top of page

Parent Visa Australia 2026: 103 vs 143 vs 804 vs 864 Compared

5 days ago
2 min read

Australia has several permanent Parent visa pathways. The main distinction is between non-contributory and contributory visas, and between pathways available to parents generally and pathways requiring the applicant to be old enough for the Australian age pension.


Subclass 103 Parent visa

The subclass 103 is a permanent Parent visa. It is less expensive than contributory Parent visas but is subject to capping and queueing and historically has much longer processing periods.


Subclass 143 Contributory Parent visa

The subclass 143 is also permanent but requires substantially higher visa application charges. Home Affairs states that contributory Parent visas may be processed faster than subclass 103, although they remain subject to capping and queueing.


Subclass 804 and 864 aged-parent pathways

Subclass 804 is the non-contributory Aged Parent visa. Subclass 864 is the contributory Aged Parent visa. These pathways require the primary applicant to be old enough to receive the Australian age pension and have specific location requirements.


Balance of family test

Most applicants for subclasses 103, 143, 804 and 864 must satisfy the balance of family test. Home Affairs states that the test cannot be waived even in compelling or exceptional circumstances.


Queueing is central to Parent visa strategy


For broader Family stream context, see the Australian Migration Program 2026.

For visa charges, see Australian Visa Fees 2026–27.


Official sources


This article provides general information only. Parent visa eligibility, age, location, sponsorship, assurance-of-support and queue requirements vary by subclass and individual circumstances.


Related Top10Migration guides



Top 10 Migration © 2026

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest

Disclaimer: Top 10 Migration Website is a directory of listings and information platform only. The inclusion, order or placement of any migration website, law firm, migration agent or service provider on this website does not constitute an endorsement, recommendation, ranking or assessment of quality. Nothing on this website should be interpreted as determining that any listed provider is better or worse than another and or that any company not listed here is not a good firm or agency. 

Any blogs, articles, commentary or other content published on this website are provided for general information purposes only and reflect opinions or general commentary. They do not constitute legal advice, migration advice or professional advice and should not be relied upon as such.

Migration and legal circumstances vary from person to person. Users should make their own enquiries and seek independent legal advice from a suitably qualified legal practitioner or other appropriately authorised professional before making decisions based on any information contained on this website. 

bottom of page