State Capitalism in Australian International Education: A Call for Fairness and Humanistic Approach

By David Yoo | Co-founder and Principal Executive Officer, APC Education Group 10/8/26

Australia’s international education sector was built on the ideal that our nation is an open, welcoming, and fair society where globally minded individuals can transform their lives through hard work. As someone who migrated to Australia from Brazil over four decades ago, after my parents fled war-torn South Korea, this ideal is not an abstract concept to me. It is my lived experience. The privilege of being Australian was hard-won, and for over 30 years, contributing to nation-building through intercultural education at APC Education Group has been my life’s privilege.

Lately, however, that aspiration has turned into exasperation.

Under the banner of regulatory reform and the Simplified Student Visa Framework (SSVF), we are witnessing a systemic shift toward State Capitalism and one that I believe, threatens to dehumanise international students and dismantle the private education ecosystem that educates half of our nation’s international cohort.

The Myth of the “Level Playing Field”

During a recent Q&A at The PIE Live Asia-Pacific, Assistant Minister for International Education Julian Hill dismissed concerns over targeted visa denials as “conspiracy theories,” citing a headline overall visa grant rate of roughly 78%. [https://thepienews.com/julian-hill-on-public-good-vs-private-profit-visa-refusals-and-value/]

While a headline figure may sound reasonable, a closer analysis of the Department of Home Affairs data available at Data.gov.au reveals a starkly different reality once broken down by sector and client location (where the application was lodged). Contrary to the Assistant Minister’s comments, evidence suggests that private sector stakeholders are experiencing genuine adverse impacts, rather than merely exhibiting a “victim mentality”, as he has stated.

• While 0% grant rates may infer 100% rejection, it can also reflect lack of activity (determinations) or very low volumes and other factors.  However, it is hard not to presume that in the case of Indonesia onshore (in Australia) for May 2026, a 0% grant rate is a de facto 100% rejection rate given it has been consistently in the top 10 in terms of the number of international students in Australia over the past 6 years (currently number 6.) 
• In markets like the UK, offshore VET grant rates fell to 33% in June 2026, meaning two out of three applicants were turned away. 
• In key historical markets like China, offshore ELICOS grant rates fell to 45%, and VET to just 28%.

When Assistant Minister Hill noted that 97% of VET students study at private providers and that TAFE’s “market share” has been “completely and utterly decimated,” it laid bare a troubling ideological premise; that public market share must be protected at all costs, and that private, for-profit education is inherently suspect and morally inferior.

Public Good vs. Bureaucratic Overreach

If the goal of government policy is to maintain integrity in international education, all accredited providers, whether public or private, welcome rigorous and transparent standards. Every registered provider in Australia is bound by the exact same accreditation criteria and quality frameworks.

On 23 July 2026, the Australian Trade and Investment Commission, Austrade, together with the Department of Education and the Department of Home Affairs, conducted a joint webinar “Global Agent Update”: [ https://youtu.be/S62FN8yFJ80?si=vNemzVtEq47to-9m]

They reiterated that Evidence Levels (EL) are not publicly available, and that a common misconception was that they are not an indicator of provider quality but the scrutiny level for a nationality.  They should not be used to guide marketing and recruitment strategies such that a higher evidence level nationality is to be avoided.

Evidence Levels are calculated using visa grants over visa rejections. When government action restricts the visas granted (denominator) while increasing non-transparent rejections (numerator), private providers whose programs are generally shorter in length and draw students from a broader range of nationalities, are disproportionately penalised for decisions entirely outside their control.  It is then inevitable that most independent providers will be EL3 under the SSVF by the end of the year, if not sooner, simply as a result of wanting to give more people access to better educational opportunities. 

However, when non-transparent visa assessments that impact ELs and arbitrary visa allocations are used as a de facto rationing mechanism, the SSVF ceases to serve educational integrity. Instead, it becomes an instrument of market distortion to serve State Capitalism as stakeholders misconstrue it as a proxy for quality and integrity of the provider.

As a first generation migrant, the privilege of being an Australian was not a birthright.  It was hard won and I am grateful to be able to continue contributing to nation building.  But of late, I feel like private enterprise only exists to fund and sustain the public bureaucracy where they pass laws and use frameworks such as the SSVF not for the common good, but for institutional convenience.

The fundamental purpose of state-funded institutions is to step in where there is genuine market failure, not to crowd out private innovation or enjoy taxpayer-funded immunity while restricting independent enterprise. Doing good and making money to be self-sustainable are not at odds with the Australian values of diversity, inclusion and a “fair go”.  Being odd is not the same as being at odds with the current political environment. 

The Humanist Path Forward

We do not seek hand-outs or special favours. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in international education simply ask for a fair, transparent, and level playing field.

International students are not economic levers, nor are they political tools to manage housing or infrastructure pressure. They are aspirational individuals seeking knowledge, human connection, and growth. Excluding prospective students based on nationality, social circumstance, or non-transparent bureaucratic metrics dehumanises the very people who enrich our multicultural fabric.

To my fellow educators, dedicated SME owners and courageous entrepreneurs across Australia, please persevere and stay connected. The current uncertainty is difficult, but our work has a purpose far greater than balance sheets. We see you and appreciate your contributions in building self-sustaining citizens, fostering global understanding, and enriching our communities. 

It is time for the Government to act in a transparent way and rebuild trust and cohesion to preserve the fragile social license they’ve been given, and where integrity is judged by educational quality, not sector ownership.