Streamers fit the bill

Explanatory memoranda for bills introduced into the Australian parliament are usually rather dull. However, the EM for the scheme that would impose Australian content obligations on streaming services offers a startling insight into how Australia is underserved by international players. It reveals that in Spain, Netflix has committed AUD$1.7 billion to local content between 2025 and 2028, while in Korea it has committed AUD$3.812 billion between 2023 and 2027.  

As the EM observes, “That equates to more expenditure over four years in each of these jurisdictions by a single streaming service than the entire reported expenditure on the commissioning and acquisition of Australian content by streaming services in Australia since 2019.”  

Against low levels of investment in Australian content is the dramatic take-up of these services: ACMA has reported that in 2023-24, 69% of Australian used these streaming video on demand (SVOD) services. The former Coalition government started the policy conversation on how to bring the streamers into the regulatory framework, which already imposes broadcast obligations on commercial free-to-air TV and an expenditure obligation on pay TV. The current government has also been working on it for a while, and has now tabled the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025, which introduced a model to replace the voluntary reporting scheme that ACMA has been overseeing for the last six years. 

For a streaming service to be subject to the Australian content expenditure requirements, it will need to meet three separate tests. In summary, the primary purpose (or a significant purpose) of the service must be to provide programs to paying subscribers; it must have at least one million paying subscribers in Australia; and programs it supplies must include drama, children’s, documentary, arts or educational programs. This means the scheme should catch Netflix, Amazon Prime, Stan, Binge, Apple TV+, Disney+ and Paramount+ but not YouTube, other user-generated services or those of limited appeal, or the FTA broadcaster services like 9Now, 7Plus and 10Play.  

The baseline amount the streamers will need to pay is 10% of their total program expenditure in Australia. This includes a proportion of what they spend on global content that is also shown in Australia and on programs made for other markets and licensed for use here. As an alternative to this approach, they can choose to pay 7.5% of the revenue derived from Australia each year, including subscription fees and advertising. They get to claim as “qualifying expenditure” the amount spent on eligible Australian programs that are either commissioned by the streamer itself or – provided the program hasn’t been previously shown in Australia (apart from a theatrical release) – acquired by it. Failure to comply with the investment obligations can result in civil penalties, although the scheme itself has some inbuilt flexibilities, like three-year acquittal periods which allow either additional expenditure or an underspend to be carried over.  

While the production sector has welcomed the introduction of the bill, the FTAs are concerned about a possible increase in production costs and streamers themselves see regulation as unnecessary. But as the EM points out, the streaming services have very low levels of Australian content and regulation is already locked in across Europe and in other countries. And in an environment where audiences are moving from FTA and pay TV services to streamers, it’s inequitable to impose obligations on these local services but not on the international players earning subscription revenue from Australians. 

References 
Explanatory Memorandum: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7404  

ACMA report: https://www.acma.gov.au/publications/2024-12/report/communications-and-media-australia-trends-and-developments-viewing-and-listening-2023-24