The Claim
“Scrapped a program which encouraged Australian video game development.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim is TRUE. The Australian Interactive Games Fund (AIGF) was indeed scrapped by the Abbott Coalition government in the May 2014 federal budget [1][2].
The fund was established in 2012-2013 under the previous Labor government (Rudd/Gillard) with a total budget of $20 million, managed through Screen Australia (the Australian Federal Government's key funding body for screen content) [3][4]. By September 2013, the fund had supported 21 independent game development projects with approximately $2.6 million in grants [1].
The 2014-2015 budget, delivered on May 13, 2014, announced the termination of the AIGF effective July 1, 2014, with expected savings of $10 million [1][2]. Games that had received funding under the program included titles such as 3 Sprockets' "Fight the Dragon," Uppercut Games' "Epoch 2," and Flat Earth Games' "Towncraft" [1].
Missing Context
The claim omits several important contextual elements:
Budget deficit context: The 2014 budget was framed by the Abbott government as addressing a "budget emergency," with widespread cuts across health, education, and other sectors. Treasurer Joe Hockey stated that cutbacks were expected to reduce the budget deficit from $49.9 billion to $29.8 billion [1]. The AIGF was one of many programs cut, not a targeted attack on gaming specifically.
The fund was relatively new: The AIGF had only been in operation for approximately one year when it was cancelled, having been established in the 2012-2013 period [3][4]. It was not a long-standing institution but rather a recently introduced pilot program.
Partial funding had already been distributed: While $10 million in "savings" was projected, approximately $2.6 million had already been committed to projects by September 2013 [1], meaning the full $20 million was never actually available to be "saved."
Subsequent replacement policy: In 2021-2022, the Coalition government introduced the Digital Games Tax Offset (DGTO), a 30% refundable tax offset for eligible game developers spending a minimum of $500,000 on qualifying Australian development expenditure [5][6]. This replaced the grant-based AIGF with a tax-based incentive that took effect July 1, 2022.
Source Credibility Assessment
The original source provided is the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), which is one of Australia's oldest and most established newspapers (founded in 1831). According to Media Bias/Fact Check, SMH is rated as having "Left-Center" bias with "Mostly Factual" reporting [7]. It is generally considered a mainstream, reputable source for Australian news, though like most major outlets, it has some editorial leanings. The article in question appears to be factual reporting on the budget announcement rather than opinion or analysis [8].
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Search conducted: "Labor government video game funding cuts arts programs"
Finding: The AIGF was actually established by the Labor government in 2012-2013 as part of their support for the digital creative industries [3][4]. The Rudd-Gillard government created the fund with $20 million over three years. Therefore, on this specific issue, Labor's approach was markedly different - they created the fund rather than cut it.
However, broader context shows both parties have made difficult arts funding decisions:
- Labor (2007-2013): Created the AIGF but also faced criticism for other arts funding decisions and budget constraints
- Coalition (2013-2022): Cut the AIGF in 2014 but later introduced the Digital Games Tax Offset in 2021-2022, which industry representatives considered a more sustainable long-term approach [5][6]
The Interactive Games and Entertainment Association (IGEA) and industry representatives have generally viewed the tax offset as a more appropriate mechanism for supporting the industry compared to the grant-based fund, as it aligns with international best practices (similar to programs in Canada and the UK) [6].
Balanced Perspective
While the factual claim is accurate - the Coalition did scrap the AIGF - the context is important:
The 2014 budget context: This was a sweeping austerity budget with cuts across virtually all sectors. The AIGF was not uniquely targeted; it was one of many programs reduced or eliminated [1].
Later policy evolution: By 2021-2022, the same Coalition government introduced the Digital Games Tax Offset, which provides 30% tax rebates for qualifying game development expenditure over $500,000 [5][6]. This represents a shift from direct grants to tax incentives, which industry experts generally consider more sustainable and scalable.
Industry adaptation: Despite the loss of the AIGF, the Australian game development industry continued to grow, with titles like "Cult of the Lamb," "Phantom Abyss," and "Crossy Road" achieving international success, often supported by state-level funding (particularly from Film Victoria and Screen Queensland) [6].
International comparisons: The shift to tax offsets aligns Australia with global best practices. Canada has offered similar tax incentives since 1999, and the UK introduced comparable programs in 2015 [6].
Key context: This was not a permanent abandonment of video game industry support, but rather a policy shift from one mechanism (direct grants) to another (tax offsets), occurring within the broader context of 2014 budget austerity measures.
TRUE
7.0
out of 10
The claim is factually accurate. The Abbott Coalition government did scrap the Australian Interactive Games Fund in the May 2014 budget [1][2][3]. However, the claim lacks important context: (1) this occurred within a broader austerity budget affecting many sectors, not as targeted hostility toward gaming; (2) the fund itself was relatively new (established ~2012-2013 by Labor); and (3) the later Coalition government introduced alternative support through the Digital Games Tax Offset in 2021-2022 [5][6].
Final Score
7.0
OUT OF 10
TRUE
The claim is factually accurate. The Abbott Coalition government did scrap the Australian Interactive Games Fund in the May 2014 budget [1][2][3]. However, the claim lacks important context: (1) this occurred within a broader austerity budget affecting many sectors, not as targeted hostility toward gaming; (2) the fund itself was relatively new (established ~2012-2013 by Labor); and (3) the later Coalition government introduced alternative support through the Digital Games Tax Offset in 2021-2022 [5][6].
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (8)
-
1
ausgamers.com
Last night saw Australia's government reveal the hard hitting 2014-2015 budget, and with it a number of cuts and changes to the Australian economy including health, education and business. Of the rath ...
AusGamers.com -
2
theconversation.com
This exclusion of games from artistic funding in this year’s budget follows the cancellation of the Interactive Media Fund in last year’s budget. Where to now for the Australian videogame industry?
The Conversation -
3
aph.gov.au
Chapter 3 Government support for the video game industry 3.1 Many submitters commented on current and previous government assistance available to Australia's video game development industry. This chapter outlines the Australian I
Aph Gov -
4
ign.com
Australian developers speak in wake of the elimination of the Interactive Games Fund.
IGN -
5
rsm.global
On 1 July 2022, the Digital Games Tax Offset (DGTO) became available to Australian game developers – ushering in a new era for our nation’s burgeoning digital games industry.
RSM Australia -
6
stevivor.com
Australian game development is an ever growing industry. Locally-created games like Phantom Abyss and Cult of the Lamb are just two titles hitting the gaming world and immediately making waves. The trouble is, those two titles — and many others — are only possible because of grants made available to creatives. Depending on the Australian you ask about potential funding sources, you're likely to get a different answer. On the eve of big changes coming federally, we thought we'd look into what's been available to developers to date, and what's to come.
Stevivor -
7
mediabiasfactcheck.com
LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording
Media Bias/Fact Check -
8
smh.com.au
Video game developers have taken a $10 million hit in the federal budget with the axing of the Australian Interactive Games Fund.
The Sydney Morning Herald
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.