Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 3569
- 14 Comments
No refunds on SAF Levy: Raised with government
I have raised the issue of 'no SAF Levy refunds' today with the government. I have made the submission in writing by way of email but cannot put the contents of that email on this blog, as the communication has been marked as 'FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY".
I will report back on here when I receive an update.
Liana Allan
Comments
-
Monday, 14 January 2019Any updates on this?
-
Wednesday, 30 January 2019
Hi Liana,
Recently had a case officer refuse a Nomination on "unsigned" employment contract. (signatures were attached in a separate pdf) . Nevertheless Client prefers to simply Re-Lodge the Nomination (and not go through many many months of Appeal costs/delays/process) and will now submit anew with with page by page signed Contract of Employment.
However as the original Nomination was refused how can the Government simply keep the SAF Levy on a nomination refused by the Delegate? ( I understand Home affairs keeping the $330 VAC processing Charge) This leads to questioning the motives of Case Officer Nom refusals simply to "bolster the Governments coffers" ?.
Does the client have access to waiver of this "confiscated" SAF Levy for the new (excactly duplicate Nomination - naturally with the multi-signed original Employment Contract) ?
The Form 1424 does not appear to cater for SAF Levy Refunds ????
This apparent "money-grab" certainly encourages Sponsoring Employers not to Train Australians as the Government appear to be "collecting" funds for apparent "Government training projects"
Liana, I and my client would much appreciate your current efforts to persuade the Government to come to the party and be fair on Australian Employers (who through their successes actually boost the australian economy)
This is terribly frustrating, especially to a loyal Australian Business.
Many thanks Liana. -
Thursday, 31 January 2019
Hi folks do we have an update on this? The Govt is in my opinion illegally keeping funds that don’t belong to them and are paid in good faith when a nomination is withdrawn or refused. . The SAF should be a secondary VAC for The nomination once approved. I too have a client who just got rejected for a nomination , in my opinion incorrectly. They are now $7200 down and have to relished as the applicants are offshore. An appeal is a waste of time due to the extended delays but case officers don’t care. Their attitude is simply to appeal
It. This is madness and has to stop. -
Tuesday, 05 February 2019
Hi,
I agree with Matthew, in my opinion the SAF levy should be paid upon approval of the nomination only. This is so crazy and frustrating, I do also agree that the Department is keeping funds that do not belong to them, sponsors are getting nothing in exchange of their contribution when their nominations are refused.
Liana, did you get any updates from the Government? What could we do as professionals to push for a change?
Thanks,
Noemi -
Friday, 08 February 2019
Hi Liana, I do think the SAF levy is for the future training cost of nominee once their visas have been granted. If the nomination has been refused, the SAF levy should be refund to the applicant. Would you please take your precious time to contact the Department of Home Affairs to amend their policy.
Many thanks!
Richard -
Monday, 18 February 2019
I have been pondering this issue myself of late, how can they be withholding 'contributory' funds, would it not be more logical for this payment to at least be retained in a credit like concept.
If a business has fronted up to four years worth of levy for a nomination and that nomination is then refused, those funds should still be carried over into a subsequent application at the very least! -
Thursday, 14 March 2019
The nomination application of my client was refused because of late submission of supporting documents. When I submitted the application, I wrote a message saying the documents will be submitted soon. The case officer acknowledge my letter by refused the nomination just the same.
I will try to send a Form 1424 to refund the SAF payment. Wish me luck -
Saturday, 30 March 2019
I noticed in readings of MIGRATION AMENDMENT (SKILLING AUSTRALIANS FUND) BILL 2017, Chapter 3 Key issues under Provision of refunds
3.60 Ramsay Health Care Australia submitted that it would be appropriate that pro rata refunds of levies paid towards a new nomination be available for the unused portion of a proposed employment period in particular circumstances, including:
if sponsorship, nomination and/or visa application is refused or withdrawn;
if the employment relationship ceases during the proposed period of sponsorship;
if the employee never commences employment; or
if the employee is granted an alternative visa.
Above recommendations are logical and reasonable, unlike current refund policy put Australian Business in an embarrassed situation to spend fortune for nothing if unsuccessful. -
Thursday, 06 June 2019
I lodged a nomination application to sponsor an English plumber we had decided to employ for which we paid $5130. Due to recent changes in immigration policy relating to labour market testing around that time, I realised that the application would fail. I then withdrew the application (before any work had commenced on the application). I could not afford to re-submit the nomination application for the English plumber. I then applied for a refund but it was refused.
I can accept that the nomination fee would not be refunded but I cannot accept that the SAF levy would not be refunded when no work was undertaken on the application and the plumber did not commence working for us. It is theft in my opinion. We don’t want to go to this expense but are forced to because of a lack of local candidates. I wrote to my local member to complain but I’ve had no response. -
Friday, 07 June 2019
I had a Nomination refusal last year and my client (sponsor) went to their local member at my suggestion. The local member suggested we lodge a claim through "The Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration" (CDDA Scheme)
https://www.finance.gov.au/resource-management/discretionary-financial-assistance/cdda-scheme/information-for-applicants-cdda/
The local member provided a letter of support with the application. The claim was lodged on 9 May 2019 and they advise that claims are placed in a queue, while in the queue you are updated every 3 months. They also advised that "due to the number of claims received by the Department, it may be many months before a claim is allocated for assessment". I will provide an update when a receive an outcome. -
Wednesday, 18 September 2019
Any updates on this issue will be very much appreciated. It is so wrong.
-
Thursday, 30 January 2020
Ok everyone, anyone had any updates on this, where to apply for SAF levy refund, we don't need to do all this paperwork and then tell us the Job isn't Genuine, and refuse the nomination how ridiculous, cant even get a Diesel Mechanic. Government just take all our money from every struggling business and have to pay upfront SAF levy. Is it worth taking this to ACCC if we are unable to get contribution to training money back. This just doesn't seem correct that they can just keep money when we cant get what we paid for.
-
Saturday, 22 August 2020
Can someone please help and advise, where to send the SAF refund form to?
Immigration blog
That's good!
Is a bit unfair for business to pay for 3-4 yrs of SAF levy them the nomination will only be refused.
SAF is the new training benchmark criteria but it will look like business will lose a lot of money for nothing if the nomination is only refused, on top of the fact that they are already training their respective employees already and padding Coast for this too.
Abi
MARN 1460806