This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

HECS System Changes: Impact on Students

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Gillian Beer
Bruce Chapman

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of changes to Australia’s student financing system on various hypothetical students who choose the Government’s proposed deferred payment options, HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP. The present values of their HECS repayments under the existing (2004) system are compared with the present values of repayments under various alternative systems. These alternative systems relate to increasing the HECS charge by 25 per cent for HECS-HELP students and introducing a fee paid with a debt of $12,500 per year for FEE-HELP students. For HECS-HELP students it is found that the impact of an increase of 25 per cent in the charge is likely to be small. For example, we show that for ‘average’ males and females, an increase of 25 per cent in the HECS charge will result in a much smaller true financial cost than this. Further, graduates earning relatively low incomes are protected from the 25 per cent increase in the HECS charge by the higher repayment thresholds and they (especially female graduates) will pay substantially less HECS compared with the current system. High income graduates, however, will experience true price increases which are considerable and of the order of 20 per cent or more. For FEE-HELP students, not surprisingly, the present values of HECS repayments are substantial given debt accumulations of $12,500 per year for a four-year period of study.. However and importantly, it is found that many low-income graduates will not fully repay debts of this amount. As well, because debt totals are to be limited to $50,000 per student it is possible to model the effect of the need for some to pay a proportion of the charge up-front, and it is clear that in this case FEE-HELP adds very substantially to a student’s payment obligation and is also arguably very regressive. A commentary is offered on ways in which the proposed 2005 changes to financing might be improved.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/pdf/DP484.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 484.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 22 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:auu:dpaper:484

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Drew Treasure).

Related research
Keywords: HECS; higher education; financing;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Bruce Chapman & Chris Ryan, 2002. "Income-Contingent Financing of Student Charges for Higher Education: Assessing the Australian Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 449, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
  2. Chapman, Bruce, 1997. "Conceptual Issues and the Australian Experience with Income Contingent Charges for Higher Education," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(442), pages 738-51, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by providing information about publications in your institution.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-31.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.