The Fire Services Property Levy (FSPL) was a tax on property owners in Victoria, collected via council rates (or separate notices for non-rateable land), used to fund fire services (notably CFA and Fire Rescue Victoria).

From 1 July 2025, the FSPL was replaced with the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund (ESVF). The change broadened the scope of services to include additional emergency/recovery services and volunteer support such as SES, Triple Zero Victoria and Forest Fire Management.

Under the new ESVF Victorian rates increased substantially by 100% to 190%, depending on the property type. The levy is calculated based on a fixed charge plus a variable rate tied to the property’s Capital Improved Value (CIV). Different land/property-use classifications have different variable rate multipliers (residential, commercial, industrial, primary production, public benefit and vacant land). Some concessions/exemptions apply, e.g., for pensioners or eligible volunteers, or for certain farm enterprises.

Positives

• More comprehensive emergency services funding
  • Because the levy (now ESVF) covers more services (not just fire response), it better reflects the broader risk environment (fires, storms, flood, etc.) and gives more stable funding for agencies like SES, Triple Zero, forest fire management and volunteer support.
• Predictability & transparency
  • The levy is tied to property value (CIV) and has a fixed component, which offers a more predictable basis. The fact that it's visible on rates notices helps make clear what homeowners are paying.
• Shared responsibility
  • It spreads the cost of emergency services to all property owners (including vacant land), under the logic that all land has some risk or contributes in some way to the statewide emergency services burden.
• Support for volunteers
  • Some concessions/rebates for CFA and VICSES volunteers under the new system help reduce the burden for those contributing in service.

Negatives/Criticisms

• Significant cost increases for many property owners
  • The change to ESVF has meant much higher levies for many people — especially in rural areas and for primary producers. Some rates have reportedly more than doubled.
• Disproportionate impact on certain groups 
  • Farmers/primary production owners are seeing much larger increases, even though their incomes may be more variable. People on fixed incomes/low-income households are also feeling the strain on their budgets from higher levies. For volunteers, while there are concessions, some volunteer firefighters feel the levy changes still don’t adequately recognise their contribution.
• Complexity & administrative concerns
  • Councils are required to collect the levy, and there are worries they are not fully prepared for the changes. Additionally, there is some confusion about property classification, valuation, distinguishing between principal place of residence and non‑PPR.
• Perception of fairness
  • The levy is based on property value (CIV), which may not correlate with ability to pay (e.g. a property owner with a high-value property but modest income). Some argue it’s a regressive kind of tax in certain situations.
• Political backlash / public discontent
  • The increases and the changes have been controversial. There have been protests from farmers, volunteer firefighting brigades, and local councils. Some property owners feel it was insufficiently consulted.

Key trade‑offs and considerations

• There's a tension between ensuring emergency services are well funded (given increasing natural disaster risk) and keeping taxes/levies affordable, especially for vulnerable or less well‑resourced communities.
• The method of calculating the levy (fixed + variable rate on capital improved value) tries to balance fairness vs revenue‑raising, but it inevitably benefits some property types more than others. The details of classifications matter a lot.
• Concessions or rebates help but may not completely offset the burden for some.
• Whether the expanded scope (more services, volunteers, etc.) justifies the higher cost depends on how efficiently those additional services are run and whether property owners feel they get value.