Universities are unlikely to see much return from a proposed levy on international student tuition fees, critics say, amid widespread scepticism about whether the policy will ever get off the ground.

In a blow to the already-struggling university sector, the government revealed in its White Paper on immigration that it is considering?taking up to?6 per cent of international education income?which it said would be spent on higher education and skills.

The proposal came alongside other measures?that many fear will hurt the sector¡¯s competitiveness, including slashing the length of the graduate route by six months.?

Details of the levy were kept vague, with the government saying more details will be set out in October¡¯s autumn budget.

ÍøÆØÃÅ

If the levy does come into force, the government appears to expect universities, who would lose millions in income, to shift the burden on to international students by increasing tuition fees.?

There are doubts about whether all universities will do this, given the high costs already borne by international students, which some believe has already made the UK less globally competitive.?

ÍøÆØÃÅ

¡°This is a very, very price-sensitive and competitive market,¡± said Vivienne Stern, chief executive officer of Universities UK (UUK). ¡°We¡¯re not in a position¡­where institutions can unthinkingly increase fees and I think the government is rather naive if they think that¡¯s how it will be dealt with.¡±?

Documents released alongside the immigration White Paper set out the impact of a 6 per cent levy, with policymakers suggesting?demand could fall?by up to 7,000 students per year. There are also questions about how much of the levy would be returned to the sector.

¡°It will not float in any sizeable way to university coffers,¡± said Jonathan Simons, partner and head of the education practice at consultancy Public First, who believes the greater focus will be on the wider skills agenda.?

Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, compared the policy to the existing apprenticeship levy. ¡°Not all the money that is raised by the apprenticeship levy gets spent even on apprenticeships,¡± with the Treasury absorbing some of the funding, he said.?

Stern, who described the proposal as ¡°vague¡±, said the ¡°absolute red line¡± for universities is that any levy must be used to benefit students enrolled in higher education. ¡°It¡¯s extremely important we don¡¯t allow governments to think about this as a source of funding for other domestic priorities.¡±

ÍøÆØÃÅ

There are also doubts about how genuine the policy is at all.?

¡°The levy will probably never happen,¡± said Hillman.?¡°It reads as if it¡¯s just been inserted in the White Paper last minute,¡± with the?6 per cent figure seemingly ¡°pulled out of thin air¡±, he continued.?

Simons agreed that the lack of detail suggested the policy had emerged as an option ¡°late on in the day¡±, potentially as a compromise in place of more dramatic changes to the graduate route.?

ÍøÆØÃÅ

¡°We¡¯ve already seen a bunch of Labour MPs in university seats coming out against it,¡± he continued. ¡°When push comes to shove, [policymakers] are cognisant of the need not to really disrupt the sector.¡±

There is a precedent for the idea, however. In Australia, a levy on international students was?first proposed in 2023?in an effort to redistribute funding among universities, although it was never put into practice.

For the UK, Hillman continued, ¡°it looks like an exercise in kite flying, where you propose a seemingly outrageous idea¡± that is later replaced by something ¡°not quite as outrageous¡±, at which point ¡°everybody breathes a sigh of relief, but the government still gets some of what?it wants¡±.?

But he added, even if this is the case, it could still damage perceptions of the UK among prospective international students and put them off applying to British universities.?

ÍøÆØÃÅ

helen.packer@timeshighereducation.com