SOCIAL SECURITY - childcare subsidy - review of CCS payment date - no attendance within 26 weeks of grant - later attendance and new application - no discretion to backdate claim - separate decision that cancellation void at law, and applicant retains entitlement if remaining criteria met on reassessment - CCS entitlement to be reassessed from 28 October 2024 to 19 January 2025 - decision under review affirmed

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information pursuant to subsection 201(1A) of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999.

1. Ms Carnaghan and [Mr A] are the parents of [Child 1] and [Child 2]. Ms Carnaghan has been in receipt of childcare subsidy (CCS) in respect of [Child 1] since April 2021. This review is only in relation to [Child 2].
2. Ms Carnaghan submitted a claim for paid parental leave and CCS on 22 May 2024. On 12 June 2024, Ms Carnaghan was notified in writing that her CCS claim had been finalised and had been granted from 29 April 2024. The letter recorded the CCS percentages for [the children] as 74.92% and 89.24% respectively.
3. On 1 July 2024, following an updated combined adjusted taxable income, Centrelink wrote to Ms Carnaghan and advised that the CCS percentages for [the children] were now 74.22% and 88.05% respectively.
4. According to Centrelink records, a determination was made on 28 October 2024 to cancel Ms Carnaghan's eligibility for CCS in respect of [Child 2], because he did not attend any child care sessions within 26 weeks of 29 April 2024. However, Ms Carnaghan was not notified of the cancellation determination.
5. Coincidently, also on 28 October 2024, Ms Carnaghan entered into written care arrangement with [named] Early Learning Centre ([ELC]). [Child 2] commenced his first session of child care on Wednesday 20 November 2024.
6. On 2 December 2024, [Mr A] submitted a claim for paid parental leave. The form also included a claim for CCS. A Centrelink officer contacted [Mr A] on 11 December 2024 and advised him to withdraw his CCS application because Ms Carnaghan was already in receipt of CCS for the children. The withdrawal was completed by the Centrelink officer on [Mr A]'s behalf.
7. It was not until 7 February 2025 when Ms Carnaghan accessed the Centrelink website to update the new child care details for [Child 1], who was commencing after-school care with a new child care provider, that she noticed there was no record of her eligibility for CCS in respect of [Child 2]. She then lodged an application for CCS in respect of [the children] on the same day. The application was subsequently granted from 20 January 2025. Ms Carnaghan was notified in writing on 10 February 2025. The letter recorded the CCS percentages for [the children] as 72.32% and 84.88% respectively.
8. Ms Carnaghan requested a review of the decision to pay her CCS from 20 January 2025 and not from an earlier date on 11 March 2025, which was subsequently affirmed by an authorised review officer on 14 March 2025. Ms Carnaghan then lodged an application to the Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) on 16 March 2025 for an independent review of Centrelink's decision of 14 March 2025.
9. On 12 August 2025, the Tribunal conducted a hearing at which Ms Carnaghan participated by conference telephone and gave oral evidence to the Tribunal on affirmation. Her partner, [Mr A] also participated by conference telephone and gave oral evidence to the Tribunal on affirmation as a witness.
10. The Tribunal had before it the relevant documents from Centrelink's files and computer records in respect of the decision of 10 February 2025, numbered 1 to 75. Ms Carnaghan confirmed to the Tribunal her receipt of these documents. The Tribunal also considered a submission from Ms Carnaghan numbered A1 to A3 and additional evidence discussed at hearing, numbered A4 to A37. Relevant aspects of the evidence and material before the Tribunal will be referred to in the Tribunal's consideration of the issues which it has to decide.

1. The statutory provisions relevant to this review are contained in the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999 (the Act), the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999 (the Administration Act) and the Child Care Subsidy Minister's Rules 2017.
2. The issue to be considered by the Tribunal is whether Ms Carnaghan is entitled to receive CCS from a date earlier than 20 January 2025.

1. Ms Carnaghan told the Tribunal that she had an issue with the overall treatment of the matter by Centrelink. As noted above, Centrelink had decided to cancel Ms Carnaghan's eligibility to receive CCS in respect of [Child 2] on 28 October 2024. Given that her eligibility had been cancelled in respect of [Child 2], Centrelink determined that Ms Carnaghan was required to lodge a new claim for CCS.
2. There is no dispute that Ms Carnaghan met the initial eligibility requirements to receive CCS as a fee reduction for [the children] when a session of care was provided, in accordance with section 85BA of the Act. As such, an eligibility determination was made by Centrelink in respect of [the children] under subsection 67CC(1) of the Administration Act on 7 February 2025. The discretionary date of effect was determined to be 20 January 2025.
3. As Ms Carnaghan did not lodge a CCS claim until 7 February 2025, her eligibility could not be backdated earlier than the first Monday of a CCS fortnight within 28 days of lodging the claim. This date is therefore 20 January 2025, in accordance with subsection 67CC(4) of the Administration Act. There is no discretion in respect of backdating any further in these circumstances and the Tribunal so finds.
4. However, in a separate decision (Review number 2025/S194702), this Tribunal found that the cancellation decision of 28 October 2024 in respect of [Child 2] was void at law. This means that Ms Carnaghan retains her entitlement to receive CCS for [Child 2] by fee reduction from 28 October 2024 if she meets the remainder of the criteria under section 67CD of the Administration Act. In particular, that the child care provider has given the Secretary a report under section 204B of the Administration Act in relation to the child for the relevant week/s.
5. Ms Carnaghan gave oral evidence that [Child 2] has attended [the] ELC since 20 November 2024 and that the provider confirmed to her that all reports since then have been provided to Centrelink. As such information is not available to the Tribunal to verify, the matter has been sent back to the Secretary with the direction to reassess Ms Carnaghan's entitlement to CCS for [Child 2] from 28 October 2024 on the basis that her eligibility continued. This means that the CCS entitlement of Ms Carnaghan in respect of [Child 2] will be reassessed from 28 October 2024 to 19 January 2025 and a decision made in this regard. As this will be a new decision, it is open to Ms Carnaghan to seek a review of any decision that is made.