A month before the deadline for final bids, Treasurer Dominic Perrottet told potential buyers that Land and Property Information (LPI) fees must be cut by 10 per cent. This was because GST becomes payable under a privatised LPI and consumers would otherwise have had to pay an extra 10 per cent.

He had promised that fee rises would be capped at CPI.

But Opposition finance spokesman Clayton Barr said although LPI customers may have avoided a new $19 million annual GST bill, they would still lose out because, he claimed, LPI's value had consequently dropped. LPI makes $190 million in revenue each year.

"The Government says that it will raise about $2 billion from the sale of the LPI, but it should reduce that by 10 per cent," he said in a motion for debate that was voted down.

"The bids will be decreased by that amount because the buffoons opposite forgot the GST. The bids will be reduced by $200 million to $250 million, which is reckless in the extreme."

A spokesman for Mr Perrottet said the GST issue had been considered since the 2015-16 scoping study, which it refuses to release.

He said the government applied for a tax office ruling late last year. Following the tax office ruling, the government decided that the GST must be absorbed in the fees.

"We moved to ensure that NSW citizens would not face a price change under the new operating model - we make absolutely no apologies for that," said Mr Perrottet.

"While we will always ensure transactions like this one deliver a valuable return to taxpayers, we do not prioritise price over the best interests of the people of NSW."

The government will collect bids - speculated to be about $2 billion - on Thursday for the right to run Australia's largest and oldest land titles registry for the next 35 years.

The proceeds will go to the infrastructure fund Restart NSW. The money has been earmarked for the rebuilding of Parramatta Stadium and revamping of ANZ Stadium.

Groups such as Law Society of NSW, Real Estate Institute of NSW and Institution of Surveyors NSW warn that the integrity of a "world class" land titles system that underpins billions of dollars in economic activity and $1.2 trillion dollars' worth of real estate is at stake.

It is difficult to confirm NSW will receive Labor's figure of $200 million less for LPI, but multiple sources have confirmed its value - and therefore the size of the bids - has been reduced.

Fairfax Media contacted the Treasurer on February 28, asking whether LPI customers would foot a new $19 million annual GST bill. It has since learnt, through a bidder, that the bidding groups were informed that same day of the Treasurer's decision.

A source in the data room - a secure online space only accessible to potential buyers - said the "last-minute" decision caused unrest among the bidders and reminded them of the ASIC registry sale, which was abandoned by the federal government in December. He confirmed LPI's value was affected.

The source revealed the late decision on GST was a sign the auction was being rushed.

Labor will introduce a bill on Thursday to repeal the government's legislation allowing the LPI concession that passed in September.

"It is a simple, complete and absolute repeal of the government's legislation because we can't afford MPs to say 'Oh sorry, we didn't understand'," said Mr Barr. "We are trying to save them from themselves".

Mr Barr said the late decision meant the NSW people were going to pay for the "short-sighted, greedy sloppiness" of the government.

"They know they have given away hundreds of millions of dollars because of their incompetence," he said.

The government says privatising LPI will lead to "long-term benefit to consumers, to industry and to taxpayers generally". In her second reading of the bill, Gladys Berejiklian, then Treasurer, said the private operator would invest in new technology, resulting in significant improvements.

She continued: "Expected benefits could include: faster processing times, the introduction of new services for customers, providing a better business to business - B2B - experience for business customers and greater investment in technology and innovation."

Repeal urged

The Law Council of Australia and Law Society of NSW have urged the government to repeal the legislation, arguing LPI could degrade in the hands of a profit-focused operator, which risks the integrity of a "world class" land titles system that underpins billions of dollars in economic activity and $1.2 trillion dollars' worth of real estate.

The day before the bill passed, the Law Society sent a letter to Ms Berejiklian, saying it was alarmed by the lack of public consultation, public disclosure and access to documents. It said it couldn't thoroughly scrutinise the transaction because the finer details were locked in the Concession Deed, which was cabinet-in-confidence.

"The Bill appears to have been drafted from a minimalist perspective ??? [and] in our view it is unacceptable for Parliament to be asked to authorise the transaction when much of the key information will be contained in other documentation," the Law Society said. "Too much of the detail appears to have been left to the concession agreement, leaving open the unacceptable possibility that essential public protections may be lost in the commercial negotiation process."

Pauline Wright, the new president of the law society, said: "The national economy, and public confidence in the protection of every individual's property rights, depends on the absolute security in the administration of the land titling function."

Ms Wright was one of five speakers at a forum of concerned experts held in the Jubilee Room of State Parliament last month. Beside her was John Cunningham, president of Real Estate Institute of NSW, who said privatising an efficient, safe and profitable asset did not make economic sense.

"We can't understand this. From a consumer's perspective they want surety of title, they want to understand that what they've got is safe and the concept of it going out of government hands ... doesn't sit right with them," he said. "The concern is massive, but it has fallen on deaf ears."

The Concerned Titles Group (CTG), of which Mr Cunningham is a new member, has been raising awareness and demanding answers about the increased risks of higher property costs, errors or fraud, and threats to data security.

CTG's Margaret Hole, former president of the law society, said any weakening of the titles system will create the need for title insurance, which could cost as much as $4000 per transaction. "Our future, our children, our grandchildren will pay for that."

Currently, certificates of title are guaranteed by the government. The guarantee is backed by the Torrens Assurance Fund (TAF) - funded by a $4 levy on every dealing - that provides compensation for any loss suffered as a result of fraud or error in registration.

"With the increasing cost of living, homeowners shouldn't have to pay $4000 to insure their title deed that currently only costs around $4 per transaction," said Michael Green, president of Institution of Surveyors NSW.

A poll of 1000 NSW homeowners, commissioned by the institution, found 84 per cent wanted the government to scrap the sell-off. It found the biggest concerns were the risk of error and fraud with land titles information (36 per cent), followed by knowledge of personal information in the hands of private corporations (28 per cent), and a rise in housing prices (24 per cent).

"The sacrifice of long-term stable revenue, the loss of hundreds of skilled and dedicated staff, the risk of title fraud and the prospect of price increases make the case for privatisation hard to argue," said Mr Green.

On talkback radio in recent weeks, Ms Berejiklian has repeatedly dismissed these concerns, saying there will be no need for title insurance because the state will continue to guarantee every title and compensate for errors through TAF.

She also said under the concession arrangements, fees for regulated products will be capped at CPI, whereas right now, the government can "arbitrarily put up costs and charges". She also dismissed claims the taxpayer won't be getting value for money, saying: "The government has to spend a lot of money investing in new systems and technology, which the private sector is better capable of doing."

'Horrific notion'

The Berejiklian government - less than two months old in its current form - is determined to appear united, but internal divisions can't be denied with the leaking of the draft Concession Deed, marked "Sensitive: NSW Cabinet".

Labor leader Luke Foley brandished a copy during Question Time and revealed the private operator could send hundreds of LPI jobs out the state. He demanded a commitment that every job will stay in NSW. Ms Berejiklian referred back to the four-year jobs guarantee already embedded in the legislation.

No National or Liberal MP has broken the party line, but key Liberal Party members in regional areas are coming out to fight against the transaction. Fairfax Media has seen a paper written by Mitchel Hanlon, a surveyor and president of the Tamworth branch of the NSW Liberal Party, and Margaret O'Connor, a solicitor and treasurer of the Armidale branch, spelling out why the LPI lease should be scrapped.

In it, they called the concession a "horrific notion", akin to "excising the heart from a human body in the naive expectation that its new (private) owner will somehow figure out a way to take care of the rest of the body lying limp on the operating table".

They rebuked the Premier for describing LPI as the "admin" part of the land titles system, saying the term was "wrong and misleading" and the use of it would erode "public confidence in the Berejiklian government to competently manage NSW".

They said it was a government's obligation to maintain the record of who owns what land. A secure and accurate cadastre was the public's protection against "fraud, corruption and tyranny".

Mr Hanlon has written a separate paper, outlining an alternative "vision for LPI", which will raise the government the funds needed for the sports stadiums, while keeping the asset in public hands.

"A $1 billion bond issue over 10 years [to be used to fund the sports stadia package] could be paid off from LPI profits of $130 million per annum (and rising)," he writes. "The NSW government 10 year Bond rate is quoted today as 3.417 per cent, thus for each $1 billion the annual interest cost is $34.17m. Very manageable out of an income of about $130 million."

He says after seven or eight years, the process could be repeated, except the bond issue could be for a larger amount because of LPI's greater profits. His paper has been sent to all backbenchers, and will be officially delivered to the government by Mr Green.

Mr Perrottet said he is sticking to his plans because he believes privatising LPI will deliver a better service for the industry and users. The data will continue to be owned by the government and must be stored in Australia.

"It will deliver unprecedented price certainty for 35 years, tighter regulation and oversight of the titling and registration process, innovation and investment in new technology, and the ongoing guarantee of title by the government," he said.

He would not provide direct comment on possible tension in the Coalition or claims by anonymous sources.

'A quick sugar hit'

The business press says the bidding groups are Hastings Funds Management with First State Super, Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets with Link Group, Borealis Infrastructure's Teranet with Computershare and, on its own, private equity giant the Carlyle Group. The other private equity player, Affinity Equity Partners, dropped out in January.

Public company documents show that some have tax haven links. Link Group booked $1.5 billion in cash-flows, yet paid just $2 million in tax. And Computershare's 2016 annual report shows that it has a long list of subsidiaries in secrecy jurisdictions, from Bermuda and Ireland, to British Virgin Islands and Netherlands.

Observers have long commented on the Carlyle Group's track record of profiting from wars, particularly the Iraq War, as a significant investor in the arms sector.

There's a call for all bidding proposals to be open to scrutiny before a deal is complete and all bidders to be required to use an Australian corporation with no tax haven parentage.

The government will not confirm nor comment on the bidders, bidding process or bidding proposals.

The legislation passed the upper house with the vote of Fred Nile of the Christian Democratic Party. Labor, Greens and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party all voted against the privatisation.

"Mark my words: prices for services will inevitably rise and while the budget may get a quick sugar-hit, people will be worse off," said Shooters Party's Robert Brown.

"The community is right to be concerned about increasing risk of fraud, misuse of personal data and increasing costs of property purchases as a result of the privatisation," said Greens MP Justin Field.

NSW Business Chamber supports the lease, saying: "The community gets an improved land title service, confidence that land titles data is secure, as well as new funding for infrastructure investment."

Infrastructure Partnerships Australia said it supports the LPI lease because it will help fund the building of infrastructure needed for a growing population.

"South Australia and Victoria are contemplating the same thing with their registries, because they also need the money for infrastructure and because they know it's a low-risk transaction," said IPA's chief executive Brendan Lyon.

But Victoria's Planning Minister, Richard Wynne, told Fairfax Media: "Victoria has no plans to privatise its land titles registry".

Read letters about the LPI lease on December 5, December 10, February 3, March 14 and the Herald's editorial.

Do you know more? ehan@fairfaxmedia.com.au

• Savvy Consumer - Interact with us on Facebook
• Latest consumer affairs stories

What is Land and Property Information?

The LPI keeps the record of land ownership, and currently holds 3.9 million titles. Under the Torrens title land system, the state government guarantees every Certificate of Title.

Why is it being privatised?

The government says the private sector is in the best position to invest in technology, which will lead to benefits for consumers and businesses.

Which peak bodies are against it?

Opponents to the sale include the Law Council of Australia, Law Society of NSW, Public Service Association, Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, History Council of NSW, Professional Historians Association NSW, Australian Institute of Conveyancers NSW, Surveying and Spatial Sciences Institute NSW, Real Estate Institute of NSW, Property Owners Association of Australia, Australian Valuers Institute, Association of Consulting Surveyors NSW, Institution of Surveyors NSW Inc, Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors, NSW Country Surveyors Association and Real Estate Association of NSW.

Why do they oppose it?

They say a for-profit operator will cut costs and degrade the service, risking the integrity of the land titles system, which underpins billions in economic activity and trillions in real estate. They say property costs will rise.