Gold medals, fragile futures: The athlete legacy Australia still needs

Sport’s value beyond the scoreboard

Sport is woven into Australian life, as an industry and community institution, but also as a contributor to health, education and the way Australia presents itself to the world. Its value goes beyond ticket sales, broadcast rights and medal counts. It’s seen in participation and volunteering, healthier communities, stronger social connections, national pride and Australia’s international reputation.

In 2017, the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) estimated that sport generated around $83 billion a year in economic, health and education benefits, before allowing for harder-to-measure benefits such as community cohesion, personal wellbeing and international reputation. It also estimated that at least $7 of value was created for every dollar spent in the sports sector. The figures draw on 2015–16 data, so they are best treated as a historical benchmark. Even so, the point still stands: the return from sport is felt across the economy and the community, not just within the sporting system itself.

A high-performance system under financial pressure

More recent ASC material estimates that sport creates around $55 billion of value for Australia each year, with about 30 per cent (around $16 billion) attributable to high-performance sport. Yet many professional athletes struggle to make the economics of sport work.

Professional athletes do not appear overnight - they are the product of years of investment by clubs, coaches, schools, institutes, sporting organisations and national pathways. When a talented athlete leaves sport because they can no longer afford to continue, the loss is greater than a possible future medal.

Athlete financial sustainability deserves to be treated as a performance issue, not simply a welfare issue.

The economics of elite sport

As the Brisbane Olympic Games 2032 approaches, much of the public discussion has understandably centred on venues, transport, tourism and precincts. But athletes will create many of the moments that make the Games matter. The question is not whether representing Australia should make athletes wealthy but whether a world-class system can be sustained when many people within it face years of financial insecurity, family dependency and debt.

Australia has a high-performance strategy and a range of valuable athlete-support programs. The gap lies in the economics of being an elite athlete. One that helps talented people stay in the pathway for long enough to fulfil their potential and gives Australia the best chance of converting its high-performance investment into results.

A recent study from theAustralian Sports Foundation study, interviewed 2,304 athletes across 60 sports, and found that 46 per cent of elite respondents aged over 18 earned less than $23,000 a year. That is well below the full-time National Minimum Wage of $52,254.80 from 1 July 2026 and only around $2,000 above the annualised maximum JobSeeker Payment for a single person with no children ($808.70 per fortnight from 20 March 2026). Athletes are expected to train, travel, recover, compete and meet the standards of a full-time international sporting career without a comparable level of financial security.

Who really funds the athlete journey?

Behind many medals is an invisible network of support. Parents cover rent, travel and living costs. Partners carry a disproportionate share of household expenses. Athletes use annual leave from casual or part-time work to compete internationally. Others defer study, professional development and financial independence while they pursue a national pathway. For many families, that private subsidy has simply become part of the cost of pursuing elite sport.

There is an obvious gap between what Australia asks of its athletes and the financial security available to them. Elite athletes are managing more than international competition - they are dealing with rising rents, cost-of-living pressures, insecure work and the same financial pressures facing many young Australians.

The decision eventually becomes whether they can keep pursuing an Olympic ambition without putting financial stability on hold.

The impact of professional women’s sports on Olympic pathways

Professional women’s sport has made this tension more visible. Competitions such as AFLW, Super Netball and the A-League Women now offer clearer and more predictable income and career pathways. That progress is welcome, but it also changes the market for athletic talent. A gifted young athlete choosing between sports may look at an Olympic pathway, with uncertain funding, repeated selection risk and limited commercial exposure, compared with a code offering contracts, clearer progression and a recognisable professional career.

The concern is not confined to established athletes changing sports. Choices are being made much earlier by athletes, families and coaches, with consequences for talent identification and the depth of future Olympic and Paralympic pathways.

Win Well – High performance 2032+ Sports Strategy

Australia is not starting from zero. The ASC’s Win Well High Performance 2032+ Sport Strategy recognises that performance and wellbeing go hand in hand. It commits Australia to holistic athlete development, clearer pathways and transition periods, and an inclusive, sustainable high-performance system.

The next question is what those commitments mean for an athlete trying to make the economics of elite sport work. Financial wellbeing affects whether someone can stay in a pathway, train consistently, recover properly, travel to qualification events and make sensible decisions about work or study. In practical terms, it’s part of the performance environment and protecting Australia’s existing high-performance investment.

There are already useful foundations, including personal development programs, financial-wellbeing support and elite sport education initiatives. The opportunity before Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games is to connect those supports deliberately around income security, career resilience and an athlete’s ability to earn independently.

The global shift in athlete support

Recent international developments suggest the debate about athlete funding is moving. In May 2026, International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Kirsty Coventry attracted widespread criticism after commentating that she did not believe in paying athletes at the Olympic Games. She subsequently clarified that she was referring to medal prize money, arguing that direct support should reach a broader group of athletes rather than only medal winners.

One month later, the IOC announced its Fit for the Future Olympian Grant. From Milano Cortina 2026, every eligible Olympian will be able to apply for USD $10,000 for each Olympic Games attended. The IOC expects approximately 14,000 Olympians to be eligible across each four-year cycle, with payments to Milano Cortina athletes expected in 2027. It’s important to note that this is a post-Games grant for sporting development or career transition, not an income stream that funds the years of preparation required to reach the Games.

For Australian Olympians, the IOC grant will sit alongside the Australian Olympic Committee’s (AOC’s) Olympian Futures Fund. Under the current AOC model, eligible athletes selected to attend the Games between Milano Cortina 2026 and Brisbane 2032 will receive a $5,000 team-selection payment. They may also be eligible for a $32,000 retirement grant per Games attended, although that grant is designed to be paid in instalments beginning 16 years after the relevant Olympic appearance and is subject to a means-testing threshold still to be determined.

This means an eligible Australian Olympian may receive around $19,400 in near-term gross assistance through the USD $10,000 IOC grant (about AUD $14,400) and the $5,000 AOC team-selection payment, subject to final delivery arrangements, eligibility and tax treatment. The $32,000 AOC retirement grant is meaningful, but it is not money available to meet current living costs.

These initiatives are welcome and recognise the value athletes bring to the Olympic movement. They do not, however, solve the underlying question of how athletes fund the years required to get there.

Australia’s Glasgow 2026 Commonwealth Games performance showed the depth of talent in the system, with Australia finishing on top of the medal table with 70 gold medals and 171 medals overall. Glasgow, with 74 nations and territories competing across 10 sports, is not a direct proxy for Los Angeles 2028 or Brisbane 2032. Talented athletes need to be able to stay in the pathway long enough to reach the world stage.

Building a more sustainable athlete system

Australia now needs a more coordinated response that treats athlete sustainability as part of the performance infrastructure required for Brisbane 2032.

One option is an Australian athlete living standard - a targeted minimum income floor for nationally categorised athletes in priority Olympic and Paralympic pathways whose training and competition commitments materially restrict their ability to earn. This would not be a universal payment but instead calibrated to the real cost of participating in high-performance sport and tied to agreed training, competition and development commitments.

An income floor would inevitably raise difficult questions about selection and categorisation. The ASC’s refreshed National Athlete Categorisation Framework gives sports a common basis for identifying athletes with the greatest potential to contribute to future medal success, so it makes sense to start there rather than create a parallel system. Any enhanced financial support would still need published criteria, consistent sport-specific application, periodic review and a credible appeals process. If the rules are unclear, decisions about who qualifies for support could quickly become a source of inequity and undermine confidence in the system.

A second option is portable career support. Grants alone are not enough. Athletes also need practical access to superannuation, income protection, health and allied-health support, education and career-transition services. Governments, sporting organisations, employers, education providers, philanthropy and commercial partners could all have a role in delivering that support.

France’s Army of Champions shows one-way public-sector employment can provide high-level athletes with income, professional development, injury support and career-transition pathways while allowing for sporting commitments.

Australia could test whether a tailored public service supported employment pathway might form one part of the answer. The Army Reserve already shows that part-time service can sit alongside civilian work or study, although high-performance sport brings a different set of demands. Training loads, international travel, deployment risk, service obligations and the reality of managing two careers would all need careful assessment.

There is also a case for doing more to help athletes build their own earning capacity. Commercial education, brand development, sponsor access, digital-content skills, governance literacy and support for post-sport careers can all reduce financial dependence over time. The aim is not to make athletes dependent on the system, but to give them a better chance of building sustainable lives around elite sport and maximise their earning potential.

What needs to happen before Brisbane 2032

If Australia expects athletes to train, travel and perform at an elite international level, it should be possible for those with the strongest performance potential to remain in the system.

With less than six years until Brisbane 2032, the next two to three years matter. A meaningful measure of progress would be the shift from a collection of individual programs to a coordinated athlete sustainability framework with clear ownership, transparent eligibility, a baseline level of support, and measurable outcomes.  

BDO’s specialised Sports and Entertainment team invite governments, sporting bodies, athlete representatives, philanthropic organisations, employers and commercial partners to continue the conversation.This could involve discussion around consistent eligibility principles for economic support, a targeted athlete living standard, improve portable career and wellbeing support, strengthen employer and education pathways, and help athletes build independent earning capacity. Contact our team to find out more.

Non BDO Authors – Lucy Cammiss (The LightHaus): https://au.linkedin.com/in/lucy-cammiss-29a2241b