Parent Visa 103 vs 143 Australia: Which One Should You Choose?

The first decision every family faces when starting the parent visa process is also the one with the largest financial stakes: Subclass 103 (non-contributory) or Subclass 143 (contributory). The difference in government fees alone is roughly $43,000 per parent. But choosing the cheaper option isn't always rational — and in many cases, it works out to be more expensive in real terms.

This post walks through both options with enough detail to make the decision clearly.

The Core Difference

Both the 103 and the 143 are permanent offshore parent visas. They have identical eligibility requirements — the Balance of Family test, settled sponsor, health, and character requirements are the same. The difference is entirely in cost and queue position.

The "contributory" fee in the 143 functions as a priority payment. Applicants who pay it are placed in a faster-moving queue than those who don't. The Department uses the fee to offset projected healthcare and social services costs for the parent over their lifetime as a permanent resident.

The 103: Cheap Upfront, Enormous Time Cost

The Subclass 103 has approximately $7,345 in government fees for a primary applicant, paid through first and second instalments under the Department's requests. There is no contributory second instalment. For a couple, the government-fee total is approximately $12,310 before the Assurance of Support bond, because the secondary applicant's first instalment is lower.

The problem is the queue. As of 2026, the non-contributory queue is so congested that new applicants are looking at waiting periods in excess of 30 years. The Department allocated only 1,700 places to the non-contributory stream in 2025–26, compared to 6,800 for the contributory stream. At that ratio, the queue does not move quickly.

A 55-year-old parent lodging a 103 today would realistically receive a decision at age 85 or later. That is not a retirement plan. It is, however, a queue position — and some families lodge a 103 as a placeholder while actually pursuing another pathway, or because the parent's health makes the 143 inadvisable and they want to have something in the system.

The 103 makes genuine practical sense in only a narrow set of circumstances:

• The parent is young enough (under 45) that a 30-year wait still yields meaningful time in Australia as a PR
• The family cannot afford the 143 fees and has no prospect of affording them
• The parent is included as a secondary applicant in a joint application on the relevant subclass (the secondary applicant charge is lower)

The 143: Expensive, but the Only Realistic Path to PR

At approximately $50,000 in government fees per adult (first instalment at lodgment, second instalment ~12–15 years later when the case is assessed), the Subclass 143 is one of the most expensive visa pathways in the world. For a couple, total charges approach $100,000.

What you're buying is a 12–15 year wait rather than a 30+ year wait. That difference is the entire argument for the 143.

A parent who is 60 today and lodges a 143 would be looking at a grant around age 72–75. That's a meaningful window — time to settle in Australia, benefit from Medicare, and live near family without constant visa rotation.

The fee structure also has a cash-flow advantage. The first instalment is approximately $5,040 for the primary applicant and $2,515 for a secondary adult. The much larger second instalment (~$43,600 per applicant) isn't due until the application reaches the front of the queue — roughly 12–15 years later. Families have time to save.

The 173 Option: Staged Contributory Pathway

The Subclass 173 is a temporary visa that provides a stepping stone to the 143. It is the same contributory pathway, but split differently:

• The parent applies for a temporary visa (173) first — approximately $3,095 for the primary applicant ($1,550 for a secondary adult) at the temporary stage
• The 173 is granted sooner than the 143 (though still from the same queue — timing is similar)
• After the 173 is granted, the parent enters Australia and remains for up to 2 years
• During that 2-year period, the parent pursues the 143 permanent stage under the Department's instructions, paying the permanent-stage instalments of approximately $420 for a primary applicant ($210 for a secondary adult) and $19,420 per applicant
• Total visa instalments for the primary applicant end up around $52,065 before the separate Assurance of Support bond; the detailed bond-inclusive primary total is approximately $62,065

The 173 appeals to families where:

• The parent cannot afford the full second instalment upfront but wants to stage the cost
• The family wants the parent to enter Australia earlier on a valid visa and begin life there before the PR is confirmed
• There are cash-flow reasons to defer the large instalment

The tradeoff is complexity — you are managing two separate applications — and the overall cost is marginally higher than going direct to 143. The processing time is essentially the same, because the 173 draws from the same queue.

Note that from 22 April 2026, the 173 is still lodged via paper form (it has not yet been migrated to ImmiAccount online lodgment, unlike the 143, 103, 864, and 804).

The Decision Framework

Choose 103 if:

• The parent is under 45 and a 30-year wait would still be useful
• The family genuinely cannot raise $50,000 now or over the next decade
• The parent's health is likely to fail the $86,000 Significant Cost Threshold assessment, making the 143 a high financial risk (you'd lose the first instalment but avoid the second)

Choose 143 if:

• The parent is over 50 — a 30-year wait is not viable
• The family can fund the first instalment now and plan for the second over 12 years
• You want a reliable, predictable pathway with a realistic end point

Consider 173 first if:

• You want the parent to enter Australia before full PR is granted
• Cash flow makes staged payments preferable to the larger lump sums
• You want flexibility to return to the parent's home country for longer periods during the 2-year temporary grant

Consider 870 as a separate temporary route: The Subclass 870 (Sponsored Parent Temporary) is not a permanent visa. It allows a 3- or 5-year stay, is renewable once up to a maximum cumulative stay of 10 years, has no PR pathway, and does not require the Balance of Family test. It is not a parallel strategy: a parent cannot apply for or hold an 870 while they have applied for or hold a permanent or temporary parent visa, and cannot apply for an 870 after lodging a permanent parent-visa application. The sponsor may be an Australian citizen, permanent resident, or eligible New Zealand citizen and must meet the applicable 870 requirements, including the source-frame taxable-income threshold of $83,454.80.

What Families Often Get Wrong

Assuming the 103 is a sensible "hedge." Lodging both a 103 and a 143 simultaneously for the same parent is not standard practice and doesn't provide dual-queue benefit. The contribution determines the queue — you can't pay and not-pay at the same time for the same applicant.

Waiting to lodge because the fees seem too high. Every year you delay lodging a 143 is a year added to the back of the queue. The queue date is set at lodgment, not at payment of the second instalment. Lodging now — even with uncertainty — is almost always better than waiting.

Assuming the 103 will get faster over time. Under the current 2025–26 planning levels, only 1,700 places are allocated to the non-contributory stream, a small fraction of the backlog.

The Australia Parent Visa Guide includes a cost modelling worksheet for the 103/143/173 decision, covering total government fees, AoS bond requirements, and a comparison of the real timelines against different parent ages.

See more Australia guides →