Australian State and Territory Governments regularly deploy wholly owned development corporations to advance urban planning objectives to do with competition in greenfield housing production, innovation in urban design and regeneration of obsolete industrial areas. This paper critically examines the rationale for these corporations, and compares practices in Australia with those in the US, drawing on examples from New York City. The paper finds that the suite of urban intervention tools in Australia can, and should, be broadened beyond large scale development corporations to include more nimble, customised and community based enterprises. These would follow American models but with greater transparency in the provision of grants and subsidies.