NDIS Banning Orders: Breach Penalty, Banned Provider Register and 5 Reasons

Key Takeaways

• An NDIS banning order is a written order under section 73ZN of the NDIS Act 2013 that prohibits or restricts what a person may do. It can be permanent or time-limited, general or limited to some activities, and can carry conditions.
• It can bind registered and unregistered providers, workers and key personnel (current or former), people never in the sector and, since 9 April 2026, applicants for registration, quality auditors and registration consultants.
• Breaching an order has been a criminal offence since 9 April 2026 (s 73ZNA): up to 5 years' imprisonment or 300 penalty units ($109,200), or both, or 150 units ($54,600) for the strict liability offence.
• The civil penalty for a breach is 1,000 penalty units ($364,000), or 10,000 units ($3,640,000) for a serious contravention by an NDIS provider. A company faces up to five times those amounts (calculated: $1.82 million and $18.2 million).
• Every order in force must be on the NDIS Provider Register (s 73ZDA(3)). The Commission's search listed 836 banning orders, 699 in force, when it was updated on 6 October 2026.
• The Commission made 111 banning orders in April to June 2026, its highest quarter, and 103 were against individuals.

An NDIS banning order is an order the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commissioner makes under s 73ZN of the NDIS Act to stop or limit what a provider, worker or other person can do in the sector. Breaching one has been a crime since 9 April 2026, with up to 5 years' imprisonment, and orders are published on the Commission's register.

What is an NDIS banning order?

A banning order removes a person from disability supports, in whole or in part. The Commissioner makes it by written notice under s 73ZN of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013, and it takes effect on the day the order specifies. It is an administrative decision, and the usual threshold is that the Commissioner "reasonably believes" a ground in the Act is met. No charge or conviction has to come first.

An order can be shaped to the risk. Under s 73ZN(3) it may apply generally or be of limited application, be permanent or for a specified period, and carry conditions. The register shows the range in use. An order made on 23 December 2025 lets a worker deliver supports for 12 months only under the direct, in-person supervision of someone who holds a worker screening clearance. Four orders made on 18 February 2025 permanently prohibit four workers from using the restrictive practices that the Victorian Senior Practitioner's office lists as prohibited, without removing them from the sector.

The Commissioner must usually invite submissions first (s 73ZN(7)), but need not where the grounds include an immediate danger to a person with disability or the person's registration has been revoked (s 73ZN(8)). The order must state its reasons. If the person works for, or is key personnel of, a provider, the Commissioner must notify that provider as soon as possible (s 73ZN(9)(c)), and the order survives the person leaving the job (s 73ZN(5A) and (5B)). Orders can be varied or revoked under s 73ZO, and a decision to make one is reviewable (s 99(1), item 15).

Who can be banned?

Almost anyone connected to disability supports. Under s 10C an "NDIS provider" is anyone, other than the Agency, who receives NDIS funding or NDIS amounts other than as a participant, so the term covers unregistered providers as well as registered ones. Section 73ZN then sets out four groups.

The last row is new. The NDIS Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Act 2026 (Act No. 41 of 2026, assented 8 April 2026) inserted s 73ZN(2B) and (2C) in its Schedule 1, which commenced on 9 April 2026. On 17 June 2026 the Commission used it, making two permanent banning orders that each cite s 73ZN(2B)(c)(iii); one bars the person from any involvement in preparing or advising on applications for registration. Our guide to the Integrity and Safeguarding Act covers the rest of that package, including the anti-promotion order.

What is the penalty for breaching an NDIS banning order?

Breaching a banning order, including a condition of it, now engages three limbs in s 73ZNA: two criminal offences and a civil penalty, all in force since 9 April 2026. Before that date a breach was a civil penalty only, 1,000 penalty units under the former s 73ZN(10).

The units come from the Act. The dollars use the Commonwealth penalty unit of $364 for conduct on or after 1 July 2026 (Crimes Act 1914 s 4AA), as the Australian Financial Security Authority's table records; it was $330 from 7 November 2024 to 30 June 2026. The company column is calculated, not published: Crimes Act s 4B(3) lets a court fine a company up to five times the maximum for a person, and s 82(5) of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 sets the same five-times cap on a company's civil penalty.

A "serious contravention" (s 11B) is conduct that involves a significant failure or is part of a systematic pattern of conduct. A pattern is judged by how many contraventions there were, over what period, how many people were affected and how complaints were handled. The 10,000 unit tier applies only to an NDIS provider, so a worker who is not a provider faces the 1,000 unit civil maximum.

How do I check the NDIS banned providers register?

Section 73ZDA(3) requires the NDIS Provider Register to include the name, ABN (if any) and order details of every person against whom a banning order is in force, and orders that have ended may stay on it (s 73ZDA(4)). The Commission publishes this part as its compliance and enforcement actions search, which also lists compliance notices, enforceable undertakings, refusals to re-register, and suspensions and revocations of registration: 4,357 actions of all types on 6 October 2026.

To check a person or business before you engage them:

1. Enter one name or an ABN. The Commission advises searching a business by a single or partial word, and a worker by first name or last name, not both.
2. Set Type to "Banning order" and leave Status on "Any status", so ended orders show too.
3. Read each result in full: the date of effect, whether it is in force, the section relied on and exactly what is prohibited. A limited order may still allow some roles.
4. Check the infringement notice list, then record the date and result on file.

The search leaves out warning letters, civil proceedings and actions the Commission has chosen not to publish. For registration status, use Find a registered provider, where the status "Revoked" shows banned and deregistered providers. Neither replaces the NDIS Worker Screening Check, which is verified in the worker screening database through the Registered provider portal.

How many NDIS providers have been banned?

The register listed 836 banning orders on 6 October 2026, 699 of them in force. Its year filter shows the climb.

Most of those banned are individuals. The Commission's Quarterly Performance Report Q4 2025-26 splits its orders by who they were made against:

The NDIS Minister's media release of 17 August 2026 calls the 111 the most the Commission has issued in a single quarter and puts 2026's total to June at 158, a 35 per cent rise on the same period of 2025. An earlier version of this post gave 5 provider and 55 individual bans for January to March 2025, from the Commission's report for that quarter; the later report revises them to 6 and 57.

The "831 NDIS providers banned" headline. The figure comes from a paywalled News Corp report, "NAMED: 831 NDIS providers banned, 4000+ flagged by watchdog", carried by the Daily Telegraph, the Herald Sun and sister papers at the end of September 2026. We could not read past its summary, and we could not find 831 in any Commission, NDIA or ministerial publication. It fits the register: counted by date of effect, the 831st banning order took effect on 25 September 2026 (our count from the register's CSV). Most of those orders are against individual workers, so "providers" overstates it. We could not match "4,000+ flagged" to a published figure. The register's total of all enforcement actions, banning orders included, was 4,357 on 6 October 2026, and the report's summary says "Almost 5000 NDIS providers have faced regulatory action or been put on notice".

What gets a provider or worker banned?

The legal grounds are the ones in s 73ZN. The conduct behind them tends to fall into five patterns. The grouping is ours, drawn from the Act and, for patterns 2 to 5, the register's entries; the Commission does not report its orders this way.

1. Worker screening failures

Registered providers must make sure key personnel and workers in risk-assessed roles hold an NDIS Worker Screening Check clearance, valid for five years, according to the Commission's worker screening guidance. The Q4 2025-26 report records the final wave of the original 2021 applications falling due for renewal in April to June 2026, so a clearance that lapses while the worker keeps working is a live risk this year.

A second risk sits on the provider. If it puts a banned person into the role the order prohibits, the worker breaches s 73ZNA, and on our reading the provider risks a ban for being "involved in" another person's contravention (s 73ZN(1)(b)(ii)).

What compliant providers do. Check the clearance and the banning register before the first shift, and track every expiry, as our guide to ongoing worker screening obligations sets out.

2. Restrictive practice breaches

A restrictive practice used without state or territory authorisation, or outside the person's behaviour support plan, is unauthorised, and every unauthorised use is a reportable incident. The Commission's reportable incidents page allows five business days to report it, or 24 hours if the person was harmed.

What compliant providers do. Use a restrictive practice only under a current, authorised plan, report every unauthorised use on time, and stop any practice with no plan behind it. Our guide to the regulated restrictive practices has the detail.

3. Abuse or misconduct that harms a participant

Here the Commission can move fastest. Where the Commissioner reasonably believes there is an immediate danger to a person with disability, the order can be made without first inviting submissions (s 73ZN(2)(a)(iv) and (8)). The test is the Commissioner's reasonable belief, so a worker can be banned while police inquiries or a prosecution are still running.

What compliant providers do. Run incident management that staff use: they know what a reportable incident is, complaints are acted on, and concerns about a worker are investigated and recorded.

4. Financial misconduct and fraud

Claiming for supports never delivered, or misusing participant funds, is a contravention, and a conviction for an offence involving fraud or dishonesty is a ground in its own right (s 73ZN(1)(c) and (2)(b)). In January 2023 the Commission permanently banned Millennium Disability Care Pty Ltd and a second Victorian entity, and banned five associated individuals for five to 10 years, after obtaining evidence of falsified and inappropriate claims, according to the then Minister's release of 22 January 2023. Our NDIS fraud crackdown guide covers the Fraud Fusion Taskforce side.

What compliant providers do. Tie every claim to a service record showing who delivered the support, when and to whom, and never claim ahead of delivery.

5. Key-personnel and suitability failures

The Commissioner can ban a provider or member of its key personnel who is not suitable to provide supports, having regard to matters in the NDIS rules (s 73ZN(1)(b)(iii) and (2)(a)(iii)). A banned person cannot be registered in a way inconsistent with the order (s 73E(3)), and an order against key personnel survives their leaving the role (s 73ZN(5B)). Undisclosed history, and a director carried over from a provider whose registration was revoked, are two gaps to check for.

What compliant providers do. Check every new director, manager and key person against the register before appointment, and keep key-personnel records current.

What compliant providers do differently

Each of the five patterns has a matching control, and a provider either has evidence of it or does not. A banned provider and a compliant one differ on whether the clearance was checked, the restraint was authorised and reported, the incident was reported on time, the claim was backed by a record and the history was disclosed.

Search the register for every new worker, contractor, director and consultant, and keep the result. Keep one list of clearance numbers and expiry dates, with reminders before each lapse. Log every incident, unauthorised restrictive practices included, against its reporting deadline. Our free NDIS Provider Compliance Health Check walks through the areas an assessor looks at, and the NDIS provider compliance knowledge base has the underlying obligations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the penalty for breaching an NDIS banning order?

Under s 73ZNA of the NDIS Act, a fault-based breach is an offence carrying up to 5 years' imprisonment or 300 penalty units ($109,200), or both. A strict liability offence carries 150 units ($54,600). The civil penalty is 1,000 units ($364,000), or 10,000 units ($3.64 million) for a serious contravention by an NDIS provider, and a company faces up to five times the civil amounts. Dollars use the $364 unit applying from 1 July 2026.

How do I check if a worker or provider is banned by the NDIS Commission?

Use the Commission's compliance and enforcement actions search on ndiscommission.gov.au. Enter one name or an ABN, searching a worker by first or last name only, set the type to Banning order and the status to any, and read each result for its date, status and what it prohibits. Record the check on file. Worker screening clearances are checked separately, in the NDIS worker screening database.

Can someone be banned from the NDIS without a criminal conviction?

Yes. The Commissioner can make a banning order on a reasonable belief that a person has contravened the NDIS Act, was involved in someone else's contravention, is not suitable, or poses an immediate danger to a person with disability. A conviction for fraud or dishonesty is a separate ground, not a precondition. Where there is an immediate danger, the order can be made without first inviting submissions.

Do banning orders apply to unregistered providers and workers?

Yes. The NDIS Act defines an NDIS provider as anyone receiving NDIS funding other than as a participant, so s 73ZN(1) reaches unregistered providers. Section 73ZN(2) covers current and former workers and key personnel, s 73ZN(2A) covers people never in the sector, and since 9 April 2026 s 73ZN(2B) covers applicants, auditors and registration consultants. In April to June 2026, 103 of the 111 orders were against individuals.

How long does an NDIS banning order last?

As long as the order says. Under s 73ZN(3) an order can be permanent or for a specified period, and can be general, limited to particular activities, or subject to conditions. The Commissioner can vary or revoke it under s 73ZO, on their own initiative or on the banned person's written application. Of the 836 orders on the register on 6 October 2026, 699 were in force.

Are NDIS banning orders public?

Yes. Section 73ZDA(3) of the NDIS Act requires the NDIS Provider Register to include the name, ABN and order details of every person against whom a banning order is in force, and orders that have ended may remain on it. The Commission publishes them in its compliance and enforcement actions search, which anyone can use, except where it decides publishing is not in the public's or a participant's interest. The full list downloads as a CSV.