Migration (Suspension Certificate Matters) Instrument (LIN 24/034) 2024

The core concepts the instrument uses are defined within the instrument or referenced to the Migration Act and the Migration Regulations. Key concepts and how the instrument uses them are:

• Relevant score: A composite numeric measure produced by summing five weighted component ratios (s 5(1) Step 14). The five components measure (1) visa cancellations among primary persons relative to visas in effect, (2) ministerial refusals under PIC 4020 relative to total student visa decisions, (3) other student visa refusals relative to total student visa decisions, (4) unlawful non-citizen episodes of more than 28 days relative to student visa cessations under s 82, and (5) protection visa applications by persons who were primary persons when last holding a substantive visa relative to s 82 cessations (s 5(1) Steps 1-13).
• Primary applicant and primary person: The instrument defines "primary applicant" as a person who applies for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa and seeks to satisfy the primary criteria for grant (s 4). "Primary person" is a person who holds a student visa and satisfied the primary criteria for grant of that visa (s 4). The counts in each step are restricted to primary applicants or primary persons as specified in those steps.
• Reporting period: The reporting period depends on when the score is being worked out (s 4). If the score is worked out between 1 January and 30 June, the reporting period is the 12 months between 1 January and 31 December of the preceding year. If the score is worked out between 1 July and 31 December, the reporting period is the preceding financial year (s 4).
• ImmiAccount: The Departmental online portal is the mechanism for making the worked-out score available to the provider. Notification that a score is available is delivered via ImmiAccount (s 4 definition; s 7).
• External statutory references built into the components: The instrument relies on provisions of the Migration Act for event definitions (for example, cancellation under ss 109, 116, 128, 501, 501A; s 82 cessation) and on regulatory instruments such as PIC 4020 and subclause 500.217(1) in Schedule 2 to the Regulations for the ministerial assessment of PIC 4020 (s 5(1) Steps 1, 5, 10, 12).

Weights and calculation mechanics are explicit:

• Step 3: (Step 1 / Step 2) × 25 , weight for cancellations per visas in effect.
• Step 6: (Step 5 / Step 4) × 40 , weight for PIC 4020 refusals relative to all grant/refusal decisions.
• Step 8: (Step 7 / Step 4) × 10 , weight for other refusals relative to all decisions.
• Step 11: (Step 9 / Step 10) × 15 , weight for unlawful non-citizen episodes relative to s 82 cessations.
• Step 13: (Step 12 / Step 10) × 10 , weight for protection visa applications relative to s 82 cessations.
• Final score is sum of the five weighted numbers (Step 14).

The instrument also clarifies scope limitation for counts to overseas students or intending overseas students in respect of the registered provider only (s 5(2)), tying every numeric input back to the provider.

Primary affected parties identified in the instrument are:

• Registered providers: The instrument explicitly attaches the calculation to "a registered provider" (s 5). Providers that enrol overseas students or intending overseas students will be the subjects of the counts used to generate the relevant score (s 5(2)). The instrument does not itself state the downstream regulatory or administrative consequences of a particular score, but the provider is the entity that receives the notification and for whom the score has effect (s 7).
• Primary applicants and primary persons: The inputs to the method are counts of student visa applications and student visa holders who meet the "primary" criteria. A primary applicant is a person applying for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa who seeks to satisfy the primary criteria for grant (s 4). A primary person is a person who holds such a student visa and satisfied the primary criteria for grant (s 4). Where Steps specify counts of student visa refusals, grants, cancellations, or status changes, those counts are limited to these primary applicants or primary persons (s 5(1) Steps 1-13).
• Students and intending students: While the instrument does not directly regulate individual students, their visa outcomes and status events (for example, cancellations, becoming unlawful non-citizens, lodging protection visa applications) are the raw events from which the provider's relevant score is calculated (s 5(1) Steps 1, 9, 12).
• The Department: The instrument requires the Department to compute or otherwise make the relevant score available to the provider via ImmiAccount and to notify the provider when a score has been worked out (s 7). The Department therefore acts as the computing and notifying agency under the instrument.

Who pays, in the sense of administrative or compliance costs: The instrument establishes that registered providers will be the practical focus for data collection and consequence. Providers will carry the operational burden of tracking the events that feed the score and monitoring ImmiAccount for Department notifications (s 4 ImmiAccount; s 7). The Department supplies the worked score via ImmiAccount, so it holds the procedural responsibility to notify (s 7). The instrument does not create criminal penalties or fines within its text, nor does it alter visa-holder entitlements directly; its effects are mediated via whatever regulatory framework uses "relevant score" as an input elsewhere in the Regulations.

The instrument principally imposes procedural obligations on the Department and operational obligations on providers through the rules it creates. It does not set out civil liabilities or criminal sanctions in itself. The operative duties and rights implicit or explicit in the instrument are:

Duties of the Department

• To make the worked-out relevant score available to the registered provider via ImmiAccount and to notify the provider that the score has been worked out and is available (s 7(a), s 4 definition of ImmiAccount).
• To calculate or cause to be calculated the relevant score in accordance with the precise stepwise method set out in s 5(1) Steps 1-14, and to apply the reporting period rules in s 4 when determining which events fall into the reporting period.

Duties of registered providers (procedural/operational)

• The instrument does not impose an express statutory duty on providers to do anything in response to receiving a score. However, because the relevant score is calculated "in respect of the registered provider only" (s 5(2)), providers bear the implicit operational duty to understand which of their enrolled or intending overseas students or primary applicants contribute to the counts, to maintain records if they wish to verify the Department's calculations, and to monitor ImmiAccount for notifications (s 7, s 4 ImmiAccount).
• Providers must be aware of the reporting period variations depending on when the score is worked out, as that affects which events are counted (s 4 reporting period).

Rights and limits

• Providers have the right, under the instrument, to be notified that a score has been worked out and to have the score made available via ImmiAccount (s 7(a)). The instrument does not specify appeal rights, review rights, or timeframes for challenging the calculation; any such rights would be found elsewhere in the Regulations or the Migration Act.
• The instrument constrains the universe of counted events to those relating to overseas students and intending overseas students for the registered provider only (s 5(2)), providing a statutory limit on which events may be used in the calculation.

Operational clarifications relevant to duties

• Reporting periods are specific: calculations carried out in the first half of the year use the preceding calendar year; calculations carried out in the second half use the preceding financial year (s 4). Providers must map their internal data to these reporting windows to align records with the Department's reporting base.
• The instrument references other statutory provisions as counting criteria: cancellations under ss 109, 116, 128, 501, 501A of the Migration Act (s 5(1) Step 1), cessations under s 82 (s 5(1) Step 10), and decisions where the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020 under subclause 500.217(1) in Schedule 2 to the Regulations (s 5(1) Step 5). Providers need to understand these external provisions to interpret which events will be included.

In short, the instrument prescribes a calculation and notification regime. It places operational burdens on providers to track and verify the events feeding the calculation, and it places procedural duties on the Department to notify providers via ImmiAccount and to apply the specified method and reporting periods.

The instrument itself contains no express penalty provisions, criminal sanctions, civil fines, or enforcement powers. It focuses solely on a formulaic method for calculating a relevant score, timing and frequency of that calculation, and the administrative mechanics for notifying a registered provider (ss 5-7). The instrument does, however, reference statutory events and decision-making mechanisms that are consequences under other provisions of the Migration Act and the Regulations.

What the instrument does establish that is relevant to enforcement and administrative action:

• The Department is the agency that notifies providers and makes the relevant score available via ImmiAccount (s 7). Notification mechanics are thus administrative rather than judicial.
• The numeric components that feed the score are counts of statutory events that may originate in enforcement actions taken under the Migration Act, such as visa cancellations under ss 109, 116, 128, 501 or 501A, and cessations under s 82 (s 5(1) Steps 1, 10). Those underlying events may themselves be outcomes of enforcement action under the Act; this instrument does not modify those enforcement powers but uses their resulting events as inputs.
• The instrument references decision types (for example, refusals where the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020 under subclause 500.217(1)) that are ministerial decision outcomes in the Regulations (s 5(1) Step 5). The instrument thus relies on existing regulatory decision-making as a factual input; it does not allocate new enforcement authority.

Practical implications for enforcement and compliance

• Because there are no penalties in this instrument, any regulatory consequence for a particular relevant score must be located elsewhere in the Migration Regulations or other instruments that use "relevant score" as an input. The instrument does not specify what scores trigger suspension certificates, sanctions, or other regulatory steps. Users must refer to the Regulations to determine the enforcement consequences that follow from a given score (s 3 notes that the instrument is made under subreg 1.29(3) of the Regulations).
• The Department's role in working out and notifying scores may be subject to administrative law principles if affected parties seek review of particular administrative acts, but the instrument is silent on processes for review, internal reconsideration, or merits review with respect to the calculation. Any challenge to a computed relevant score would have to engage the external statutory framework for review that applies to Departmental administrative action under the Migration Act or the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, none of which are incorporated into this instrument.

In sum, the instrument imposes no standalone penalties; it creates a measurement and notification mechanism that relies on events produced by enforcement powers elsewhere, and which is likely to feed other regulatory processes found in the Regulations. The instrument's enforcement footprint is operational and data-driven rather than punitive in itself.

This instrument is made under subregulation 1.29(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (s 3), and it expressly cross-references a range of other statutory provisions whose events and decisions are used as inputs into the calculation. The interaction points that are explicit in the instrument are:

Direct cross-references within the calculation

• Migration Act 1958 provisions: The instrument uses events defined in the Act as countable inputs. Steps 1 and 10 of the calculation rely on visa cancellations and cessations which are governed by specific Act provisions: cancellations under sections 109, 116, 128, 501 or 501A of the Act are counted (s 5(1) Step 1). Step 10 counts student visas that ceased to be in effect in accordance with section 82 of the Act (s 5(1) Step 10). The instrument therefore operationally depends on how those Act provisions define and record those events.
• Migration Regulations 1994 provisions: The instrument references PIC 4020 and subclause 500.217(1) in Schedule 2 to the Regulations as a necessary factual basis for counting refusals where the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020 (s 5(1) Step 5). It also references paragraph 1.29(4)(a)(i) of the Regulations to limit counts to overseas students and intending overseas students in respect of the registered provider only (s 5(2)).
• The instrument itself is a delegated legislative instrument under the Regulations; it does not supersede or amend those provisions but gives effect to subregulation 1.29(3) by specifying the method, timing and effect period for a relevant score.

Administrative process and notification

• The instrument mandates ImmiAccount as the portal through which providers receive notification that a score has been worked out and is available (s 4 definition of ImmiAccount, s 7). That ties the instrument into the Department's online administrative processes governed by broader departmental and regulatory practice.
• The reporting-period rule (s 4) establishes how to map event dates to the applicable reporting window. Where the reporting period refers to the preceding financial year or preceding calendar year, the calculation may interact with accounting, record-keeping, and audit processes that are governed by other laws or regulations affecting providers.

Limitations and scope

• The instrument does not itself create new statutory obligations under the Migration Act, nor does it specify regulatory consequences that attach to particular scores; instead, it produces a numerical output that will be used under the Regulations' existing framework (for which this instrument is made under s 3). To understand the substantive regulatory effects of a given score, one must consult the parent Regulations, including the specific subregulatory provisions about suspension certificates and any thresholds or actions tied to the "relevant score".
• The instrument presumes the existence and primacy of Departmental records and decision classifications under the Act and Regulations. The legal characterisation of an event under those instruments (for example, whether a decision is recorded as a cancellation under s 109 versus another provision) will determine how it is counted in the relevant score.

In practice, the instrument operates as a measurement sub-system within the Migration regulatory architecture: it defines how to quantify a provider-specific metric that will be used by the broader regulatory provisions of the Migration Regulations and the Migration Act. The instrument itself does not create new statutory powers beyond its delegated specification role under subregulation 1.29(3).

The instrument contains its own creation and commencement details and does not record prior amendments within its text. The explicit amendment-history facts present in the instrument are as follows:

• Instrument identifier and year: Migration (Suspension Certificate Matters) Instrument (LIN 24/034) 2024 (title at s 1 and header).
• Made by: Clare O'Neil, Minister for Home Affairs (header and signature block).
• Date made: 21 March 2024 (header).
• Commencement date: the instrument commences on 23 March 2024 (s 2).
• Authority for making the instrument: subregulation 1.29(3) of the Migration Regulations 1994 (s 3).

No subsequent amendments, revocations, or historical versions are listed in the instrument text. The instrument does not contain savings or transitional provisions beyond the reporting-period and timing rules set out in s 6, which indicate how often and when the relevant score is to be worked out going forward (s 6). Because this is a stand-alone instrument made under the Regulations, any amendment history would appear in the Federal Register of Legislation or in later instruments that expressly amend or replace LIN 24/034; the instrument itself contains no such entries.

Providers and practitioners should note the commencement timing: the instrument takes effect on 23 March 2024 (s 2), and s 6 makes explicit that in the year of commencement the relevant score is to be worked out twice,once in the period 1 January to 30 June and once in the period 1 July to 31 December (s 6(a)). This may mean that, operationally, there will be two calculations in the first year even though the instrument only commences late March 2024; the reporting-period rules in s 4 determine which historical events are included. Any future legislative change to subregulation 1.29(3) of the Regulations or to related provisions referenced in the calculation (for example PIC 4020 or the Act sections used) may require this instrument to be amended or replaced.

The instrument itself contains no litigation history, and it names no cases. There are no judicial decisions, appeals, or administrative review outcomes cited in the text. The instrument does not create review pathways, nor does it state that the calculation is subject to merits review in any particular way. Legal challenge or litigation relating to this instrument could, in principle, arise from:

• Administrative law challenges to a Departmental act of computation or notification if affected parties assert error or jurisdictional excess in how the Department applied the method. The instrument does not address internal review or merits review rights for a worked-out relevant score.
• Disputes over the classification of particular events under the Act or Regulations that are used in the inputs (for example whether a visa cessation qualifies under s 82 for counting purposes, or whether a refusal should be characterised as one in which the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020), but the instrument itself contains no litigated examples.

Because the instrument provides a technical arithmetic method rather than a standard-setting exercise that creates new criminal liabilities, any litigation would likely focus on the Department's factual determinations or on the legal characterisation of events used as inputs. The instrument does not reference existing case law, nor does it indicate that any judicial or tribunal decisions have interpreted or applied the instrument to date.

Practitioners seeking to challenge a computed score would need to examine the procedural and review pathways available under the Migration Act, the Migration Regulations and the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) regime, none of which are specified in this instrument itself.

This instrument contains a number of technical features and reference points that can produce practical traps if they are not carefully managed. The following are specific "gotchas", each tied to the instrument text and how it will operate in practice.

Reporting-period asymmetry and alignment risk (s 4, s 6)

• The reporting period depends on when the score is worked out. If the Department works out the score between 1 January and 30 June, the reporting period is the preceding calendar year; if between 1 July and 31 December, the reporting period is the preceding financial year (s 4). That means the data window a provider must map to will shift depending on which half-year cycle the Department runs, creating accounting and data-alignment complexity for providers who use financial-year reporting internally.

Denominator choice and potential for small-number distortions (s 5(1) Steps 2, 4, 10)

• Several Steps rely on denominators that can be small, for example Step 2 counts the total number of student visas held by a primary person in effect for at least one day in the reporting period, and Step 10 counts total number of student visas held by a primary person that ceased to be in effect in accordance with s 82 (s 5(1) Steps 2, 10). Small denominators can produce large component values after multiplication by the specified weights (for example ×25, ×15), potentially producing high relevant scores from a small number of events. The instrument does not specify any floor, cap or rounding method for these ratios.

No rounding or numeric formatting rule (s 5(1))

• The instrument prescribes arithmetic but is silent on rounding, number of decimal places, or limits on the final score. It is thus possible the Department will present fractional scores; the instrument contains no rule for rounding or truncation.

Dependence on Departmental classification of events (s 5(1) Steps 1, 5, 9, 12)

• The numerators require the Department to classify events such as cancellations under particular Act sections, refusals where the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020, and whether a non-citizen was unlawful for more than 28 days. Those are administrative classifications. If those factual classifications are disputed, the instrument does not set an internal dispute or verification process, nor any independent audit mechanism.

Reference to external thresholds and provisions (s 5(1) Step 5; s 5(2))

• Step 5 depends on subclause 500.217(1) in Schedule 2 and PIC 4020. The legal meaning and operation of PIC 4020 are external to this instrument. Practitioners must consult the Regulations for how PIC 4020 is applied and recorded, as errors in mapping a refusal to PIC 4020 will affect the Step 6 calculation and thus overall score.

Scope limitation to provider’s own overseas students (s 5(2))

• The instrument limits counts to overseas students or intending overseas students "in respect of the registered provider only" (s 5(2)). Determining whether a particular student is "in respect of" a particular provider will require clear record-keeping and may be operationally complex where students transfer, where admissions are deferred, or where students hold multiple enrolments during the reporting period.

Timing of effect and overlap (s 7)

• The period a score has effect begins the day after notification and ends at the earlier of six months after it takes effect or the day the Department notifies a further score (s 7). Because s 6 requires twice-yearly computation, it is possible that a provider will be notified of a second score before the statutory six-month horizon expires, and the instrument expressly says the later notification ends the prior score even if the second score is the same as the first (s 7(b)(ii)). Providers must therefore monitor ImmiAccount continually rather than relying on a fixed six-month window.

First-year double computation (s 6(a))

• The instrument commences 23 March 2024 but s 6(a) requires two computations in the year of commencement, once in the period 1 January to 30 June and once in the period 1 July to 31 December. Providers should note that the first computation in the year of commencement will use the preceding calendar year as the reporting period (s 4), potentially introducing retrospective counting.

No direct specification of consequences or thresholds in this instrument (s 3)

• The instrument gives no indication of what specific regulatory consequences, thresholds, or triggering events flow from particular relevant scores. Users must consult the parent Regulations and related instruments to understand how the score is used in decisions such as suspension certificates or other administrative actions. Assuming a particular score automatically causes a specified sanction would be a mistake; the instrument only sets the calculation mechanics.

Overall, these technicalities mean providers must align internal data systems to the Departmental reporting windows, keep granular records that map students and events to their own provider, and be prepared for potentially granular or fractional scores produced by the prescribed arithmetic. Verification routes and remediation are not specified in this instrument and must be sought via the Regulations or Departmental channels.

The instrument does not create new affirmative statutory acts for providers beyond the need to know and respond to their worked-out relevant score, but it does create an operational requirement to monitor, verify, and, where necessary, reconcile the data that will feed the calculation. The steps below are a practical compliance checklist closely tied to the instrument’s specific provisions.

1. Understand the statutory definitions used in the instrument (s 4)

• Read and confirm internal definitions for "primary applicant", "primary person", "overseas student", "intending overseas student", and "substantive visa" as used in the Migration Act and the Regulations, because the instrument’s counts are strictly limited to those categories (s 4; s 5(2)).
• Ensure administrative staff understand that "primary applicant" is specifically a person applying for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa seeking to satisfy the primary criteria (s 4), and "primary person" is a current visa holder who satisfied those criteria (s 4).

2. Map internal data fields to the instrument’s counting rules (s 5(1) Steps 1-13)

• Create a data extraction plan that maps your student-management system events to the instrument’s Steps.
  • Step 1 requires counting cancelled student visas for primary persons under ss 109, 116, 128, 501 or 501A of the Act.
  • Step 2 requires counting student visas held by primary persons that were in effect for at least one day in the reporting period.
  • Step 4 requires counting total decisions to grant and to refuse a student visa to primary applicants in the reporting period.
  • Step 5 requires counting refusals where the Minister was not satisfied PIC 4020 as per subclause 500.217(1).
  • Step 9 counts non-citizens who were unlawful for more than 28 days and were primary persons immediately before becoming unlawful.
  • Step 10 counts student visas held by primary persons that ceased in accordance with s 82.
  • Step 12 counts protection visa applications by persons who were primary persons when they last held a substantive visa.
• Where your internal system does not categorise events the same way (for example, it does not tag a refusal as a PIC 4020-related refusal), devise a reconciliation protocol with the Departmental classification.

3. Implement reporting-period logic (s 4, s 6)

• For calculations done between 1 January and 30 June, use the preceding calendar year as the reporting period; for those done between 1 July and 31 December, use the preceding financial year (s 4).
• Anticipate two computations per year as required by s 6, including two in the year of commencement.

4. Track denominators carefully and have explanations ready (s 5(1) Steps 2, 4, 10)

• Because denominators can be small, document how you count visas "in effect for at least one day" and visa cessations under s 82, so you can explain variances and check for data-entry anomalies.
• Keep line-item audit trails for each counted event, with dates and Departmental references where available.

5. Monitor ImmiAccount for notifications and maintain an administrative log (s 4, s 7)

• The Department will notify the provider that a score has been worked out and is available via ImmiAccount (s 7(a)). Assign responsibility to specific staff to check ImmiAccount and to log the date of notification, the notified score, and the effective date (the score takes effect the day after notification, s 7(a)).
• Record when scores lapse: they end at the earlier of six months after taking effect or the day the Department notifies a further score (s 7(b)).

6. Prepare verification and dispute protocols

• Although the instrument does not set review rights, create an internal process to reconcile the Department’s notified score against your internal calculations. If you find discrepancies, escalate to the Department with documented evidence (matching event dates, visa numbers, decision records).
• Preserve originals of the records used to populate Steps 1-13 (for example, copies of refusal notices, cancellation notices, s 82 cessation data, protection visa application lodgement acknowledgements).

7. Coordinate compliance across units and external advisors

• Ensure coordination between enrolment, student support, legal/compliance, and finance teams so that students who change enrolment, transfer, defer, or cease have their status accurately reflected in the provider’s records for the applicable reporting period.
• Consider involving migration advisors or counsel to interpret external references used as inputs, for example PIC 4020 or subclause 500.217(1), to ensure accurate mapping to internal records.

8. Run internal mock calculations

• Before the Department notifies an initial score, run your own internal calculation following the Step 1-14 formula (s 5(1) Steps 1-14) using the appropriate reporting period and verify that outputs are consistent with expectations.
• Document assumptions and rounding conventions you use for internal reports. The instrument is silent on rounding; be prepared to explain any differences if the Department presents a fractional score.

9. Maintain change control and versioned datasets

• Because the instrument ties counts to specific reporting windows and to the provider's own overseas students, maintain versioned datasets for each reporting period so that if the Department queries a figure you can reproduce the counts used in the computation.

10. Stay alert to regulatory linkage

• The instrument is made under subregulation 1.29(3). To understand what consequences a given relevant score may have, review the Migration Regulations, and any policies or instruments that use "relevant score" as an input. The instrument itself does not describe downstream consequences.

By following these steps, a provider can satisfy the practical demands of the instrument: ensuring accurate data mapping to the prescribed Steps, timely monitoring of ImmiAccount notifications, and documented reconciliation procedures so that any Departmental calculation can be verified against the provider’s records.