New laws requiring major streaming services to invest in local content have sparked debate about their impact on Australian film and television production. The regulations mandate that platforms with over one million subscribers must allocate a minimum of 10% of their local spending or 7.5% of their Australian revenue towards local programming. This shift was initially celebrated as a significant win for the local industry, with projections suggesting an influx of hundreds of millions in funding.
Netflix, which generated an estimated $1.3 billion in Australian revenue last year, is the largest player in the market, holding a market share of at least 25%, according to MediaWeek (2024). If all streaming services comply with the new regulations, the potential investment could amount to $390 million. Nonetheless, the effectiveness of these measures remains uncertain.
According to a recent report from the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), the top five streaming companies collectively spent $414 million on Australian content last financial year. This included a mix of commissioned, co-commissioned, or acquired programs. Paul Miller, Chair of the Streaming for Australia Coalition, stated that the ACMA’s findings “clearly show that Australia’s SVOD services are already investing at a higher rate than Australia’s broadcasters.” He suggested that the local content quota is addressing a non-existent problem.
Analysis of Local Content Spending
Following a thorough examination of the ACMA data, Australian documentary filmmaker Simon Nasht highlighted a crucial point: of the 4,500 programs labeled as “commissioned,” a staggering 4,459 were acquired, with 3,901 being sports content. This means only 1.5% of the local content produced by streamers consists of new and original programming. Nasht expressed skepticism about the industry’s commitment to telling meaningful Australian stories, emphasizing that while Australians love sports, it does not equate to a dedication to authentic local narratives.
The decline in investment for new Australian adult drama is concerning. The ACMA reported that spending dropped from $32.5 million in the 2023-24 financial year to just $19 million last year, representing only 6% of the total $309 million spent by the industry overall.
Streaming services often claim their expenditures are higher than reported figures suggest. However, they tend to overlook government subsidies, which can reach up to 40%. Until now, these reporting practices have been voluntary, allowing for significant discrepancies in reported spending.
Future of Local Content Legislation
The new content legislation, set to take effect in January 2026, aims to cover a range of programming, including adult and children’s drama, documentaries, arts, and educational content. Notably, sports programming and the acquisition of existing content are excluded from these requirements. This exclusion raises questions about how the streaming services will bridge the gap between their current spending and what the law mandates.
The enforcement of this legislation rests with the ACMA, which has been criticized for being underfunded and ineffective. The agency is already tasked with regulating social media age restrictions without additional resources. The threshold of one million subscribers for platforms could also complicate matters. For example, should the proposed merger between Netflix and Warner Bros—which owns HBO Max—occur, it would reduce the number of streaming platforms, potentially impacting revenue.
Additionally, streamers have the option to calculate their quota requirements based on 10% of their expenses, a practice that could invite creative accounting practices.
As the landscape of streaming in Australia continues to evolve, the true impact of these new regulations on local content remains to be seen. The challenge lies not only in ensuring compliance but also in fostering a genuine commitment to producing original Australian stories that resonate with local audiences.
