The Balance-of-Family Test for Filipino Families, Explained

Many Filipino families are spread across the world. One child works in Sydney, another in Dubai or Riyadh, and one or two stayed home in the Philippines to be near the parents. When the Australia-based child finally wants to sponsor Mama and Papa for a permanent parent visa, they hit a quiet but decisive rule that almost nobody warns them about: the balance-of-family test. It is not about money, health or character. It is simply a head-count of where your parents' children live — and it can stop a parent visa before it even begins.

This guide explains the test in plain English, shows you how to count your siblings correctly (including why a brother on a temporary Australian visa might not count), works through a realistic OFW-family example, and explains the one visa that lets you sidestep the test entirely so your parents can still join you.

What the balance-of-family test actually is

The balance-of-family test is a gateway requirement for every permanent Australian parent visa. Before the Department even looks at your parents' health, character or place in the years-long queue, the sponsoring child must show that the family's centre of gravity is in Australia. In the Department's words, a parent passes the test if either of these is true:

• The half rule: at least half of the parent's children are "eligible children" — Australian citizens, permanent residents, or eligible New Zealand citizens — who usually live in Australia; or
• The most-in-Australia rule: there are more eligible children usually resident in Australia than in any other single country.

The key word is all of the parent's children. The test counts every living son and daughter of the parent applicant — biological, adopted and step-children — no matter how old they are, whether they are married, or which country they live in. It is not limited to the child doing the sponsoring. This is exactly where Filipino families are caught off guard: the migrating parent may have six children, and the test weighs all six, not just the one who built a life in Australia.

This test applies to subclasses 103 and 804 (the non-contributory Parent and Aged Parent visas), 143 and 173 (the Contributory Parent visas), and 864 and 884 (the Contributory Aged Parent visas). If your parent cannot satisfy the test, none of these permanent options is available — and importantly, the test cannot be waived, no matter how genuine or compassionate the circumstances.

How children are counted — and why a temporary visa changes everything

To work out the result, you make two columns: the number of eligible children usually resident in Australia, and the number of children resident in each other country. Then you apply the two rules above. A few counting details decide most cases:

• Only eligible children count as "in Australia." An eligible child is an Australian citizen, an Australian permanent resident, or an eligible New Zealand citizen. A child physically living in Australia but holding only a temporary visa — a student, a 482 worker, a 485 graduate, a bridging visa — does not count toward the Australian side of the ledger.
• Children overseas are counted by country of usual residence. A daughter who has settled in Saudi Arabia counts for Saudi Arabia; a son who stayed in Cavite counts for the Philippines.
• Every child is counted, including those estranged, married into another family, or living far away. You cannot simply leave a sibling off the form.

That temporary-visa rule is the single biggest trap for Filipino families. It feels deeply unfair: your brother is physically in Melbourne, working full-time, paying rent and tax — but if he is on a 482 Skills in Demand visa rather than holding PR, he counts as not in Australia for this test. The arithmetic only flips in your favour once he becomes a permanent resident or citizen. For families on the edge of passing, the timing of a sibling's PR grant can be the deciding factor, which is why it is worth mapping everyone's visa status before lodging anything.

A worked example: siblings across the Philippines, Australia and the Gulf

Consider Lola Remedios, a widowed mother of five whose daughter Grace, an Australian permanent resident in Brisbane, wants to sponsor her on a Contributory Parent (143) visa. Her five children are spread the way many OFW families are:

• Grace — Australian permanent resident, Brisbane (eligible, in Australia)
• Mark — works in Dubai on an employment visa (United Arab Emirates)
• Joy — works in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (Saudi Arabia)
• Paolo — lives in Carmona, Cavite (Philippines)
• Anna — lives in Carmona, Cavite (Philippines)

Now run the test. Eligible children in Australia: 1 (Grace). Half of five is 2.5, so the half rule needs at least three in Australia — Lola Remedios fails the half rule. The most-in-Australia rule looks at each country separately: Australia 1, UAE 1, Saudi Arabia 1, Philippines 2. The Philippines has the most, so she fails that rule too. Result: she does not pass the balance-of-family test, and the permanent 143 is closed to her, even though Grace is willing and able to pay the high contributory fee.

Change one fact and the answer can change. If Mark in Dubai had instead become an Australian permanent resident and moved to Australia, the Australian column becomes 2 and the Philippines column stays at 2 — there would no longer be "more in any other single country," so the most-in-Australia rule could be satisfied. This is why the same parent can fail one year and pass the next: it depends entirely on where the children are settled and what status they hold at the moment of assessment.

Why the test cannot be waived — and what that means for your plan

It is tempting to assume there must be an exception for a frail, widowed parent with one devoted child in Australia. There is not. The balance-of-family test is a mandatory legal criterion for the permanent parent visas, and the Department has no discretion to waive it on compassionate, financial or health grounds. A registered migration agent cannot argue around it either; the only honest thing a professional can do is count the children correctly and tell you the truth early.

That truth is worth hearing before you spend money. Permanent parent visas are among the costliest and slowest in the system — the Contributory Parent (143) carries a total charge of around AUD 48,640 per applicant and an estimated 15-year wait, while the lower-cost Parent (103) sits behind an estimated 33-year queue (both figures as at 31 March 2026). Lodging a permanent application that was never going to pass the balance-of-family test wastes the first instalment and years of hope. A clear-eyed count up front protects your family from that.

How the subclass 870 sidesteps the test entirely

Here is the good news many families miss. The Sponsored Parent (Temporary) visa, subclass 870, does not require the balance-of-family test at all. It is the practical "see them now" route for parents who can never pass the test — like Lola Remedios above.

The 870 lets a sponsored parent stay in Australia for up to 3 or 5 years per grant, with a cumulative maximum of 10 years across grants. It is not permanent residency and it does not lead to it, but it lets your parents live near you, meet their grandchildren and be part of daily life — without ever counting siblings in Dubai or Cavite. A few conditions apply: the sponsoring child must be approved as a sponsor first, a security bond may be required, and the program is capped at roughly 15,000 places a year, so it is not guaranteed simply because the test is skipped.

For most spread-out Filipino families, the realistic plan is therefore two-track: use the 870 to bring your parents over now while you are young and able to sponsor, and only pursue a permanent parent visa if and when enough siblings settle in Australia to satisfy the balance-of-family test. Mapping that sequence is exactly the kind of planning we walk families through.