Regulator’s August liaison forum, where the focus moved decisively from education to accountability. The emphasis is now on ensuring entities report with precision, completeness, and a clear commitment to transparency.
Compliance No Small Challenge for the Regulator
At the liaison forum, the Regulator was transparent about the challenges—30 days after the reporting deadline for most entities, it had received a little over 2,500 reports, far short of the 5,000 expected by the scheme.
The Regulator shared with forum attendees steps were already being taken to communicate with entities suspected of failing to report, and that this work would be ongoing.
This quiet signal shouldn’t be overlooked. While a ‘please comply’ letter may seem toothless, it’s backed by a suite of enforcement powers—including public statements about non-compliance, infringement notices, and one of the more severe civil penalties in any disclosure regime: up to 0.6% of revenue for certain breaches.
Adding to the pressure are new elements of the scheme that rely on comparative analysis—such as slow small business payer directions—which may prompt the Regulator to escalate its compliance response more swiftly.
For large entities that have yet to report, proactive self-remediation could be a strategic move—especially while the window for voluntary correction remains open.
Need Payment Times Support?
RGC offers on-demand support and enterprise solutions for payment times compliance, delivered by Australian-qualified legal practitioners and accountants. Learn more here.




Comments