Australian media companies are pushing for the tax commissioner to be given sweeping new powers to investigate how much money Google, Meta and TikTok actually make in Australia.
The push comes amid concerns that complex corporate structures are being used to shift billions of dollars in local revenue offshore
The call comes as the Albanese government prepares to introduce a new levy on major technology platforms under its proposed News Bargaining Incentive scheme.
At the centre of the debate is a surprisingly simple question: how much money do the world’s biggest digital advertising companies really earn from Australians?
Nobody appears entirely sure.
Google and Meta transferred at least $11 billion offshore last year through related-party arrangements that allow overseas entities to sell advertising to Australian businesses, according to company filings.
The practice is legal and common among multinational corporations, but critics argue it obscures the true scale of revenue generated in Australia.
The government’s proposed scheme would impose a 2.25% cent levy on Google, Meta and TikTok’s Australian-attributable consolidated revenue unless they enter commercial agreements with Australian news publishers.
However, determining that revenue figure may prove easier said than done.
Government estimates suggest the measure could raise between $200 million and $250 million annually, implying the companies generate between $13 billion and $16 billion from Australian users and advertisers.
Those figures are significantly higher than the revenue reported through some local subsidiaries.
The discrepancy has reignited long-running questions about how multinational technology companies structure their Australian operations and whether existing reporting requirements provide a complete picture of their local earnings.
Industry body Free TV, which represents major commercial broadcasters, has told the government stronger investigative powers are needed if the scheme is to work.
According to Free TV chief executive Bridget Fair, the scheme is trying to recognise the value these companies generate in Australia based on the news content of broadcasters and other news providers, and that needs to be recognised in total, not after complicated accounting treatments.
Fair says the tax office needs to have express powers to interrogate what revenue is generated in this territory for this scheme.
Free TV also told the government it was concerned that transfer pricing and other practices made it difficult to find the true figure to tax.
Streaming services are already required to invest the equivalent of 7.5% of local revenue into Australian content production, while the proposed news bargaining levy sits at 2.25%
“It’s only going to end up generating about the same as we were getting five years ago,” said Fair.
“Despite massive growth in the advertising market, these people have enjoyed. It’s more companies, but the same number,” she said.
The proposal has been welcomed by Australian news publishers but fiercely opposed by the technology sector.
Meta this week described the measure as “a discriminatory, retroactive tax targeting a handful of foreign companies”, while US business groups have warned it could damage Australia’s investment reputation.
The White House has previously criticised the proposal as “foreign extortion”.
Beyond the clash between publishers and Silicon Valley, the debate exposes a broader policy challenge facing governments around the world: how to tax digital businesses whose revenues can move across borders with a few accounting entries.
If Canberra is serious about taxing Big Tech’s Australian earnings, critics argue the first step may be establishing exactly what those earnings are.
