Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Taxing beer to subsidise champagne

By Steven Schwartz - posted Tuesday, 20 September 2022

A nanosecond after US President Joe Biden announced the partial cancellation of American student loans, a collection of interest groups demanded the Australian government do the same.

The government should not comply. Cancelling Australian student loans is unfair, unnecessary, and unlikely to influence the courses that students choose to study.

Let's start with why it is unfair.


Contrary to the rhetoric of some interest groups, forgiving student debt does not make education "free." As long as academics wish to be paid for their work, education can never be free. The government currently collects around four billion dollars a year from student loan repayments. If graduates' debts are forgiven, the average Australian taxpayer (including low-paid workers who never had the opportunity to attend a university) will have to make up the shortfall.

Taxpayers already pay part of the interest on student loans, and they also absorb the loss if graduates never earn enough money to repay their loans. Modest taxpayer contributions are acceptable because we all benefit from an educated society. But income-contingent loans also create what economists call "moral hazard" (a willingness to take risks when someone else bears the consequences). Cancelling debts magnifies moral hazard adding to the costs taxpayers must absorb.

Universities are the marshalling yards for the gravy train of life. Graduates enter lucrative careers inaccessible without a degree. They also build influential networks at university that help them advance in business and society. Taxing the low-paid in order to cancel the loans of better-paid graduates is highly regressive; it is like taxing beer to subsidise champagne. Cancelling loans will also add to the money supply stoking the inflationary fire that disproportionally affects lower-paid workers. Finally, cancelling graduate debts makes fools of those who repaid their loans.

Now, let's turn to why cancelling Australian student debt is unnecessary.

Most American student loans work like mortgages. Graduates must make periodic payments until they repay their debt plus interest. If they lose their jobs or work only part-time, graduates are still liable to make payments. If they default, their credit ratings will be adversely affected, making it difficult for them to finance a car or buy a house.

Australian student loans are fundamentally different. Default is impossible because payments are matched to a graduate's income. Those who lose their jobs, take time off to have children or earn less than the repayment income threshold ($48,361) have no obligation to repay their loans. Cancelling the loans of graduates who are not required to pay is simply unnecessary.


Some naïve Australian politicians believe that offering "free" education will motivate students to choose specific courses of study. For example, facing a shortage of nurses, the Victorian government offered to pay the tuition loans of nursing graduates. The idea is to encourage more students to study nursing by retrospectively making their tuition free. Time will tell if the Victorian strategy works - but if history is a guide, it probably won't.

When the UK government allowed English universities to increase their fees, some institutions held back, hoping low prices would attract students. These institutions quickly discovered their tactic did not work.

Like Australians, English students do not have to pay fees while studying. Loan repayments are not due until years later when students are working. The delay between incurring the debt and paying it back mutes the influence of prices. The only truly price-sensitive students are international students who are not eligible for student loans and must pay their tuition fees upfront. Ironically, these students do not seek the cheapest university. They prefer more expensive courses as they view high prices as indicators of high quality.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

This version of the article was first published on Wiser Every Day.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Emeritus Professor Steven Schwartz AM is the former vice-chancellor of Macquarie University (Sydney), Murdoch University (Perth), and Brunel University (London).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Steven Schwartz

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Steven Schwartz
Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy