New Zealand directors at risk of harm can soon apply to use an alternative address
From 18 November 2026, New Zealand directors at risk of harm can apply to keep their home address off the Companies Register.

From 18 November 2026, New Zealand’s rules on the publication of directors’ residential addresses are changing.
Once the Companies (Address Information) Amendment Act 2025 (the Act) is in force, directors may apply to have an alternative address shown on the New Zealand Companies Register if they consider that public availability of their residential address is likely to result in physical or mental harm to them or someone they live with.
Under the current Companies Act 1993 regime, a director must provide their residential address to the Registrar when the director is registered. That address is generally publicly available on the Companies Register.
The public nature of directors’ addresses has long raised privacy and safety concerns from directors, who could remove their residential address from the Companies Register only in very limited circumstances. The Act aims to address those concerns, at least in part.
What is changing?
The Act allows a director (whether an existing or a prospective director) to apply to the Registrar in the prescribed form for the director’s residential address to be withheld from the public register and replaced with an alternative address. If the application complies with the statutory requirements, the Registrar must take reasonable steps to prevent public access to the residential address and ensure that the alternative address is publicly available. This includes taking reasonable steps to redact the residential address from publicly available documents where necessary.
The Act does not provide a general suppression mechanism for shareholders. However, where the director is also a shareholder, the alternative address will also apply to that person in their capacity as shareholder. The same mechanism applies where the director of a company resides with a shareholder of that company, provided that the shareholder consents to being covered by the application. In those circumstances, the Registrar must take reasonable steps to prevent public access to the shareholder’s residential address and show the director’s alternative address for the shareholder on the Companies Register. The company may also replace the shareholder’s residential address with the alternative address in the share register available for inspection.
What are the requirements?
The Companies Act 1993 (Address Information) Amendment Regulations 2026 (the Regulations), which also commence on 18 November 2026, set out the information requirements for the application. The director must specify their name (including any other names by which that director is known on the Companies Register), phone number, email address, residential address, proposed alternative address and any companies of which the director is or will be a director.
Where the application also covers the director in their capacity as a shareholder, or a shareholder who lives with the director, the relevant shareholder details must also be provided.
An application by a director must also include a statutory declaration made by the director verifying that public availability of the director’s residential address is likely to result in physical or mental harm to the director or someone living with the director. Notably, the Regulations do not require supporting evidence of the risk of harm beyond the director’s statutory declaration.
The application must also be accompanied by any prescribed fee.
An alternative address must not be the company’s registered office or address for service, a postal centre or a document exchange (such as a PO box). The Act permits the address to be the offices of an accounting firm, barristers and solicitors, or another person, provided the address identifies that arrangement and gives sufficient details to locate the relevant office or premises. Similar location details are required where the address is in a building containing multiple premises. A person may have only one alternative address at any time. Directors should choose the alternative address carefully as it can also be used for service of legal proceedings and other documents.
The application process is not limited to residential addresses provided after commencement of the Act. It can also apply to residential address information already held by the Registrar, although applications cannot be made until the new regime is in force.
What is not changing?
Directors must still provide their residential addresses to the Registrar. The new regime restricts public access; it does not erase those addresses from the Registrar’s records.
Companies must also continue to hold the required residential address information in their internal records. However, where the new regime applies, they may use the alternative address in place of the residential address in company records available for public inspection, including the relevant share register.
What happens next?
The Regulations now specify the information required for an application. The Companies Office has said it will publish detailed application guidance when the new regime takes effect on 18 November 2026. Practical details, including processing times and how historical documents will be identified and redacted, remain to be clarified.
Directors concerned that publication of their residential address could put them or someone they live with at risk should consider whether the new regime may assist them. Ahead of commencement on 18 November 2026, they should review the director and shareholder information held on the Companies Register and identify a suitable alternative address. Contact our team for advice or for help preparing an application.
Services in this insight
New Zealand directors at risk of harm can soon apply to use an alternative address
When software stalls the starting grid – Why testing matters
Open banking standards to be managed by MBIE
Not fooling around – "The Meme Bill" approaches second reading, but how will it actually work here?
"Now is the time to act" – Reserve Bank seeks feedback on modernising New Zealand’s retail payment system
Global AI shut down – What the United States export controls on AI mean for New Zealand businesses
Fair Trading Act reform – More agile product safety standards
Fair Trading Act reform – New "safe harbour" for suspected scam activity
Fair Trading Act reform – Changes will increase governance risk for business
New Zealand’s online gambling laws get a shake up
Consultation opens on New Zealand's payment services regulation
Modern slavery regulation on the way – Is your business ready?
From Hertzian waves to hyperlinks – What the BSA’s online decision means for your business
Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground
Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand
The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships
New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
IPP3A is nearly in force – What agencies need to know
OPC shifts public enquiries online – What agencies should do now
AI as a confidante? Legal privilege and the ever-increasing use of AI
New Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code – What you need to know
Building blocks of trade mark law: New Zealand approach to "use as a trade mark" now compatible with Australia
Consumer law update 2025
Open banking launches in New Zealand
Is fair something to fear? The Government announces beefed-up Fair Trading Act
Is it fair? Lessons from Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta
Open banking almost live
Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act
Product labelling changes flagged for New Zealand
Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 introduced to New Zealand
Open banking regulations released for consultation
Ten tips for buy-side M&A success
A recipe for disaster – Is caramel a copyright work?
Becoming a Globally Renowned Fintech Nation (and how regulation can light the path)
Important changes made to the Privacy Act
New Zealand may ban social media for young users
Customer and Product Data Act update – Open banking officially on the way
Tips from the trenches – Your AI policy cheat sheet
Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media
Security guidance released for emerging tech companies
Customer and Product Data Bill – Select Committee reports back
Consumer law update 2024
New Zealand’s Artist Resale Royalty is ready to go
The shape of coffee – “Moccona” vs “Vittoria”
New Zealand’s Copyright Act gets a sense of humour
WIPO’s traditional knowledge treaty is adopted
Doing business in the Middle East
AI and advertising – What producers need to know
Seven contract clauses every freelancer needs
Baby Reindeer – When truth is stranger than fiction?
Our comments on the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
Therapeutic Products Act to be repealed this year
Is End-to-End to end?
Geographical indications – Changes uncorked by the EU-NZ Fair Trade Agreement
Lawyers and Generative AI – New NZ Law Society guidance released
Facing the future – A biometrics code of practice for New Zealand?
Deepfakes and style mimicking – Should New Zealand adopt a right of publicity?
Five Eyes release the Five Principles to Secure Innovation
The copyright conundrum with generative AI
Innovate at the speed of trust – Privacy Commissioner releases new guidance on artificial intelligence tools
Political advertising on social media: sludge or copyright quagmire?
Privacy Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament
New Data Privacy Framework: Meta gets a lifeline
The long and winding road to royalties
Implications of the Supreme Court’s “new debt” approach in Mainzeal
EU gets closer to AI laws
UK Supreme Court puts Quincecare ‘duty’ back in its box
A Deep Dive into The Customer and Product Data Bill
Searching for a shield: Meta’s €1.2 billion fine and international transfers in the age of Big Data
New NZ-UK Free Trade Agreement signals tech, media and IP law changes
Ditch the fax! Tips for building a tech-savvy law firm
The Incorporated Societies Act 2022 – what you need to know for your society
Common myths about copyright online
Artificial artist, or artificial plagiarist?
Big boost to gaming
Is your product “AI powered”?
The latest on New Zealand’s Consumer Data Right
Space Law in New Zealand
You Cannot Defame the Dead or Can You? Tikanga Māori and NZ Defamation Law
Open Banking is coming – through the Consumer Data Right
Massive SEC Fines for Companies Using Text and Instant Messaging
One Act to Rule Them All
A Legal Guide to Kicking SaaS
Potential changes to the Privacy Act 2020
NZ's Social Media "Code of Practice" Launched
Are you being unfair?
Are you legal?
Power Up 2022
A new Companies Office levy is one step closer
Has Paramount Pictures gone maverick?
From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners
I'm back, baby
Retail Payment System Act 2022 now in force
Paying the price for getting privacy wrong
Can AI be an inventor?
Finfluencer Crackdown
TIN Fintech Insights Report Launch
Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'
Disclosure of personal information - how to, not don't do
The Spice May Flow, But The Copyright Doesn’t
Other articles you
might like
Part 3 in our series on proposed reforms to New Zealand's Fair Trading Act.
Part 2 in our series on proposed reforms to New Zealand's Fair Trading Act.
Part 1 in our series on proposed reforms to New Zealand's Fair Trading Act.
.webp)

.webp)

.webp)
%20(1).jpg)
.webp)




.jpg)