Â鶹ÒùÔº

As the end of the 2024–25 financial year nears, the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC), in partnership with the (ASF), has launched a new joint fundraising initiative allowing Australians to make tax-deductible donations and .

The ASF is and is the only organization in Australia that allows a donor to claim a tax deduction for philanthropic donations to sport.

This is because sport is for either DGR or charitable status under Australian law.

But is this new joint fundraising initiative a gold medal idea for our athletes, or one that falls short of a podium finish?

Aussies tax payers and Olympic dreams

The new initiative, named the "Aspiring Australian Olympian Funding program," means individual donations of A$2 or more made through the ASF .

Australians can direct funds to a specific athlete, coach or official selected to participate in representative, elite or high performance sport in the Olympic/Paralympic program (summer and winter).

Depending on the donor's marginal tax rate, the effective cost of a donation for the (over $250,000).

For instance, a $1,000 donation could yield a tax refund of up to $470, bringing the net cost down to just $530.

Companies paying the full company tax rate that donate $1,000 would .

Ahead of the 2026 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, more than 30 Australian athletes (from disciplines such as alpine skiing, bobsleigh and figure skating) have .

However, , so more financial support is needed.

The brutal reality for many athletes

The ASF's 2023 " found many of Australia's elite athletes were under significant financial pressure: 46% of those over the age of 18 were earning less than $23,000 per year. This places them below at $489 a week.

The report also found 67% of elite athletes said their financial struggles affected their parents and support networks. Also, 42% of elite athletes aged 18–34 reported they were suffering poor mental health as a result of their financial predicament.

The report also found the costs of training, equipment, travel and accommodation continued to rise, resulting in many questioning the sustainability of elite sport funding models both and .

Pros and cons

The new funding program's use of tax incentives as a funding carrot is good in principle, but there are potential unintended consequences.

This includes athletes being pitted against one another: there is a danger the athletes best skilled in marketing and public relations will receive more funding.

The current economic climate doesn't bode well for the program. Many Australians are facing , which means a lot of people may not be able to donate even if they want to.

Also, what happens if an athlete who benefits from the program is injured or found to be a drug cheat, and can't compete? Can a donor request a refund?

Finally, taxpayers who have the most capacity to donate are likely high-income earners, some of whom may donate to sport entities already. Now, their donations will be subsidized by the tax system.

Some alternative ideas

In the United Kingdom, National Lottery revenue plays a significant role in funding Olympic and Paralympic sports. Administered by (the UK's equivalent of the ASC) funds from the lottery are directed to high-performance sports programs and athletes.

This approach .

Another idea is to redirect a portion of government taxes collected from sports betting, which could be lucrative given Australia's .

The federal government could offer a further incentive by matching peoples' donations dollar for dollar.

As we direct funds to athletes, we also need to think about the potential tax impact for them. Will the funds they receive be considered income and be taxed? The government could consider making the payment to the athlete .

If we are going to succeed on the world stage, especially as the 2032 Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games approach, we need to financially support our athletes so they can focus on representing their country.