US tariffs 'second fiddle' to overseas student caps
President Donald Trump's tariffs have become arguably the biggest economic story of the year, with most Australian goods being hit with a 10 per cent levy while 50 per cent tariffs are imposed on steel and aluminium sent to the US.
But the direct impact of the measures on Australia is relatively small as most exports tend to go to China, Japan and Korea, according to University of Sydney economics lecturer Luke Hartigan.
The bigger issue may be one Australia has already inflicted on itself.
"It's important to look at the larger scheme of things," Dr Hartigan told AAP.
"The tariff exemption is important, but if we wanted to shoot ourselves in the foot, we would reduce the number of international students."
"What's happening with our tariffs with the US is second fiddle."
International student education was worth $51 billion for the Australian economy in 2023/24, but both political parties have vowed to slash numbers, with Labor already revealing a 270,000 cap from 2025 after more than 445,000 commenced study the year before.
Dr Hartigan said international students were important for soft power.
"They get to see Australian culture, they get to learn about Australia and they go back and speak favourably about Australia, so it's a very positive thing," he said.
But most Australian political commentary has taken on the tariff issue, especially as Mr Trump is set to lift his tariff pause on July 9.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government will continue negotiating for exemptions while keeping the national interest in mind, and dismissed Trump-style isolationist policies.
However, opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan has said the government has "waved the white flag" and called out Mr Albanese for failing to meet Mr Trump face-to-face.
"There are countries dealing and talking to the new US president, but not ours ... it is embarrassing," Mr Hogan said.
Australia could feel some indirect effects when the pause lifts, Dr Hartigan said.
Tariffs on China could cause issues for Australia and uncertainty around the levies could play out in the stock market.
Australia's limits on international students could be a bigger issue than US tariffs, an expert has warned.
President Donald Trump's tariffs have become arguably the biggest economic story of the year, with most Australian goods being hit with a 10 per cent levy while 50 per cent tariffs are imposed on steel and aluminium sent to the US.
But the direct impact of the measures on Australia is relatively small as most exports tend to go to China, Japan and Korea, according to University of Sydney economics lecturer Luke Hartigan.
The bigger issue may be one Australia has already inflicted on itself.
"It's important to look at the larger scheme of things," Dr Hartigan told AAP.
"The tariff exemption is important, but if we wanted to shoot ourselves in the foot, we would reduce the number of international students."
"What's happening with our tariffs with the US is second fiddle."
International student education was worth $51 billion for the Australian economy in 2023/24, but both political parties have vowed to slash numbers, with Labor already revealing a 270,000 cap from 2025 after more than 445,000 commenced study the year before.
Dr Hartigan said international students were important for soft power.
"They get to see Australian culture, they get to learn about Australia and they go back and speak favourably about Australia, so it's a very positive thing," he said.
But most Australian political commentary has taken on the tariff issue, especially as Mr Trump is set to lift his tariff pause on July 9.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government will continue negotiating for exemptions while keeping the national interest in mind, and dismissed Trump-style isolationist policies.
However, opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan has said the government has "waved the white flag" and called out Mr Albanese for failing to meet Mr Trump face-to-face.
"There are countries dealing and talking to the new US president, but not ours ... it is embarrassing," Mr Hogan said.
Australia could feel some indirect effects when the pause lifts, Dr Hartigan said.
Tariffs on China could cause issues for Australia and uncertainty around the levies could play out in the stock market.
Australia's limits on international students could be a bigger issue than US tariffs, an expert has warned.
President Donald Trump's tariffs have become arguably the biggest economic story of the year, with most Australian goods being hit with a 10 per cent levy while 50 per cent tariffs are imposed on steel and aluminium sent to the US.
But the direct impact of the measures on Australia is relatively small as most exports tend to go to China, Japan and Korea, according to University of Sydney economics lecturer Luke Hartigan.
The bigger issue may be one Australia has already inflicted on itself.
"It's important to look at the larger scheme of things," Dr Hartigan told AAP.
"The tariff exemption is important, but if we wanted to shoot ourselves in the foot, we would reduce the number of international students."
"What's happening with our tariffs with the US is second fiddle."
International student education was worth $51 billion for the Australian economy in 2023/24, but both political parties have vowed to slash numbers, with Labor already revealing a 270,000 cap from 2025 after more than 445,000 commenced study the year before.
Dr Hartigan said international students were important for soft power.
"They get to see Australian culture, they get to learn about Australia and they go back and speak favourably about Australia, so it's a very positive thing," he said.
But most Australian political commentary has taken on the tariff issue, especially as Mr Trump is set to lift his tariff pause on July 9.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government will continue negotiating for exemptions while keeping the national interest in mind, and dismissed Trump-style isolationist policies.
However, opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan has said the government has "waved the white flag" and called out Mr Albanese for failing to meet Mr Trump face-to-face.
"There are countries dealing and talking to the new US president, but not ours ... it is embarrassing," Mr Hogan said.
Australia could feel some indirect effects when the pause lifts, Dr Hartigan said.
Tariffs on China could cause issues for Australia and uncertainty around the levies could play out in the stock market.
Australia's limits on international students could be a bigger issue than US tariffs, an expert has warned.
President Donald Trump's tariffs have become arguably the biggest economic story of the year, with most Australian goods being hit with a 10 per cent levy while 50 per cent tariffs are imposed on steel and aluminium sent to the US.
But the direct impact of the measures on Australia is relatively small as most exports tend to go to China, Japan and Korea, according to University of Sydney economics lecturer Luke Hartigan.
The bigger issue may be one Australia has already inflicted on itself.
"It's important to look at the larger scheme of things," Dr Hartigan told AAP.
"The tariff exemption is important, but if we wanted to shoot ourselves in the foot, we would reduce the number of international students."
"What's happening with our tariffs with the US is second fiddle."
International student education was worth $51 billion for the Australian economy in 2023/24, but both political parties have vowed to slash numbers, with Labor already revealing a 270,000 cap from 2025 after more than 445,000 commenced study the year before.
Dr Hartigan said international students were important for soft power.
"They get to see Australian culture, they get to learn about Australia and they go back and speak favourably about Australia, so it's a very positive thing," he said.
But most Australian political commentary has taken on the tariff issue, especially as Mr Trump is set to lift his tariff pause on July 9.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government will continue negotiating for exemptions while keeping the national interest in mind, and dismissed Trump-style isolationist policies.
However, opposition trade spokesman Kevin Hogan has said the government has "waved the white flag" and called out Mr Albanese for failing to meet Mr Trump face-to-face.
"There are countries dealing and talking to the new US president, but not ours ... it is embarrassing," Mr Hogan said.
Australia could feel some indirect effects when the pause lifts, Dr Hartigan said.
Tariffs on China could cause issues for Australia and uncertainty around the levies could play out in the stock market.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
29 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
TikTok building new version ahead of US sale: report
TikTok is building a new version of its app for users in the United States ahead of a planned sale of the app to a group of investors, The Information reports citing unnamed sources. This comes as US President Donald Trump said on Friday he will start talking to Chinese authorities on Monday or Tuesday about a possible TikTok deal. He said the United States "pretty much" has a deal on the sale of the TikTok short-video app. TikTok has developed a plan to launch the new app to US app stores on September 5, the report said. Last month, Trump extended to September 17 a deadline for China-based ByteDance to divest the US assets of TikTok. TikTok did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. A deal had been in the works earlier this year to spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm, majority-owned and operated by US investors. That was put on hold after China's government indicated it would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump said the United States will probably have to get a deal approved by China. TikTok is building a new version of its app for users in the United States ahead of a planned sale of the app to a group of investors, The Information reports citing unnamed sources. This comes as US President Donald Trump said on Friday he will start talking to Chinese authorities on Monday or Tuesday about a possible TikTok deal. He said the United States "pretty much" has a deal on the sale of the TikTok short-video app. TikTok has developed a plan to launch the new app to US app stores on September 5, the report said. Last month, Trump extended to September 17 a deadline for China-based ByteDance to divest the US assets of TikTok. TikTok did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. A deal had been in the works earlier this year to spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm, majority-owned and operated by US investors. That was put on hold after China's government indicated it would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump said the United States will probably have to get a deal approved by China. TikTok is building a new version of its app for users in the United States ahead of a planned sale of the app to a group of investors, The Information reports citing unnamed sources. This comes as US President Donald Trump said on Friday he will start talking to Chinese authorities on Monday or Tuesday about a possible TikTok deal. He said the United States "pretty much" has a deal on the sale of the TikTok short-video app. TikTok has developed a plan to launch the new app to US app stores on September 5, the report said. Last month, Trump extended to September 17 a deadline for China-based ByteDance to divest the US assets of TikTok. TikTok did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. A deal had been in the works earlier this year to spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm, majority-owned and operated by US investors. That was put on hold after China's government indicated it would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump said the United States will probably have to get a deal approved by China. TikTok is building a new version of its app for users in the United States ahead of a planned sale of the app to a group of investors, The Information reports citing unnamed sources. This comes as US President Donald Trump said on Friday he will start talking to Chinese authorities on Monday or Tuesday about a possible TikTok deal. He said the United States "pretty much" has a deal on the sale of the TikTok short-video app. TikTok has developed a plan to launch the new app to US app stores on September 5, the report said. Last month, Trump extended to September 17 a deadline for China-based ByteDance to divest the US assets of TikTok. TikTok did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. A deal had been in the works earlier this year to spin off TikTok's US operations into a new US-based firm, majority-owned and operated by US investors. That was put on hold after China's government indicated it would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on Chinese goods. Trump said the United States will probably have to get a deal approved by China.
The Advertiser
29 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Israeli PM says he believes Trump can help seal truce
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he believes his discussions with US President Donald Trump will help advance talks on a Gaza Strip hostage release and ceasefire deal. Israeli negotiators taking part in ceasefire talks in Qatar have clear instructions to achieve an agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before boarding his flight to Washington DC. "I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results," he said, adding that he was determined to ensure the return of hostages held in the Gaza Strip. "There are 20 hostages that are alive, 30 dead. I am determined, we are determined, to bring them all back. And we will also be determined to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel," Netanyahu said. It will be Netanyahu's third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago. Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war, a move opposed by some hardline members of his religious-nationalist coalition. Others including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar have expressed support. The document outlines plans for a 60-day ceasefire during which Hamas would hand over 10 living and 18 dead hostages, Israeli forces would withdraw to a buffer zone along the Gaza Strip's borders with Israel and Egypt, and significant amounts of aid would be brought in. The document says the aid would be distributed by United Nations agencies and the Palestinian Red Crescent. It does not specify what would happen to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the US organisation that has distributed food aid since May. As in previous ceasefire agreements, Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli facilities would be released in exchange for the hostages but the number is not yet agreed upon. The proposal stops short of guaranteeing a permanent end to the war - a condition demanded by Hamas - but says negotiations for a permanent ceasefire would take place during the 60 days. During that time, "President (Donald) Trump guarantees Israel's adherence" to halting military operations, the document says, adding that Trump "will personally announce the ceasefire agreement". The personal guarantee by Trump appeared to be an attempt to reassure Hamas that Israel would not unilaterally resume fighting as it did in March during a previous ceasefire, when talks to extend it appeared to stall. Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a US-backed Gaza Strip ceasefire proposal in a "positive spirit," a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed "to the necessary conditions to finalise" a 60-day truce. Netanyahu's office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were "not acceptable to Israel". However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to "continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to". Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss. Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Iranian authorities never have a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace. On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of about 50 hostages still held in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023 when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing about 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians. with AP Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he believes his discussions with US President Donald Trump will help advance talks on a Gaza Strip hostage release and ceasefire deal. Israeli negotiators taking part in ceasefire talks in Qatar have clear instructions to achieve an agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before boarding his flight to Washington DC. "I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results," he said, adding that he was determined to ensure the return of hostages held in the Gaza Strip. "There are 20 hostages that are alive, 30 dead. I am determined, we are determined, to bring them all back. And we will also be determined to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel," Netanyahu said. It will be Netanyahu's third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago. Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war, a move opposed by some hardline members of his religious-nationalist coalition. Others including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar have expressed support. The document outlines plans for a 60-day ceasefire during which Hamas would hand over 10 living and 18 dead hostages, Israeli forces would withdraw to a buffer zone along the Gaza Strip's borders with Israel and Egypt, and significant amounts of aid would be brought in. The document says the aid would be distributed by United Nations agencies and the Palestinian Red Crescent. It does not specify what would happen to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the US organisation that has distributed food aid since May. As in previous ceasefire agreements, Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli facilities would be released in exchange for the hostages but the number is not yet agreed upon. The proposal stops short of guaranteeing a permanent end to the war - a condition demanded by Hamas - but says negotiations for a permanent ceasefire would take place during the 60 days. During that time, "President (Donald) Trump guarantees Israel's adherence" to halting military operations, the document says, adding that Trump "will personally announce the ceasefire agreement". The personal guarantee by Trump appeared to be an attempt to reassure Hamas that Israel would not unilaterally resume fighting as it did in March during a previous ceasefire, when talks to extend it appeared to stall. Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a US-backed Gaza Strip ceasefire proposal in a "positive spirit," a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed "to the necessary conditions to finalise" a 60-day truce. Netanyahu's office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were "not acceptable to Israel". However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to "continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to". Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss. Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Iranian authorities never have a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace. On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of about 50 hostages still held in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023 when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing about 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians. with AP Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he believes his discussions with US President Donald Trump will help advance talks on a Gaza Strip hostage release and ceasefire deal. Israeli negotiators taking part in ceasefire talks in Qatar have clear instructions to achieve an agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before boarding his flight to Washington DC. "I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results," he said, adding that he was determined to ensure the return of hostages held in the Gaza Strip. "There are 20 hostages that are alive, 30 dead. I am determined, we are determined, to bring them all back. And we will also be determined to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel," Netanyahu said. It will be Netanyahu's third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago. Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war, a move opposed by some hardline members of his religious-nationalist coalition. Others including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar have expressed support. The document outlines plans for a 60-day ceasefire during which Hamas would hand over 10 living and 18 dead hostages, Israeli forces would withdraw to a buffer zone along the Gaza Strip's borders with Israel and Egypt, and significant amounts of aid would be brought in. The document says the aid would be distributed by United Nations agencies and the Palestinian Red Crescent. It does not specify what would happen to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the US organisation that has distributed food aid since May. As in previous ceasefire agreements, Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli facilities would be released in exchange for the hostages but the number is not yet agreed upon. The proposal stops short of guaranteeing a permanent end to the war - a condition demanded by Hamas - but says negotiations for a permanent ceasefire would take place during the 60 days. During that time, "President (Donald) Trump guarantees Israel's adherence" to halting military operations, the document says, adding that Trump "will personally announce the ceasefire agreement". The personal guarantee by Trump appeared to be an attempt to reassure Hamas that Israel would not unilaterally resume fighting as it did in March during a previous ceasefire, when talks to extend it appeared to stall. Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a US-backed Gaza Strip ceasefire proposal in a "positive spirit," a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed "to the necessary conditions to finalise" a 60-day truce. Netanyahu's office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were "not acceptable to Israel". However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to "continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to". Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss. Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Iranian authorities never have a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace. On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of about 50 hostages still held in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023 when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing about 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians. with AP Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he believes his discussions with US President Donald Trump will help advance talks on a Gaza Strip hostage release and ceasefire deal. Israeli negotiators taking part in ceasefire talks in Qatar have clear instructions to achieve an agreement under conditions that Israel has accepted, Netanyahu said on Sunday before boarding his flight to Washington DC. "I believe the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results," he said, adding that he was determined to ensure the return of hostages held in the Gaza Strip. "There are 20 hostages that are alive, 30 dead. I am determined, we are determined, to bring them all back. And we will also be determined to ensure that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel," Netanyahu said. It will be Netanyahu's third visit to the White House since Trump returned to power nearly six months ago. Public pressure is mounting on Netanyahu to secure a permanent ceasefire and end the war, a move opposed by some hardline members of his religious-nationalist coalition. Others including Foreign Minister Gideon Saar have expressed support. The document outlines plans for a 60-day ceasefire during which Hamas would hand over 10 living and 18 dead hostages, Israeli forces would withdraw to a buffer zone along the Gaza Strip's borders with Israel and Egypt, and significant amounts of aid would be brought in. The document says the aid would be distributed by United Nations agencies and the Palestinian Red Crescent. It does not specify what would happen to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the US organisation that has distributed food aid since May. As in previous ceasefire agreements, Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli facilities would be released in exchange for the hostages but the number is not yet agreed upon. The proposal stops short of guaranteeing a permanent end to the war - a condition demanded by Hamas - but says negotiations for a permanent ceasefire would take place during the 60 days. During that time, "President (Donald) Trump guarantees Israel's adherence" to halting military operations, the document says, adding that Trump "will personally announce the ceasefire agreement". The personal guarantee by Trump appeared to be an attempt to reassure Hamas that Israel would not unilaterally resume fighting as it did in March during a previous ceasefire, when talks to extend it appeared to stall. Hamas said on Friday it had responded to a US-backed Gaza Strip ceasefire proposal in a "positive spirit," a few days after Trump said Israel had agreed "to the necessary conditions to finalise" a 60-day truce. Netanyahu's office said in a statement that changes sought by Hamas to the ceasefire proposal were "not acceptable to Israel". However, his office said the delegation would still fly to Qatar to "continue efforts to secure the return of our hostages based on the Qatari proposal that Israel agreed to". Netanyahu has repeatedly said Hamas must be disarmed, a demand the militant group has so far refused to discuss. Netanyahu said he believed he and Trump would also build on the outcome of the 12-day air war with Iran last month and seek to further ensure that Iranian authorities never have a nuclear weapon. He said recent Middle East developments had created an opportunity to widen the circle of peace. On Saturday evening, crowds gathered at a public square in Tel Aviv near the defence ministry headquarters to call for a ceasefire deal and the return of about 50 hostages still held in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrators waved Israeli flags, chanted and carried posters with photos of the hostages. The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered on October 7, 2023 when Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing about 1200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Gaza's health ministry says Israel's retaliatory military assault on the enclave has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians. with AP
The Advertiser
29 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
How one decision could see us shortchanged on billions
The federal budget is under pressure, the global economic outlook is volatile and cost-of-living pressures continue to hammer Australian families. And yet the communications regulator is proposing the federal government adopt a policy that could forgo up to $3.2 billion in revenue. The approach would also reduce competition among telecommunications providers and hamper the introduction of new technologies. It all revolves around how the federal government approaches telecommunications spectrum licenses. Some 69 existing spectrum licenses across seven bands are due to expire between 2028 and 2032, 48 of which are held by three mobile network operators. Spectrum is a valuable public resource. It must be managed carefully to ensure the proper functioning of commercial, government, military and emergency communications - everything from mobile phones, to radios, to televisions, to satellites, to submarines utilise spectrum to communicate. It is the job of the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to assign spectrum. However, their approach to this issue is baffling and potentially costly. ACMA plans to renew expiring mobile spectrum licenses without a competitive auction, a decision that risks forfeiting between $2 billion and $3.2 billion in public revenue over the coming years. The cost has been estimated in independent economic analysis by Professor Richard Holden, Scientia Professor of Economics at UNSW Business School and editor of the Journal of Law and Economics. Professor Holden says the failure to hold a competitive auction for spectrum is "based on flawed economic reasoning (and) may significantly undermine public trust, market competition, and the integrity of the regulatory process". In his independent analysis, commissioned by ACCAN, Professor Holden argues that by granting renewed access to existing telcos without testing the market through an auction, ACMA risks entrenching incumbent dominance, limiting opportunities for new entrants, and failing to ensure fair market value for a critical public resource. Remember, this is a public resource that ACMA must manage in the best interest of the Australian people. You don't need to be an expert to understand that if you have an asset that multiple parties want to purchase, it makes sense to have a competitive process for its sale. Many of us act on this logic when we put our homes up for auction or other competitive sales approaches. The failure of the regulator, ACMA, to understand this is bewildering. One can only conclude that ACMA is more concerned about the welfare of the industry rather than the impact this proposal will have on the Australian public. As Professor Holden points out, if this proposed approach proceeds, it will likely be presented as "a textbook case of regulatory capture". Of course, it is not the first time this question as been asked. In January this year, the ABC cast doubt on the independence of ACMA over its practice of sharing press releases in advance of public dissemination with companies about whom it had taken regulatory action after an in-depth investigation. The ABC has also criticised ACMA as a "watch poodle" in regard to its enforcement of decently standards in the Radio Code in a Media Watch segment in 2024. Not only did the chair of ACMA seem unable to provide a straight answer about content suitability in front of the Senate - but the quantum of the fines it doled out was appropriately criticised as a "slap on the wrist". And yet, this is a time when we need a strong regulator to protect the public interest more than ever. Trust in our major telcos is brittle. Our research shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were told to expect. The latest Morgan Poll placed the telcos just behind the major supermarkets in public trust. This crisis of trust is not helped by news this month that the ACCC has fined Optus $100m, subject to court approval, for unconscionable conduct. Unconscionable conduct is a high bar and one that Optus has spectacularly surpassed, allegedly preying on some of our most vulnerable communities and consumers, including Indigenous communities. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has previously identified poor sales conduct - including misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact every day for Australians. And it appears to me that the regulator is protecting Australian telecommunication consumers' interests. We believe a parliamentary inquiry into ACMA's recent decision-making should be initiated to assess the regulator's performance, ensure accountability, and restore public confidence in the regulation of communications in Australia. To safeguard public revenue and promote competition in the telecommunications sector, the government must consider whether ACMA's approach to conducting auctions for expiring spectrum licenses is suitable. Australia must have faith in its telecommunications and an effective regulator is critical to this. We must also have faith that a valuable public asset is delivering full value to taxpayers and will continue to deliver the best and most advanced technologies to consumers at affordable prices well into the future. The federal budget is under pressure, the global economic outlook is volatile and cost-of-living pressures continue to hammer Australian families. And yet the communications regulator is proposing the federal government adopt a policy that could forgo up to $3.2 billion in revenue. The approach would also reduce competition among telecommunications providers and hamper the introduction of new technologies. It all revolves around how the federal government approaches telecommunications spectrum licenses. Some 69 existing spectrum licenses across seven bands are due to expire between 2028 and 2032, 48 of which are held by three mobile network operators. Spectrum is a valuable public resource. It must be managed carefully to ensure the proper functioning of commercial, government, military and emergency communications - everything from mobile phones, to radios, to televisions, to satellites, to submarines utilise spectrum to communicate. It is the job of the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to assign spectrum. However, their approach to this issue is baffling and potentially costly. ACMA plans to renew expiring mobile spectrum licenses without a competitive auction, a decision that risks forfeiting between $2 billion and $3.2 billion in public revenue over the coming years. The cost has been estimated in independent economic analysis by Professor Richard Holden, Scientia Professor of Economics at UNSW Business School and editor of the Journal of Law and Economics. Professor Holden says the failure to hold a competitive auction for spectrum is "based on flawed economic reasoning (and) may significantly undermine public trust, market competition, and the integrity of the regulatory process". In his independent analysis, commissioned by ACCAN, Professor Holden argues that by granting renewed access to existing telcos without testing the market through an auction, ACMA risks entrenching incumbent dominance, limiting opportunities for new entrants, and failing to ensure fair market value for a critical public resource. Remember, this is a public resource that ACMA must manage in the best interest of the Australian people. You don't need to be an expert to understand that if you have an asset that multiple parties want to purchase, it makes sense to have a competitive process for its sale. Many of us act on this logic when we put our homes up for auction or other competitive sales approaches. The failure of the regulator, ACMA, to understand this is bewildering. One can only conclude that ACMA is more concerned about the welfare of the industry rather than the impact this proposal will have on the Australian public. As Professor Holden points out, if this proposed approach proceeds, it will likely be presented as "a textbook case of regulatory capture". Of course, it is not the first time this question as been asked. In January this year, the ABC cast doubt on the independence of ACMA over its practice of sharing press releases in advance of public dissemination with companies about whom it had taken regulatory action after an in-depth investigation. The ABC has also criticised ACMA as a "watch poodle" in regard to its enforcement of decently standards in the Radio Code in a Media Watch segment in 2024. Not only did the chair of ACMA seem unable to provide a straight answer about content suitability in front of the Senate - but the quantum of the fines it doled out was appropriately criticised as a "slap on the wrist". And yet, this is a time when we need a strong regulator to protect the public interest more than ever. Trust in our major telcos is brittle. Our research shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were told to expect. The latest Morgan Poll placed the telcos just behind the major supermarkets in public trust. This crisis of trust is not helped by news this month that the ACCC has fined Optus $100m, subject to court approval, for unconscionable conduct. Unconscionable conduct is a high bar and one that Optus has spectacularly surpassed, allegedly preying on some of our most vulnerable communities and consumers, including Indigenous communities. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has previously identified poor sales conduct - including misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact every day for Australians. And it appears to me that the regulator is protecting Australian telecommunication consumers' interests. We believe a parliamentary inquiry into ACMA's recent decision-making should be initiated to assess the regulator's performance, ensure accountability, and restore public confidence in the regulation of communications in Australia. To safeguard public revenue and promote competition in the telecommunications sector, the government must consider whether ACMA's approach to conducting auctions for expiring spectrum licenses is suitable. Australia must have faith in its telecommunications and an effective regulator is critical to this. We must also have faith that a valuable public asset is delivering full value to taxpayers and will continue to deliver the best and most advanced technologies to consumers at affordable prices well into the future. The federal budget is under pressure, the global economic outlook is volatile and cost-of-living pressures continue to hammer Australian families. And yet the communications regulator is proposing the federal government adopt a policy that could forgo up to $3.2 billion in revenue. The approach would also reduce competition among telecommunications providers and hamper the introduction of new technologies. It all revolves around how the federal government approaches telecommunications spectrum licenses. Some 69 existing spectrum licenses across seven bands are due to expire between 2028 and 2032, 48 of which are held by three mobile network operators. Spectrum is a valuable public resource. It must be managed carefully to ensure the proper functioning of commercial, government, military and emergency communications - everything from mobile phones, to radios, to televisions, to satellites, to submarines utilise spectrum to communicate. It is the job of the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to assign spectrum. However, their approach to this issue is baffling and potentially costly. ACMA plans to renew expiring mobile spectrum licenses without a competitive auction, a decision that risks forfeiting between $2 billion and $3.2 billion in public revenue over the coming years. The cost has been estimated in independent economic analysis by Professor Richard Holden, Scientia Professor of Economics at UNSW Business School and editor of the Journal of Law and Economics. Professor Holden says the failure to hold a competitive auction for spectrum is "based on flawed economic reasoning (and) may significantly undermine public trust, market competition, and the integrity of the regulatory process". In his independent analysis, commissioned by ACCAN, Professor Holden argues that by granting renewed access to existing telcos without testing the market through an auction, ACMA risks entrenching incumbent dominance, limiting opportunities for new entrants, and failing to ensure fair market value for a critical public resource. Remember, this is a public resource that ACMA must manage in the best interest of the Australian people. You don't need to be an expert to understand that if you have an asset that multiple parties want to purchase, it makes sense to have a competitive process for its sale. Many of us act on this logic when we put our homes up for auction or other competitive sales approaches. The failure of the regulator, ACMA, to understand this is bewildering. One can only conclude that ACMA is more concerned about the welfare of the industry rather than the impact this proposal will have on the Australian public. As Professor Holden points out, if this proposed approach proceeds, it will likely be presented as "a textbook case of regulatory capture". Of course, it is not the first time this question as been asked. In January this year, the ABC cast doubt on the independence of ACMA over its practice of sharing press releases in advance of public dissemination with companies about whom it had taken regulatory action after an in-depth investigation. The ABC has also criticised ACMA as a "watch poodle" in regard to its enforcement of decently standards in the Radio Code in a Media Watch segment in 2024. Not only did the chair of ACMA seem unable to provide a straight answer about content suitability in front of the Senate - but the quantum of the fines it doled out was appropriately criticised as a "slap on the wrist". And yet, this is a time when we need a strong regulator to protect the public interest more than ever. Trust in our major telcos is brittle. Our research shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were told to expect. The latest Morgan Poll placed the telcos just behind the major supermarkets in public trust. This crisis of trust is not helped by news this month that the ACCC has fined Optus $100m, subject to court approval, for unconscionable conduct. Unconscionable conduct is a high bar and one that Optus has spectacularly surpassed, allegedly preying on some of our most vulnerable communities and consumers, including Indigenous communities. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has previously identified poor sales conduct - including misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact every day for Australians. And it appears to me that the regulator is protecting Australian telecommunication consumers' interests. We believe a parliamentary inquiry into ACMA's recent decision-making should be initiated to assess the regulator's performance, ensure accountability, and restore public confidence in the regulation of communications in Australia. To safeguard public revenue and promote competition in the telecommunications sector, the government must consider whether ACMA's approach to conducting auctions for expiring spectrum licenses is suitable. Australia must have faith in its telecommunications and an effective regulator is critical to this. We must also have faith that a valuable public asset is delivering full value to taxpayers and will continue to deliver the best and most advanced technologies to consumers at affordable prices well into the future. The federal budget is under pressure, the global economic outlook is volatile and cost-of-living pressures continue to hammer Australian families. And yet the communications regulator is proposing the federal government adopt a policy that could forgo up to $3.2 billion in revenue. The approach would also reduce competition among telecommunications providers and hamper the introduction of new technologies. It all revolves around how the federal government approaches telecommunications spectrum licenses. Some 69 existing spectrum licenses across seven bands are due to expire between 2028 and 2032, 48 of which are held by three mobile network operators. Spectrum is a valuable public resource. It must be managed carefully to ensure the proper functioning of commercial, government, military and emergency communications - everything from mobile phones, to radios, to televisions, to satellites, to submarines utilise spectrum to communicate. It is the job of the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to assign spectrum. However, their approach to this issue is baffling and potentially costly. ACMA plans to renew expiring mobile spectrum licenses without a competitive auction, a decision that risks forfeiting between $2 billion and $3.2 billion in public revenue over the coming years. The cost has been estimated in independent economic analysis by Professor Richard Holden, Scientia Professor of Economics at UNSW Business School and editor of the Journal of Law and Economics. Professor Holden says the failure to hold a competitive auction for spectrum is "based on flawed economic reasoning (and) may significantly undermine public trust, market competition, and the integrity of the regulatory process". In his independent analysis, commissioned by ACCAN, Professor Holden argues that by granting renewed access to existing telcos without testing the market through an auction, ACMA risks entrenching incumbent dominance, limiting opportunities for new entrants, and failing to ensure fair market value for a critical public resource. Remember, this is a public resource that ACMA must manage in the best interest of the Australian people. You don't need to be an expert to understand that if you have an asset that multiple parties want to purchase, it makes sense to have a competitive process for its sale. Many of us act on this logic when we put our homes up for auction or other competitive sales approaches. The failure of the regulator, ACMA, to understand this is bewildering. One can only conclude that ACMA is more concerned about the welfare of the industry rather than the impact this proposal will have on the Australian public. As Professor Holden points out, if this proposed approach proceeds, it will likely be presented as "a textbook case of regulatory capture". Of course, it is not the first time this question as been asked. In January this year, the ABC cast doubt on the independence of ACMA over its practice of sharing press releases in advance of public dissemination with companies about whom it had taken regulatory action after an in-depth investigation. The ABC has also criticised ACMA as a "watch poodle" in regard to its enforcement of decently standards in the Radio Code in a Media Watch segment in 2024. Not only did the chair of ACMA seem unable to provide a straight answer about content suitability in front of the Senate - but the quantum of the fines it doled out was appropriately criticised as a "slap on the wrist". And yet, this is a time when we need a strong regulator to protect the public interest more than ever. Trust in our major telcos is brittle. Our research shows that 41 per cent of consumers have limited faith in their telco to act in their best interest -and almost a third said the coverage they received didn't match what they were told to expect. The latest Morgan Poll placed the telcos just behind the major supermarkets in public trust. This crisis of trust is not helped by news this month that the ACCC has fined Optus $100m, subject to court approval, for unconscionable conduct. Unconscionable conduct is a high bar and one that Optus has spectacularly surpassed, allegedly preying on some of our most vulnerable communities and consumers, including Indigenous communities. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman has previously identified poor sales conduct - including misleading and high-pressure tactics - as the most common systemic issue it investigates. These concerns are not academic, they have a real-world impact every day for Australians. And it appears to me that the regulator is protecting Australian telecommunication consumers' interests. We believe a parliamentary inquiry into ACMA's recent decision-making should be initiated to assess the regulator's performance, ensure accountability, and restore public confidence in the regulation of communications in Australia. To safeguard public revenue and promote competition in the telecommunications sector, the government must consider whether ACMA's approach to conducting auctions for expiring spectrum licenses is suitable. Australia must have faith in its telecommunications and an effective regulator is critical to this. We must also have faith that a valuable public asset is delivering full value to taxpayers and will continue to deliver the best and most advanced technologies to consumers at affordable prices well into the future.
