Most international students can no longer bring a partner or children to Australia on a student or graduate visa. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke confirmed the change at a National Press Club address on 17 September 2026. Here's what changed, who is exempt, and what to do next.
What's changed
A Student visa (subclass 500) lets you study in Australia. A Temporary Graduate visa (subclass 485) lets you stay and work here after you finish studying. Both visas used to let you bring a partner or dependent children. Most new applicants can no longer do this.
Who this affects
New applicants - family members generally cannot be added to a new application
Already in Australia - no change. Your family's current visa continues until you leave, or become eligible for a permanent visa
Exempt - students from Pacific and ASEAN nations, and PhD or other doctoral students
Changing or extending your course
Genuine extensions — illness, your provider closing — are unchanged
Course transfers at the same level, same institution, still work, but need a new visa application
After finishing a course, you can only move up the qualification scale — for example, bachelor's to master's — not sideways or down
When does this start?
No commencement date has been announced. Current rules apply until then. Confirm the rules on the day you apply, not from news reports.
Disclaimer: This information is general only and does not take into account your personal situation. Australian migration rules and state nomination requirements can change quickly. You should get advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer before making a visa decision.
In 2021, JD Sheard moved from Canada to Adelaide on Australia's Global Talent visa, after two decades of scaling businesses across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Europe. This included growing a multinational technology and engineering services company from 100 to more than 1,800 employees across four countries.
His story provides a clear, real-world example of the distinct advantages that the National Innovation Visa (NIV)—the pathway that replaced the Global Talent visa—brings to the state. Unlike traditional skilled migration, high-calibre individuals like JD generate compounding economic impacts by bringing exceptional skills to build things that did not previously exist in Australia.
Specifically, JD’s transition to South Australia has delivered the following major benefits:
Personally invested significant funds to launch Eastend Ventures, South Australia's first registered Early Stage Venture Capital Limited Partnership (ESVCLP) of its kind.
Helping first-time founders, young people, and repeat entrepreneurs get their businesses off the ground in catered-for markets outside of Sydney and Melbourne.
Driving employment demand in high-value, knowledge-intensive sectors such as software engineering, AI, cybersecurity, and defence technology.
Fostering the commercialisation of genuinely innovative products, from construction technology to AI infrastructure, and expanding South Australia's export potential.
Drawing more than $25 million for Eastend Ventures Fund 1, including a $5 million commitment from the South Australian Government’s investment corporation, Funds SA.
Driving company growth and hiring that ultimately flows through into broader taxable income over time
What is the National Innovation Visa?
When JD applied, the pathway was known as the Global Talent visa. That program has since become the National Innovation Visa (subclass 858), a permanent visa for people with an internationally recognised record of outstanding achievement in their field. South Australian state nomination for the NIV is aimed at high-calibre, high-performing individuals who can drive innovation, productivity, and growth in the state.
How does this compare to other migration pathways?
Most skilled migration to Australia fills a specific, single role. While valuable, general skilled migration and employer-sponsored visas tie the visa holder to an individual position, meaning they cannot easily start new ventures, back other founders, or move capital into the local economy at scale.
The National Innovation Visa works differently. Because it isn't tied to a single employer, a visa holder like JD can found a company, sit on multiple boards, and direct capital into other people's ventures simultaneously. The visa is designed for individuals whose contribution is not just a single job, but a multiplying body of ongoing economic activity.
Concrete Proof: Why JD is a Model for the NIV
It's easy to talk about a visa category in the abstract, but JD's career since arriving in Adelaide shows in concrete terms what a single high-calibre migrant can bring to a state economy.
A remarkable, formally recognised record of achievement
JD's qualifications and career achievements are exactly the kind of internationally recognised, top-of-field profile the National Innovation Visa is designed to identify.
An MBA in Finance and a Company Directors Course qualification (GAICD) from the Australian Institute of Company Directors
Project Management Professional (PMP) certification
Harvard Business School Online certificates in Alternative Investments and Financial Accounting
A commercial pilot licence, held alongside a full-time executive career
Leadership of a multinational company's growth from 100 to more than 1,800 employees across four countries, including the creation of some of the oil and gas industry's earliest widely adopted SaaS, IoT, AI and machine learning products, adopted by Fortune 500 companies as early clients
It's an unusually broad combination — deep technical and digital transformation experience, formal financial and governance qualifications, and a demonstrated ability to scale a business internationally. That breadth is precisely what the National Innovation Visa's 'exceptional and outstanding achievement' test looks for.
He leads a venture capital firm putting money into Australian startups
In 2023, JD co-founded Eastend Ventures with Josh Garratt to back early-stage, high-growth B2B technology companies.
Eastend Ventures Fund 1 became South Australia's first Early Stage Venture Capital Limited Partnership (ESVCLP), reaching a $13 million first close in June 2025 on its way to a $50 million target.
His own investment is drawing in further capital for South Australia
JD and his co-founder have put more than $2 million of their own money into Fund 1 — a direct personal stake that gave other investors confidence to follow.
That confidence is compounding: Funds SA's Chief Investment Officer described the Eastend partnership as helping the state access a more diverse pipeline of investment opportunities, including those emerging from South Australia itself.
Every dollar Fund 1 raises is a dollar that wasn't available to South Australian startups before Eastend Ventures existed. As the fund grows toward its $50 million target, so does its capacity to back more local businesses — meaning JD's influence on the state's investment landscape compounds well beyond his own initial contribution, with knock-on benefits for the wider Australian economy as the companies he backs grow, hire and eventually attract further national and international investment.
He's helping create employment for Australians
Fund 1 is targeted at up to 30 early-stage portfolio companies, and has already backed local businesses including Heatseeker, Priori Analytica and the tradie app Jack.
Every one of those companies hires locally as it grows. That's a direct, compounding employment effect that a single skilled employee in a single role can't replicate on the same scale.
He's backing an overlooked part of Australia's startup ecosystem
Most Australian venture capital flows to Sydney and Melbourne. Eastend Ventures was deliberately built to invest in South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland instead — states that together receive a small share of national VC investment.
This wasn't the first fund JD backed either — through Virtca Capital he had already deployed an earlier $3 million fund into early-stage companies before Eastend Ventures existed.
A hands-on presence connecting SA to the world
JD remains an active member of the Adelaide-based angel investor network, Southern Angels, and serves as a Non-Executive Director for South Australian technology companies Optible AI and JACK App. Through Eastend, JD also assists SA businesses with expansion into the US, Canada, and the UK, allowing South Australian intellectual property to generate revenue from international markets while retaining local operations.
What JD's story says about Australia's opportunity
JD Sheard’s story highlights the structural economic benefits the National Innovation Visa is designed to deliver. Rather than simply filling a single workforce vacancy, JD addressed a structural shortage in the South Australian economy: early-stage capital and scaling networks for innovative companies.
His work demonstrates the true potential of the visa pathway as an economic multiplier—where exceptional individuals launch ventures, attract institutional capital, mentor local founders, create high-skilled jobs, and drive long-term tax revenue for the state.
Work Visa Lawyers prepared JD's application by matching his international track record to the Global Talent pathway. If a path like JD's sounds like it could be yours, that's a conversation worth having early—well before you've locked in a move, and while there's still time to build the strongest possible case.
Disclaimer: This information is general only and does not take into account your personal situation. Australian migration rules and state nomination requirements can change quickly. You should get advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer before making a visa decision.
Australia's Working Holiday Maker (WHM) program is changing. Backpackers who want to stay for a second or third year will now have to enter a ballot. But here is the part that is being overlooked: backpackers still have to complete 88 days of regional work before entering that ballot. They do all the hard work. Then they wait. And many of them will get nothing in return. That is worth examining carefully.
What Is the Working Holiday Maker Program?
The Working Holiday (Subclass 417) and Work and Holiday (Subclass 462) visas let young people from eligible countries visit Australia for up to one year. They can work to fund their trip. If they want to extend their stay, they need to complete a set amount of regional work in qualifying industries such as agriculture, fishing, and some regional hospitality roles.
Until now, completing 88 days of regional work almost guaranteed a second-year visa. Completing six months of regional work in the second year gave backpackers access to a third year. The ballot removes that guarantee. Completely.
What Did Tony Burke Announce on 17 September 2026?
Immigration Minister Tony Burke announced the ballot system at the National Press Club. Here is how it works:
Year two: 45,000 ballot places — down from 57,000 who qualified last year. The 88-day regional work requirement still applies before entry into the ballot.
Year three: just 5,000 ballot places — down from 31,000 who qualified last year. The six-month regional work requirement still applies.
UK backpackers are excluded from the ballot entirely under the Australia–UK Free Trade Agreement. They do not need the regional work requirement either.
The changes can be implemented by ministerial direction and regulation — not legislation.
The changes form part of a plan to bring net overseas migration from 292,000 down to 225,000 by 2028.
Working Holiday Visa Ballot Problem
Under the new system, backpackers still have to do all the regional work. Every bit of it. They still have to spend 88 days on farms, in fisheries, or in qualifying regional roles. The work is physically demanding. It is often in remote areas. It takes months out of their travels.
But after all of that work, they go into a ballot. And a ballot means they might not win a visa at all.
Last year, 57,000 backpackers stayed for a second year. Under the ballot, only 45,000 places are available. That means roughly 12,000 people who complete all the required regional work could still miss out on a second-year visa.
For the third year, the shortfall is even more stark. Last year, 31,000 backpackers qualified. Under the ballot, only 5,000 places exist — a reduction of more than 80%.
You work for months in regional Australia. You do the jobs that Australians often will not do. Then you might get nothing. That is the reality of this ballot.
Why This Kills the Motivation to Do Regional Work
Immigration lawyer Chris Johnston, principal of Work Visa Lawyers, sees the problem clearly.
"The likely result of the ballot will be 200,000 backpackers in Australia and almost none of them want to do the regional work anymore. The uncertainty of the ballot will remove motivation."
— Chris Johnston, Immigration Lawyer, Work Visa Lawyers
The old system worked because the incentive was direct and certain. Complete 88 days → get a second-year visa. Almost always. That certainty was exactly why backpackers were willing to travel to remote farms and do hard physical work.
The ballot breaks that link. Why would you spend three months doing difficult work in regional Australia if there is a real chance you still won't get the visa? The answer, for many backpackers, will simply be: you won't.
On the morning of Burke's press conference, Work Visa Lawyers received a call from a backpacker who had just heard the news. The question was immediate: if the ballot means I might not get a second-year visa anyway, what other options do I have? That question tells you everything about what this ballot does to motivation.
Backpackers Are Already Saying No — and Social Media Shows It
That phone call to our office was not an isolated reaction. Across Facebook groups and online communities dedicated to working holiday makers in Australia, backpackers responded to the announcement almost immediately. The dominant sentiment was not confusion. It was a decision.
Post after post across groups with tens of thousands of members said the same thing: if completing the 88 days, or 6 months, of regional work no longer guarantees a second-year visa, I am not going to do it. Why would I spend three months on a remote farm for a lottery ticket?
This Is Worse Than the Pause That Came Before
Before September 17, the government had quietly suspended WHM visa applications from 24 countries and slowed processing times across the board. The industry called it a crisis.
But the ballot is arguably worse. Here is why.
The pause stopped new people from entering Australia on WHM visas. But backpackers already in Australia on their first-year visa still had a reason to do the regional work. The second-year visa was still achievable if you put in the time.
The ballot changes the situation for people already in the country. It tells backpackers currently working their way through regional Australia: you can complete the regional work, but we might not give you a visa for it. The work requirement has not changed. The guarantee has gone.
Is This Exploitative? Let's Ask the Question.
The Working Holiday Maker program was designed for cultural exchange. Young people experience Australia. Australia gets seasonal labour. The deal was always implied: do the hard regional work, get the extra time in the country. That implied deal is now broken on the government's side.
We know the original system already had serious problems. The Fair Work Ombudsman's 2016 inquiry into the 417 visa program — which surveyed more than 4,000 overseas workers — found that 66% felt their employer was taking advantage of them. Some 35% believed they were paid less than minimum wage. Fourteen per cent had to pay in advance to get regional work. Six per cent had to pay an employer to sign off their 88 days.
The power imbalance between employers and backpackers chasing visa days was real, documented, and serious.
The ballot does not improve that dynamic. It makes it worse. A backpacker who has done their 88 days and is now waiting on a ballot result has even less leverage than before. They completed the requirement. They are not sure they will win the visa. An employer who knows a backpacker is desperate — and not certain they will win the ballot anyway — has even more power over them, not less.
Requiring the work while removing the reward is not a balanced system. It is one where the worker carries all the risk.
Was Anyone Actually Consulted?
At the National Press Club on September 17, Tony Burke presented the ballot as part of a measured plan to manage migration numbers. But how many backpackers were consulted before this was announced? How many received a phone call, a survey, or an invitation to comment?
The Tourism and Transport Forum told the Australian Financial Review that the industry had been "blindsided" by the changes. "All we would have liked was for government to consult us while they were thinking about this," TTF CEO Margy Osmond said.
The National Farmers' Federation also called for "urgent" consultation before any further changes — after the fact, not before. If peak industry bodies that depend on these workers were not consulted, it is reasonable to assume the workers themselves — the backpackers — were not either.
This was a policy decision made about them, not with them.
There Is a More Logical Approach
If the goal is to reduce the overall number of Working Holiday Makers in Australia, there is a simpler way to do it.
Reduce the number of first-year WHM visa grants. That controls total numbers at the point of entry. But leave the second and third year incentives intact. Keep the direct link between completing regional work and receiving the extension visa. Backpackers already in Australia still have a clear reason to do the regional work. Farms and hospitality businesses keep their workforce. And the deal remains honest: work the days, get the visa.
The ballot, by contrast, breaks the deal for people already here. It removes the motivation from workers already in the country and already willing to do the work. That is the wrong target and the wrong tool.
What Should You Do If You Are a Backpacker Right Now?
If you are currently in Australia on a first-year Subclass 417 or 462 visa, here is what to keep in mind.
The ballot is not yet in place. No commencement date has been published. Rules made by ministerial direction can change.
If you are already doing or planning your 88-day regional work, do not stop based on uncertainty alone. The situation is still evolving.
Speak to an immigration lawyer before making decisions about your regional work or alternative visa pathways.
There may be other visa options available depending on your nationality, skills, and situation.
Do not assume the ballot is the end of the road. Get advice specific to your circumstances.
Can Work Visa Lawyers Help?
Yes. If you are a backpacker on a Subclass 417 or 462 visa and you are worried about what the ballot means for your plans, Work Visa Lawyers can help. Our team — including principal immigration lawyer Chris Johnston — understands this program in detail and is already hearing from backpackers affected by the uncertainty.
We can review your individual situation, explain your options, and help you find a path forward that makes sense for you. Contact us for an appointment.
What is the backpacker ballot and when does it start?
The ballot is a new system for second and third-year Working Holiday Maker visas. Backpackers must still complete regional work, but they then enter a draw rather than automatically receiving a visa. Second-year places are capped at 45,000. Third-year places are capped at 5,000. No start date has been announced yet.
Do I still need to do 88 days of regional work if there is a ballot?
Yes. The 88-day requirement for a second-year visa still applies. The six-month requirement for a third-year visa still applies. The ballot does not remove those requirements — it just means completing them no longer guarantees a visa.
Does the ballot affect UK backpackers?
No. UK working holiday makers are excluded from the ballot under the Australia–UK Free Trade Agreement. They are also not required to complete regional work to extend their stay. This applies only to UK passport holders.
Why would I bother doing the regional work if the ballot means I might not get a visa?
That is exactly the question being asked by backpackers right now. The ballot removes the certainty that made the regional work worthwhile. Many backpackers will decide it is not worth the risk. That is the core flaw in this policy — it removes motivation for the very work requirement it still demands.
What happens if I do the regional work but don't win the ballot?
You will not receive a second or third-year visa through that pathway. Depending on your nationality, skills, and circumstances, you may have other options. A migration lawyer can advise you on what alternatives exist for your specific situation.
Is there any legal challenge to the ballot system?
The changes are being made by ministerial direction and regulation rather than legislation. That means they can be changed more quickly, in either direction. No legal challenge has been announced at this stage. Check the Department of Home Affairs website and speak to an immigration lawyer for the latest developments.
Disclaimer: This information is general only and does not take into account your personal situation. Australian migration rules and state nomination requirements can change quickly. You should get advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer before making a visa decision.
On 17 September 2026, Immigration Minister Tony Burke announced major changes to Australia's Working Holiday Maker (WHM) program.
The centrepiece is a ballot system for backpackers wanting a second or third year.
Both agriculture and hospitality sectors depend heavily on Working Holiday Makers to fill seasonal roles that Australians consistently leave vacant. Without them, the workforce gaps do not fix themselves — they just grow.
If the ballot is introduced, this will reduce the incentive to do regional work.
How do we know that the ballot is going to reduce the incentive to do regional work?
As soon as the announcement was finished, the first phone call we received in our office was from a backpacker saying "I'm not going to do the ballot. What other options are there?".
After Tony Burke's announcement, Chris Johnston and Tajinder Kaur, immigration lawyers, did a live stream on YouTube explaining all the changes announced and answering some questions we received about it. You can check the video here.
What Is the Working Holiday Maker Program?
The Working Holiday Maker (WHM) program lets young people from eligible countries visit Australia for up to one year. They can work to fund their travels.
If they complete 88 days of regional work in their first year — in industries like agriculture, fishing, and some regional hospitality roles — they can apply for a second-year visa (Subclass 417 or 462).
If they complete six months of regional work in their second year, they can apply for a third year.
For decades, this system gave farms and regional hospitality businesses a reliable seasonal workforce. That has now fundamentally changed.
What Did Tony Burke Announce on 17 September 2026?
Burke announced the following key changes at the National Press Club:
A ballot for year-two WHM visas, capped at 45,000 places — down from 57,000 who qualified last year.
A ballot for year-three WHM visas, capped at just 5,000 places — down from 31,000 last year.
Processing times for WHM applications stabilised at three months.
UK backpackers excluded from the ballot under the Australia–UK Free Trade Agreement.
The changes form part of a plan to reduce net overseas migration from around 292,000 to 225,000 by 2028.
The Ballot Removes the Motivation to Do Regional Work
There is a problem at the heart of this policy that no one in government appears to have thought through: the ballot does not just reduce numbers. It removes the reason backpackers do the regional work in the first place.
Immigration lawyer Chris Johnston, principal of Work Visa Lawyers, is direct about where this leads.
"The likely result of the ballot will be 200,000 backpackers in Australia and almost none of them want to do the regional work anymore. The uncertainty of the ballot will remove motivation."
— Chris Johnston, Immigration Lawyer, Work Visa Lawyers
The logic is simple. If completing 88 days of regional work no longer guarantees a second year, why do it? And why would anyone commit to six months of regional work for a third year when only 5,000 places exist — down from 31,000 last year — and the odds of winning the ballot are close to nothing?
The old system worked because the incentive was certain. Complete 88 days of regional work → get a second year. Almost guaranteed. The ballot breaks that link entirely. And it is worth remembering: Australians already do not want most of these regional jobs. That is why the WHM program exists in the first place. Removing the motivation for backpackers to do the same work does not make those roles more appealing to locals.
What the Numbers Mean for Farms
The National Farmers' Federation (NFF) has put the numbers into sharp relief. Working Holiday Makers fill about one in seven farm jobs across Australia — making up around 44% of the horticulture workforce, 31% of the grains sector, 26% of red meat workers, and 25% of cotton workers.
The cut to the third-year ballot is more than 80%. Last year, 31,000 backpackers stayed for a third year. Under the ballot, only 5,000 places are available.
NFF President Hamish McIntyre called it a "low blow for farmers." The government's unilateral slowdown on WHM visas, he said, had "already caused havoc across agriculture ahead of the busiest time of year for food and fibre production."
NFF Executive Officer Richard Shannon took direct aim at the government's framing of the changes as a response to housing pressures. "Nothing in the changes to specified work or Working Holiday Maker settings does anything to build a single house," he said. "Backpackers doing harvest work in regional Australia are not the cause of housing shortages in our capital cities. They are the reason fruit gets picked, packed and onto supermarket shelves."
The federation warned that harvests are already underway in parts of Queensland and the warning is clear: food prices will rise if farms cannot get the workers they need in time.
Esperance farmer Mic Fels, speaking to the ABC, described the slowdown that preceded Burke's announcement as "quite catastrophic — and I'm not using hyperbole here." He said the impact on the broadacre sector, especially in Western Australia, had already been devastating.
The NFF was equally pointed about the new three-month processing target: "Farmers need approvals in days, not months. For many farms, three months is the difference between harvesting a crop and losing it."
What the Numbers Mean for Hospitality
Accommodation Australia has estimated the ballot caps amount to roughly a 40% reduction from current backpacker levels — a cut the peak body says will fall at the worst possible time for the sector.
Accommodation Australia represents close to 5,000 hospitality, travel, and accommodation providers with around 250,000 workers. Before this announcement, there were already more than 38,000 vacancies across the sector. CEO James Goodwin has been clear that targeted migration is "necessary to fill the large gaps to ease the worker shortage and unlock investment and growth" — not cut.
Tourism and Transport Forum (TTF) CEO Margy Osmond described the announcement as an "extraordinary slap in the face for an industry already under pressure." Major changes had been made, she said, "without previously consulting the people who have to make it work."
Osmond told the Australian Financial Review that the industry had been "blindsided" by Labor's reforms, and warned the new laws would see backpackers feeling "not welcome in Australia."
"All we would have liked was for government to consult us while they were thinking about this," Osmond said.
Osmond also flagged that tourism and hospitality were left off the priority processing list entirely — despite facing the same workforce pressures as construction, which was included. With more than 38,000 vacancies already unfilled, the sector has no buffer to absorb a 40% reduction in its most flexible workforce.
The Industry Had Already Sounded the Alarm
Weeks before the September 17 announcement, the government had quietly paused WHM applications from 24 countries and slowed processing times across the board. Even before the ballot was confirmed, the Tourism and Transport Forum reported a drop in bookings for tourism activities nationally — tourism boats on Sydney Harbour, flights, and national park visits.
Working Holiday Makers spend $4.4 billion in Australia every year. Of that, $1.1 billion flows directly into regional economies — into accommodation, transport, hospitality, tours, and local businesses.
All four major industry bodies — the NFF, TTF, Accommodation Australia, and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) — went to Parliament House to call for urgent action before September 17. None of them was consulted before Burke's announcement.
Can Work Visa Lawyers Help?
Yes. Work Visa Lawyers are Australia's leading immigration law firm for businesses and individuals navigating complex visa situations. If you run a regional business that relies on WHMs — whether in agriculture, hospitality, or tourism — our lawyers can review your situation and identify workforce solutions that work for you.
We can advise on employer-sponsored visas, PALM scheme eligibility, and any pathways that help keep your business operating through the summer season and beyond. Contact us for an appointment.
What is the new Working Holiday Maker ballot and when does it start?
The ballot is a new system for second and third-year WHM visas (Subclass 417 and 462). Instead of applying directly after completing regional work, backpackers must enter a draw with limited places. Year two is capped at 45,000. Year three is capped at 5,000. No start date has been published yet. Changes are being made by ministerial direction, not legislation, so timing may shift.
Does the ballot affect UK backpackers?
No. UK working holiday makers are excluded from the ballot under the Australia–UK Free Trade Agreement. They also do not need to meet the regional work requirement. The number of UK backpackers in Australia has grown from around 17,000 to nearly 80,000 since the FTA took effect.
Why are farmers worried about the WHM ballot?
Working Holiday Makers fill about one in seven farm jobs in Australia. They make up 44% of the horticulture workforce alone. With the third-year ballot cut by over 80%, farmers face serious labour shortages during peak harvest season — starting now, with harvest already underway in parts of Queensland.
Are there other workforce options if backpacker numbers fall?
Yes. Regional employers can explore the PALM scheme, which brings workers from Pacific Island nations and Timor-Leste. Employer-sponsored visa pathways may also be relevant for some roles. Talk to an immigration lawyer to understand what options apply to your business.
Is the government consulting farming and hospitality industries?
Not yet — and the NFF, TTF, Accommodation Australia, and ACCI are calling for urgent consultation. The September 17 announcement was made without prior consultation with any of these peak bodies.
Could the WHV ballot lead to higher food prices?
Yes, according to the NFF. The federation has warned publicly that food prices will rise if farms cannot get the workers needed to harvest crops. Harvest in Queensland has already begun, and processing times of three months mean many farms will not get workers in time.
Disclaimer: This information is general only and does not take into account your personal situation. Australian migration rules and state nomination requirements can change quickly. You should get advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer before making a visa decision.
Understanding PIC 4020: Avoiding an Australian Visa Refusal
Every Australian visa application depends on giving accurate information. Public Interest Criterion (PIC) 4020 is the rule the Department of Home Affairs uses to stop fraud, bogus documents and misleading information. If you get this wrong, you could be barred from getting an Australian visa for years. This guide explains what PIC 4020 means, what can trigger a refusal, and what you should do next.
What is PIC 4020?
PIC 4020 requires every visa applicant to give information and documents that are genuine, accurate, and not false or misleading.
This rule does not stop at your visa application form. It can also apply to information you give in a health questionnaire, a medical examination, or any communication with a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth.
If the Department believes you provided, or caused someone else to provide, a bogus document or false or misleading information, your visa application may be refused. You can read the Department's own guidance on providing accurate information for more detail.
Why does PIC 4020 matter?
A PIC 4020 refusal is not just about losing one visa application. It can shut you out of Australia for years, even if you later become eligible for a different visa.
This is why it is critical to check every document and every answer on your application before you submit it. This includes forms completed by a migration agent, employer or education provider on your behalf. You are responsible for what is submitted in your name, even if someone else prepared it.
What may lead to a refusal under PIC 4020(2)?
The Department can refuse a visa under PIC 4020(2) for a number of reasons, including:
providing fraudulent or bogus documents
providing incorrect or misleading information about your educational qualifications or study history
providing a bogus employment reference or employment letter
providing incorrect or misleading information about your skills or employment history
failing to disclose a previous visa refusal
providing incorrect information about your personal circumstances
If any of these apply to your situation, it is worth reviewing your application closely before you lodge it, or before you respond to any Departmental request.
What happens if your visa is refused under PIC 4020(2)?
If your visa application is refused under PIC 4020(2), you will be barred from being granted an Australian visa for three years.
Can the three-year exclusion period be waived?
A waiver may be available in limited circumstances, including where:
compelling circumstances affecting the interests of Australia justify granting the visa
compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting the interests of an Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident, or eligible New Zealand citizen justify granting the visa
A waiver is discretionary. This means it is assessed case by case, based on your individual circumstances. There is no guarantee a waiver will be granted, so it helps to put your strongest case forward with proper evidence.
What is PIC 4020(2A)?
PIC 4020(2A) requires you to satisfy the Minister as to your identity. While general false information triggers the three-year ban under PIC 4020(2), PIC 4020(2A) deals specifically with your identity.
An identity-related concern can arise where the Department believes you may be pretending to be another person, using a false identity, or withholding information relevant to establishing your true identity.
What may raise identity concerns?
The Department may raise an identity concern if you fail to disclose, or give incorrect information about:
an alias, nickname or other name you are known by
your overseas travel history
your previous residential addresses
another citizenship or nationality
previous legal names, maiden names or spelling variations
another date of birth
What happens if your visa is refused under PIC 4020(2A)?
If your visa is refused because you are unable to satisfy the Minister as to your identity under PIC 4020(2A), you will be barred for ten years from applying for any Australian visa, whether onshore or offshore. This is a much longer exclusion period than the three-year ban under PIC 4020(2), so identity-related information deserves particular care.
Have you received a Section 57 Natural Justice letter?
Before refusing a visa under PIC 4020, the Department will usually send a "Section 57 Natural Justice" letter. This letter asks you to explain any discrepancies it has identified. If you have received one of these letters, or if your visa has already been refused under PIC 4020, it is critical to seek professional migration advice immediately. How you respond can affect whether you face a three-year or ten-year exclusion, so it is important to get this right the first time.
What should you do?
If you are concerned about PIC 4020, or you have received a natural justice letter, do not respond without getting advice first.
You should check:
whether every document in your application is genuine and accurate
whether your education, employment and skills information is correct and consistent across all documents
whether you have disclosed any previous visa refusals
whether your identity details (names, dates of birth, nationalities) are consistent across every document you have submitted
whether you have received a Section 57 natural justice letter and how much time you have to respond
If you are unsure about any of these points, or you are running out of time to respond to a Departmental letter, you should get advice as soon as possible. A PIC 4020 refusal can affect your ability to live, work or study in Australia for years.
Can Work Visa Lawyers help?
Yes. Work Visa Lawyers can help you understand your PIC 4020 risk and prepare a clear, well-evidenced response.
We can assist with:
reviewing your visa application for PIC 4020 risks before you lodge it
responding to a Section 57 natural justice letter
preparing a waiver request for a PIC 4020(2) exclusion
addressing PIC 4020(2A) identity concerns
appealing a PIC 4020 visa refusal
PIC 4020 matters are assessed on the specific facts of your case, and the consequences of getting your response wrong can last for years. Getting advice early gives you the best chance of a good outcome.
What is PIC 4020 on an Australian visa application?
PIC 4020 is Public Interest Criterion 4020. It requires you to give information and documents that are genuine, accurate, and not false or misleading when you apply for an Australian visa. It applies to your application form, health questionnaire, and any communication with a Medical Officer of the Commonwealth.
What happens if my visa is refused under PIC 4020?
If your visa is refused under PIC 4020(2), you will be barred from being granted an Australian visa for three years. If it is refused under PIC 4020(2A) because you cannot satisfy the Minister as to your identity, the exclusion period is ten years.
Can I get a waiver for the PIC 4020 three-year ban?
A waiver may be possible if compelling circumstances affecting Australia's interests, or compassionate or compelling circumstances affecting an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, justify granting the visa. A waiver is discretionary, so it is assessed case by case.
What is the difference between PIC 4020(2) and PIC 4020(2A)?
PIC 4020(2) covers false, misleading or bogus information generally, and carries a three-year exclusion. PIC 4020(2A) is specifically about your identity, such as undisclosed aliases, addresses or nationalities, and carries a longer, ten-year exclusion.
What should I do if I get a Section 57 natural justice letter?
A Section 57 letter gives you a chance to explain a discrepancy before the Department decides whether to refuse your visa under PIC 4020. You should seek professional migration advice immediately, as your response can determine whether you face a three-year or ten-year ban.
How can Work Visa Lawyers help with a PIC 4020 issue?
Work Visa Lawyers can review your application for PIC 4020 risks, help you respond to a natural justice letter, prepare a waiver request, and assist with an appeal if your visa has already been refused. You can arrange an appointment to discuss your specific circumstances.
Disclaimer: This information is general only and does not take into account your personal situation. Australian migration rules can change quickly. You should get advice from a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer before making a visa decision.
