MEDIA RELEASE - 22 August 2026

Funded by All, Adopted by Few: Who Pays for the ACT Buyback, and For What?

The Commonwealth will fund the majority of the ACT’s gun buyback — 75 per cent of the buyback and all of the cost of destroying firearms. SSAA ACT INC asks why every Australian taxpayer should fund a scheme most of the country has declined, to acquire and destroy the lawful property of vetted owners, for a public-safety benefit no one has defined

CANBERRA, ACT — The ACT and Commonwealth governments have agreed how the ACT’s participation in the National Gun Buyback will be funded: the Commonwealth will pay 75 per cent of the buyback and its administration, and 100 per cent of the cost of destroying the surrendered firearms, with the ACT funding the remainder. The agreement makes the ACT the second jurisdiction to join, after New South Wales. No start date and no compensation schedule have been set. SSAA ACT INC — which represents the licensed owners the scheme will affect — says the announcement settles the money but leaves the two questions that matter unanswered: what benefit the scheme buys, and why the nation should pay for it.

“Australians in Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory are now helping to fund a buyback their own governments declined to run at home. They will pay the majority of the cost in the ACT — and every dollar of the cost of destroying lawfully owned firearms — for a benefit no one has been able to define. The people paying are entitled to know what their money is buying.”

Nicole, Secretary, SSAA ACT INC

A scheme funded by all, adopted by few

The Commonwealth’s share is raised from all Australians. Yet a clear majority of jurisdictions are not taking part in the national buyback: Victoria and Queensland have rejected it, South Australia has no plans, the Northern Territory will not contribute funds, Western Australia ran its own separate scheme, and Tasmania has not signed.

 

Only New South Wales and the ACT are proceeding.

 

That means taxpayers in the jurisdictions that declined will nonetheless fund half of the New South Wales buyback and three-quarters of the ACT’s — and, in the ACT, the entire cost of destroying the firearms surrendered. Cost-sharing on national agreements is ordinary; but a scheme funded by all and adopted by only two of eight jurisdictions is national in its funding, not in its participation.

A benefit still undefined

The ACT Chief Minister described the measure as “reducing the number of high-risk firearms in circulation” and “a sensible and practical measure to help keep Canberrans safer.” But the caps do not target “high-risk firearms”; they limit the number of firearms a law-abiding owner may hold, whatever the type. On the Government’s own figures, about 14 per cent of the ACT’s 7,000-plus licence-holders are expected to surrender firearms, and nowhere is it stated what measurable reduction in harm this will achieve.

 

The best independent evidence finds the benefit unproven: the Lay Rapid Review of Victoria’s Firearms Laws (May 2026) found “no clear evidence that numerical caps on individual ownership, by themselves, reduce firearms-related harm,” and the ACT’s own Standing Committee found “significant uncertainty over the operation of the proposed numerical caps” (Report 9, Finding 1). “Strongest laws in the country” measures effort, not effect. 

Committing before the terms are known

The ACT has committed to the scheme, and to funding a quarter of it, before the public or the owners affected know what a surrendered firearm will be worth or when the scheme begins. The Territory’s own Standing Committee recommended that the full estimated cost be tabled in the Assembly before it commits (Report 9, Recommendation 8).

 

Instead, the funding split of an uncalculated total has been settled first. And whatever compensation is ultimately set, the ACT — unlike New South Wales — is bound by section 23 of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth) to acquire property only on just terms: a fixed schedule set below market value is not an approach the ACT can lawfully adopt.

The alternative SSAA ACT supports

SSAA ACT Inc. is not opposed to sensible firearms regulation. It supports a proportionate alternative the evidence backs: a voluntary buyback at fair market value, a five-year evidence review, and strengthened firearm storage, compliance and licence pre-approval — the ACT committee’s own priority recommendation against firearm theft (Report 9, Recommendation 7) — in place of numerical caps and compulsory acquisition.

 

Before any firearm is acquired or destroyed, two groups deserve answers: ACT owners, who will lose lawful property, and every Australian taxpayer, who will pay for it.

-ENDS-

MEDIA CONTACT

Nicole

Secretary

SSAA ACT INC

info@ssaaact.org.au

NOTES TO EDITORS

NOTES TO EDITORS

Funding detail and quotations are drawn from ABC News, “Federal government to fund majority of ACT gun buyback scheme after negotiations,” by Charlie Gore (21–22 August 2026): Commonwealth 75% of buyback and administration and 100% of destruction costs; ACT the second jurisdiction to join, after NSW (commencing 2 November); no start date or compensation schedule set; about 23,000 ACT firearms and 7,000+ licence-holders, with about 14% affected by the cap. Evidence sources: Lay Rapid Review of Victoria’s Firearms Laws (May 2026); ACT Standing Committee on Legal Affairs, Report 9 (11th Assembly, May 2026), Finding 1 and Recommendations 7 and 8. Legal: Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth) s 23.

 

The Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia ACT Inc (SSAA ACT Inc.) is the peak body representing licensed firearms owners, competitive shooters, hunters and rural users in the Australian Capital Territory. SSAA ACT represents approximately 5,700 members; there are approximately 7,000 licensed firearm owners in the ACT (these are distinct figures).

 

This release is for public information and does not constitute legal advice.