Per Capita Submission Guidelines

Key Takeaways

• "Per Capita submissions" covers two different tasks: work you pitch to Per Capita, the Melbourne think tank founded in 2007, and the formal submissions Per Capita lodges with government and parliamentary inquiries. The evidence bar is similar; the routes are not.
• Per Capita publishes research reports, short commentary, and inquiry submissions on tax, inequality, housing, and superannuation. It has no open op-ed page, so a 250-word pitch reaches a program lead faster than an unsolicited 3,000-word draft.
• Every per capita figure in a pitch needs a named denominator, a period, and a source. Reviewers check this before they read the argument.
• Timelines vary by stream. Inquiry submissions follow published government deadlines; commissioned research follows funding and program cycles that can run for months.

1. Introduction

Search for "Per Capita submissions" and you will find two unrelated things sharing one phrase. One is the process of getting your own writing into Per Capita, the Australian think tank founded in 2007 and based in Melbourne. The other is the stream of submissions Per Capita itself files with parliamentary committees, productivity inquiries, and treasury consultations, usually in partnership with other organisations.

Both matter to policy writers, and both fail for the same reason. A draft arrives without a distributional angle, or a per capita number arrives without a denominator, and the piece dies in a review queue. This guide covers what Per Capita publishes, how to pitch it, how to present per capita evidence so it survives scrutiny, and which comparable outlets fit which kind of expert.

2. What Per Capita publishes

Per Capita's output falls into three formats, and mixing them up is the most common reason a pitch goes nowhere.

Research reports. Long-form analysis, typically built on Australian Bureau of Statistics data or treasury modelling. Topic areas include tax policy, inequality, housing affordability, superannuation tax concessions, and how government spending is distributed across income groups. The annual Per Capita Tax Survey, run over several years, asked Australians about their attitudes to taxation and public services, and reports drawing on it are representative of the house style: survey or administrative data, a distributional claim, and a policy recommendation.

Commentary. Shorter pieces, roughly 600 to 1,200 words, tied to a news event such as a federal budget, an interest rate decision, or a housing release. These carry less data and more argument.

Inquiry submissions. Formal documents responding to a terms of reference, with a defined word limit set by the committee or department, and a hard lodgement date. Per Capita often co-signs these with other civil society organisations, which changes the drafting process: you are negotiating language with partners, not just writing.

A research report is judged on method. A commentary piece is judged on whether it says something the news coverage missed. An inquiry submission is judged on whether it answers the questions the committee actually asked. Decide which one you are offering before you write a word.

3. How to pitch, and what to attach

Send a pitch, not a finished draft. Think tanks commission work; they rarely pick finished articles out of a pile. A short pitch gives an editor the option to shape the piece with you, which is the outcome you want.

A workable pitch runs 200 to 300 words and contains five things:

1. The finding. One sentence, stated as a claim, not a topic. "Superannuation tax concessions deliver more per dollar to the top income decile than to the bottom half" is a claim. "Superannuation tax concessions" is a topic.
2. The evidence you hold or can obtain. Name the dataset. If you need a data request or a licence, say so and say how long it will take.
3. Why now. Tie the piece to a release date, a budget, a consultation closing, or a bill before parliament. A pitch with no timing hook competes against every other idea in the inbox.
4. Scope boundaries. State what the piece will not cover. This prevents the reviewer from assuming you are making a broader argument than you are.
5. Who you are. Two lines. Relevant publications, current affiliation, and the reason you can write this particular piece.

Attach a one-page CV and links to two published pieces. If your pitch relies on numbers you have calculated yourself, include a data note: indicator, numerator source, denominator, period, and any adjustment you applied. That single page does more for your credibility than another paragraph of argument.

Follow up once, after about two weeks. If the answer is no, ask whether a different format would suit, such as an inquiry submission rather than a report. Programs change, and an idea that fails in March may fit a consultation opening in August.

4. Presenting per capita evidence

A per capita figure is a ratio, and both halves need a source. Most rejected numbers fail on the denominator.

The choice of denominator changes the story. Total resident population, working-age population, households, and persons aged 15 and over produce different per capita values from the same national total. Australian GDP per capita in the national accounts uses quarterly resident population estimates from the ABS. Health and mortality rates are usually age-standardised, because a crude per capita rate in an ageing population measures demography as much as it measures service performance.

Three further checks decide whether a reviewer trusts your number:

• Nominal or real. State the deflator and the reference year. A per capita figure in nominal dollars across a decade mixes inflation with real change.
• Cross-country comparison basis. Market exchange rates and purchasing power parities produce different rankings. The OECD publishes PPP series for this purpose; say which one you used.
• Per person or per household. Household-level figures require a household size assumption, and that assumption is often the whole argument.

The phrase "per capita recession" has a precise meaning in Australian commentary: two consecutive quarters in which real GDP per capita falls while headline GDP grows. Using the phrase loosely invites a correction in the first review round.

Data note template for a pitch

Include this table in the pitch rather than in the finished piece. It takes ten minutes to build and removes the main reason a data-led pitch gets set aside.

5. Per Capita compared with other policy outlets

Fit matters as much as quality. Each outlet below rewards a different kind of writer, and submitting the wrong format wastes a month.

Two practical points from this comparison. First, only one of these routes resembles a newspaper op-ed page. The rest are commissioning conversations, which is why the pitch format in section 3 matters more than a polished draft. Second, if your subject is technology regulation rather than Australian distributional policy, the Per Capita research program is unlikely to be the right home, and your timeline will shorten considerably elsewhere.

Inquiry submissions follow different rules again. The committee or department publishes a word limit, a format, and a closing date. Late submissions are accepted at the committee's discretion and are often published without being taken as evidence at a hearing.

6. FAQ

Q1. Can I send a finished article to Per Capita without a pitch?

You can, but a finished draft gives the editor only two options: publish or decline. A pitch gives them a third option, which is to commission a version that fits their program. For a small team, the pitch is easier to read and easier to say yes to. Keep the draft in reserve for the follow-up email if the editor asks to see it.

Q2. What length should a Per Capita submission be?

Match the format. Commentary generally runs 600 to 1,200 words. Research reports run much longer, and the length is usually settled during commissioning rather than proposed by the author. Inquiry submissions have a word limit set by the body running the consultation, and going over it risks having the extra material ignored.

Q3. Do I need to be Australian to contribute?

For work on Australian tax, housing, or welfare policy, you need to work with Australian data and understand Australian institutional detail, which in practice favors people based here or closely connected to the policy community. Comparative work that places Australia alongside OECD peers is a genuine opening for outside researchers, provided you use a consistent comparison basis such as purchasing power parities.

Q4. What is the most common reason a data-led pitch is rejected?

The denominator is missing or inconsistent with the claim. A pitch that says "spending per person has fallen" without naming the population series, the period, and whether the figures are real invites a reviewer to check, find a mismatch, and stop reading. A one-page data note prevents this.

7. Conclusion

Treat a Per Capita submission as a commissioning proposal rather than a manuscript. Work out which of the three formats fits your material, lead the pitch with a claim and its evidence, and attach a data note that names the denominator behind every per capita figure you use. That package travels well: the same structure works for a research report, a short commentary, or an inquiry submission with a hard deadline.

Before you send, open the outlet's current guidelines page and check the contact route, because program staffing and submission windows change between funding cycles. Then compare two or three outlets from the table above and pick the one whose format matches the piece you can actually deliver this quarter.