On 18 November 2025, the Companies (Address Information) Amendment Bill received royal assent and became the Companies (Address Information) Amendment Act 2025 (Act). The new privacy measures for company directors will come into force on a date set by Order in Council, or automatically by 18 November 2026 if no order is made. The enactment of the Amendment Bill marks a significant step in the ongoing corporate governance reforms outlined in our previous article.
What does the Act do?
Under the Companies Act 1993, companies are required to publish the residential addresses of its directors and certain shareholders on the NZ Companies Register (Register). The Amendment Bill addresses long-standing concerns about the safety and privacy risks associated with this requirement.
The new Act allows directors and proposed directors to apply to the NZ Registrar of Companies (Registrar) to replace their residential address with an alternative address. To qualify, an application must:
- be made by the director in the prescribed form;
- include a statutory declaration that public disclosure of the residential address is “likely to result in physical or mental harm” to the director or someone they live with;
- specify a compliant alternative address; and
- be accompanied by the prescribed fee (if any).
The alternative address acts as a substitute for a director’s residential address on the Register. The alternative address must be a physical New Zealand address (not a postal centre or a document exchange) but cannot be the company’s registered office or address for service. This ensures that directors can still be reached independently of the company. Accountancy firms, law firms and “other persons” may provide an alternative address, provided the application specifies that the alternative address is at the offices of that firm or person.
Once an application is accepted, the Registrar must ensure the alternative address is publicly available on the Register. The Registrar must also take reasonable steps to prevent public access to other documents which may contain the residential address. This may include redacting information from publicly available company documents.
Where a director is also a shareholder of the company, or lives with a shareholder who consents in the application to having the alternative address apply to them, the Registrar has the same obligations with respect to the shareholder.
What’s still unclear?
Several details remain unclear at this stage, including:
- what qualifies as “harm” and whether any evidence will be required to be provided with the statutory declaration;
- the form of the application, the form of the statutory declaration and the amount of the prescribed fee; and
- the timeframes for the Registrar to process an application and if approved, to update the address information and make the redactions thought necessary.
Our view
We expect the heightened privacy protections brought in by the Act will be welcomed by company directors and seen as an improved alternative to the current process (which requires a protection order from the Family Court to be submitted with the application for address suppression).
However, there will likely also be questions whether a general ‘opt-out’ regime would be more suitable and why the Act does not also afford the same protections to shareholders who are not also directors (and don’t live with a director). It also remains to be seen how burdensome the redaction requirements will be for the Registrar, particularly where there are numerous historical filings.
We will keep you updated as details emerge. In the meantime, please contact one of our experts if there is anything you would like to discuss.
This article was co-authored by Lucas Dearlove, a Summer Clerk in our Corporate team.
Key contacts
Speak with one of our experts.
