- Australia has banned agent commissions for onshore international student transfers starting January 2026.
- The policy targets poaching and course hopping by removing financial incentives for switching providers.
- A cutoff date of March 31, 2026 applies for new student enrolment acceptance rules.
(AUSTRALIA) — The Australian Government enacted a ban on education agent commissions for onshore international student transfers on Thursday, January 29, 2026, targeting incentives officials say drive “poaching” and “course hopping” in the international education sector.
The policy bars education providers from paying or offering commissions, bonuses, or other benefits to agents for recruiting international students who have already commenced a course with another Australian provider.
Julian Hill MP, Assistant Minister for International Education, linked the change to student protection and system integrity in remarks dated January 21, 2026. “Banning education agents from gaining unnecessary commissions will strengthen integrity in Australia’s international education system, and put the interests of students first. It will curb the practice of agents persuading newly arrived students to abandon their course and unnecessarily transfer to another provider,” Hill said.
The ban applies to students accepted for enrolment after March 31, 2026, creating a cutoff that providers, agents and students will need to track when considering transfer pathways.
Australia implemented the measure as a domestic education and visa integrity policy, led by the Australian Department of Education and the Department of Home Affairs. The change does not involve U.S. agencies, and the policy sits within Australia’s framework for regulating providers and agents operating in its international education sector.
Jason Clare, Minister for Education, framed the move as a crackdown on abuse in remarks dated January 20, 2026. “The party is over. The rorts and loopholes that have plagued this system will be shut down. This change removes the incentive for unscrupulous education agents to facilitate unnecessary or non-genuine transfers,” Clare said.
The government introduced the ban through the National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students Amendment (Education Agent Commissions) Instrument 2026, an instrument amending the National Code of Practice.
What the instrument does
The instrument restricts provider-to-agent payments tied to onshore transfers, rather than banning agents from working with international students altogether. Providers can still engage agents, but the instrument restricts financial arrangements that reward agents for moving students who have already started at another Australian provider.
The policy language covers “commissions, bonuses, or other benefits,” capturing a range of incentive structures that providers might use in recruitment. That framing aims to reach more than a single type of payment and to reduce agent commissions linked to transfer outcomes.
The government’s integrity rationale centres on the moment a student has “already commenced” with another provider, making the transfer recruitment itself the focus of the restriction. By drawing the line at students who have begun study elsewhere, the measure seeks to remove incentives to pursue transfer churn rather than genuine academic progression.
Why the government acted
Officials have described the targeted conduct as “poaching,” where agents persuade students to abandon one provider for another soon after arrival. The government also connected the ban to “course hopping,” a practice it says undermines the integrity of Australia’s international education system.
The reform aims at “unscrupulous agents” who, the government says, were financially incentivized to “poach” students from universities and move them into lower-quality, lower-cost Vocational Education and Training (VET) providers shortly after arrival. The government has not described the practice as universal across the sector, but it has singled out these incentive-driven transfers as an integrity risk.
Exceptions and edge cases
While the ban tightens provider payment rules for onshore transfers, the instrument sets out exceptions that will likely shape how providers and agents handle borderline cases around timing and course progression.
- Transitional grandfathering. Commissions are allowed if the student was accepted for enrolment on or before March 31, 2026, effectively protecting earlier acceptances.
- Link to original course and COE. Permitted commissions can be tied to the original course(s) for which the student’s visa was granted, as specified in the Confirmation of Enrolment (COE).
- Completion-based exception. Commissions are allowed where the student has completed their principal course of study before starting the new course.
These exceptions create edge cases that providers and agents will need to document carefully, particularly when students hold multiple offers, defer, or navigate acceptances that straddle the March 31, 2026 cutoff. The instrument focuses on acceptance timing, Confirmation of Enrolment links, and principal course completion, rather than a general prohibition on all agent involvement.
Operational and reporting changes
Implementation will also bring operational changes for providers, including new reporting expectations designed to make agent commission arrangements more visible to regulators.
Institutions must report all agent commissions to the Department of Education via the PRISMS system starting in mid-2026. The government has framed reporting as a transparency measure that strengthens the audit trail around recruitment incentives and supports detection of arrangements that encourage course hopping.
Students and agents may notice shifts in how providers handle transfer discussions and related paperwork, as providers seek clearer documentation to show compliance with the new restrictions. The policy focus remains on provider conduct and reporting, rather than on introducing a new visa application requirement for students.
Practical effects for stakeholders
In day-to-day terms, the change alters who can pay whom, and for what, when a student moves between Australian providers after already starting a course.
Before the ban, commission incentives could exist around onshore transfer recruitment, creating circumstances where agents had a financial reason to steer students toward switching providers. The government has linked those incentives to aggressive poaching and rapid course hopping shortly after arrival.
After the ban, providers face restrictions on paying commissions, bonuses, or other benefits for recruiting students who already commenced with another provider, when those students are accepted for enrolment after March 31, 2026. The intent is to remove a financial driver that officials say encouraged non-academic transfers.
That shift could change how agent services are paid for in some transfer situations. Students can still choose to transfer, but they may now have to pay for agent services directly if they wish to use an agent, as the receiving institution can no longer pay the agent a commission.
The government framed that consequence as part of the integrity goal, seeking to ensure transfers are made for academic reasons rather than agent profit. The policy does not ban transfers, and it does not describe legitimate academic reasons for moving providers as improper.
Agents whose business models relied on “flipping” students from universities to VET providers will see a significant loss in revenue, the government said. Providers, meanwhile, will need to review contracts and commission structures to ensure they do not offer commissions, bonuses, or other benefits for the targeted onshore transfer recruitment.
Broader regulatory context
The policy also sits alongside other integrity reforms the government has pursued, including legislation aimed at closing loopholes around how agent activity and payments are defined.
Australia’s move follows the Education Legislation Amendment (Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2025, which expanded the legal definitions of “education agents” and “commissions” to close loopholes. The government has presented the commission ban as part of a broader push to strengthen compliance in international education.
Officials have also positioned the ban within a wider integrity context tied to student visa compliance, with the Department of Home Affairs involved in spearheading the policy.
Some international students and education businesses operate across borders, and the policy arrives as governments review international student settings. In the United States, a different regulatory framework applies, and Australia’s ban does not rely on U.S. enforcement mechanisms.
The U.S. Higher Education Act of 1965 continues to allow incentive-based compensation for the recruitment of international students, while prohibiting it for domestic students. The U.S. briefly considered similar bans under the THRIVE Act, and the REMOTE Act of 2022 restored the legality of these commissions for U.S. institutions.
Even so, the Australian government has presented this as a domestic integrity measure focused on onshore transfers and the provider-agent financial link that can fuel poaching and course hopping. The policy’s core mechanism is to remove provider-funded incentives tied to switching providers after study has begun.
Compliance tasks for providers
For providers, the practical compliance task is twofold: ensure contracts and marketing do not create prohibited incentive structures, and meet reporting expectations through PRISMS starting in mid-2026.
The policy places those obligations on institutions, reflecting the government’s focus on regulating provider behaviour and building an enforceable record of payments.
Readers checking the official text will need to focus on commencement and application provisions, definitions that set the scope of “commissions” and covered benefits, any transitional arrangements tied to March 31, 2026, and how PRISMS reporting obligations operate from mid-2026. Those details will shape how providers handle agent relationships when an onshore international student seeks to change courses and institutions.
Closing remarks
Clare cast the policy as a turning point in the government’s integrity agenda. “The party is over. The rorts and loopholes that have plagued this system will be shut down. This change removes the incentive for unscrupulous education agents to facilitate unnecessary or non-genuine transfers,” he said.
