Manuscript received October 7, 2026; accepted November 6, 2026; published November 12, 2026.

Abstract—Household investment in education is shaped by the policy environment in which families make decisions. Drawing on historical institutionalism, cost-sharing theory, and the logic of positional competition, this study treats major policy documents as critical junctures and divides Chinese education policy since 1993 into four regimes: expanding cost sharing, free compulsory education, regulation of private tutoring, and the "Double Reduction" reform. Combining policy documents, education finance statistics, and published household survey results, it compares the level, composition, and urban–rural distribution of household education spending across the four regimes. Household education investment evolved from compulsory payment of school fees to competitive investment in private tutoring and then to structural adjustment. The expansion of public funding did not reduce total household spending, because resources released by lower school fees were largely redirected into competitive spending outside school. Each policy shift changed the channels and composition of household investment, while families' willingness to invest under competitive pressure showed strong path dependence. The main form of the urban–rural gap also shifted, from the burden of school fees to academic tutoring and possibly to non-academic enrichment. The study argues that equity-oriented policy should move from isolated fee reductions and supply controls toward governance coordinated with reform of student assessment.