Adani's $600,000 Donation to LNP Concealed for a Year Using Federal Disclosure Gap
Adani, the multinational conglomerate, donated more than $600,000 to the Liberal National party (LNP) of Queensland in the lead-up to the 2024 state election, yet these substantial contributions remained undisclosed to the public for a full year. The donations, which represent the party's largest single federal donor during that period, were only revealed through the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) on 2 February 2026, bypassing Queensland's stringent state-level disclosure requirements.
Exploiting a Federal Loophole for State Election Influence
Queensland legislation mandates real-time disclosure for state-level political donations, typically within seven days, and as quickly as 24 hours for contributions made in the week preceding election day. However, Adani utilised a federal loophole under sections 302CA and 314B of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, allowing the donations to be reported federally rather than at the state level. This meant the funds were not disclosed in real time, depriving voters of critical information before the election held on 26 October 2024.
The bulk of the donations arrived in three large, nearly identical instalments: $166,667 on 13 August, another $166,667 on 19 September, and $166,666 on 24 October, supplemented by an additional $100,000 on 23 October. In total, Adani provided the LNP with $621,500 across 10 instalments during the 2024-25 federal reporting period, with four smaller donations also made ahead of the May 2025 federal election.
Political and Transparency Backlash
Greens state MP Michael Berkman condemned the practice, stating that the LNP had "exploited a gaping loophole in our donation laws." He argued that "Queenslanders were robbed of the opportunity to make an informed vote, because the LNP kept this cash injection secret before the election." Berkman further emphasised that this incident strengthens the case for banning corporate donations altogether, a policy long advocated by the Greens.
Clancy Moore, chief executive of Transparency International Australia, highlighted the ethical concerns, noting that while federal donations are intended for federal purposes, making large contributions days before a state election could indirectly free up other funds for campaigning. Moore described this as a "massive loophole" that undermines public transparency and accountability in the electoral process.
Corporate and Political Responses
An LNP spokesman asserted that the party had "complied with all disclosure requirements," adhering to the legal framework as it stood. A spokesperson for Bravus Mining and Resources, Adani's renamed Australian branch, confirmed that the company had "met our donations disclosure obligations in line with the law." They added that Adani also donated to the federal accounts of the Australian Labor party, the LNP, and Katter's Australian party to support democratic processes, but noted they have not contributed to state-based party accounts for several years.
This controversy follows a recent agreement between the LNP and Adani to end a legal dispute over deferred royalty payments from a deal signed under the previous Labor government. Former treasurer Cameron Dick alleged that this settlement resulted in a financial windfall of at least $500 million for Adani, raising further questions about the interplay between corporate donations and political decisions.
Implications for Future Electoral Transparency
The case underscores ongoing debates about political donation reform in Australia. New laws passed under the Albanese government, set to take effect in July, aim to enhance transparency and require more timely disclosure of donations. However, critics argue that without closing such loopholes, corporate influence in elections may continue to evade public scrutiny.
As electoral laws evolve, the Adani-LNP donation saga serves as a stark reminder of the challenges in ensuring fair and transparent political financing, particularly in a federal system where state and national regulations can intersect in ways that obscure donor activities.
