Will Australians gain once we count the costs and overseas income?

I regard this as a very important question for Australia’s future. I have very little certainty about how it should be resolved.

AI could make Australian businesses more productive and improve the services people receive. Whether Australians gain overall depends on who receives the income, who bears the costs and how those outcomes develop over time.

Production and income

GDP measures production within Australia. National income also accounts for income paid overseas and received from abroad; net national income allows for depreciation. More production here does not necessarily mean the same increase in income retained by Australians. ABS definitions.

Foreign-owned businesses can still bring wages, tax revenue, useful services and cheaper inputs. Imported services, local production and overseas profits need to be counted separately, without subtracting costs twice.

The Productivity Commission’s modelling illustrates potential productivity and output gains under stated assumptions. It does not settle the balance after transition costs, environmental effects and the distribution of returns.

What Big Tech has already changed

Australia has already experienced useful digital services growing alongside concentrated ownership and shifting revenue.

In its 2019 inquiry, the ACCC estimated that Google received $47 and Facebook $24 of every $100 spent on Australian online advertising, excluding classifieds. Those were advertising receipts, not a measure of profits transferred overseas. 2019 inquiry.

The ACCC also found that platforms’ success in attracting advertising had contributed to a reduced capacity for Australian media businesses to invest in journalism, particularly locally. At the same time, digital tools lowered publishing costs and helped new publishers enter. ACCC’s account of the transition.

Cloud computing offers another example. The ACCC’s 2025 report describes how it helps smaller businesses access technology without large upfront infrastructure costs, while identifying barriers to switching and risks from concentrated providers. 2025 inquiry.

Investment also happens here. AWS opened its Sydney cloud region in 2012 and announced A$20 billion of Australian infrastructure spending for 2025–2029. That is a spending commitment, rather than an estimate of Australia’s net gain. Amazon’s announcement.

These experiences show why useful technology, local investment and the distribution of income need to be examined together.

What happens if we leave this unresolved?

My concern is that AI could expand Australian production while the returns concentrate among a small number of owners, including overseas providers. Workers and communities could carry income losses, retraining costs or infrastructure charges while receiving an uncertain share of the gains.

Dependence may also become harder to change. In September 2026, the ACCC warned that integrating AI into existing digital platforms could improve services while raising entry barriers and making switching more difficult. ACCC’s current assessment.

These risks do not establish that Australia will lose overall. They explain why productivity projections alone cannot answer the question.

Leaving it unanswered still has consequences. Ownership, contracts and market power will continue to shape who receives the gains and who pays for the transition.