New Foreign Worker Levy - applies to partner visas?

[tylerolo]

Hi all,

as you may have seen in the budget tonight, a new temporary visa will also now require employers to pay a levy for each foreign worker they employ. The issue that's unclear however from this guidance is whether this levy will only apply to workers sponsored by the organisation (thereby allowing an employer to employ somebody on a partner visa without paying this levy). 

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts or info that I may have missed (a slightly confused and worried partner!) 

 

https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/visa-price-increase-fact-sheet-2017-18.pdf

[amibovered]

Just to help others to answer, what visa is your partner on?

[Samson]

This would only apply when a company nominates a new person from March 2018 under the new TSS visas. And will probably be paid at time of nomination. 

Its gonna cost new small business upto $4800 to employ skilled workers from abroad. (1200 per year) 

This is a huge amount to pay at nomination, good bye temporary migrants. Australia is digging it's own grave here. 

 

[Guest263228]

10 minutes ago, Samson said:

This would only apply when a company nominates a new person from March 2018 under the new TSS visas. And will probably be paid at time of nomination. 

Its gonna cost new small business upto $4800 to employ skilled workers from abroad. (1200 per year) 

This is a huge amount to pay at nomination, good bye temporary migrants. Australia is digging it's own grave here. 

 

How so? Just how did Australia manage in days of normal migration streams, prior to mass migration and visa rorts?  Now perhaps business will be more 'mindful' importing workers. At last the Conservatives are getting something right.

[MaggieMay24]

My company would still pay the upfront levy in order to bring skilled workers from overseas that we can't find here.  I'm sure it will affect a lot of other businesses though.

[Slean Wolfhead]

11 hours ago, Samson said:

This would only apply when a company nominates a new person from March 2018 under the new TSS visas. And will probably be paid at time of nomination. 

Its gonna cost new small business upto $4800 to employ skilled workers from abroad. (1200 per year) 

This is a huge amount to pay at nomination, good bye temporary migrants. Australia is digging it's own grave here. 

 

There are IT agencies in Canberra and Sydney that are Indian-owned and only seem to deal with Indians who are sponsored.  $4800 could be less than the first paypacket on the rates charged, which is still easily payable from somebody who might be coming in from a wage 10 times less, or a company that generally charges the customer between 40 and 100% markup on the wages that the employee gets.  

It's a pity the rules don't seem to distinguish between private and public sector, and large and small businesses.  As always with policy, one size has to fit all or it's too costly to manage.

 

[Petals]

Its ok wanting to get skilled workers,however we have a glut of graduates and under employed people here in Australia desperately wanting to get experience and a job.    Any measure that will assist Australians to get work is good.     Maybe its not good for people on here at present, however if you come and get permanent residence, bring up your family here, educate your family here, do you not want them to be able to get experience and a job.   With all the skill importation its driving ordinary young Australians out of the work force.   17% unemployment here on the Mornington Peninsula.    Also so many people under employed and they are not mentioned in figures.

 

[AJ]

If businesses are not willing to pay this to get a skilled worker then their need must not be as urgent as they say, which would give them more time to take on an Australian and train them.

[Beffers]

On 2017-5-9 at 1:12 PM, Pura Vida said:

How so? Just how did Australia manage in days of normal migration streams, prior to mass migration and visa rorts?  Now perhaps business will be more 'mindful' importing workers. At last the Conservatives are getting something right.

Spot on - I don't think Australia are digging their own grave at all. They are just attempting to manage immigration more succinctly.  They've already announced that there may be a new temp visa for specialised roles. Eg academics, health specialisms, etc. This will stop willy nilly immigration and allow for better control. 

Edited May 11, 2017 by Beffers

[Guest263228]

On ‎10‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 7:10 AM, MaggieMay24 said:

My company would still pay the upfront levy in order to bring skilled workers from overseas that we can't find here.  I'm sure it will affect a lot of other businesses though.

Affect in the way of actually employing locals perhaps. If your company prefers to employ 'imported' workers over local residents, without proper market testing or training, they should be slugged far more for that privilege IMO. Just how are those on the dole, with you apparently abhor, expected to get a foot into the employment market?

[Guest263228]

4 minutes ago, Beffers said:

Spot on - I don't think Australia are digging their own grave at all. They are just attempting to manage immigration more succinctly.  They've already announced that there may be a new temp visa for specialised roles. Eg academics, health specialisms, etc. This will stop willy nilly immigration and allow for better control. 

They need to go further but it is a start.

[MaggieMay24]

22 hours ago, Pura Vida said:

Affect in the way of actually employing locals perhaps. If your company prefers to employ 'imported' workers over local residents, without proper market testing or training, they should be slugged far more for that privilege IMO. Just how are those on the dole, with you apparently abhor, expected to get a foot into the employment market?

I didn't say we prefer to employ overseas workers.  If we could find enough people locally with the niche technical skills that we need then we'd prefer to hire them as it's certainly easier, cheaper and quicker to get them on board.  Unfortunately there aren't enough people locally and we have competitors who need them too.  And I don't abhor the dole either.  For every story in the news about 457 rorting, there are just as many stories about dole bludgers.  I think the dole is a necessary support mechanism for people who cannot work, but shouldn't be available for people who simply don't want to.

[Guest263228]

13 hours ago, MaggieMay24 said:

I didn't say we prefer to employ overseas workers.  If we could find enough people locally with the niche technical skills that we need then we'd prefer to hire them as it's certainly easier, cheaper and quicker to get them on board.  Unfortunately there aren't enough people locally and we have competitors who need them too.  And I don't abhor the dole either.  For every story in the news about 457 rorting, there are just as many stories about dole bludgers.  I think the dole is a necessary support mechanism for people who cannot work, but shouldn't be available for people who simply don't want to.

The reason why there are more stories in the news about dole bludgers than 457 rorting, is that much of the media is due to their  owners, whom for too obvious reasons are compliant to the business/real estate industry and not so much on the 'side' of the battlers or victims of those mentioned.

As I said in the Australian scenario few if anyone, can do anything, other than basically survive on the dole here. Not a lifestyle style as some appear to continue to suggest. Surely it would be better to chase down the taxes of those that refuse to pay or avoid through creative accounting, like the big corporations?

Why some support slugging the vulnerable, simply because they are easier to 'pin down' remains beyond me.