Mr. Krabs, the famously money-obsessed owner of the Krusty Krab, guards every cent as if his life depends on it. Beneath the caricature of greed, however, lies a simpler truth: having grown up with almost nothing, every coin represents security. 

Much similar to Mr. Krabs, students at HAU find themselves guarding their own cents.  With yet another proposed Tuition and Other Fees Increase (TOFI),  the Angelite community faces a familiar cycle — new percentages accompanied by promises unfulfilled, lingering questions, and growing uncertainty over whether education will remain financially within reach.

TOSFI Over The Years

On February 27, 2026, leaders of the HAU Student Community gathered for the fifth consecutive TOFI consultation, wherein a 2% increase on fees would be imposed in the academic year 2026-2027. This is the sixth increase proposed in a row, with previous hikes ranging from 2.9% to 8%, making this year’s proposal the smallest increment. From 2022 to 2026, the total hikes add up to 21.9%, compounding roughly 11.3k to 19.8k raise per semester.

Student councils, organizations, and partylists have openly expressed their stance against another TOFI. College student councils disseminated surveys to determine validity and gain perspective on the increase. Paying students, parents, and guardians see the proposal as unnecessary, citing the lack of evident or tangible changes in educational facilities and services.

In a position paper released by the College Student Council – School of Computing (CSC-SOC), the council stated, “While institutions have the right to review and adjust tuition to sustain operations and improve services, such increases must be justified, transparent, and sensitive to the financial realities of students,” after a detailed report of their survey responses. 

A third-year student from SOC, David Dominic Mendoza reported that inadequate transparency from the administration has become an issue. 

“I don’t get what’s up with the tuition right now, and I think that’s a huge issue of transparency… It would really irk me if it were to go back up again, especially now with how little HAU is sharing… because it’s not like we’re seeing any improvements with the facilities,” he stated.

Moveover, students mentioned specific facilities across campus that have yet to be upgraded. From drafting tables, studios, laboratories, to broken tiles and flawed appliances in every classroom — back-to-back increases and no tangible modifications raise distress over the obvious discrepancies.

Softening the Blow & Edging Out the Unable

Individually, the percentage of increases each year seem miniscule and somehow insignificant — but pack an unsuspecting punch per semester. Such small, yet consistent increases cushion and dull the perception of students and its true financial impact.

When increases become a yearly occurrence, students are unable to anticipate tuition amounts — leaving out those who can no longer pay to assure their education. 

Working students are left with no disposable income, parents forced to pay the increase with no explanation, and the student body remains in a campus and system almost unchanged. Thousands are spent unknowingly, and only realized with the course of time. Consecutive increases bear a rather heavy burden for payors, slowly pushing out those who can no longer afford pursuing a degree at HAU. 

University administrators argue that the 2% proposition will contribute in maintaining the recent improvements of passing rates and post-graduation performance. For example, supporting the attainment of industry-recognized certifications for SOC, participation in international conferences for students in the School of Nursing and Allied Medical Sciences (SNAMS), and upgrades for facilities across several departments including School of Engineering and Architecture (SEA) and the School of Arts and Sciences (SAS).

A majority of the consultation emphasized educational enhancements in terms of training establishments and other services, however, most students have reported to not see any noteworthy changes that improve learning.

Comfort rooms across campus — all remain with broken tiles, defective sinks, and faulty door locks. Classrooms still housing armchairs falling apart, blinds hanging off the walls by a single screw, and projectors gather dust rather than being fixed. Eating areas are made uncomfortable with chairs that no longer have backrests, cramped-up spaces, and deformed metal tables. 

“Honestly speaking, I am not fully convinced that I am getting my money’s worth. While the university provides quality education, some facilities are not well maintained, and certain services are underutilized or inconsistent,” Ashliyah Gomez, a student from SAS, shared. 

Development of facilities suddenly becomes a top-priority in the increase, while basic maintenance and repair of communal spaces is promised, but neglected. 

Framed as modest adjustments on paper, these changes ultimately determine who can stay and bear the expenses, and who must leave to save themselves from debt. Minimal changes accumulate into big financial constraints. This is no longer a pattern of increases, but rather, a normalized habit that silently forces students to keep up at the expense of institutional development each year. 

For some, the decision centers around whether education is financially possible, not a valuable essential.

When Small Increases Become Heavy Burdens

Salary and wages remain stagnant no matter how severely inflation rates rocket, striking a disparity between this and annual tuition increases. Payors struggle to band together enough to pay-off account balances, leaving them no choice but to work extra hours, pull out from savings, delay the progression of their education — or retreat from the university entirely. 

In a statement on TOFI by Kellie Casuga, a second-year scholar from the School of Hospitality and Tourism Management (SHTM), she shared that the hikes are still felt despite their full tuition scholarship. 

“Kahit na scholar, mataas pa rin ‘yung miscellaneous fee, so parang hindi nagiging worth it, kasi palagi na lang siyang tumataas nang tumataas, tapos walang nag-i-improve,” she reported. 

Others have voiced their dissatisfaction for the services paid for at HAU, expressing concern over whether the money spent for tuition and other school fees is directed towards real improvements. 

A lack of visible advancements after a continuous series of increases not only discourages students from partaking in the conversation, but also hurts financial capabilities. In the cases of working students, cash outflows for TOSF raise while inflows are rarely fixed. Parents adjust distribution of money amongst needs, compromising necessities to secure the education of their children. Even scholars, student assistance, and recipients of grants, pay the hike when the discount is less than 100%. 

These proposals are not simple increases printed onto a table of fees, but a force that pushes the many to reevaluate and rectify expenses even outside of educational expenditures.

Life past the campus walls shifts with the increases from within — what more when it is yearly?

Councils Left Behind: Two Sides of the Coin

CSCs and the HAU – University Student Council (HAU – USC) are funded by the “USC and CSC fees” listed under miscellaneous fees, receiving P65 and P80 respectively per student. This raises unease over HAU’s claim of being a student-centered institution.

In an interview with a college finance councilor, who requested anonymity, it was stated that a 1-2% increase would highly improve the funding of CSC activities but still cause added financial distress.

“Since tuition and other miscellaneous fees already increase almost every year, adding more to council and publication fees may further add to the financial burden of students, even if the amount may seem small,” the councilor shared.

On the other hand, colleges with smaller populations currently experience frequent budget limitations as CSC fees remain equal across departments. Scarcity of tuition funding amidst large events similar to College Days or University Days, leave councils to make do or rely on sponsorships that are difficult to acquire and maintain. 

Certainty, Not Greed

Mr. Krabs treated every cent, penny, and nickel as his reassurance and gap between poverty, finding comfort in the monetary stability. Just like Mr. Krabs guarding his jar of coins, students are compelled to protect what little financial certainty they have.

Students are not Anti-TOFI because they do not see the need in institutional development, but rather, every peso and centavos counts as the people’s assurance of certainty — no matter how minimal the increase is. 

Inflation driven by global crises continues to erode household budgets. Families juggle rising food prices, transportation costs, and the need for multiple sources of income just to stay afloat. In this climate, tuition hikes introduce another layer of unpredictability into already fragile financial plans. For many students, that 2 percent is not spare change; it is the margin that determines whether education remains accessible or slowly slips further out of reach.

Nonetheless, student participation in such conversations and consultations is key to making concerns heard. Students have already made their position clear. Through consultations, discussions, and public discourse, they have articulated why that small fraction matters. Their voices echo a simple but urgent appeal: protect the nickel.

The question now no longer rests on the student body’s willingness to guard their 2 percent. The greater question lies with the administration: whether it is willing to listen to the very community it claims to serve. Because if Mr. Krabs knew anything, it is that every coin tells a story. 

And right now, the students are asking the administration to hear theirs — and to choose certainty over another hand reaching into the jar.