Australian Electoral Commission Investigates One Nation's Election Funding Claims
The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is investigating whether Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party breached electoral funding laws concerning its $6 million public funding claim following the last federal election, according to documents obtained by Australia under freedom of information laws.
The documents reveal that the AEC questioned the party about over $800,000 of claimed electoral expenditure, leading One Nation to withdraw more than 140 items from its funding claim. These items accounted for nearly 15% of the party’s total $6.01 million public funding request.
Additionally, the commission is examining if the party violated electoral funding regulations related to payments made to certain suppliers that were reimbursed in the claim.
One Nation continues to receive significant financial support from its backers, recently securing over $7 million following its performance in the South Australian election. Meanwhile, the AEC is reviewing the party’s taxpayer funding claims for potential breaches.
As the party’s registered agent, Pauline Hanson faces criminal penalties if she submitted an "incomplete, false, or misleading claim" to a Commonwealth entity, according to the declaration she signed accompanying the funding claim.
History of Funding Claims and Repayments
One Nation has previously been found to have incorrectly claimed public funding for electoral expenses, resulting in the party repaying election funding twice—once after the 2019 election and again following the 2022 election.
In 2021, the AEC conducted a compliance audit involving Hanson, concluding that she had claimed approximately $165,000 in expenses that were either "not electoral expenditure" or related to spending "that had not been incurred." The New South Wales Electoral Commission also denied funding claims by One Nation in 2021, determining that the party incorrectly claimed $118,000 in taxpayer funds for electoral materials, including merchandising.
Freedom of Information Documents Reveal AEC Queries
Australia requested multiple documents One Nation submitted to the AEC to justify the taxpayer funds it received under public funding arrangements after the 2025 federal election, as well as correspondence between the party and the regulator regarding its claim.
Based on the 6.4% national vote the party secured at the last election and its Senate performance, One Nation received over $6 million in public funding from the AEC.
The released documents show that after the party lodged a claim for just over $6 million in July last year, the commission questioned 143 of One Nation’s claimed expense items.
A senior compliance officer from the AEC raised concerns with the party in late October, requesting additional information to justify and process the claim.
"Information can include further descriptions of the goods and services provided and what the dominant purpose of the expenditure was for," the compliance officer wrote in an October email to the party’s operations manager, Alex Jones.
The officer requested the document be returned within the same week "so that we may continue processing the claim." Following a phone call regarding these queries, Jones, based at the party’s Brisbane headquarters, informed the AEC that the party would "voluntarily withdraw" the queried items.
"I wish to voluntarily withdraw the 143 items which have been queried totalling $809,648.11 from the party’s interim claim, to allow us more time to assess the queries and provide appropriate responses for each in the party’s final claim," Jones stated in an email.
In November, One Nation submitted its final claim. However, details of this submission, including responses to the 143 queried items, have been redacted under freedom of information laws.
Restricted Access to Documents Due to Ongoing Investigation
The AEC refused to release certain documents to Australia, including two key documents detailing the party’s funding claim. This decision is based on the AEC’s ongoing compliance review of payments made to One Nation. The commission routinely examines funding claims made by all political parties.
The AEC stated that releasing these documents "may influence or jeopardise the compliance review process" and that disclosing supplier information could compromise the ongoing investigation into the party’s financial compliance.
"[The documents] relate to an ongoing investigation into the accuracy of PHON’s election funding claim, which includes the assessment of evidence provided by PHON in support of its claim for election funding," the AEC said in its decision letter.
"The two documents in question identify suppliers associated with PHON’s electoral expenditure and form part of the evidentiary basis for the current investigation. Disclosure would therefore reveal aspects of the scope and evidentiary focus of the investigation.
"I consider that release of the documents could reasonably be expected to forewarn third parties of the direction of the investigation, including the nature of the evidence being examined, and in doing so put the investigation in jeopardy."
The AEC also noted it may need to seek further information or evidence from certain suppliers identified in these documents.
"Disclosing the identities of these suppliers could prejudice the conduct of the investigation and the proper administration of the law in this course of the investigation.
"I am satisfied that the risk identified is real and arises directly from the content of the documents and the circumstances of the investigation."
Concerns Over Party’s Financial Practices
Australia has previously reported that former candidates described the party as operating a "money making scheme," with information provided to the commission showing candidates reported spending just $872,116 for the 2025 election despite the party’s claim of more than $6 million.
Last month, financial records lodged by the Queensland division of One Nation with the Office of Fair Trading revealed the party had not submitted any financial reports since 2022.
These reports were described by a leading financial expert as "sloppy and unprofessional," highlighting missing and worthless assets exceeding $1 million.
One Nation did not respond to Australia’s inquiries regarding the AEC review.
Contact Information for Confidential Tips
encourages individuals with information on this subject to contact them confidentially through various secure methods.
app includes a Secure Messaging tool that encrypts messages end-to-end and conceals communication within routine app activity, preventing observers from detecting the communication or its content.
If not already installed, app can be downloaded for iOS or Android, with Secure Messaging accessible via the menu.
For those able to use the Tor network securely, messages and documents can be sent via ’s SecureDrop platform.
Additional secure contact methods, including instant messengers, email, telephone, and post, are detailed in ’s guide at the.com/tips, which also discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each method.
Those with information can email sarah.martin@the.com.
