Dependency assessment for Subclass 114: what case officers look for in 2026

For Subclass 114, a case officer is not asking whether your relative sends money. They are asking whether, for at least three years before the application, the applicant depended on that Australian relative for basic needs — food, shelter and clothing — and whether that reliance outweighs every other source of support, including the applicant's own income. That is the dependency criterion on the Department of Home Affairs' Aged Dependent Relative visa (Subclass 114) page, as published in August 2026, and it is the part of the visa most applications turn on.

What follows describes how that judgement is framed in the regulations and in the Department's PAM3 procedures guidance. It is general information about how the criterion works, not an assessment of any individual case; where a figure, period or current requirement matters to a decision, the official publication governs, and a registered migration agent or legal practitioner is the appropriate source for advice on particular facts.

What does "dependent" actually mean for Subclass 114?

The official page states the requirement plainly: you must have been dependent on your relative in Australia for basic needs like food, shelter and clothing for at least three years before you apply, and dependency may arise from a disability that prevents you from working. The page also directs applicants to give evidence of how long that support has been provided.

In legislative terms, clause 114.211 of the Migration Regulations 1994 requires the applicant to be the aged dependent relative of an Australian citizen, Australian permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen, and regulation 1.03 is the provision that defines "aged dependent relative", along with "settled" and "eligible New Zealand citizen". The "aged" element is tied to age pension age: the official eligibility criteria state the applicant must be old enough to receive the age pension in Australia, and the Department of Social Services' age pension page is the reference point for that age.

Dependency itself has two moving parts, and both have to hold:

Duration — the basic-needs reliance must have run for at least three years before lodgement, not just at the moment of applying.
Degree — the reliance must be substantial. PAM3 frames this as whether the support from this relative exceeds the support coming from anyone or anything else, and whether the applicant's own resources are enough to maintain them.

The practical consequence is that "close family" is not the same as "dependent". Regular money that covers groceries, rent and clothing reads very differently from birthday gifts, occasional top-ups, or help with a one-off expense.

Does the applicant's own pension or income end the claim?

Not automatically — but it is the point where many dependency arguments fail. There is no rule on the official page saying any income disqualifies an applicant. The question is whether the income, on its own, covers basic needs.

PAM3 directs the officer to examine the applicant's own income sources, including pension, rent and investment income, and to treat the dependency definition as not met where that independent income is sufficient to live on. So a small pension that covers a fraction of monthly living costs leaves the dependency argument intact: the relative's money is still what puts food on the table and pays the rent. A pension plus rental income that comfortably covers housing, food and clothing leaves little for the dependency claim to rest on, however regular the transfers are.

Two things follow from this. First, the applicant's own finances have to be disclosed rather than left for the officer to discover, because the dependency narrative is read against the financial record. Second, the comparison is made at both ends of the process: clause 114.221 requires the applicant to continue to satisfy clause 114.211 at the time of decision, and PAM3 lists an improvement in the applicant's financial position during processing as a recognised risk. Public interest criterion 4020, which concerns providing true and correct information, is the backdrop against which inconsistent or incomplete financial disclosure becomes a problem in its own right.

Which evidence actually gets weighed?

The official page names three examples of dependency evidence — bank statements, money transfers and rent receipts — and asks for evidence of how long support has been provided. PAM3's assessment step refers to reviewing the applicant's financial records, living arrangements and income sources over at least the preceding three years.

Document	What it can establish	Where it falls short
Bank statements (applicant's)	That money arrives regularly and is spent on living costs; whether balances alone would cover basics	Doesn't identify who sent the funds or what they bought
Money transfer / remittance records	The sponsor's contribution, its frequency and amount across the three-year window	Irregular lump sums read as gifts rather than maintenance
Rent receipts or housing payment records	That shelter is being funded, and by whom	Rent paid in the applicant's name out of their own funds cuts against dependency
Records of living arrangements	Who provides shelter day to day, and for how long	A shared address without financial records proves little on its own
Records of who pays medical or other essential costs	A further dimension of reliance beyond food and rent	One-off payments don't show continuing basic-needs support

What the officer is doing with these documents is checking coherence. Amounts that match the stated cost of living, arriving at a steady rhythm, across a period that visibly covers three years, tell a consistent story. Large unexplained gaps, transfers that start shortly before lodgement, or documents that contradict the applicant's stated housing arrangements do the opposite.

One mechanical point worth repeating from the official instructions: don't send original documents. Certified copies only.

How is the three-year period counted?

The official wording is "for at least 3 years before you apply", so the clock runs backwards from lodgement, and the evidence has to cover the span rather than the endpoint. Because clause 114.221 requires the applicant to keep satisfying clause 114.211 at the time of decision, dependency has to remain true while the application is being processed as well.

That has a practical implication for anyone planning to lodge: the record is built before the application, not after it. Evidence created in the weeks before lodgement cannot backfill three years, which is why a thin early period is difficult to cure later.

What happens when the officer thinks the record is thin?

The Department will tell you if further information is needed, and the official page advises providing anything missing at lodgement as soon as possible. In PAM3 terms, that request is a section 56 request under the Migration Act, with a response period typically given as 28 days. The examples PAM3 gives of what gets requested — bank transfer records, co-residence evidence, medical dependency evidence — map closely onto the three items on the official document list.

If a refusal is being contemplated on adverse information, PAM3 describes a separate natural justice step: the applicant is given the adverse material and a chance to respond before a decision is made. If nothing comes back, or the response doesn't address the gap, the officer can decide on the material already held. A refusal is given in writing with reasons and with advice on whether review rights apply, and the official page states the application fee is not refunded if the visa is refused.

For a paper Subclass 114 application lodged outside Australia on or after 25 June 2020, documents can be uploaded after the acknowledgement letter by importing the application into ImmiAccount using the application ID, date of birth and identity document number; if you can't use ImmiAccount, or lodged the application outside Australia before 25 June 2020, attach them to a completed Other Family Visa Processing Centre online form.

Where dependency sits alongside the other criteria

Dependency is one gate among several, and each one is independently fatal. The official eligibility list also covers:

an approved sponsorship by an eligible relative or that relative's partner, with the sponsor aged 18 or over, settled in Australia, and an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen (Form 40);
having no partner;
an assurance of support, requested by the Department at the relevant point in processing and assessed by Services Australia;
the health requirement and the character requirement, for the applicant and family members who apply with them;
any debt to the Australian Government being repaid or under an approved arrangement;
immigration history, including previous cancellations or refusals.

On the sponsor's own capacity, PAM3 notes there is no fixed income threshold, but the sponsor's ability to meet the applicant's basic needs has to be credible and supported by income, asset or tax records. Two constraints are worth knowing before lodging: sponsorship for Subclass 114 cannot be transferred to a different sponsor, and regulation 1.20LAA restricts sponsorship where the sponsor previously held a Subclass 802 visa supported by a state or territory welfare authority.

On the assurance of support, PAM3 records a bond of AUD 5,000 for the main applicant and AUD 2,000 for each adult family member, with the assurance typically running for two years. Bond amounts and assurance periods change, so confirm them against Services Australia's current published assurance of support requirements rather than any summary.

Where dependency arguments usually fail

The recurring patterns are narrow and predictable:

The money shown is occasional or gift-like rather than covering food, shelter and clothing.
The applicant's own documented income is enough to cover those basics.
Support from another person is greater than support from the sponsoring relative — a separate problem from the "no partner" rule, which is an outright bar.
The record doesn't span three years, or has gaps that no document explains.
Circumstances changed between lodgement and decision.
Documents that don't line up with each other, which turns a dependency question into a credibility question.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a small pension automatically disqualify a Subclass 114 applicant?

No. The test is whether the applicant's own income is sufficient to maintain them, not whether any income exists. A pension that covers only part of living costs can coexist with genuine dependency on the Australian relative for basic needs.

How many years of dependency does Subclass 114 require?

At least three years before the application is made, according to the Department of Home Affairs' official page. Dependency must also continue to be satisfied at the time of decision under clause 114.221 of the Migration Regulations 1994.

Can dependency be based on a disability rather than age alone?

The official page states dependency could arise from a disability that prevents the applicant from working. The basic-needs requirement still applies, and the "aged" element is met by being old enough to receive the Australian age pension.

What happens if the case officer asks for more dependency evidence?

The Department will specify what it wants; PAM3 describes this as a section 56 request, commonly with around 28 days to respond. If the response doesn't address the gap, the officer can decide on the material already held, and a refusal is issued in writing with reasons and any review rights.

Can the sponsor be changed during processing if they can no longer support the application?

PAM3 states that sponsorship for Subclass 114 cannot be transferred. If the original sponsor dies or loses the capacity to sponsor, the application cannot succeed on a substitute sponsor.

Does the applicant need to be outside Australia?

Yes. The official instructions require the applicant to be outside Australia when applying and when the decision is made, and the application is a paper application lodged by post or courier to the Parent, Child and Other Family Processing Centre in Perth.