The amount Australians can donate to political parties and how much candidates can spend campaigning will be capped under controversial electoral reforms.
Political hopefuls will only be able to take $50,000 from a single donor while donors can hand out up to $1.6 million to different political parties and candidates nationwide, although this is limited to $250,000 in any state or territory.
A state branch has its own donation cap, meaning a person can donate $50,000 to each state or territory branch of a major party and their national branch, meaning parties can receive up to $450,000 from a single source.
Aggregated donations from a person over $5000 will need to be disclosed - down from the threshold of $16,900 for 2024/25 - and reporting will need to be done more frequently under the laws.
There will also be a cap on federal spending for non-political parties of $11 million, which covers unions and special interest groups such as Climate 200.
The amount a person could donate was increased from Labor's initial $20,000 while the disclosure threshold was brought up from $1000 after negotiations with the coalition.
The laws are set to clear the Senate on Wednesday as the deal between the major parties limits debate to 2.5 hours and forces a vote.
It creates the path for the legislation to clear the lower house on Thursday, although it won't come into effect before the federal election that has to be held by late May.
Crossbenchers and teal independents have supported some measures, including more transparency around disclosures and capping big spending during elections.
But they have been critical of the major parties being able to spend up to $90 million nationally, while they're subject to an electorate cap of $800,000.
Senate candidates can spend up to $200,000 for each federal electorate their state has.
While a Labor or Liberal politician is subject to this spending cap, the national war chest can be used to flood key electorates with more general party advertising, meaning it doesn't count in the candidate's cap.
This meant the major parties could move money from safe seats, where less would be spent, and target marginal seats with broad advertising while independents would be limited.
More cash will also be handed to candidates by the Australian Electoral Commission per vote received, significantly boosting the coffers of Labor and the coalition compared to independents.
Special Minister of State Don Farrell, who spearheaded negotiations, met with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton separately on Tuesday to get the deal over the line.
As such, crossbenchers have branded the reforms "a stitch-up", arguing it entrenches incumbency and disproportionately benefits the major parties.
They argue the $90 million national spending cap will disadvantage independents, who will be stuck with the $800,000 electorate cap or separate state or territory cap for Senate candidates.
That Australians had increasingly turned away from Labor and the coalition should have been a sign they needed to win voters' trust back, but they instead decided to stack the rules, independent MP Kate Chaney said.
ACT senator David Pocock called out Labor and the coalition for always putting their interests first.
This included part of the laws where a party with an independent's name in it, which Senate candidates do to get their name above the line where most people vote, will still be capped at the electorate or state threshold.
This means they can't access the larger $90 million pool.
"Giving more taxpayer funding to politicians with no truth in political advertising protections is particularly shameful," he said.
The real-time disclosures and reduction in the threshold were "much-needed sunlight on who is funding our elected representatives", Transparency International Australia CEO Clancy Moore told AAP.
"But the two-party deal being rammed through the senate as the clock ticks down for this parliament risks entrenching the major parties and harming minor parties and challengers."
