Director identification numbers – time is ticking!

It's a bad time for the government to be asking us to provide them with our passport, Medicare details, drivers licence, address, TFN, date of birth......... Just so we can prove our identity to get an identity number (DIN).

Um, AlanB, the government already has all that info. As for whether it's "just an identity number" well, no. It's a particular ID number for a group of people who wish to take a role in the governance of companies or trusts. That's a much bigger responsibility than you seem willing to accept it is, based upon your cynical comments here and on other articles where this topic has come up.
I cannot disagree more strongly with all you've said on this matter.
Anyone who wants to be a Director should just do this.

How much does it cost?

It is free ... we both chose to do it over the phone as this avoided intermederies and so to our aging suspicious untrusting of new fangled technology minds it seemed more secure.. just make sure you use originals or photocopies of paperwork so no numbers are wrong... if the wait list is long they "at times" provided a call back service... good to note they also record the call ...mostly they are polite

Those who are quite justifiably suspicious and untrusting of an app that comes off Google Playstore (myGovID), or want to avoid waiting in a long phone queue can still lodge a paper application:

https://www.abrs.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-10/Application_for_a_director_identification_number.pdf

This is the first I've heard of it. Amazing how the ATO and ASIC can send out a reminder about lodging your BAS an ASIC annual return, but not send any letter out to company directors about this.
Ditto re. STP - I was bombarded with emails and letters.
Director ID ? Crickets ?
From my read of Section 1272A of the Corporations Act it says that a "director may apply" or if "may be requested be the Registrar".

So I until I get a format request, I won't.

Christian, you have no choice but to meet the requirements. It's the law. Or do you refuse to wear seatbelts, stop at red lights and drive under the speed limit ... until you receive a 'formal request's?

Christian, as I've said elsewhere, being a Director - even of something as humble as your own SMSF Trustee Company - is a significant corporate responsibility. Part of it is to stay informed. No one can or should blame the ATO or ASIC for them not knowing about this - you are supposed to have been tapping into sources of updated information about your obligations! If you aren't willing to do that then maybe you should cease being a Director.
That's a bit harsh, I know. The more positive way of looking at it is this. You read Firstlinks. That's a source of information and it has now informed you of what you have to do. How about a comment thanking Firstlinks for giving this issue coverage in time for you to apply and get your ID.

Personally, I use an admin service that includes education and updates. So I knew about this month's ago. But I do say thanks to Firstlinks for providing a great service too.

Christian: The ATO did not write directly to directors to inform them of the DIN, but relied on advertising and accountants to convey information to the 2m+ directors impacted by the change. Some people didn't get the information, some delayed their application, some are having difficulties applying online with error messages and/or with phone delays. Not all applicants want to use an app or mobile phone, some prefer paper applications. There is an ABC report on this. Unhelpfully, the link to the paper application has gone, maybe because the ATO found paper applications too inconvenient to process. You are right that Corporations Act s.1272A states that an eligible officer (a director) "may" apply to the Registrar for a director identification number. However, S.1272C(1) states that an eligible officer "must" have a director identification number - unless, under s.1272C(2), they have already applied for a DIN. So a director must apply for a DIN (by 30 Nov), but will not be penalised if they don't have a DIN by 30 Nov. Given inefficient communication of the new DIN requirement, but mainly because of the technical failures to provide a streamlined, accessible, efficient and workable application facility, it is likely there will be an announcement soon from the ATO that the deadline for applying will be extended. After that we can expect the ATO to use accountants to identify and chase up non-applying client directors, and directors still without a DIN, as well as those with a DIN. Although without the cooperation of directors it may be problematic to identify who has or hasn't applied and who has or hasn't got their DIN. What a mess. This process does not meet my concept of access, equity and efficiency. Maybe it'll become the ATO's version of RoboDebt. We'll see how they go explaining this debacle at Senate Estimates.

Christian, I'm with you buddy. So many emails. Government agencies wanting you to give them another bit of your time to do some piece of crap for them. The impositions just keep on coming. We're busy, and when we're done, we want to chill, not navigate yet another process dreamt up by a bored bureaucrat. PHEW ! Feel better now. Had my rant !! lol

Fistly, thanks to Firstlinks for making readers aware of this 'legal obligatory requirement' and providing a great service too.
ATO did send email advising requirements of Director Identification Number to all businesses registered directors.
Moreover, ignorance of law is not a pardonable excuse. As a director one has some obligations and this one is at no cost.

We used the online method. It was quick and easy. From memory, once we had entered name and DOB details, most of the information was populated by the system. We had one minor issue with a recent change of address, however, that was resolved in one phone call to our accountant.