Tampering with mail, and the Commonwealth postal offences.

What is the definition of tampering with mail?

Section 471.7 of the Criminal Code (Cth) sits in Part 10.5, which deals with postal services. The full text is on the Federal Register of Legislation, and the Act is also on JADE.

The section creates two offences, and they are not the same. Under section 471.7(1) a person commits an offence if the person dishonestly opens a mail-receptacle, or dishonestly tampers with one. The maximum is 5 years. Under section 471.7(2) a person commits an offence if the person intentionally opens a mail-receptacle, is not authorised by Australia Post to open it, and knows that they are not authorised. The maximum is 2 years.

The difference is dishonesty. Subsection (2) is the lesser offence, and it is made out by an unauthorised opening done knowingly. Subsection (1) requires the prosecution to prove that the opening or the tampering was dishonest, and it more than doubles the penalty. A postal worker who opens a mail-bag they are not rostered to open has a very different case to answer than one alleged to have opened it to take what is inside.

A mail-receptacle is not a letterbox at the front of a house. Section 470.1 defines it as a mail-bag, package, parcel, container, wrapper, receptacle or similar thing that belongs to, or is in the possession of, Australia Post, and that is used or intended for use in the carriage of articles by post. It does not matter whether the receptacle actually contains anything. The definition is why section 471.7 is the natural charge where the allegation concerns mail-bags inside a sorting facility.

Is mail theft a crime in Australia?

Yes, and Division 471 sets out a graded scheme. Section 471.1 is the theft offence. A person commits it if they dishonestly appropriate a mail-receptacle, an article in the course of post, or a postal message, with the intention of permanently depriving another person of it. The maximum is 10 years.

Section 471.2 is receiving. A person commits it if they dishonestly receive stolen property knowing or believing the property to be stolen, and the maximum is also 10 years. The section carries alternative verdict provisions in both directions. On a charge of theft the tribunal of fact may convict of receiving instead, and on a charge of receiving it may convict of theft, provided the defendant has been accorded procedural fairness. That matters in practice, because the Crown does not always know at the outset which side of the line the evidence will fall.

Below those two sit the rest. Section 471.3, taking or concealing mail, carries 5 years. Section 471.6, damaging or destroying mail, carries 10 years and can be committed intentionally or recklessly. Section 471.8, dishonestly obtaining delivery or receipt of an article in the course of post that is not directed to you, carries 5 years. Sections 471.4 and 471.5, which deal with the dishonest removal of postage stamps and the dishonest use of used stamps, each carry 12 months.

Different sections again cover what is sent rather than what is taken. Section 471.11 makes it an offence to use a postal service to make a threat to kill, with a maximum of 10 years, or a threat to cause serious harm, with a maximum of 7 years. Actual fear on the part of the person threatened is not an element. Section 471.12 makes it an offence to use a postal service in a way that reasonable persons would regard as menacing, harassing or offensive, with a maximum of 2 years. Its online cousin is section 474.17, which carries 5 years and which we deal with in our note on using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence.

What's the offence for opening someone's mail?

The answer turns on a definition that most people never see. An article in the course of post means an article that is being carried by post, and includes an article that has been collected or received by or on behalf of Australia Post for carriage by post but has not been delivered by or on behalf of Australia Post. Delivery ends the course of post.

So a parcel taken from a mail-bag at a sorting centre is squarely inside Division 471. A letter lifted from a residential letterbox after the postie has been is not, because it is no longer in the course of post and a home letterbox is not in the possession of Australia Post. The conduct is still criminal. It is just criminal under State or Territory law, and the charge in New South Wales is more likely to be larceny, or goods in custody if the item is found in the person's possession later.

Where a person takes delivery of a parcel addressed to someone else and keeps it, section 471.8 is the section to look at. It makes it an offence to dishonestly obtain delivery of, or receipt of, an article in the course of post that is not directed to the person, and it carries 5 years. Again, the element that carries the weight is dishonesty, not the taking.

What is the punishment for opening someone else's mail in Australia?

The stated maximum is 5 years for the dishonesty offence and 2 years for the unauthorised opening offence. Those maximums describe the worst case, not the ordinary one, and they are not where a postal charge usually ends up.

A Commonwealth offence punishable by more than 12 months imprisonment is indictable: section 4G of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth). But where the maximum does not exceed 10 years, the offence may be dealt with summarily if the prosecutor and the defendant both consent: section 4J. Every offence in Division 471 falls under that ceiling. Consent must be given before the hearing of evidence begins.

Summary disposal caps the sentence. Where the maximum term provided does not exceed five years, the maximum on summary conviction is 12 months imprisonment, or a fine of 60 penalty units, or both. Where the maximum provided exceeds five years, the summary ceiling is 2 years, or 120 penalty units, or both: section 4J(3). A penalty unit is $330 for offences committed on or after 7 November 2024, so those fines are $19,800 and $39,600. The Judicial Commission's Local Court Bench Book sets the scheme out.

A federal offender is sentenced under Part IB of the Crimes Act 1914. Section 16A requires a sentence of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances, and lists the matters the court weighs. There is no standard non-parole period. Where the allegation is that a person used a position of trust, general deterrence carries real weight, and the number of items, the value taken and the period over which the conduct ran all matter. So do a plea of guilty, restitution, prior good character and prospects of rehabilitation.

Is it a crime to throw away mail in Australia?

Section 471.6 makes it an offence to engage in conduct that causes damage to, or the destruction of, a mail-receptacle, an article in the course of post, or a postal message, where the person intends that damage or is reckless as to whether the conduct causes it. The maximum is 10 years, which is the same as the theft offence.

The section also treats conduct as causing the destruction of a thing where it causes the physical loss of the thing by interfering with it. A courier who dumps undelivered parcels rather than delivering them is not saved by the fact that the parcels are intact somewhere in a skip. Recklessness is enough for the fault element, so an intention to destroy need not be proved.

The limit is again the course of post. Binning junk mail addressed to the last tenant of your own house is not an offence against section 471.6, because the article has been delivered.

Is it illegal to withhold someone's mail in Australia?

Concealing mail is dealt with by section 471.3, which makes it an offence to dishonestly take or conceal a mail-receptacle, an article in the course of post, or a postal message. The maximum is 5 years.

Everything turns on dishonesty, and the Criminal Code defines it. Section 470.2 says dishonest means dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people, and known by the defendant to be dishonest according to the standards of ordinary people. Both limbs must be proved. Section 470.3 makes the determination of dishonesty a matter for the tribunal of fact, which means it is a jury question in an indictable trial and a question for the magistrate on summary disposal.

That two-limb test is a real constraint on the reach of these sections. A person who genuinely believed they were entitled to open a package, or who did not appreciate that ordinary people would regard what they did as dishonest, does not commit the offence. Section 471.1 goes further and says an appropriation may be dishonest even if the person is willing to pay for the property. Willingness to pay is not an answer to a theft charge.

How are postal charges defended?

These cases are built on circumstantial evidence. A pattern of loss is compared with shift rosters. CCTV is reviewed. A search warrant follows, and cash or goods are seized. Nothing in that chain proves, by itself, who opened what.

The first questions are identification and opportunity. A roster shows who was working. It does not show who was standing at a particular bench. Where several people had access to the same mail-bags, the Crown must exclude the others as a reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence. Footage that shows a person near a receptacle is not footage that shows them opening it.

The second question is dishonesty. On a section 471.7(1) charge, an authorised opening done for a work reason is not dishonest, whatever else may have happened afterwards. The Crown must prove the state of mind at the moment of opening. That is why the alternative in section 471.7(2), which asks only about authority and knowledge of the lack of it, is often where a contested case settles.

The third question is the seizure. Cash found in a house is not proof that the cash came from the mail. Where money or goods are seized, the lawfulness of the warrant and of the search is examined first, and section 138 of the Evidence Act 1995 may be engaged. Our note on what happens after a search warrant covers that ground, and our note on money laundering and proceeds of crime covers what follows when the Commonwealth restrains the money.

Anyone approached by the AFP about mail losses should say nothing and get advice before any interview. The right to silence is not a badge of guilt, and an employee's obligation to answer their employer is not an obligation to answer the police. Our guide to the recorded police interview explains how that plays out.

Common questions

What can I do if someone is tampering with my mail?

Report it to Australia Post. Australia Post refers suspected postal offences to the Australian Federal Police, which investigates them, and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions prosecutes them. If the item disappeared after it was delivered, the matter belongs to State or Territory police instead, because the Commonwealth sections apply while the article is in the course of post.

What should I do if my mail is stolen?

Report the loss to Australia Post and to police. Where identity documents or cards were in the missing item, treat it as an identity theft risk and notify the bank or issuer at once. Stolen mail is a common precursor to identity fraud, and the earlier the accounts are locked, the smaller the problem becomes.

Is stealing mail a federal offence in Australia?

Yes, while the article is in the postal system. The Division 471 offences are Commonwealth offences. Section 471.9 applies extended geographical jurisdiction of category C, under section 15.3 of the Criminal Code, to sections 471.1 to 471.8, so the offences can reach conduct that occurs outside Australia. Once an article has been delivered, State and Territory theft laws apply instead.

Who is responsible for stolen mail?

Criminal responsibility rests on the person who took the item, and it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Compensation for a lost or stolen article is a separate question, governed by Australia Post's terms of carriage and by any extra cover bought when the item was sent. A criminal charge does not decide it.

Does a postal charge go to a jury?

Not usually. Every Division 471 offence carries a maximum of 10 years or less, so all of them may be dealt with summarily under section 4J of the Crimes Act 1914 if the prosecutor and the defendant both consent. Most are. Consent has to be given before the hearing of evidence starts, and the summary sentencing ceilings in section 4J(3) then apply.

Is there a minimum sentence for tampering with mail?

No. There is no mandatory minimum and no standard non-parole period, because standard non-parole periods are a New South Wales device under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 and have no work to do on a Commonwealth charge. Sentencing is governed by Part IB of the Crimes Act 1914, and section 16A requires a sentence of a severity appropriate in all the circumstances.

To speak to a criminal defence lawyer, call Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019.

This article is written by Aaron Kernaghan, criminal defence lawyer at Good Legal Lawyers, as at 10 July 2026. It is commentary and reflects the personal opinion of the author only. It is not legal advice, it is not a substitute for advice on your own matter, and it does not purport to be accurate or complete. Any matter referred to may be before the court and any person charged is presumed innocent. For advice on a specific matter, contact Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019 or contact the firm.

More criminal-law commentary by Aaron Kernaghan.

← Back to all news