Petrol retailers should not use the current pandemic to further increase profits, which the latest ACCC petrol industry report shows have risen in recent years, and should pass on the full benefit of falling oil prices to motorists, the ACCC has said.

Weekly average international crude oil prices have decreased by around US$ 50 per barrel since the beginning of the year and this has largely flowed through to Australian wholesale petrol prices, which have decreased by around 50 cents per litre (cpl) in the same period.

Over the same period, seven-day rolling average petrol prices across the five largest cities (i.e. Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth) have decreased by around 45 cpl. These cities have regular petrol price cycles, which makes it difficult to assess the exact flow through of falls in international crude oil and refined petrol prices in the short term.

“The drop in the crude oil price is good news for the Australian motorists. At this time the Australian economy needs all the assistance it can get, and lower world crude oil prices are one of the few positives from current world events,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims said.

“In the larger Australian capital cities, petrol retailers took too long to pass on the savings from the rapid drop in international oil prices, and this did not reflect well on them.”

In Hobart, Canberra and Darwin as well as many regional locations, retail prices have been much slower to come down and the extent of the falls has varied widely.

Fuel prices are generally higher in regional Australia due to a number of factors, including lower population and demand, meaning there are fewer petrol stations, which often leads to less competition. There are also higher costs for transport and storage of fuel, and less convenience sales which can support the operation costs of petrol retailers when fuel prices are low.

Price changes in regional centres can lag up to six weeks behind changes in the larger capital cities, because the turnover of stock is generally lower in the country. The reduction in demand for petrol due to current travel restrictions may have further exacerbated the lag.

“We have previously found that the lack of vigorous and effective competition in some regional locations was a major reason for higher prices in those locations,” Mr Sims said.

“Where there is competition, you tend to see lower prices. Giving your business to outlets that are pricing competitively sends a strong message to those that have high prices that they will lose your business. We recommend motorists compare prices on fuel price apps and websites, such as MotorMouth and the government schemes in NSW, WA and the NT, which also provide information on retail prices in regional locations.”

“Especially at this difficult time, retailers must not take advantage of the situation to increase their profits, but should pass on savings to motorists,” Mr Sims said.

“The ACCC’s role is to monitor the market closely, and we will continue to do this, particularly to keep the pressure on the petrol retailers at this time.”

New ACCC report shows retail profits increased over time

The latest ACCC petrol industry report reports on the revenues, costs and profits in the Australian petroleum industry up to June 2018. It includes financial results for the retail and wholesale sectors as well as for refining and across the total downstream industry.

Retail sector net profits across all fuel products, convenience store and non-fuel services were $616 million in 2017-18, the last year covered by this report.

The sector generated a record high $333 million in net profits on petrol products – regular unleaded petrol (RULP), premium unleaded petrol (PULP) and ethanol blended petrol (EBP). This equates to a record net profit of 3.0 cpl on petrol products, which was almost double the average in the period 2008-09 to 2013-14 of 1.6 cpl.

About 60 per cent of petrol net profits ($199 million) were made on premium fuels, which only accounted for about a third of petrol sales by volume.

“Much of the increase in net profits on petrol products was driven by sales of PULP, which has a significantly higher profit margin for retailers,” Mr Sims said.

Net profits on PULP 95 and PULP 98 were 5.8 cpl and 5.9 cpl respectively, while net profits on regular unleaded were 1.5 cpl in 2017-18.

PULP 95 and PULP 98 have become more expensive relative to the retail price of RULP. The annual average price differential between RULP and PULP 98, for instance, increased to 20.4 cpl in 2017-18, an increase of 3.9 cpl since 2009-10. Profits were also influenced by higher sales volumes of PULP (particularly PULP 98).

Retailers also earn substantial profits from convenience store sales. Convenience and other non-fuel sales contributed around 37 per cent of total retail sector net profits (or $226 million) in 2017-18, illustrating their importance to petrol retailers’ businesses as the profit margins on these products are significant.

“Petrol stations make most of their profits from convenience sales and premium fuel. The average net profits on regular unleaded, at about 1.5 cpl are only a small part of the price motorists pay,” Mr Sims said.

The annual average retail price of RULP in the five largest cities in 2017-18 was 134.5 cpl.

“Drivers who have the option, can save money by resisting the temptation of convenience foods at petrol stations and using regular unleaded petrol, although motorists should follow their car manufacturers’ advice,” Mr Sims said.

Net profits in 2017-18 were stronger for refining and across the total downstream industry

The number of refineries halved from eight in 2002-03 to four in 2017-18, significantly rationalising operations. The financial performance of the refining sector fluctuated over the same period.

Refining net profits however recovered following several years of net losses after the Global Financial Crisis. Net profits reached $845 million in 2017-18, the highest since 2007-08. Overall profits for the total supply sector (which comprises refining, importing and transactions between refiners) were $1.19 billion in 2017-18.

Wholesale sector net profits were about $976 million in 2017-18 across all products and services. They have fluctuated over time but have been relatively consistent since 2008-09.

Net profits for the total downstream industry across all products and services were $2.78 billion (or 2.9 cpl), the highest recorded since 2007-08 and more than double the figure recorded for 2013-14 ($1.24 billion, or 1.4 cpl).

For petrol products, total industry net profits were $1.44 billion in 2017-18, or 4.2 cpl, the highest recorded by the ACCC. They were around double the profits on petrol products across the industry in 2013-14 ($723 million, or 2.0 cpl).

Notes to editors

On 16 December 2019, the Treasurer issued a new direction to the ACCC to monitor the prices, costs and profits relating to the supply of petroleum products in the petroleum industry in Australia. As part of this direction, the ACCC produces industry reports that focus on particular aspects of consumer interest in the fuel market in relation to prices, costs and profits.

This is the first industry report under the new direction. It reports on the revenues, costs and profits for the total downstream petroleum industry as well as for the following industry sectors: retail, wholesale, and total supply (which comprises refining, importing and transactions between refiners).

The focus of this report is to provide transparency around the financial performance and the profitability of the downstream petroleum industry. It presents results from analysis of this data.

The ACCC analysed the financial data of 11 companies:

• refiner–wholesalers – BP, Caltex, Mobil and Viva Energy
• independent wholesalers – Liberty, Puma Energy and United
• supermarket chains – Coles Express and Woolworths
• large independent retailers – 7-Eleven and On The Run.

The ACCC previously reported on financial results to the end of 2013-14.

This report includes data from 2002-03 to 2017-18 (the latest data analysed), but excludes results for 2014-15 and 2015-16, which was a period when the ACCC conducted other financial analysis of the industry as part of its regional market study reports.

All results in this report are in real terms in 2017-18 dollars.

The ACCC has announced that it will not oppose Ventia’s proposed acquisition of Broadspectrum. Ventia is a 50/50 partnership between CIMIC Group Limited (ASX:CIM) and funds management firm Apollo Global Management, LLC.

Ventia and Broadspectrum are both providers of infrastructure services. The ACCC’s review focused on three types of infrastructure services: design and construction, operation and maintenance and facilities management.

The companies provide services to a wide range of industries, including industries that provide critical services to consumers such as electricity, telecommunications and water.

“We looked at this proposed acquisition closely to ensure strong competition remains in the supply of infrastructure services to industries with a direct impact on consumer prices,” ACCC Commissioner Stephen Ridgeway said.

“We contacted many customers of infrastructure services, and received consistent feedback that there is sufficient competition from alternative suppliers and that companies will continue to have a variety of options when contracting for infrastructure services.”

“Ventia and Broadspectrum generally offer differentiated services with minimal overlap in a number of industries including defence, justice, education, social housing, oil and gas, environmental consulting and real estate,” Mr Ridgeway said.

We are conscious of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on many businesses and transactions and, where possible, we will expedite reviews as we have done in this review.

Further information is available at Ventia Services Group Pty Ltd - Ferrovial Services Australia Pty Ltd (Broadspectrum).

Background

Ventia is a 50/50 partnership between CIMIC Group Limited and funds management firm Apollo Global Management, LLC. Ventia provides infrastructure services throughout a range of industries, including social infrastructure, transport and utilities. Ventia also supplies services for telecommunication infrastructure assets through its Visionstream subsidiary.

Broadspectrum provides infrastructure services across a range of industries, including defence, urban and social infrastructure, natural resources, transport, telecommunications and real estate. It also provides integrated property and facilities management services to 37 different Australian Government entities, including the ACCC.

Broadspectrum operates in its own name and through its subsidiary brands, including APP Corporation and Easternwell Group.

Design and construction services involve the planning, design and construction of capital assets. These services are inputs into the overall project delivery method used to take the project design from conception to construction, and handover to the customer.

Operation and maintenance services relate to existing infrastructure and include a combination of ongoing asset maintenance and repair, operational support and asset replacement.

Facilities management services relate to the maintenance of physical assets and their support processes.

Maintaining profits was a major consideration for the big four banks as they weighed whether to reduce mortgage rates in line with Reserve Bank of Australia cash rate cuts during 2019, the ACCC has found.

The ACCC’s Home Loan Price Inquiry interim report, released today, shows that the big four banks considered various factors as they decided whether to pass on the RBA’s June, July and October 2019 rate cuts. But recovering profits was central to their decisions to not always fully pass through the lower rates to mortgage customers.

“The banks were attempting to shore up their profitability during a period of low interest rates,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims said.

“It was their strong preference, after the RBA’s cuts, not to further reduce the rates customers were earning on some deposit products as they approached zero per cent.”

“The banks’ reluctance to cut these deposit rates led them to anticipate lower profits, which they aimed to recover by not always fully passing through cash rate cuts to their mortgage customers,” Mr Sims said.

The ACCC’s analysis also found that the big four banks benefitted from a sustained decrease in their funding costs during much of 2019. While headline rates for owner-occupier home loans with principal and interest repayments fell overall during 2018 and 2019, the banks’ funding costs fell even more over the same period.

“We recognise that much has changed in the economic and funding environment since last year. The COVID-19 pandemic has shifted priorities and the banks are playing an important role in supporting the economy,” Mr Sims said.

“However, the inquiry findings shed an important light on bank decision making and raise questions about whether the banks could, at the time, have passed on a higher proportion of those RBA cash rate cuts to their mortgage customers.”

The ACCC’s Home Loan Price Inquiry interim report also shows that although average interest rates charged by the big four banks on home loans fell during 2019, a lack of price transparency and higher interest rates for existing loans continued to cost customers.

The interim report examines home loan prices charged by the big four banks between 1 January 2019 and 31 October 2019. It found that home loan pricing practices continue to make it difficult for consumers to compare different mortgage products.

Headline rates did not accurately reflect the price most big four bank customers actually paid for their home loans, because the overwhelming majority of customers received discounts, including opaque discretionary discounts.

“Given the economic disruption, uncertainty and job losses stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, many consumers may not be inclined to shop around and ask for discounts from their banks right now,” Mr Sims said.

“However, our analysis shows how that even a small further reduction in interest rates could potentially save thousands of dollars over the life of a mortgage. Consumers should consider this carefully when it is time to re-engage with their lender.”

For example, a customer with an average-sized new, owner-occupier, principal and interest mortgage of $386,000 could save about $5000 on interest payments in the first year if they went from having no discount to receiving the big four banks’ average discount of 128 basis points.

At the end of September, customers with new owner-occupier loans with principal and interest repayments were paying, on average, 26 basis points less than customers with existing loans. The difference was usually even more significant for customers with older loans.

The ACCC’s final report, scheduled for release later this year, will consider barriers to consumers switching to alternative home loan suppliers.

Further information at Home loan price inquiry

Background

On 14 October 2019, the Treasurer, the Hon. Josh Frydenberg MP, issued a direction to the ACCC to conduct an inquiry into the market for the supply of home loans. The specific matters the ACCC was directed to take into account included:

• prices charged for home loans since 1 January 2019, including:
  • the difference between advertised interest rates and interest rates paid by customers
  • the difference between interest rates paid by new and existing customers
  • home loan suppliers’ pricing decisions following changes in the RBA’s target for the cash rate, including the extent to which changes were due to suppliers’ cost of funds and the timing of the suppliers’ announcements
• impediments to consumers refinancing to alternative home loan suppliers.

The interim report focuses on the first issue regarding the prices charged for home loans between 1 January 2019 and 31 October 2019 by the big four banks, which account for close to 80 per cent (by value) of home loans held by authorised deposit-taking institutions in Australia. The final report will consider the second issue, impediments to consumer switching.

The big four banks are Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, National Australia Bank, and Westpac Banking Corporation.

In preparing the interim report, the ACCC used its compulsory information gathering powers to obtain information and documents from the big four banks, and supplemented its analysis with data supplied by the RBA and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. 

The findings in the report reinforce and build on those in the ACCC’s earlier Residential Mortgage Price Inquiry.