Cash Salary and ACS Skill Assessments

Skill assessment outcomes issued by the ACS are frequently misunderstood - particularly in cases where salary was paid in cash.

One of the most common assumptions is that ACS rejects applications simply because salary was paid in cash.

That assumption is incorrect.

However, the opposite assumption — “cash salary is fine if documents are submitted” — is equally misleading and often results in unrealistic expectations.

This blog explains how ACS actually assesses employment, why cash salary creates a higher verification risk, and what applicants should realistically consider before lodging an application.

Request a Call from Experts

How Does ACS Assess Employment Experience?

ACS does not “approve documents” in isolation. It assesses whether claimed employment is skilled, relevant, and independently verifiable. The assessment generally focuses on four core areas:

Employer Verification
- The existence and operational status of the employer during the claimed period of employment
- Business registration records and historical operational activity
- Official contact details available for verification
- Responsiveness to verification requests, where applicable
Where the original employer has ceased operations, supporting evidence such as reference letters issued during the period of employment and corroborative statements from former supervisors or seniors may be submitted to explain the circumstances.

However, if ACS is unable to independently verify the employment through available channels, or does not receive sufficient confirmation during its verification process, the employment period may be assessed as unverifiable, irrespective of the documents provided.
Financial Evidence
- Salary slips or wage statements issued by the employer
- Bank statements reflecting salary credits (where applicable)
- Tax or statutory records (where available)
- Statutory or notarised declarations explaining cash-based salary arrangements
Salary paid in cash is not assessed in isolation. In such cases, salary slips and declarations are reviewed as supporting documents alongside employer verification and the overall consistency of the employment record.

Statutory or notarised declarations may be submitted to explain salary arrangements, particularly where standard banking records are not available. However, declarations are explanatory in nature and do not replace independent employer verification or other corroborative evidence.

If employment cannot be verified through the combined assessment of financial and employer-related evidence, the experience may be assessed as unverifiable, irrespective of the number of salary documents submitted.
Role Relevance and Skill Level
- Alignment of duties with ANZSCO tasks
- Skill level and complexity of work performed
- Career progression and role development over time
Job titles alone are not decisive. ACS bases its assessment on the substance of the work performed, not merely the designation used by the employer.
Consistency Across Documents
- Employment dates
- Salary details
- Employer information
- Job duties and responsibilities
ACS places significant emphasis on internal consistency across all documents submitted in support of employment claims. Each document is expected to corroborate the others.

Where material inconsistencies are identified and cannot be reasonably explained, ACS may reject the entire employment period on the basis that the experience cannot be reliably verified. In such cases, the volume of documents submitted does not compensate for lack of consistency.

Planning for Australia PR? Connect Now

Where Employment Verification Becomes a Risk

Employment verification may be impacted even where an authorised senior or reporting manager is nominated, as applicants do not control the timing, delivery, or response to third-party verification communications.

In such circumstances, assessing authorities may be unable to independently confirm the employment despite the availability of supporting documentation. This may result in the employment experience being assessed as unverifiable.

Where Cash Salary Becomes a Risk

Payment of salary in cash is not, by itself, grounds for refusal. However, verification becomes significantly more challenging where the employing entity has ceased operations and no authorised senior employee or HR representative is available to confirm the employment.

In such situations, despite the availability of supporting documentation, assessing authorities may be unable to independently verify the employment due to the absence of a functioning employer or designated verifier. As a result, the employment experience may be assessed as unverifiable.

A Common Misconception

A common misunderstanding is that salary mode alone determines the outcome of a skill assessment.

In practice, this is not the case. Even bank-paid or cheque-paid salaries may be assessed as unverifiable if the employer or employment details cannot be independently confirmed.

Planning for Australia PR? Connect Now

Why Some Applications Get Rejected Despite Genuine Work Experience

Applicants often assume that genuine work experience will automatically result in a positive skill assessment. However, decisions issued by the Australian Computer Society (ACS) are based on verifiability, not intention or effort.

An application may be assessed as unverifiable even where the work performed was genuine, if ACS is unable to independently confirm the employment through its verification processes.

Common reasons for such outcomes include:

Employer non-response to verification requests, including cases where the original employer has ceased operations and verification depends on former supervisors or senior personnel
Inability to validate the employer’s business operations during the claimed period of employment
Material inconsistencies across submitted documents

In such cases, the assessment outcome reflects verification limitations rather than a judgement on the applicant’s honesty or the genuineness of their work experience.

Skill assessment outcomes are determined solely by the assessing authority based on its internal verification and assessment processes.

Each application is assessed independently on its own merits.

How Applicants Can Reduce Verification Risk

While not all verification risks can be mitigated, applicants may reduce risk by taking the following steps:

Confirming that the employer is operational and contactable at the time of application. Where the employer has ceased operations, this should be clearly disclosed rather than omitted.
Submitting reference letters that were issued during the period of employment wherever possible. References issued long after the business has closed generally carry limited evidentiary weight.
Providing corroborative statements from former supervisors or senior colleagues only where the employer is no longer operational. Such statements should clearly explain the supervisor’s role, reporting relationship, and the circumstances under which the employment can no longer be verified by the company.
Maintaining strict consistency across all employment records, including dates, duties, salary details, and employer information. In ceased-employer cases, even minor inconsistencies can result in the experience being assessed as unverifiable.
Submitting statutory or notarised declarations to explain non-standard salary arrangements, including cash-based payments. These declarations are explanatory in nature and do not replace independent employer verification.

Where an employer has ceased operations, evidence from former supervisors or colleagues may be considered as supplementary support. However, such evidence does not substitute independent employer verification, and the employment may still be assessed as unverifiable if ACS is unable to independently confirm the employment.

These measures do not guarantee a positive outcome, but may assist ACS in assessing verifiability in cases where standard verification channels are no longer available.