Almost 145,000 Australians to lose autism support under NDIS overhaul, leaked modelling shows

Internal Australian government modelling, surfaced on 15 July 2026, projects that 144,600 Australians now receiving support for autism under the National Disability Insurance Scheme will lose access to those packages by 2030, with the deepest cuts concentrated in participants under 18.

The figures, obtained under Freedom of Information by the ABC and reported by the broadcaster's disability affairs correspondent, describe the projected downstream effect of the NDIS's redesigned eligibility framework. The scheme, launched nationally in 2020, has ballooned from 376,000 participants to more than 730,000 over six years and now consumes roughly a third of the federal social-services budget. The redesign is the centrepiece of an attempt by Canberra to re-anchor the scheme around what officials describe as "permanent and significant" functional impairment, and to push the remainder into mainstream health, education and community services.

What the modelling actually says

The departmental spreadsheet, dated to the first quarter of 2026, ranks participants by projected exit pathway. The single largest cohort, roughly 63,000 children and adolescents, would be reassessed against the tightened functional criteria and removed on the basis that their needs can be met by schools and the federal government's Thriving Kids initiative. A second cohort of around 48,000 adults would be transitioned onto mainstream mental-health and employment supports rather than individualised NDIS packages. A residual 33,000 would exit via a tightened early-intervention rule that disqualifies participants whose primary diagnosis is developmental delay without a co-occurring permanent impairment.

The ABC's reporting does not give a precise breakdown by jurisdiction, but the National Disability Insurance Agency's own quarterly report shows the highest per-capita NDIS participation rates are in Western Australia, Queensland and New South Wales. Those states are also where waitlists for community-based allied-health services are longest.

The political shape of the reform

The redesign is being driven jointly by the Department of Social Services and NDIA chief executive Liz MacMillan, with political ownership split between Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek and NDIS Minister Mark Butler. The government has framed the change as a sustainability measure: scheme costs have grown at a compound annual rate of roughly 14 per cent since 2020, faster than any other line item in the federal budget.

The Opposition, led by Angus Taylor, has seized on the leaked figures to argue that the reform amounts to a quiet retrenchment of the country's signature disability entitlement. Disability advocacy groups, including Autism Aspergers Advocacy Australia and the Australian Autism Alliance, are pushing for the modelling to be released in full and for an independent actuarial review before any participant is reassessed.

Where the figures don't add up

There are reasons to read the 144,600 number as a worst-case projection rather than a likely outcome. The departmental model assumes that all currently eligible participants will be reassessed within a single rolling four-year window; in practice, reassessment is tiered by participant category and review date. It also assumes no expansion of Thriving Kids or of state-run early-intervention capacity, both of which are flagged in the same departmental documents as scaling up.

The cleaner counter-argument is the cost arithmetic. Even at a stable participant count of 730,000, NDIS outlays are projected to reach $52 billion by 2030 under current per-capita growth, against a federal revenue base that the Parliamentary Budget Office last week revised downward. The government is paying for sustainability with narrower eligibility, and the question is whether the mainstream services being offered in lieu are real or aspirational.

What to watch next

The reform package is expected to be tabled in Parliament when the budget sittings resume in August. Two dates matter: the release of the full departmental modelling, which the Minister has committed to in answer to a Senate question on notice, and the announcement of Thriving Kids provider contracts, which will tell advocacy groups and the sector whether the alternate services exist in practice or only on paper.

If the modelling is confirmed and the contracting fails to keep pace, Australia will be running an unfunded transition for tens of thousands of families whose support is being removed faster than its replacement is being built. That is the asymmetry the redesign has to close, or the headline figure will end up defining it.

This publication frames the NDIS redesign as a contested sustainability exercise rather than a settled reform; the leaked departmental modelling is treated as a worst-case projection pending full release, and the deficit between outgoing NDIS packages and incoming mainstream services is treated as the central policy question rather than a footnote.