System Message:

Australian Immigration Daily News

Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form
Posted by on in General
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 4550
  • 6 Comments

Mistake on DIBP website re 888 visa?

Migration Alliance members might be able to comment on the email I received this morning, below:

'Hi Liana,
There seems to be an error on DIBP's website regarding subclass 888 visa.
According to the website (in innovation stream):
"You must be able to show that you (or your partner, or you and your partner together) have:

    had an ownership interest and a direct and continuous management role in an actively operating main business (or main businesses) in Australia that had an annual turnover of at least AUD300,000 for the two years immediately before you apply)"

However, when I went through legislation today, I noticed that 888.25 says that:
(5) The main business in Australia, or main businesses in Australia, of the applicant, the applicant’s spouse or de facto partner, or the applicant and his or her spouse or de facto partner together, had an annual turnover of at least AUD300 000 in the 12 months immediately before the application was made.
 
Please see the parts that I have highlighted and if you think the info on their website is wrong (as I do), please let them know.'

 

My comments:

Clients of the DIBP are relying on the information published in the DIBP website.  This is why the unwitting public must be made aware of the work that registered migration agents do.   This is why migration agents can be relied upon and trusted to provide immigration advice and assistance.  We are interested in the fine details because fine details make all the difference (make or break).  We are also insured for the advice we provide.  DIBP might want to check their own PAMs before releasing information to millions of vulnerable people who rely upon the advice on the DIBP website. 

PAMS: For the purpose of 888.225(5), the 12 month prescribed period need not equate to a fiscal year.

 

 

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:
2

Comments

  • Liana - Allan
    Liana - Allan Thursday, 12 December 2013

    To get to the error:
    Click on: http://www.immi.gov.au/Visas/Pages/888.aspx
    Then click on 'Visa applicants' which is the middle option on the tabs.
    Then scroll down the page and click on 'Business Innovation Stream'.
    Then scroll down and you wil get to:

    Ongoing business involvement

    You must be able to show that you (or your partner, or you and your partner together) have:

    had an ownership interest and a direct and continuous management role in an actively operating main business (or main businesses) in Australia that had an annual turnover of at least AUD300,000 for the two years immediately before you apply
    owned at least one of the following percentages of the main business (or main businesses) in Australia in the year immediately before you apply:
    51 per cent of a business with a turnover of less than AUD400,000 per year
    30 per cent of a business with a turnover of AUD400,000 or more per year
    10 per cent of a publicly listed company

  • Guest
    Sirous Thursday, 12 December 2013

    Thanks Liana for all your time and effort in keeping us informed.

  • Guest
    DIBP are dysfunctional -they only have 40000 staff who help get the information right??? Thursday, 12 December 2013

    So, does the DIBP have insurance to cover themselves in the event that they provide incorrect information to their clients? Migration Agents have insurance. I hope that the Office of the MARA are looking at this post. They might want to start advertising the reason the public should use a RMA. First reason - protecting the public from the DIBP incorrect and incomplete information

  • Guest
    Jennifer Fong Thursday, 12 December 2013

    Agree, DIBP website has mistake. This is what supported on PAMS: For the purpose of 888.225(5), the 12 month prescribed period need not equate to a fiscal year.

  • Guest
    Mairaj Thursday, 12 December 2013

    Good reason for using migration agents :)

  • Guest
    jaleh Thursday, 12 December 2013

    As a matter of course, the information on the Department's website should not be relied on, ever. The website contains very general information and any details contained within that frame work is in all likelihood inaccurate, out of time, and out of date.
    The only reliable source for any of the sub classes of visa must necessarily be the Legislation and the Regulations.
    This is not the first inaccurate bit of info on the website. I had discovered so many over the years that I advise all my clients not to pay too much attention on the legal requirements of any of the visas and consult with a migration agent first.

Leave your comment

Guest Tuesday, 26 November 2024
Joomla SEF URLs by Artio