Levy payers funded a $200,000 early exit ACC refuses to explain

ACC has spent almost $200,000 to bring forward the departure of a chief executive who was already leaving, and its board will not say why. For an organisation funded by compulsory levies and currently asking businesses to pay more, that silence is the real story.

Former chief executive Megan Main left at the end of July 2026, three to four months before her contract was due to end in November. An Official Information Act response obtained by the NZ Herald shows she received $160,630.50 gross in lieu of her three-month notice period, plus nearly $10,000 in legal fees and $13,840 for a five-and-a-half-day Institute of Directors governance course and travel, taken after she had gone. Board chair Jan Dawson said Main and the board “mutually agreed her end date would be brought forward”, and that the course had been previously approved. Asked why almost $200,000 was needed to shave a few months off, ACC spokeswoman Megan Heffield said only that ACC had “nothing additional to add”.

A denial that did not age well

The payment sits awkwardly beside what Main herself said. In a July 2026 interview she was asked directly whether there was an exit payment of any kind. Her answer was “No. No.” She said she had announced in December that she was finishing early. The Herald notes no such announcement of an early finish was made by Main or ACC. Main did not respond to further questions this week.

What was said publicly in December 2025 was that Main would not seek reappointment when her term ran out in late 2026. That is a different thing from leaving early with a six-figure cheque. Whatever the semantics of a “payment in lieu of notice”, levy payers were told one story and the OIA told another.

The money is not ACC’s to be casual with

This matters because ACC is not a private company spending shareholders’ funds. It is a monopoly insurer funded by compulsory levies on employers, earners and vehicle owners, plus Crown appropriations. And its books are in poor shape.

ACC’s 2025 annual report recorded a net deficit of $1.5 billion for 2024/25, built on a $5.8 billion underwriting loss propped up by investment returns, with claims liabilities of $63.6 billion against a $51.1 billion investment fund. Its 2025 Financial Condition Report put the gap between expected costs and levy income for 2025/26 at $2,556 million, and forecast underwriting deficits of $2.0 to $2.6 billion a year for the next four years. In early 2025, Treasury warned ACC’s deficits were averaging $3.3 billion a year over 2024-28, a material hit to the Crown’s balance sheet.

The response has landed on business. The earners’ levy is rising from $1.39 to $1.59 per $100 of liable earnings and the average motor vehicle levy from $113.94 to $141.69. Back in 2024, BusinessNZ called for ACC to manage its accounts transparently so levy payers could have confidence the scheme was being run properly. Two years on, that confidence is not being earned.

Second time in a year

This is not a one-off. In October 2025 ACC apologised after the Chief Ombudsman found it had acted unreasonably in handling OIA requests about a senior executive’s Wellington farewell, which cost around $17,287. ACC had tried to exclude much of that cost from its answer. The person who apologised then was Main.

The farewell episode involved money that was hidden. This one involves money that was disclosed only under compulsion and then left unexplained. The common thread is an organisation that treats executive spending as something the public finds out about, rather than something it is told.

A turnaround that needs credibility

The timing makes it worse. ACC is in the second phase of a turnaround after an independent review found serious issues with governance, case management and performance culture. That same analysis made the point bluntly, every dollar of scheme underperformance feeds into future levy rounds.

Dawson has spoken of ambitious targets to restore the scheme’s financial health, and new chief executive Sid Miller started on 21 September. There is a reasonable case that ACC has made operational progress. But a board demanding sustained cost discipline from staff, claimants and levy payers cannot exempt its own dealings with the top job from scrutiny.

$200,000 will not fix or break a $2.5 billion funding gap. That is not the point. The point is whether the people paying the levies can trust how decisions are made at the top. Miller’s first useful act would be to publish the rationale for the payment the board will not explain. Until someone does, every levy increase letter lands with a question attached.

Sources

• NZ Herald: ACC paid nearly $200,000 for former CEO Megan Main’s early departure, legal fees and training (2026-09-24)
• The Post: ACC boss not seeking reappointment, as scheme faces major hurdles (2025-12-10)
• ACC: Annual Report 2025 (2025-11-14)
• ACC: Financial Condition Report 2025 (2025-11-14)
• Treasury: Briefing to the Incoming Minister for ACC (2025-02-01)
• Insurance Business: ACC turnaround enters second phase under scrutiny from multiple directions (2026-07-30)
• BusinessNZ: ACC accounts under pressure (2024-10-09)
• NZ Herald: ACC apologises after whistleblower complaint leads to Ombudsman investigation (2025-10-13)