New Zealand's exempt-qualifications list is published by the immigration department rather than the qualifications authority, and two versions of it are in force at once — one of them frozen at 2017 content

Three corrections, and they compound.

The qualifications authority does not publish this list. The immigration department does, as immigration instructions. NZQA’s role is that of a contractor, described in its own briefing to the minister: “MBIE engages NZQA’s services to compile the List of Qualifications Exempt from Assessment (LQEA), containing select qualifications from quality-assured and credible overseas educational institutions.”

NZQA’s public pages do not mention the list at all. We read its assessment pages — what an assessment is, how to apply, the fees, how evaluations are done — and found no reference to the exemption. The only public-facing “you may not need an assessment” statement lives on the immigration site. If you go looking on the qualifications authority’s website for the list that exempts you from its service, you will not find it.

And there is no “the list”. There are two, live at the same time. One was updated last month. The other is frozen at 2017 content and awards points on a scale that no longer exists.

The legal status, in one line

Immigration instructions are, under section 22(8) of the Immigration Act 2009, “statements of Government policy.” Not regulations, not delegated legislation — policy statements certified by the Minister, which “take effect from … the date they are certified” or a later specified date, and which the chief executive “must publish.”

That matters for two reasons. It explains why the list can change on a news item rather than a legislative amendment, and it explains why two versions can sit side by side without anything being invalid.

The two lists, and the note where they disagree

Appendix 3, marked effective 29 September 2023, carries this note:

“The List of Qualifications Exempt from Assessment contained in Appendix 3 is applicable only to people who have made a Skilled Migrant Category residence application under SM instructions or a work visa application under WI instructions. The List of Qualifications Exempt from Assessment contained in Appendix 17 applies to people who have made a visa application under all the other instructions.”

Appendix 17, marked effective 23 June 2025, carries this one:

“Appendix 17 applies to people who made a Skilled Migrant Residence application under SR instructions or a work visa application under WI instructions where the specified country is listed in Appendix 17. The List … contained in Appendix 3 applies to people who made a Skilled Migrant Category residence application under SM instructions or a work visa application under WI instructions where the specified country is not listed in Appendix 17.”

Those are not the same rule. The first splits by instruction set. The second splits by instruction set and by whether your country appears in the newer appendix. We are not going to paraphrase the two into one clean sentence, because they cannot be. If which appendix governs your application matters to you — and it will, because the two award different points — put the question to the immigration department in writing.

Why the older list is worse than merely old

Appendix 17’s country tables are actively maintained: every one we read carried an effective date of 24 August 2026, covering Australia, Canada, China, Fiji, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, plus a separate table for engineering degrees accredited under two of the international accords. That resolves a standing question about whether the list is still maintained. It is. Last updated 24 August 2026.

The country pages hanging off Appendix 3 are not. Several we opened carried an effective date of 28 August 2017; one carried none at all; and its own index still lists two countries with cut-off dates from 2016.

And the two lists award points on different scales. Appendix 3’s Australia table shows a bachelor’s degree at 50 points; Appendix 17’s shows 4. The immigration department explains the newer figure: “The LQEA has also been updated to reflect changes to the SMC points system. Points for bachelor’s degrees increase from 3 to 4, while points for master’s and doctoral degrees remain unchanged.”

Both numbers are live on the same government website today. Anyone reading a points figure off a New Zealand government page without checking which appendix they are in can be wrong by an order of magnitude. We report the figures as published and do not tell you which applies to you; that is the department’s call and it depends on which instructions your application was made under. Our general position on official numbers we cannot reconcile is the same as in assessment outcome validity periods.

(One navigation defect worth knowing so you do not think you have gone wrong: on the current index, the United Kingdom entry links into a page whose own title names a different country. The UK table really is inside it, at an anchor further down, marked with the current effective date. The page identifies itself incorrectly.)

The four conditions, and the trap in the second one

Appendix 17 states them plainly:

“A qualification is exempt from assessment and qualifies for the indicated points if: the qualification and the awarding institution is listed; and the qualification was awarded from or within the year listed in the ‘effective from’ column; and the qualification was not completed outside of the list country, including any overseas campuses of the listed awarding institution; and the qualification meets other requirements and is not excluded by the notes listed in the notes section.”

The second condition is the one that catches people, because the list carries closed date ranges. Most entries are open-ended — “effective from 1999” — but a meaningful number are bounded at both ends. We read one country table containing six closed ranges, including institutions listed as effective from 1999 to 2017 and from 2008 to 2020.

So your university can be on the list and your degree can still not be exempt, because you graduated after the year its listing closed. There is no warning next to your name; the range is simply a column.

The third condition is the one that catches transnational students. A qualification “not completed outside of the list country, including any overseas campuses of the listed awarding institution” — which means a branch campus of a listed university does not inherit the listing. That is the same distinction that governs recognition generally, in awarded by versus taught by and does a branch campus count as studying overseas.

And the fourth condition hides the qualification-type exclusions. One country’s notes limit the list to bachelor’s degrees with or without honours, master’s degrees meeting stated duration and credit minimums, and doctorates meeting a duration and thesis requirement — adding that “If the wording of ‘Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)’ is not stated on the awarding certificate and transcript, the qualification must be evaluated by NZQA”, and that “All other types of doctoral degrees including the professional practice doctor’s degrees (e.g. Juris Doctor, Doctor of Pharmacy, etc) are excluded from this list.”

There is also a general fallback: “If the standard full-time duration cannot be determined, the qualification must be evaluated by NZQA.”

What being on the list does not do

Three published limits, and the third is the one people are surprised by.

“The List of Qualifications Exempt from Assessment only provides the level and qualification type that an overseas qualification compares to on the [framework]. A qualification being named on the List … does not mean that it is comparable to a similarly named New Zealand qualification.”

“The List … is for immigration purposes only. The inclusion of a qualification on this list does not have bearing on the status of the qualification for professional registration, further study, salary or employment purposes.”

“Note: Even if your qualification is on the list of exemptions, Immigration New Zealand may still ask you to get an IQA when we process your application. This might happen if the visa requirement is to show credit or knowledge instead of type of level or qualification.”

The exemption is not a guarantee that you will not be asked for an assessment. It removes the default requirement; it does not remove the department’s ability to ask.

Two profession-specific carve-outs are published on the same pages: overseas teachers “using a qualification to apply for a visa to work in a school or early childhood setting must apply to NZQA for a Teaching International Qualifications Assessment” — set out in the New Zealand approved ITE programmes — and for accord-accredited engineering degrees, “The country you gained your qualification in must be on the relevant list of signatories when you were awarded your engineering degree.” Another year rule, and the same one the accords apply from their side in Engineering New Zealand’s accredited degrees.

If you are not exempt: what the assessment is and costs

An assessment “evaluates overseas qualifications to see where they would be on the [framework]: Level 1 to 10 / Type of qualification”, and NZQA is explicit that it does not outsource the comparison: “We cannot accept recognition evaluations from other countries because our evaluation compares an overseas qualification to a level or a qualification on the [framework].”

It will not evaluate everything. There is a minimum of “400 notional learning hours (approximately 10 weeks of full time academic study)”, and NZQA excludes secondary school qualifications, incomplete programmes, certificates of attendance, apprenticeships without formal training programmes, and “professional registration, permits, licenses or certifications.”

Fees as published on 3 September 2026, including GST: a standard assessment NZ$445; a skill shortage list assessment NZ$610; a teaching assessment NZ$746, which “includes evaluation of an additional 2 free Standard IQAs”; a NZ$275 surcharge for pre-1998 qualifications, “because the evaluation of older qualifications requires more time and resources”; and an appeal NZ$765. NZQA adds: “There is no refund if you choose to cancel your application.”

Timing: “Due to high demand, the average wait times for IQA applications are now 10 weeks”, though “Once we have confirmed that the application you’ve submitted contains all the evidence and documentation we need, we complete 90 per cent of applications within 3 weeks.” Note where the clock actually starts — and note that “We may cancel your application if we do not hear back from you within 30 days.”

How that assessment differs from an Australian skills assessment is in the NZQA IQA versus an Australian skills assessment, and what a level result actually unlocks in what an NZQA Level 7 outcome unlocks.

What to do

1. Work out which appendix governs your application first. They award different points and their own notes disagree about the boundary.
2. Check the effective-from column for your institution, and check whether it closes. A listed university with a closed range does not cover a later graduate.
3. Check where you actually studied. An overseas campus of a listed institution is excluded by name.
4. Read the notes section for your country, which is where qualification types are excluded.
5. Do not treat listing as a guarantee. The department can still ask for an assessment.
6. Do not use the list for anything other than immigration. It says so.

What this page does not do

We do not reproduce either list, and we cannot tell you whether your qualification is exempt — the immigration department determines that. We do not assess qualifications, we do not calculate points, and we do not write about which visa category to apply under. Nothing here predicts a visa or assessment outcome.