482 nomination and visa evidence in 2026: what must still be valid at decision

A nomination that was valid on the day the subclass 482 application was lodged is not enough. Regulation 482.212(1) of the Migration Regulations 1994 requires three things about the nomination, and the third is written in the present perfect: the nomination was approved under section 140GB of the Migration Act, the nominator was an approved work sponsor at the time the nomination was approved, and the approval of the nomination has not ceased under regulation 2.75. That wording is why nomination failure is the most common fatal defect at decision: the requirement keeps running until the case officer signs off, not just until lodgement. The analysis below follows the Migration Regulations 1994 as published on the Federal Register of Legislation, the Department of Home Affairs page for the Skills in Demand visa (subclass 482), and the department's PAM3 policy instructions for this subclass. Treat it as general explanation of how the criteria operate, not advice on an individual file; a case turns on its own facts and on the regulations in force when the decision is made.

What exactly has to be true about the nomination, and at which moment?

Regulation 482.212(1) does three separate jobs, and each is tested against a different moment in time. The approval itself (limb (a)) and the sponsor's approved status (limb (b)) are historical facts: they are assessed as at the date the nomination was approved. The "has not ceased" limb (c) is a continuing state.

Limb (a) — the nomination identified in the visa application was approved under section 140GB.
Limb (b) — the person who made the nomination held approved work sponsor status when that approval was given.
Limb (c) — the approval has not ceased under regulation 2.75 at any point up to decision.

Two consequences follow from that structure. First, a later problem at the sponsor end can sink a nomination that was perfectly healthy at lodgement. Second, the visa applicant's own evidence cannot repair limb (c); no amount of skills documentation substitutes for a live nomination.

How does an approved nomination stop counting?

Regulation 2.75 sets the events that cause an approval to cease, and the current text of that regulation is the authority to read. In practice, the situations the PAM3 instructions flag as requiring action during visa processing are: the nomination is refused, the nomination is withdrawn, and the sponsor's own approval expires — the policy guidance treats a lapsed sponsor approval as leaving the nomination invalid.

The 482 pathways also matter for identifying which criteria apply. The visa operates through three streams (Commonly described as the Specialist Skills, Core Skills and Labour Agreement streams), and the separate sets of English criteria in the regulations — 482.222, 482.232 and 482.243 — track that structure. Which limb applies does not change the nomination test; 482.212(1) is common to all of them.

What should be verified before the visa application goes in?

These steps run in order, and each one is a separate check.

Read the nomination approval notice and record the approval date, the nominated occupation, and the nominated position.
Confirm the nominator held approved work sponsor status on the approval date shown.
Check the sponsor approval's own validity window against the expected processing period, and flag any expiry risk.
Confirm the occupation and duties in the employment contract match the approved nomination.
Confirm that the nomination identifies the primary applicant and that any family members included are either listed in the nomination or hold the sponsor's written consent under 482.315.
Record the date this check was done and set a review date.

Checkpoint	Verify before lodgement	Verify again before decision
Nomination approval	Approved under s.140GB; noted on file	Still approved, not withdrawn, not refused
Sponsor status	Approved work sponsor at approval date	Sponsor approval still current
Occupation and duties	Contract matches nomination	Position unchanged and still genuine
Family members	Listed in nomination or consent held	Relationship and listing still accurate

What has to be monitored while the application is pending?

The applicant's own evidence can still be supplemented during processing where further material is requested, but the nomination must remain continuously valid until decision. Anything that changes the employer's circumstances during processing can feed into limb (c). Watch for: expiry of the sponsor's approval; withdrawal of the nomination; adverse information about the nominator under regulation 1.13A or 1.13B, which engages 482.216; and any change to the position itself, because 482.212(2) separately requires that the applicant's intention to perform the nominated occupation is genuine and that the position associated with the nominated occupation is genuine.

What happens inside processing when a nomination collapses?

The PAM3 decision sequence puts nomination verification early: the case officer confirms the nomination is approved, has not ceased, and that the nominator was an approved work sponsor when it was approved. Where the nomination is later refused or withdrawn, the instructions require the officer to invite the applicant to comment.

Two mechanisms then matter:

Invitation to comment. Where the officer is considering refusal on the basis of specific information, a written invitation and a reasonable time to respond is required in the process described by the policy instructions, alongside the natural justice step before any adverse decision.
Withdrawal declaration. Where a 482 applicant has declared willingness to withdraw if the nomination fails, the policy instructions treat that declaration as an automatic withdrawal.

Suppose an applicant — hypothetical example only — is nominated by a business whose standard business sponsorship approval expires while the 482 application is pending. Even if the nomination was valid on the lodgement date, limb (c) is no longer satisfied at decision and the visa cannot be granted on that nomination. The remedy is a fresh, valid nomination, not better applicant evidence.

Which parts of the file are the applicant's own evidence?

Nomination failure attracts attention because it is fatal, but it is not the only barrier, and these criteria must be met independently.

Skills, qualifications and employment background — criteria 482.221, 482.231 and 482.242. Policy guidance interprets this as at least one year of full-time work (or equivalent part-time or casual work) in the nominated occupation or a related field, within the five years before application; voluntary or unpaid work does not count. Related-field experience must involve tasks that are the same as, or closely related to, the nominated occupation and at the same skill level — kitchenhand experience does not support a chef nomination.
Skills assessment — the instructions allow one only where absolutely necessary, working from ANZSCO's indicative skill level and the core tasks rather than every listed task.
English — set by the minister's legislative instrument for the relevant stream, with the exemptions described in policy guidance; plan for results to remain valid across the processing period.
Health, character and related criteria — public interest criteria set out in 482.217, including 4019 for applicants aged 18 or over; the special return criteria 5001, 5002 and 5010 under 482.218; and health insurance arrangements under 482.214. Where the nominated occupation is a medical practitioner, registration recognition is required by 482.215, and condition 8607 generally requires any Australian licence or registration to be obtained before starting work.
Three-year conduct rule — 482.213 requires that the applicant has not engaged in conduct breaching sections 245AR(1), 245AS(1), 245AT(1) or 245AU(1) in the three years before application, unless the minister considers it reasonable to disregard.

A nomination can be unimpeachable and the application still refused on one of these. Conversely, a strong applicant-side file does nothing for a ceased nomination.

When a refusal cites regulation 2.75, what review options exist?

Refusal on nomination grounds puts time limits in play. The routes are merits review before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or Administrative Review Tribunal, with applications due within 21 days for onshore applicants and 28 days for offshore applicants, and thereafter judicial review in the Federal Court or Federal Circuit Court, which examines legal error and procedural fairness rather than re-hearing the facts. Merits review assesses the case against the criteria as they stand at the tribunal's decision, so a valid nomination covering that period is generally the issue that determines whether review can succeed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a 482 visa be granted if the nomination was valid when I lodged but ceased later?

No. Regulation 482.212(1)(c) requires that the approval of the nomination has not ceased under regulation 2.75, and that requirement is assessed at the time of decision, not only at lodgement.

What causes a subclass 482 nomination to cease?

Regulation 2.75 sets the ceasing events and should be read in its current form. The situations flagged in the department's policy instructions include the nomination being refused or withdrawn, and expiry of the sponsor's own approval.

Does an expired sponsorship approval invalidate an existing nomination?

Yes, according to the policy instructions. Policy instructions treat a lapsed sponsor approval as leaving the nomination invalid, so the nomination has ceased and 482.212(1)(c) is not met; limb (b) remains satisfied because it asks only whether the nominator was an approved work sponsor when the nomination was approved.

Is one year of full-time experience enough on its own?

No. The experience must have been gained in the five years before application, in the nominated occupation or a closely related field at the same skill level, and paid work only counts towards it.

Do family members need to be included in the nomination?

Regulation 482.315 requires a secondary applicant either to be identified in the nomination or to have the sponsor's written consent, and the relationship must satisfy the definition of a member of the family unit.

Will the case officer warn me if the nomination fails during processing?

The policy instructions require the applicant to be invited to comment where a nomination has been refused or withdrawn, and require a reasonable opportunity to respond before an adverse decision is made.

Does a skills assessment have to be lodged with every application?

The instructions permit a request only where it is absolutely necessary, and the lapse of time is not the trigger — insufficient evidence of skills or qualifications is. Applicants are given a reasonable opportunity to provide one where it is genuinely needed.