Migration (Fees for assessment of qualifications and experience) Instrument (LIN 23/002) 2023

The instrument deploys several modular concepts that determine who pays, when, and for what. The primary concept is the fee schedule: the instrument is a list of discrete assessment and review matters (labelled by item number) each paired with a fixed monetary fee (sections 5 and 6). Those scheduled matters are named programmatic assessments , for example Migration Skills Assessment, Migration Points Advice (conditional on a satisfactory Migration Skills Assessment outcome), Job Ready Program provisional, employment, workplace and final assessments, a suite of TSS Skills Assessment Program processes (documentary evidence assessment, technical interviews by pathway, practical assessments), and corresponding offshore variants.

A second concept is the separation between an initial assessment fee schedule (section 5) and internal-review fee schedule (section 6). The instrument therefore recognises two categories of chargeable interactions with Trades Recognition Australia: the primary assessment application and the internal review of an assessment outcome. The internal-review fees are often lower than the initial assessment fee (compare, for example, Migration Skills Assessment $795 in section 5, item 1, with internal review $610 in section 6, item 1), but not uniformly so across every listed matter.

A third concept is temporal transition. Section 4 contains savings and transitional provisions that preserve prior fee amounts in two contexts: (1) for certain Job Ready Program applicants who meet both an application-timing condition and a payment-by deadline (section 4(1)); and (2) generally for any application for an assessment or internal review made before commencement, which remains governed by the amounts in LIN 21/023 as in force immediately before commencement (section 4(2)). The instrument’s commencement rule (section 2) anchors those timing tests to the instrument’s registration date on the Federal Register of Legislation.

A final concept is delegated administrative implementation. The instrument is made by the Minister under a subregulation of the Migration Regulations 1994, but it specifies fees payable to Trades Recognition Australia for named assessment types. The instrument therefore operates as a regulatory price list, leaving the operational conduct of assessments, and the internal review process, to Trades Recognition Australia within the budgetary effect of the prescribed fees.

The direct payers are applicants who seek the listed assessments or who apply for an internal review of such assessments from Trades Recognition Australia. The instrument’s headings in sections 5 and 6,“Fees for Trades Recognition Australia assessment” and “Fees for internal review of assessment”,make clear that the fee burden is on applicants to Trade Recognition Australia for those particular matters. Individuals participating in the Job Ready Program and applicants to TSS Skills Assessment Program or Offshore Skills Assessment Program, as identified by the item descriptions in section 5, are specifically captured.

Trades Recognition Australia is the recipient of the fees specified, by the instrument’s framing (“the fee specified for an application to Trades Recognition Australia for an assessment ... is the amount mentioned”). The instrument therefore adjusts the revenues or cost recovery position of that agency or program, subject to how those fees are collected and allocated administratively (the instrument itself does not prescribe appropriation or accounting treatment).

The instrument also affects applicants’ advisers and sponsors who advise on visa or employment pathway choices, because fee increases or decreases alter the out-of-pocket cost of particular assessment pathways. For example, the Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment fee at $2,845 (section 5, item 5) is of a materially different scale to the Job Ready Program Final Assessment at $75 (item 6); these price points will influence applicants’ decisions about pursuing workplace assessment steps, or the sequencing of provisional and employment assessments.

The Department of Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs is an indirect actor. The instrument is made by the Minister, and it ties to paragraph 5.40(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, so changes to these fees feed into the broader migration administration costs and processes. The repeal of LIN 21/023 (section 3) and the transitional provisions (section 4) also affect those with pending applications; applicants who submitted applications or fee payments close to the instrument’s commencement will need to confirm which fee schedule applies.

Finally, because the instrument does not include enforcement provisions, entities that enforce compliance with migration-related regulatory obligations (for example, visa processing sections) will need to administer outcomes in light of the new fee structure while relying on the Regulations for legal authority to accept or refuse assessments, or to validate payment.

The instrument establishes no affirmative duties on private parties beyond the practical obligation to pay the scheduled fees if they wish to engage a specific Trades Recognition Australia assessment or an internal review of that assessment. The legal mechanism is the fee prescription: when an applicant applies to Trades Recognition Australia for a listed assessment, the fee they must pay is the amount specified in the corresponding item in section 5; when an applicant seeks internal review, the fee to be paid is the amount specified for that matter in section 6. These appear as de facto duties insofar as payment is a prerequisite to the application or request for review, but the instrument itself does not describe payment procedures, conditions of acceptance, or refund policies.

Applicants retain a procedural right, as recognised by the instrument, to seek internal review of an assessment, but that right is subject to payment of the internal-review fee specified in section 6. The instrument therefore makes the internal-review right conditional on a monetary cost that varies by type of matter; for example, an internal review of a Migration Skills Assessment is $610 (section 6, item 1).

The instrument confers no rights of appeal or judicial review; it is not framed as creating judicial or administrative appeal rights beyond internal review fees. It does, however, preserve pre-commencement fee entitlements for certain applicants under its savings and transitional provisions (section 4). Those provisions confer a temporal entitlement: if an applicant satisfies the conditions in section 4(1) and 4(2), the fee payable for the Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment or an assessment or internal review made before commencement is the amount specified in the repealed LIN 21/023 as it was immediately before commencement.

Decision-making authority to prescribe fees rests with the Minister and is exercised by the instrument under the Regulation citation at the head of the instrument. The instrument sets fee quantities but delegates operational discretion,assessing, accepting, reviewing, and administering applications,to Trades Recognition Australia and to the apparatus established by the Migration Regulations. The instrument itself does not authorise or describe any discretion for waivers, concessions, or fee exemptions. If such reliefs exist they are not in this instrument and would need to be located in the Migration Regulations, department policy, or other instruments.

The instrument contains no penalty, offence, or express enforcement provisions. Its visible function is to set fee amounts; it does not state consequences for non-payment, late payment, false statements, or any enforcement mechanism for fee collection. Section references: the fee schedules are contained in section 5 and section 6; there is no clause within the instrument that specifies sanctions, recovery powers, or administrative penalties.

Because the instrument is made under paragraph 5.40(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, enforcement or consequences tied to the acceptance, rejection, or effect of assessments and internal reviews will depend on the substantive provisions of the Migration Regulations and related instruments, not on this instrument alone. The instrument signals monetary cost obligations tied to application processes, but whether non-payment renders an application invalid, or triggers administrative refusal, or permits recovery action, cannot be discerned from this text. Practitioners should therefore treat enforcement as external to this instrument and check the Migration Regulations and departmental operational guidance for rules governing payment acceptance, refunds, and administrative consequences for non-compliance.

The absence of enforcement detail in the instrument introduces an implementation risk for applicants: without the instrument specifying procedural protections, payment windows, or refund conditions, applicants must rely on the administrative practice of Trades Recognition Australia and the Department. For advisers and organisations representing applicants, that means verifying operational rules at the point of application, and documenting proof of payment and dates, particularly around the transitional deadlines in section 4. The instrument’s silence on enforcement highlights that legal consequences for failing to pay or for attempting to seek an assessment without paying will be governed by other instruments or departmental policy rather than by this fee instrument itself.

The instrument is explicitly made under subregulation 5.40(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994, which is the statutory hook cited at the top of the text. That indicates the instrument’s role is subordinate to the Regulations: it fixes the amounts for fees that the Regulations authorise to be charged. The instrument also repeals an earlier fee instrument, LIN 21/023, and uses that repealed instrument as the reference point for transitional entitlements (section 3; section 4). Therefore the principal external legal relationships are with the Migration Regulations 1994 and with the prior instrument LIN 21/023.

Within the instrument’s tables, program labels reference other programs or processes that will be governed by separate regulatory or administrative frameworks: Job Ready Program, TSS Skills Assessment Program, Offshore Skills Assessment Program, Migration Skills Assessment and Migration Points Advice. The instrument determines the fee component for engagements with those programs, but it does not alter the substantive rules or eligibility requirements of those programs; those remain in their own legislative, regulatory or administrative frameworks.

Section 4 interacts with the repealed instrument by preserving pre-commencement fee amounts for certain applicants. That creates a direct temporal interaction: applications or payment acts performed before this instrument’s commencement fall under LIN 21/023 as it stood immediately before repeal. This means practitioners must read both instruments when advising applicants whose applications or payments occur close to the commencement date.

Because the instrument does not specify enforcement mechanisms, its operational interaction with laws on debt recovery, administrative decision-making, or offences is indirect. Any consequences for non-payment, fraudulent claims about payment, or disputes about which fee applies will be handled under the Migration Regulations and any procedures established by the Department or by Trades Recognition Australia. In practice this creates a layered legal environment: this instrument fixes prices; the Regulations provide the authority and possibly procedural rules; departmental instruments and operational policies provide collection, refund, and administrative handling.

Finally, the instrument does not amend visa application fees, labour market testing rules, or visa eligibility provisions. Its effects are narrowly financial and administrative: altering the economics of seeking particular skills assessments and internal reviews undertaken by Trades Recognition Australia. Any downstream effects on visa decisions, employer sponsorship, or labour market participation will depend on how these fee changes interact with those other statutory and administrative frameworks, none of which are amended by this instrument.

The instrument is concise and records a single express amendment action: repeal of Migration (Fees for assessment of qualifications and experience) Instrument (LIN 21/023) 2021, via section 3. The instrument also contains transitional/savings provisions that reference LIN 21/023, preserving certain prior-fee entitlements under the conditions stated in section 4. There are no other amendments recorded within the text. Section 1 names the instrument; section 2 specifies commencement as the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation; section 3 repeals LIN 21/023; section 4 provides detailed limited savings; sections 5 and 6 replace prior fee tables with new fee schedules.

The instrument itself does not record earlier amendment steps to LIN 21/023 nor does it provide a history of fee movements over time. It does, however, create a discrete legal effect: from commencement onward the fee schedule in sections 5 and 6 replaces the amounts that had applied under LIN 21/023, subject to the transitional carve-outs in section 4 for certain pre-commencement applications and payments. For practitioners tracing the evolution of the fee schedule, the practical consequence is that there are two relevant instruments , the repealed LIN 21/023 and this instrument , and section 4 requires comparing the applicant’s application/payment timing with the commencement date to determine which instrument governs.

The instrument’s explanatory material at the head states the Minister and the date (21 March 2023). It does not contain an explanatory memorandum, regulatory impact statement, or ministerial second-reading speech text within the body; it is a short legislative instrument with a clear administrative purpose. Any historical analysis of fee changes or policy rationale must therefore look to external departmental materials or the Migration Regulations for context, because the text itself does not provide an internal amendment history beyond the repeal and replacement action.

The instrument contains no litigation history and does not reference any judicial decisions. It names no cases and records no disputes. There is no indication in the text of prior legal challenges to LIN 21/023 or to the underlying regulation. Consequently, based solely on this instrument, there is no source-grounded record of litigation, appeals, or judicial interpretation concerning the fee amounts or the operation of these schedules.

For practitioners seeking precedent or dispute guidance, the absence of litigation in the instrument means that any legal questions about, for example, whether an applicant is entitled to a refund, whether a payment constitutes valid acceptance of an application, or whether a fee level is unreasonably imposed will need to be addressed by reference to the Migration Regulations, departmental administrative practice, and any relevant case law external to this instrument. The instrument itself offers no adjudicative history, no examples of contested items, and no administrative determinations that might be cited.

Because the instrument sits under the Migration Regulations 1994, disputes concerning fee application or administrative handling could potentially be litigated or judicially reviewed under administrative law principles, but the instrument provides no factual or legal history about such actions. In sum, the instrument does not disclose litigation history; practitioners should not infer from this text that litigation is precluded, only that none is recorded within the instrument itself.

Timing dependencies and item-matching are the primary practical hazards. The instrument’s commencement is the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislation (section 2). Section 4(1)(a) uses a relative timing test referencing “the date three months prior to the commencement date” and section 4(1)(b) imposes a hard deadline of 30 September 2023 for payment of a Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment in order to preserve the prior LIN 21/023 fee. That combination creates potential confusion: practitioners must determine (1) the registration date to compute the commencement date; (2) whether the applicant applied on or before the date three months prior to that commencement date; and (3) whether payment for the Workplace Assessment was made on or before 30 September 2023. Failure to document and establish those dates risks paying the higher fee or losing an entitlement to the earlier fee.

Item identification risk is real. The fee tables list many similar-sounding items across programs and pathways. For example, technical interviews appear as Pathway 1 and Pathway 2 variants both in the TSS Skills Assessment Program (section 5, items 9-12) and the Offshore Skills Assessment Program (items 17-20). Practical and reassessment fees are also repeated across onshore and offshore programs (items 13-14 and 21-22). Selecting the wrong item when paying could result in underpayment, an invalid application, or the requirement to pay an additional fee. The instrument does not provide an explicit mapping from program application types to item numbers beyond the descriptive text in the table.

Fee asymmetries can produce behavioural distortions. The Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment fee ($2,845, section 5, item 5) is large relative to the provisional or employment assessments ($130 and $490, items 3 and 4) and to many internal review fees (for example, $700 for many practical/internal review matters, section 6). Applicants may defer or alter their pathway choices to avoid high-cost assessments. Where timing around transitional protection is tight, applicants who misunderstand which fee applies could elect to postpone payment and lose the old fee entitlement.

The instrument is silent on payment mechanics, refunds, or waivers. The absence of procedural detail means that applicants and advisers must confirm, separately, whether partial payments are acceptable, whether payments are refundable in the event of withdrawal or rejection, and what documentary proof of payment is required. Practitioners should not assume anything about the administrative treatment of payments from this instrument alone.

Finally, the instrument’s repeal of LIN 21/023 and reliance on LIN 21/023 for transitional calculations creates an archival risk. To determine which fee applied at a given time requires access to LIN 21/023 as “in force immediately before” commencement. Failure to retrieve and compare the prior instrument may lead to incorrect invoicing, incorrect client advice, or disputes with Trades Recognition Australia. Documenting the applicable instrument and the exact dates of application and payment is therefore essential.

Step 1: determine which instrument applies. Confirm the registration date of this instrument on the Federal Register of Legislation; the instrument commences the day after registration (section 2). If the application for assessment or internal review was made before commencement, section 4(2) preserves the LIN 21/023 fee as the applicable amount. For Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment transitional protections, verify both the date of the related Employment Assessment application (section 4(1)(a)) and that payment for the Workplace Assessment was submitted on or before 30 September 2023 (section 4(1)(b)).

Step 2: map the client’s required assessment or review to the correct item. Use the descriptive language in section 5 for assessments and section 6 for internal reviews to identify the precise item number and corresponding fee. Pay particular attention to pathway labels (for example TSS technical interview Pathway 1 versus Pathway 2) and to whether the matter is a reassessment or a first assessment, as those are priced differently.

Step 3: obtain and retain documentary proof of application dates and payment. Because the instrument’s transitional protections are date-sensitive, practitioners should keep evidence of (a) the date the application was lodged with Trades Recognition Australia; (b) the date payment was made; and (c) confirmation or receipt from Trades Recognition Australia acknowledging the application and payment. This documentation will be the primary evidence to establish whether the old or new fee applies under section 4.

Step 4: confirm operational payment mechanics with Trades Recognition Australia or the Department. The instrument fixes fee amounts but does not set payment methods, invoice procedures, or refund rules. Before sending funds, confirm the account details, accepted payment instruments, invoicing references, and refund or withdrawal policies through Trades Recognition Australia’s published procedures or departmental communications.

Step 5: where internal review is sought, identify the correct internal-review item in section 6 and pay that fee. For example, an internal review of a Migration Skills Assessment is $610 (section 6, item 1). Understand that internal-review fees are separate from initial assessment fees and will be required to lodge a review request.

Step 6: advise clients of cost differentials and timing risk. Highlight that some assessments have substantially higher fees (for example Job Ready Program Workplace Assessment at $2,845, section 5, item 5; practical assessments at $2,200, items 13 and 21) and that the instrument offers no express waiver or concession mechanism. Ensure clients decide whether to proceed with high-cost steps and that they are given the choice informed by the applicable fee schedule.

Step 7: retain LIN 21/023 for reference. For any application or internal review made before the instrument’s commencement, the prior instrument’s amounts govern under section 4(2). Keep a copy of LIN 21/023 as it stood immediately before commencement so the appropriate fee can be demonstrated if queried.

Step 8: verify related procedural or legal rules in the Migration Regulations and departmental guidance. This instrument does not cover enforcement, refund, or administrative acceptance procedures. For coercive or consequential questions (for example, whether non-payment invalidates an application or what administrative remedies are available), consult the Migration Regulations 1994 and Trades Recognition Australia operational guidance.