July 23, 2014

Mr. Bruce Whittaker

PPSA Review Secretariat

Commercial and Administrative Law Branch

Attorney-General’s Department

3-5 National Circuit

BARTON ACT 2600

Dear Mr. Whittaker:

On behalf of our members around the world, thank you for your efforts to review the implications of the Personal Property Securities Act of 2009 (PPSA) on foreign business holdings.

ISSA is a non-profit trade association with headquarters in the United States. Our association represents the institutional and industrial cleaning industry and represents over 6,400 member companies worldwide, including manufacturers and distributors of cleaning products as well as providers of professional cleaning services.

ISSA has alliances with associations, industry leaders, governments, and corporate and community entities around the world. These are in addition to ISSA’s own offices in Northbrook, IL; Amsterdam, Netherlands; Leicester, United Kingdom; Monterrey, Mexico; and Shanghai, China. ISSA members and program participants span the globe making this organization the largest cleaning and supply organization in the world.

Many of the industry’s top suppliers and vendors are located in China and North America and Australia is a vibrant market for them. As we work to keep our members up to date on the most important legal and public policy measures that affect their business around the world, we have some specific concerns with the PPSA for your review:

  • The PPSA without due process, compensation or remedy at law deprives legitimate owners of title to their personal property by the simple failure by the owner to record its ownership interest with the Australian National Registry. This deprivation of title is at odds with the law in the US, Great Britain and most of the western world.
  • The PPSA’s inclusion of all tangible property and intangible assets, including shares, intellectual property and contractual rights in the registry requirement puts manufacturers and vendors at significant risk in providing equipment or agreements for production or distribution of products inside Australia. In particular, lessors are at the highest risk, as property that is not owned by the debtor is at risk of seizure.
  • The Australian National Registry and its implications are not widely understood within Australia and certainly not understood worldwide.
  • The registry requirement puts an undue administrative and financial burden on foreign businesses, and therefore has a chilling effect on foreign investment in Australia.

ISSA respects the law’s intent to provide additional security for Australian businesses, but the applicability to foreign businesses must be revisited. On behalf of our members, we request recommendations to insure the legal property ownership by foreign investors and modificationsto the PPS Act thatsupport current and additional international business investment in Australia.

Sincerely,

William C. Balek
Director of Legislative Affairs