Migration (IMMI 18/039: Mandatory Skills Assessment—Subclass 482 Visa) Instrument 2018

The instrument uses a small set of legal concepts and structured tables to convert delegated regulatory power into operational requirements. The core concepts are:

• Specified occupation: an occupation listed in the table in s 5(2) (Column 1). Each entry is linked to an ANZSCO code (Column 2) for information (s 5(2) Note). The instrument lists 25 numbered items (some item numbers jump , see s 5 table) comprising mostly trade occupations and one professional occupation (program or project administrator, item 21).

• Relevant assessing authority: the person or body named in Column 3 of the s 5 table is designated "the relevant assessing authority" for that skilled occupation and, per s 5(2)(b), for all countries for the purposes of an application for a skills assessment by a resident of one of those countries. For the occupations listed, TRA is the assessing authority for the trades; VETASSESS is the assessing authority for the program or project administrator occupation (s 5(2)(b)).

• Type of assessment: Column 4 of the s 5 table specifies the kind of skills assessment the named authority must provide for that occupation: for most items TRA must provide either a SID Skills Assessment or a TSS Skills Assessment, and for the professional occupation VETASSESS must provide a Skills Assessment for General Professional Occupations (s 5(2)(c) and the table).

• Temporal window for evidence: the instrument fixes the relevant employment/skill evidence timeframe as “the 3 year period ending immediately before the day the application is made” (s 5(2)(d)). This determines the period that an assessing authority must evaluate.

• Class of persons (eligibility subject to specification): s 6 specifies, for each occupation, the class of persons to which the specification applies. The classes are primarily defined by passport‑issuing country (for example, item 1 automotive electrician applies to persons holding a passport issued by Fiji, Hong Kong, India, Macau, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Vietnam or Zimbabwe , s 6 table). Item 21 is drafted differently: “All persons other than exempt applicants for the occupation” (s 6 table, item 21).

• Exempt applicant: s 7 sets out discrete exemption pathways where the mandatory assessment requirement does not apply. Those pathways are: current holders of particular visas (Subclass 457 or 482) who satisfied primary criteria and are employed in Australia in the nominated occupation (s 7(1)(a)); persons employed by an established overseas business nominated by a standard business sponsor who is that company or an associated entity (s 7(1)(b)); persons holding qualifications obtained in Australia or a permitted foreign country that are commensurate with ANZSCO requirements (s 7(2)(a)); persons who have the required licence/registration/membership (s 7(2)(b)); persons who have met TRA Offshore Skills Assessment Program standards (s 7(2)(c)); and a specific high‑earner/accredited‑sponsor exemption for item 21 (s 7(4) , qualification, AUD180,000 pa and accredited sponsor).

• Permitted foreign country: s 7(3) defines this by negative charting: a permitted foreign country for an occupation is any foreign country or Special Administrative Region that is not mentioned in column 2 of the s 6 table for that occupation.

• Interaction with amending instrument LIN 24/094: s 8 provides that the amendments made by that instrument apply only to visa applications made on or after its commencement; the instrument therefore caters for temporal application of further changes.

Auxiliary definitions: ANZSCO is fixed to the edition in force on 23 November 2022 for the purposes of the definition of ANZSCO in regulation 1.03 of the Regulations (s 4). TRA and VETASSESS are given short names in s 4. The instrument does not include fee schedules, appeal rights, or intrinsic penalty provisions; it is a specification instrument tied to the primary criteria in the Regulations (s 3).

Primary persons affected (explicit in the instrument)

• Applicants for the Subclass 482 (Skills in Demand) visa who are seeking to satisfy the primary criteria (s 5(1), s 6(1)). Those applicants are the direct subject of the occupation, authority and assessment-type specifications in s 5 and the class-of-persons table in s 6. The instrument lists occupations that are subject to mandatory skills assessments for applicants of particular nationalities (see s 6 table).

• Assessing authorities named in the instrument (TRA and VETASSESS). The instrument specifies one assessing authority per occupation (s 5(2)(b) and the s 5 table). For those occupations, the named entity is the relevant assessing authority for “the skilled occupation” and “all countries” for the purpose of a skills assessment application by a resident of one of those countries (s 5(2)(b)).

• Standard business sponsors and nominating employers. Sponsors and nominators appear indirectly: the exemption in s 7(1)(b) references nomination by a standard business sponsor; s 7(4)(c) requires nomination by a standard business sponsor that has been given accredited status by the Department for the high‑earner exemption. The instrument therefore affects any standard business sponsor that nominates persons for the Subclass 482 Skills in Demand stream.

Secondary persons and entities whose choices will respond to the instrument

• Employers who hire or propose to sponsor foreign nationals in the listed occupations. They must account for whether the prospective employee is required to obtain a skills assessment from the named authority and whether any exemption under s 7 applies.

• Applicants’ representative advisors (migration agents, lawyers, compliance officers) who must verify whether the applicant is in the class of persons in the s 6 table, whether any s 7 exemption applies, which assessing authority and assessment type apply, and the timing (3‑year lookback) (see s 5(2)(d), s 6, s 7).

• Assessing bodies’ operational units. TRA and VETASSESS will be required to provide the specified assessment types for the occupations listed and to apply their assessment standards over the 3‑year period identified in s 5(2)(d).

Geographic and nationality-specific scope

• The instrument operates by mixing occupation-based lists with nationality-based classes. For most occupations the class of persons covered is defined by passport‑issuing country lists in Column 2 of the s 6 table (s 6 table entries). For example, the occupation “baker” (item 2) applies to persons holding passports issued by China, Fiji, Hong Kong, India, Macau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Vietnam or Zimbabwe (s 6 table, item 2). Conversely, “permitted foreign country” is any country or Special Administrative Region not listed in Column 2 for that occupation (s 7(3)), so persons from countries not listed are outside the immediate nationality class for that occupation. Item 21 (program or project administrator) is drafted to capture “all persons other than exempt applicants” (s 6 table, item 21), making it nationality‑neutral in the instrument’s terms.

Who pays and who decides (practical allocation of functions)

• The instrument names assessing authorities with the legal duty to carry out assessments for the named occupations (s 5(2)(b) and corresponding table). The instrument does not set fees, but by specifying particular assessing authorities and types of assessment it places the procedural burden on applicants to obtain the assessment from the named authority if they are in a covered class and not exempt (s 5 and s 6). Decision‑making on visa grant remains with the decision‑makers under the Migration Regulations 1994; this instrument defines an evidentiary requirement for satisfying the Regulations’ primary criteria (see s 3 and s 5(1)).

Who is excluded or exempt

• The instrument creates a defined class of exempt applicants (s 7). Those exemptions include current or past visa holders employed in Australia in the nominated occupation, overseas company employees nominated by a standard business sponsor that is the employer or an associated entity, holders of relevant qualifications obtained in Australia or a permitted foreign country, holders of required licences/registrations/memberships, persons who have met TRA Offshore Skills Assessment Program standards, and for item 21 a specific accredited‑sponsor, high‑earner exemption (AUD180,000) (s 7(1)-(4)). The effect is that for persons meeting any of these conditions the mandatory assessment requirement in the instrument does not apply for the listed occupation.

This instrument primarily imposes evidentiary duties on applicants and specifies which authority must perform which assessment; it does not create standalone civil penalties or appeal rights within the instrument itself. Key duties and rights that follow from the instrument text are these.

Duties imposed or implied by the instrument

• Duty to obtain a specified skills assessment when seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Subclass 482 (Skills in Demand) visa, where the applicant is in a class specified by s 6 and no exemption in s 7 applies: the instrument designates the relevant assessing authority and the type of assessment for each occupation (s 5(1)-(2), s 6 table, s 5 table). Practically, this means applicants in the covered class must arrange for the relevant assessment to be completed by the named authority using one of the specified assessment types in Column 4.

• Duty to ensure the assessment and supporting evidence cover the instrument’s specified temporal window: assessments must address the “3 year period ending immediately before the day the application is made” (s 5(2)(d)). Assessors and applicants thus must focus evidence on that three‑year look‑back.

• Duty to check and establish exemption status where applicable: s 7 sets out several factual pathways to exemption, each with precise conditions (for example, s 7(1)(a)(i)-(iii) or s 7(2)(a)(i)-(ii)). An applicant or a nominating sponsor should evaluate whether any s 7 exemption applies before commissioning an assessment.

• Duty on assessing authorities named in the instrument to be the “relevant assessing authority” for the occupation and all countries for purposes of the skills assessment application by residents of listed countries (s 5(2)(b)). The instrument therefore allocates the assessment function to those bodies.

Rights and legal effects embedded in the instrument

• Right to rely on s 7 exemptions: if an applicant meets any of the exemption categories in s 7, the applicant is defined as an “exempt applicant” for the occupation and the skills assessment requirement in the instrument does not apply to them for that occupation (s 7(1)-(4)).

• Right to an assessment type from the named assessing authority: the instrument mandates which body (TRA or VETASSESS) is the relevant assessor and which assessment type applies (s 5(2)(b)-(c) and table). That functions as a procedural right in the sense that only the named authority (or presumably a successor acting as relevant assessing authority) can provide the assessment specified for that occupation under this instrument.

• The instrument anchors the evidentiary requirement to the Migration Regulations: the instrument operates for the specific purpose of satisfying the primary criteria in Schedule 1 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (see s 5(1) and s 3). It does not create a free‑standing cause of action or new visa category.

What the instrument does not do

• It does not set fees, times for assessments, or administrative processes for the assessing authorities; these operational matters are left outside the instrument’s text. It also does not set out express sanctioning or review mechanisms within the instrument itself. Enforcement consequences for failure to meet the specified assessment requirement are therefore external , they will follow from the decision‑making provisions in the Migration Regulations 1994 (the instrument is made under those Regulations , s 3), not from the instrument directly.

Practical legal consequences (procedural)

• If an applicant is covered by the s 6 class for an occupation and is not an exempt applicant under s 7, they must obtain the assessment in the form and from the authority specified in the s 5 table and ensure it addresses the 3‑year period referenced in s 5(2)(d). Failure to do so will mean the applicant cannot rely on the assessment required by this instrument to satisfy the Regulations’ primary criteria; the consequences for the visa application (including refusal) arise under the Migration Regulations rather than under this instrument itself.

The instrument specifies assessment requirements and exemptions; it does not itself create criminal or civil penalties or detailed enforcement mechanisms. The enforcement architecture must be understood as follows, strictly on the basis of the instrument text.

What the instrument says about enforcement

• The instrument is made under the Migration Regulations 1994 (s 3). It specifies obligations for applicants who wish to satisfy the primary criteria in Schedule 1 to those Regulations (s 5(1)-(2)). It contains no express penalty provisions, infringement notices, or enforcement procedures in its text.

Where enforcement outcomes are likely to arise

• Consequences for failing to satisfy the primary criteria of the Migration Regulations (including failing to provide required skills assessments where required by this instrument) will be determined under the Migration Regulations 1994 and relevant decision‑making provisions in that statutory framework. The instrument alone does not prescribe refusal, cancellation, or penalty processes; it sets the content of an evidentiary requirement that is used by decision‑makers under the Regulations.

Practical enforcement mechanism (operational)

• The named assessing authorities (TRA, VETASSESS) are specified to provide the assessments (s 5(2)(b) and table). Those bodies’ determinations will provide the evidence that decision‑makers rely on when applying the Migration Regulations. The instrument sets the assessor and assessment type; it does not confer on assessing authorities statutory powers to take enforcement action against applicants , their role is evidentiary/assessing.

Limitations and administrative discretion

• Because the instrument is specification‑level rather than enforcement‑level, any discretion as to whether an application for a Subclass 482 visa satisfies primary criteria remains vested in the decision‑maker under the Migration Regulations. The instrument does not circumscribe that decision‑maker’s broader statutory discretions under the Regulations; it is an input into the decision‑making process (s 3, s 5(1)).

Practical implication for practitioners

• In operational terms, failure to secure the assessment that this instrument prescribes (where applicable) will leave an applicant without the evidence the decision‑maker expects to see to satisfy the primary criteria in Schedule 1 to the Regulations. Remedies for such failures will be those available under the Migration Act/Regulations (e.g., review rights, if any, within that statutory scheme), not under this instrument itself. The instrument does not create fresh avenues of legal challenge beyond the normal channels in migration law.

This instrument is an instrument made under, and therefore interacts directly with, the Migration Regulations 1994. Its interaction points and boundaries are these.

Delegation and enabling power

• The instrument is expressly made under subregulation 2.26B(1) and paragraph 1240(3)(g) of Schedule 1 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (s 3). That means it operates as a delegated specification instrument which the Regulations authorise the executive to make. The instrument therefore modifies the content of the primary criteria that appear in the Regulations by identifying particular occupations, assessing authorities and assessment types for the purposes of satisfying those criteria (s 5(1)-(2)).

Inputs into primary criteria in Schedule 1

• The instrument’s content is an evidentiary specification for the Regulations’ primary criteria. It does not itself grant or refuse visas; rather, it sets out what assessments are required for applicants to meet certain parts of the Regulations’ primary criteria (s 5(1), s 5(2)). Decision‑makers will apply the Regulations and will rely on assessments completed pursuant to this instrument as part of the decision‑making record.

Intersection with ANZSCO and external assessment bodies

• The instrument fixes the version of ANZSCO to be used: “ANZSCO as in force on 23 November 2022” (s 4). Any assessment and any matching of an applicant’s occupation to ANZSCO must use that edition for purposes tied to this instrument. That choice anchors the occupation definitions to a specific edition and prevents later ANZSCO changes from altering the occupation definitions that this instrument uses unless the instrument itself is amended.

• The instrument delegates the operational assessment task to specific external bodies (TRA and VETASSESS , s 4 and s 5(2)(b)). Those bodies’ assessment processes, licensing requirements, or programs (e.g. TRA’s Offshore Skills Assessment Program referenced in s 7(2)(c)) will therefore form part of the broader legal ecosystem in that their assessments are the approved pathway under this instrument to satisfy the Regulations’ criteria.

Interaction with other Migration Regulations provisions

• While the instrument does not quote the Migration Regulations’ substantive visa criteria, its purpose is to delineate which occupations and applicant classes will be required to obtain an approved skills assessment to meet the Regulations’ primary criteria. Any consequences stemming from failure to comply with that specification (for example refusal for not meeting primary criteria) are governed by the Migration Regulations and associated statutory processes.

Accredited sponsors and standard business sponsor requirements

• The instrument references standard business sponsors and an “accredited” status given by the Department in s 7(4)(c). The criteria and processes for giving that accredited status are not in this instrument; they sit in the Department’s administrative framework or in other regulatory instruments or provisions of the Regulations. The instrument therefore links to the broader sponsorship accreditation scheme without reproducing its terms.

Amendments and temporal application

• Section 8 clarifies that amendments made by LIN 24/094 apply only to visa applications made on or after the commencement of that amending instrument. That clause interacts directly with the temporal operation of the Regulations and any other instruments that are altered by LIN 24/094; the instrument therefore anticipates later regulatory changes and clarifies their prospective application.

What the instrument does not override

• The instrument does not change other substantive legal requirements outside the scope of skill assessment specification; it does not create or alter visa classes, nor does it set out decision‑making criteria outside the Regulations. It therefore functions narrowly as an evidentiary/specification device within the Migration Regulations framework.

This instrument contains a direct reference to later amendments and also fixes certain reference points that reflect updates. The text itself provides the following amendment history points.

Origin and citation

• The instrument is identified as the Migration (IMMI 18/039: Mandatory Skills Assessment,Subclass 482 Visa) Instrument 2018 (s 1). That is the defining citation for the instrument.

ANZSCO reference point (timing‑anchored)

• Section 4 provides that ANZSCO for the purpose of the instrument is “the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, as in force on 23 November 2022.” That language fixes the instrument to that ANZSCO edition as a point in time. The instrument therefore implicitly reflects at least one update point (23 November 2022) for occupation classification alignment.

Amendments by LIN 24/094

• Section 8 states that “The amendments of this instrument made by Schedule 1 to the Migration Amendment (Skills in Demand Visa and Related Matters) Instrument 2024 (the amending instrument) apply in relation to an application for a visa that is made on or after the commencement of the amending instrument.” That records a temporal application rule for amendments made by that 2024 amending instrument (LIN 24/094). The instrument therefore has been subject to, or is capable of being subject to, amendment by LIN 24/094 and the instrument expressly notes the start date rule for those amendments.

Internal repetition and reissue

• The source text provided repeats the instrument text in multiple blocks (the same ss 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 appear repeated). The operative instrument remains the single instrument IMMI 18/039 as identified in s 1; the repetition in the source appears to be duplicate copies of the same clauses rather than separate amending instruments.

What is not present about amendment mechanisms

• The instrument does not itself set out a multi‑amendment schedule, sunset dates, or renewal procedures. It relies on amendment by separate instruments (for example LIN 24/094) consistent with its enabling provisions under the Migration Regulations (s 3). The instrument does not itself purport to amend earlier instruments; rather, it is the subject of later amendment as recorded in s 8.

Practical effect for practitioners

• When advising clients, practitioners must check whether an application is made before or on/after the commencement of any amending instrument (for example LIN 24/094) because s 8 conditions the operative rule set on the timing of the visa application. Practically, that requires tracking commencement dates of related amending instruments and matching them to the applicant’s visa application date.

The instrument text provided contains no references to any judicial or tribunal decisions, and it does not record any litigation history. The instrument is a specification instrument under the Migration Regulations and, within its text, there are no named cases, no references to litigation outcomes, and no incorporated judicial pronouncements.

What this means in practice

• Any litigation or merits review relating to the application of this instrument would arise in the broader Migration Act and Migration Regulations framework and would be recorded in external sources (decisions from tribunals or courts). The instrument itself does not summarise or cite any litigation precedent.

Implication for legal advisers

• Because the instrument does not document litigation or appeals outcomes, practitioners should not rely on the instrument alone to understand how tribunals or courts have treated its application. If an applicant’s rights or the assessing authority’s conduct are in dispute, the relevant case law would need to be searched and analysed outside the instrument text. The instrument provides the legal specification; judicial application and interpretation would appear elsewhere.

The instrument contains several non‑obvious drafting and operational features that can catch practitioners or applicants if not carefully parsed. These are drawn directly from the instrument text and the table structures it uses.

1. Nationality‑based classes are occupation‑specific and operate by exclusion

• Each occupation in the s 6 table has an associated list of passport‑issuing countries defining the class of persons to which the specification applies. That means the mandatory assessment rule applies only to applicants who both nominate the listed occupation and fall into the listed passport class for that occupation (s 6 table). Conversely, s 7(3) defines a “permitted foreign country” as any country or Special Administrative Region not mentioned in column 2 for that occupation. Practitioners must not assume the lists are universal across occupations; they differ by item.

2. The instrument fixes the ANZSCO edition to 23 November 2022

• Occupation matching must use ANZSCO as in force on 23 November 2022 (s 4). If an applicant relies on a later ANZSCO update or uses different wording to match their occupation, the match should be to the required edition for these purposes. This edition‑anchoring can create mismatch risk if advisors use current online ANZSCO mappings without checking the specified edition.

3. The assessing authority is specified for “all countries” but the instrument still limits application by class

• Section 5(2)(b) declares the person or body in Column 3 as the relevant assessing authority “for the skilled occupation; and all countries; and for the purposes of an application for a skills assessment made by a resident of one of those countries.” That phrasing can be confusing. The practical effect is that the instrument names the assessing authority whose assessments will be accepted for that occupation (TRA or VETASSESS) regardless of the applicant’s country, but the instrument then limits which applicants must obtain such assessments by nationality/class in s 6. Read together, the authority is fixed and the class of applicants is limited.

4. Two assessment types are often offered

• For many TRA‑assessed occupations Column 4 permits either (a) SID Skills Assessment or (b) TSS Skills Assessment (s 5 table). Applicants and advisors must check which of those two assessment streams is relevant to the applicant’s circumstances and which stream the assessing authority will rely on. The instrument allows either, but assessing practice and evidentiary thresholds may differ between SID and TSS assessments with practical consequences (the instrument itself does not set differing criteria).

5. The three‑year lookback is absolute and anchored to application date

• The required assessment is to cover “the 3 year period ending immediately before the day the application is made” (s 5(2)(d)). That precise phrase means evidence must document the applicant’s skills/employment/experience for that particular three‑year window. Timing matters: evidence falling outside that exact three‑year window may not be counted for the purpose of this instrument.

6. Exemptions are factual and multi‑pronged , do not assume exemption

• The exemptions in s 7 are specific and differ by pathway. Example pitfalls:
  • s 7(1)(a) requires current holding of a Subclass 457 or 482 visa and that the person previously satisfied the primary criteria for that visa and be employed in Australia in the nominated occupation. Merely holding a prior visa is not enough unless the precise conditions are met.
  • s 7(2)(a) requires the qualification to be obtained in Australia or a permitted foreign country, and it must be “commensurate with the qualification specified for the occupation in ANZSCO.” That introduces both geographic and comparability tests.
  • s 7(4) for item 21 adds an earnings threshold (AUD180,000) and requires nomination by an accredited standard business sponsor. All three conditions must be met. Careful factual analysis and documentary proof will be required to establish any exemption.

7. Item numbering is not contiguous in the table

• The instrument’s table lists items up to 25 but item numbers jump (for example item 23 does not appear in the provided sequence). Practitioners should rely on the textual table entries for occupation names and ANZSCO codes rather than assuming contiguous numbering has substantive effect.

8. The instrument does not set fees, timelines, or evidence formats

• The assessing authority is specified but the instrument does not fix the fee, format or procedural rules for obtaining the assessment. Those operational details will be determined by the assessing body and other administrative instruments. Applicants should confirm operational requirements with the relevant assessing authority.

9. Amendments apply prospectively to later applications

• Section 8 makes the point that amendments made by LIN 24/094 apply in relation to visa applications made on or after the commencement of that amending instrument. Practitioners must therefore map the date of the applicant’s visa application to any relevant amendment’s commencement date.

10. The instrument is an input into the Migration Regulations decision process

• Misunderstanding this instrument as independently creating visa rights or remedies is a risk. It sets assessment requirements that feed into the Migration Regulations’ primary criteria; visa decisions and legal remedies remain functions of the Migration Act/Regulations and administrative practice.

The instrument is primarily procedural: compliance is about assembling the correct assessment evidence from the correct authority, for the correct occupation and class, within the required lookback period, or proving entitlement to an exemption in s 7. The following steps are grounded in the instrument text and reflect the necessary compliance sequence.

1. Identify whether the instrument applies to the applicant

• Step 1: Determine that the visa being applied for is a Subclass 482 (Skills in Demand) visa and that the applicant seeks to satisfy the Regulations’ primary criteria (s 5(1)). The instrument applies “in relation to an application by a person seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for the grant of a Subclass 482 (Skills in Demand) visa” (s 5(1)).

• Step 2: Match the applicant’s nominated occupation to the occupations listed in Column 1 of the s 5 table and note the ANZSCO code provided for information (s 5(2) and s 5 table). Use ANZSCO as in force on 23 November 2022 for any comparability determinations (s 4).

• Step 3: Check whether the applicant falls within the class of persons specified in s 6 for that occupation (s 6(2) and s 6 table). For most entries this is a passport‑country list. For item 21 the class is “All persons other than exempt applicants for the occupation” (s 6 table, item 21).

2. Check exemptions carefully (s 7)

• Before commissioning an assessment, evaluate the exemption criteria in s 7. The instrument identifies several exemption routes; these are factual and cumulative only where stated:

  • s 7(1)(a): current holders of Subclass 457, Subclass 482 (Temporary Skill Shortage) or Subclass 482 (Skills in Demand) visas who satisfied the primary criteria for that visa and are employed in Australia in the nominated occupation. Documentary proof of visa status, earlier satisfaction of the primary criteria, and Australian employment in the nominated occupation will be required.
  • s 7(1)(b): overseas company employees employed in the same or a similar occupation and nominated by a standard business sponsor that is that company or associated entity. Evidence of the overseas established business, the employment, and the nomination by an eligible sponsor will be required.
  • s 7(2)(a): possession of a relevant qualification commensurate with the ANZSCO qualification and obtained through study in Australia or a permitted foreign country. Practitioners must confirm the ANZSCO specified qualification and whether the country of study is not listed in column 2 for that occupation (s 7(3)).
  • s 7(2)(b): possession of a required licence/registration/membership where the occupation requires it and the person has been granted that licence/registration/membership.
  • s 7(2)(c): meeting TRA standards under the Offshore Skills Assessment Program for the nominated occupation.
  • s 7(4): for item 21 only, a high‑earner exemption where the applicant holds a relevant qualification commensurate with ANZSCO, will receive annual earnings of at least AUD180,000, and is nominated by an accredited standard business sponsor. All three elements are required.

• If any exemption in s 7 applies, the applicant is an “exempt applicant” and the mandatory assessment specified by the instrument for that occupation does not apply to them (s 7 heading and content).

3. Where no exemption applies, obtain the required assessment from the specified body

• If the applicant is in scope (s 6) and not exempt (s 7), instruct the named assessing authority in Column 3 of the s 5 table to conduct the specified assessment type in Column 4 (s 5(2)(b)-(c)). For the trade occupations this will usually be TRA, and for the program or project administrator occupation it will be VETASSESS.

• Make sure the assessment addresses the instrument’s required temporal window: the assessing authority must assess the applicant’s skills or employment over “the 3 year period ending immediately before the day the application is made” (s 5(2)(d)). Collect documentary evidence (employment records, pay slips, contracts, qualification completion dates, licences) that covers that three‑year window precisely.

4. Confirm the precise type of assessment to obtain

• For many TRA-assessed occupations the instrument allows either a SID Skills Assessment or a TSS Skills Assessment (s 5 table, Column 4). Confirm with the assessing authority which stream is appropriate for the applicant’s circumstances. For item 21 (program or project administrator) VETASSESS’ “Skills Assessment for General Professional Occupations” is specified (s 5 table).

5. Ensure sponsor and nomination conditions are met where relevant

• If claiming an exemption under s 7(1)(b) or s 7(4), ensure the nomination is by the correct type of sponsor: a standard business sponsor (s 4 definition note) and, where s 7(4) applies, that the sponsor has been given accredited status by the Department (s 7(4)(c)). Those sponsorship accreditation processes and evidence are external to this instrument; gather documentary proof of sponsor accreditation where s 7(4) is to be relied upon.

6. Time the visa application with attention to amendments

• Section 8 makes clear that amendments made by LIN 24/094 apply to visa applications made on or after that amending instrument’s commencement. Practically, determine whether the visa application will be made before or after any relevant commencement dates for amendments; different sets of rules may apply depending on timing (s 8).

7. Document and record compliance

• Maintain a clear evidentiary trail linking the applicant’s occupation to the ANZSCO 23 Nov 2022 descriptors (s 4), the assessing authority’s report (s 5 table and s 5(2)(b)), and the assessment’s coverage of the three‑year period (s 5(2)(d)). If claiming an exemption under s 7, keep documentary proof supporting each factual element of the exemption being invoked.

8. Administrative cross‑checks

• Confirm that the assessing authority will accept applications from the applicant’s country of residence, although the instrument specifies the authority for “all countries” for the listed occupations (s 5(2)(b)); the practical application depends on assessing authority policies and possible offshore/online assessment pathways (for example TRA’s Offshore Skills Assessment Program referenced in s 7(2)(c)).

9. Practical liaison with assessing authority

• Although the instrument does not set fees or processing timelines, those will be relevant for compliance. Engage with TRA or VETASSESS early to confirm required documentation, assessment stream (SID vs TSS), processing times, and any particular evidentiary preferences that the assessor applies to the three‑year assessment window.

10. Where in doubt, verify against the Migration Regulations

• This instrument is an evidentiary specification for the Migration Regulations. If questions remain about the visa’s primary criteria or about consequences of failing to obtain a specified assessment, consult the Migration Regulations and the decision‑making provisions that govern visa grants and refusals. The instrument itself does not prescribe sanctions; the Regulations do.

In all steps, keep documentary evidence tied to the exact legal hook in the instrument: occupation per ANZSCO (s 4), class per s 6, assessment authority and type per s 5(2)(b)-(c), three‑year period per s 5(2)(d), and exemption tests per s 7.