Australia’s AI Guardrails: How New Rules Could Reprice ASX Tech

This story features NEXTDC LIMITED, and other companies. For more info SHARE ANALYSIS: NXT

The company is included in ASX100, ASX200, ASX300, ALL-ORDS and ALL-TECH

More regulatory requirements raise costs for technology companies in Australia, separating those who deal best with changing rules for legal compliance.

By Paul Githaiga

Australia’s government has moved from guidance to proposals. A September 2024 Proposals Paper on mandatory guardrails for high-risk AI sits alongside the August 2024 Voluntary AI Safety Standard.

Together, they mark a policy pivot that will embed compliance costs and accountability obligations into AI product lifecycles in Australia. So, investors should reassess how they value growth and governance in ASX technology names.

Essentially, stronger governance can become a durable competitive advantage, while repeated, recurring compliance costs could compress valuations for smaller, capital-constrained players. 

Voluntary AI Safety Standard – August 2024

1.           Tech’s long run of outperformance remains material — but not uniform.

The S&P/ASX All Technology Index has delivered double-digit, long-term outperformance versus broad Australian equities (S&P reports the All-Tech index 10-year annualised return at ~23.9%).

By contrast, broad market benchmarks have produced materially lower decade returns (the S&P/ASX 200 has trailed tech by a wide margin over the same span). That gap is the source of the growth premium many tech stocks currently price. 

2.           Mandatory guardrails will introduce a recurring compliance layer — proportionally heavier for small caps.

The government’s Proposals Paper targets high-risk settings with requirements such as risk assessments, human oversight, transparency & auditability, and third-party review. Those obligations imply ongoing personnel, tooling, documentation, and audit costs.

These are expenses that large operators can often absorb. Yet, they can be proportionally painful for smaller, high-growth firms lacking scale. Submissions from industry bodies flagged both the need for certainty and the danger of disproportionate burdens. 

Case study — NEXTDC: growth with tight margins highlights sensitivity to incremental costs

NextDC ((NXT)) is scheduled to report its FY25 financials next week, on Tuesday August 26th. FY24 total revenue was reported as $404.3m and the first–half FY25 net loss was $42.7m (1H25), while pushing a heavy capex and development pipeline.

In capital-intensive digital-infrastructure models, incremental compliance or audit costs tied to AI-enabled services are likely to hit near-term margins unless management can offset them with pricing, scale, or productivity gains. Investors should therefore factor governance spend into near–term profitability scenarios for infrastructure and software firms

Why these updates matter (brief investor read)

The regulatory shift is not a one-off hurdle—it’s a structural transformation. Australia’s policy suite now includes both the Voluntary AI Safety Standard and a consultative Proposals Paper on mandatory guardrails for high-risk AI.

Together, they form a governance ecosystem emphasizing continuous oversight. It covers risk management, human oversight, model testing, auditability, supply chain transparency, and conformity assessments. 

What may appear as a compliance checkbox becomes a recurring operational expense in corporate budgets. Stakeholder voices will shape the regulatory final form.

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) frames regulation as essential to building public trust, noting that Australians rate privacy as their third most important concern after quality and price (84% want more control over data use).

That said, the Productivity Commission recommends targeted reform over sweeping AI legislation, advocating for outcomes-based regulation and using existing legal frameworks before layering new ones. 

Industry leaders, including KPMG and the Business Council of Australia, warn that overly prescriptive rules could stifle innovation; they propose a light-touch, proportionate approach, selectively focused on high-risk cases and leveraging existing regulators.

For investors:

The key takeaway is this: Uncertain, evolving regulation creates policy risk. That said, they also position strong governance as a competitive differentiator.

The final balance between prescriptive mandates and flexible, outcome-oriented frameworks will determine how deeply compliance costs cut into valuations—and which players can turn trustworthiness into an asset.

Macro Trends: Policy Meets Performance

Australia’s AI policy approach sharpened in 2024:

-August 2024: The Voluntary AI Safety Standard introduced 10 guardrails. These included accountability, testing, transparency, and human oversight. They set industry expectations for responsible AI deployment.

-September 2024: The Proposals Paper built on this with the same guardrail framework now proposed as mandatory requirements in high-risk contexts. These include human oversight, risk assessments, auditability, supply chain transparency, and record-keeping.

This system checks how risky different AI programs are. If an AI is high-risk, it will have more rules. If it’s low-risk, it will have fewer rules. Groups like the OAIC and the Law Council of Australia think this is important because it helps people trust new technology while still encouraging new ideas. 

But some business leaders are worried. They say too many rules could stop new ideas and make it hard for companies to compete. The Productivity Commission promotes a lean, outcomes-focused approach—leveraging existing laws (e.g., Privacy Act, Corporations Act) rather than layering new regulation.

These regulatory shifts are unfolding against a backdrop of extraordinary outperformance in Australian technology equities. The S&P/ASX 200 Information Technology Index delivered circa 27.2% annualised returns over 10 years, compared to just 11% for the broader ASX 200, fueling a significant growth premium in tech valuations. 

Investor takeaway

Compliance obligations are evolving from one-off hurdles to enduring operational realities. Governance capabilities may soon define winners and laggards.

Why this matters for investors:

-From one-off to ongoing: The shift from voluntary guidance to mandatory, structured guardrails transforms compliance into a recurring cost centre.

-Governance as a premium asset: Firms with mature risk, audit, and transparency frameworks may maintain financial resilience—and even earn valuation premiums.

-Policy trajectory is not fixed: Stakeholder influence, from privacy regulators to business councils, will significantly affect final rule intensity and flexibility.

Sector Dynamics: Five-Year Trends and Competitive Shifts

Australia’s tech segment continues to outperform broader markets. Notably, the Communication Services sector has surged circa 70.9% since 2022, driven by growth in interactive media and digital services. That performance substantially outranks the ASX 200 baseline.

This matters because compliance costs created by AI regulation won’t land evenly across the market. Smaller-cap tech firms—often lacking scale—are vulnerable to such recurring costs.

For instance:

-Megaport ((MP1)) might have to spend more money to make sure its AI tools are clear and checked properly.

-Nuix ((NXL)) makes software for the law and investigations. It may need to keep better records and reports. Its new AI features might also raise questions.

By contrast, larger-cap companies with established governance frameworks may weather regulatory shifts more easily, transforming what could be a profit threat into a manageable, perhaps even marginal, cost.

Investor takeaway

In this environment, the competitive gap could widen, benefiting scale players and punishing nimble but cost-constrained businesses.

Global vs Domestic Tech Positioning

Investors must consider how Australian tech stacks up against global peers. The S&P/ASX All Technology Index (XTX) offers broader coverage across software, hardware, fintech, and digital infrastructure than the narrower Information Technology index, giving a more diversified local tech profile. 

By contrast, the MSCI World Information Technology Index captures global large- and mid-cap tech giants across 23 developed markets, led by mega-cap names like Apple, Microsoft, NVIDIA, whose scale absorbs compliance costs more smoothly.

Australia’s tech sector remains more concentrated, with smaller market caps and niche operators. This makes it sensitive to incremental regulatory costs. Overlaying these indices, you’ll typically see them move in sync during global tech rallies.

Still, domestic tech often exhibits greater volatility during downturns or policy shifts, underscoring the outsized impact of local regulation such as AI guardrails. The final rule set could therefore swing valuation multiples sharply, rewarding well-governed players while exposing execution-riskier firms.

Investor takeaway

A balanced tech allocation, linking domestic growth exposure with global stability, can help hedge local policy shocks while preserving upside from innovation.

Company Spotlight: NEXTDC’s Revenue–Profit Gap

NextDC exemplifies the tension between capital-intensive growth and short-term margin pressure — now intensified by evolving AI-compliance demands.

NextDC’s business model, heavy upfront investments in data centre infrastructure to meet growing capacity needs, has delivered robust revenue growth. Yet consistent net losses reflect high fixed overheads and long payback periods.

For instance, FY24 saw over -$1.0bn in capital expenditure and financing activity tied to expansion projects like S6 Sydney and S7 Western Sydney.

Investor takeaway

Even minor incremental costs, like audit frameworks or compliance systems required under AI regulation, risk compressing margins further. In a low-margin, high-capex environment, governance capability isn’t just compliance, it’s a financial lever.

Challenges & Opportunities for ASX Tech Under Guardrails

Key Challenges

1.           Cost Inflation for Smaller Players – Building compliance teams, integrating oversight tools, and paying for third-party audits could be proportionally more expensive for small caps.

2.           Slower Product Rollouts – Mandatory testing and documentation may elongate product launch cycles.

3.           Global Competitiveness – If guardrails are more restrictive than those in competitor markets, Australian firms could lose speed-to-market advantages.

Key Opportunities

1.           Governance as a Differentiator – Firms with transparent processes and strong compliance reputations could gain client trust, especially in sensitive sectors (finance, health, government).

2.           Growth for Compliance-Adjacent Sectors – Companies that provide AI auditing, monitoring, and risk assessment services may see increased demand.

3.           Portfolio Reweighting – Investors and funds are likely to like technology companies that are doing well and are responsibly managed. This can make those companies more valuable.

Investment Implications: Portfolio Positioning

With new rules changing quickly and technology doing really well in Australia for a long time, three simple ways for investors to think about their money are clear:

1. Defensive Growth Positioning

Big tech companies like NextDC and WiseTech Global ((WTC)) are doing well because they have good rules to follow. NextDC has strong systems to help them keep costs low. WiseTech uses technology to help them follow the rules and make their team stronger, which is helpful as AI becomes more important.

2. Selective Small-Cap Exposure

Opportunities exist in niche AI and software players, especially those that transparently disclose capital allocation plans for compliance and a pathway to profitability. Look for companies offering clear metrics on compliance investment, such as percentage of R&D or OpEx dedicated to regulation and audit readiness.

3. Diversified Tech Allocation

A blended portfolio and mix local and global investments. It puts money in local stocks, like ASX All Tech, and global tech through ETFs. This way, it helps protect against local rules while still trying to grow.

Some popular ETFs are Vanguard’s VGS and iShares IVV. VGS lets you invest in companies around the world except Australia. IVV focuses on the S&P 500, which is a group of big U.S. companies, including a lot of tech ones.

In 2024, investors put nearly $2bn into VGS because they like how it helps spread their money around.

Why This Matters for Investors

–Governance as a competitive edge: In a regulatory shift, compliance capability adds resilience and can drive valuation premium, especially for well-resourced firms.

–Capital discipline is crucial for high-risk small caps: Without clear spending plans on governance, valuation is at risk, regardless of AI upside.

–Diversification offers pragmatic balance: Domestic tech offers innovation potential but also regulatory exposure; global indices offer scale and stability. ETFs streamline and cost-optimize this blend.

Regulation as Strategic Reset

The Australian technology sector’s 27% annualised return over the past decade reflects both market tailwinds and the sector’s ability to monetise innovation. AI guardrails now introduce a structural shift that could separate capable, well-governed growth stocks from those struggling with execution.

For investors, this is less about whether compliance will happen—it will—and more about how companies will manage it. Those who resist or delay may find that the market reprices their growth story.

The next two years could mark a turning point, one where valuation multiples reflect not just revenue trajectories, but the credibility of governance in a regulated AI environment.

Technical limitations

If you are reading this story through a third party distribution channel and you cannot see the chart included, we apologise, but technical limitations are to blame.

Find out why FNArena subscribers like the service so much: “Your Feedback (Thank You)” – Warning this story contains unashamedly positive feedback on the service provided.

FNArena is proud about its track record and past achievements: Ten Years On

Click to view our Glossary of Financial Terms