New South Wales councils collect money from developers to pay for the local infrastructure that new development needs: roads, drainage, parks and community facilities. What has not yet been spent is held. At 30 June 2025 councils held $5.4 billion, according to the NSW Audit Office, up from $5.0 billion a year earlier and $2.2 billion more than four years before. About half of it sat with fourteen councils, eleven of them in Sydney, and ten of those fourteen spent less than a fifth of their opening balance during 2024–25.
Node reading for Planning Regulations & Zoning Policy (21320): NIL RETURN. This article rests on the source data alone.
What a contributions balance is
Councils in New South Wales can require a developer to contribute towards local infrastructure as a condition of consent. The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 provides three routes. A section 7.11 contribution is charged where the development can be linked to the infrastructure it will fund. A section 7.12 levy is the alternative, charged as a percentage of the estimated cost of the development. A planning agreement is negotiated between a developer and a planning authority to deliver a particular outcome. Councils collecting these contributions must prepare a contributions plan that sets out how they are calculated and what works they will fund.
Money collected under a plan is held for the works that plan provides for, although councils may pool contributions to fund works sooner. What has been collected but not yet spent is held as restricted cash and investments and reported in each council’s audited financial statements. The Audit Office’s figure adds these balances together. It includes housing and productivity contributions and contributions for water and sewer.
Since 2009 section 7.11 contributions have been subject to a threshold of $20,000 per lot, unless a Ministerial direction sets a higher amount. The cap has not been indexed. A council can charge above it for a particular plan if IPART reviews the plan and the Minister approves; twelve councils had obtained that approval.
How much is held
The $5.4 billion held at 30 June 2025 compares with $5.0 billion a year earlier. The balance rose by $2.2 billion over the four years from 2020–21 to 2024–25. The Audit Office reports that metropolitan councils, which have the most development, held more at the end of each of those years than the year before, and that regional and rural councils, with smaller balances, also held more over the period.
The Audit Office publishes the statewide total and the figures for the fourteen largest holders. It does not publish a balance for each of the state’s other councils.
Where it is held
Contributions held at 30 June 2025, fourteen councils with the largest balances
$ million. Source: NSW Audit Office, Local government 2025, from councils’ audited financial statements.
Fourteen councils held $2.6 billion, or about half, of the statewide balance at 30 June 2025. Bayside held the most, $348 million, followed by Liverpool City at $317 million and Hills Shire at $245 million. The five largest holders together held $1,339 million. Eleven of the fourteen are Sydney councils; the other three are Central Coast, Lake Macquarie and Maitland.
| Council | 30 June 2023 | 30 June 2024 | 30 June 2025 | Change, 2023 to 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bayside | 336 | 326 | 348 | +12 |
| Liverpool City | 281 | 277 | 317 | +36 |
| Hills Shire | 219 | 243 | 245 | +26 |
| Central Coast | 191 | 201 | 216 | +25 |
| Blacktown City | 237 | 281 | 213 | −24 |
| City of Parramatta | 142 | 165 | 193 | +51 |
| Camden | 193 | 147 | 175 | −18 |
| Cumberland City | 113 | 130 | 145 | +32 |
| Lake Macquarie | 149 | 130 | 144 | −5 |
| City of Ryde | 80 | 126 | 143 | +63 |
| Maitland | 118 | 127 | 143 | +25 |
| Canterbury-Bankstown | 128 | 135 | 131 | +3 |
| Georges River | 99 | 108 | 118 | +19 |
| Ku-ring-gai | 108 | 116 | 102 | −6 |
| Fourteen councils | 2,394 | 2,512 | 2,633 | +239 |
$ million. Contributions held from developers at 30 June, the fourteen councils holding the largest balances at 30 June 2025, ordered by that balance. Source: NSW Audit Office, Local government 2025, from councils’ audited financial statements.
How the balances have moved
Change in contributions held, 30 June 2023 to 30 June 2025
$ million. Source: NSW Audit Office, Local government 2025, from councils’ audited financial statements.
Across the fourteen councils the balance rose from $2,394 million at 30 June 2023 to $2,633 million at 30 June 2025, an increase of $239 million, or 10%. The movements differ. Seven councils held more at 30 June 2024 than a year earlier, and more again at 30 June 2025: Central Coast, City of Parramatta, City of Ryde, Cumberland City, Georges River, Hills Shire and Maitland. The largest increase over the two years was at City of Ryde, from $80 million to $143 million. Four held less at 30 June 2025 than two years earlier: Blacktown City, Camden, Ku-ring-gai and Lake Macquarie. Blacktown City’s balance rose to $281 million in 2024 and fell to $213 million in 2025; the Audit Office notes that Blacktown City spent 80% of its balance in 2023 and in 2025.
A balance moves with both sides of the account: it rises when contributions are received and falls when they are spent. The published figures give the closing balance only, so a stable balance can reflect large receipts matched by large spending, and a rising one can reflect either faster receipts or slower spending.
The councils where development is concentrated
Share of New South Wales dwelling approvals in the fourteen councils
Per cent of new dwellings approved in New South Wales, financial years. Source: ABS, Building Approvals, Australia, local government area data, new residential building, all sectors.
The fourteen councils are also where much of the state’s new housing is approved. Over the three financial years from 2022–23 to 2024–25 they accounted for 47.8% of the dwellings approved in New South Wales, 68,369 of 143,049. The Audit Office makes the same point in its own terms: the large growth councils hold large balances because they have a large volume of development.
That share of approvals is close to their share of the contributions balance, but the two are not directly comparable. Contributions are generally paid later in the development process than approval, rates differ between plans and councils, and the balance includes water, sewer and other contributions that do not follow residential approvals. The comparison shows where development and held contributions coincide; it does not measure how quickly any council spends.
How much is spent
The Audit Office compared what each of the fourteen councils spent from its contributions during a year with the balance it held at the start of that year. During 2024–25, ten of the fourteen spent less than 20% of their balance at 30 June 2024. Nine did so in 2023–24, and eight in 2022–23. All fourteen told the Audit Office that their capital expenditure budgets include plans to spend these funds.
How long money has been held is harder to establish. All fourteen councils publish contribution registers as required, showing receipts by plan, but not all registers show the date each contribution was first received. The Audit Office identified two plans dating from 2001 with no recent expenditure, and five further plans holding contributions collected more than ten years earlier.
Councils gave the Audit Office a range of reasons for the pace of spending, among them:
- a lack of funds for maintaining and renewing existing assets, reducing available council funds required to fund growth assets or top up plans
- slow receipt of funds which is not aligned with when the new residents need the infrastructure
- contribution thresholds not indexed
- escalating costs leading to funding gaps, making planned projects unaffordable
- existing asset renewal taking priority over new infrastructure in the council’s delivery program
- delays and other difficulties in acquiring land, including through compulsory acquisition, to build infrastructure
- rapid population growth and growth in locations other than those predicted
- significant time and resources required to amend contribution plans to respond to changes
The Audit Office’s view is that delay between collection and spending could indicate that infrastructure planning and delivery are not operating as intended, and that it risks the value of funds eroding as costs rise and land becomes scarcer. It points to the NSW Productivity Commissioner’s 2020 review of infrastructure contributions, which made 29 recommendations that the NSW Government is implementing in stages.
What these figures do not show
A held balance is money collected for works set out in a plan. Those works can be scheduled years ahead, and some depend on land being acquired first. The balance alone does not show whether a council is behind its own works schedule, which would need each plan’s schedule set against its spending. Nor does it show what has been delivered through planning agreements as works in kind rather than cash. The figures cover New South Wales only, and among councils only the fourteen largest holders are reported individually. The spending comparison is the Audit Office’s measure: spending during the year against the balance held at its start.
Findings are presented on the basis of data and evidence alone.
