Use Net Overseas Migration statistics to understand overseas migration, not Overseas Arrivals and Departures

An explanation of why Overseas Arrivals and Departures data is not a direct measure of overseas migration

Released
18/06/2026
Released
18/06/2026 11:30am AEST

Our advice

When discussing migration, it’s important to use the right statistics. While the ABS releases international migration and travel statistics in separate releases – in Net Overseas Migration (NOM) and Overseas Arrivals and Departures (OAD) – they are not interchangeable. They are different and serve very different purposes. 

The ABS advises that you should only use migration statistics for measuring migration. This is not a mere statistical technicality – using OAD data as a migration measure will provide an inaccurate and misleading indication of migration levels. 

The latest Net Overseas Migration data, for December quarter 2025, shows that annual net overseas migration was 300,960 people since December quarter 2024. Using net permanent and long-term (PLT) movements from OAD as a proxy for net overseas migration would overestimate migration by 60%, or an extra 179,570 people. Over time, net PLT overstates migration to a varying extent, meaning that it does not provide a reliable standalone signal for broad changes in the rate of migration.

This article provides a comparison of NOM and OAD and explains why net permanent and long-term movements should not be used as a proxy for migration statistics. It provides clear reasons for this, using examples, to support informed use of these important statistics.

NOM and OAD are different and measure different things

Net Overseas Migration measures population change from overseas migrationOverseas Arrivals and Departures measures cross-border travel activity 

Net Overseas Migration (NOM) is the official measure of migration. 

It is based on the concept of usual residence in the country, not just whether someone has crossed the border into or out of Australia.

Under the “12/16month rule”, there are two groups of migrants who contribute to change in the population: 

  • “Migrant Arrivals”, who add to the population, are people who were living outside Australia who arrive here and spend at least 12 months in Australia in the 16 months following their arrival.
  • “Migrant Departures”, who reduce the population, are people who were living here who depart Australia and spend at least 12 months away in the 16 months following their departure.

This is measured based on where people were actually living before and after travelling. People who do not change their country of usual residence do not influence NOM.

This aligns with international best practice and ensures NOM reflects real changes in Australia’s usually resident population.

Overseas Arrivals and Departures (OAD) data is a transactional count of border crossings, not population change.                                                                                    

Each arrival or departure is counted as a movement when the border is crossed millions of times every year, which means:

  1. The same person may be counted multiple times if they travel frequently. 
  2. Travellers may be categorised differently in different movements. 
  3. Duration cannot be measured accurately for all trips at the time of travel.

OAD data includes some information on short-term and long-term movements, making it valuable for understanding:

  • travel trends, including for tourism
  • seasonal patterns in travel
  • the volume and characteristics of shortterm movements.

However, OAD does not measure migration and is not designed to be a proxy for migration.

Net permanent and long-term arrivals and departures is not NOM

Permanent and long-term (PLT) overseas travel movements refer to those by people who have a length of stay (intended, actual or imputed) in or out of Australia of 12 months or longer when they cross the border into or out of Australia.

The difference between PLT arrivals and departures is sometimes assumed to be similar enough to Net Overseas Migration (NOM) data that it can provide a reliable, early indication of migration. This is not consistent with ABS advice, given the two statistics measure different things and have different purposes.

There are three key reasons why PLT is not suitable as a proxy for migration.

Reason 1 – PLT data includes people even when they are not migrating

OAD data classifies movements as PLT based on the best estimate of their duration of stay available at the time of travel. This includes a traveller’s self-declared intended duration of stay, which may not match how long the traveller ends up staying in Australia. For example, a visitor who declares an intended stay of 12 months at the border is counted as a PLT movement, even if they leave after a much shorter stay and never migrate to Australia. Further to this, OAD data doesn’t check what the traveller did before their trip or does after their trip.

Let’s look at an example:

Example 1

An Australian citizen who has lived in the UK for 2 years travels to Australia for a wedding for 2 weeks:

  • On their passenger card, they tick the box to say they are an Australian resident returning to Australia.
  • Because they ticked resident on their passenger card, the duration of their trip in the OAD data is counted as the time they spent overseas – 2 years.

This adds one PLT arrival to the OAD data even though they return to the UK after the wedding and have not migrated back to Australia.

Reason 2 – PLT data includes people who have already migrated to Australia

A person cannot migrate to Australia if they already live here. Migration occurs when a person changes their country of usual residence from one country to another.

OAD data is a count of border crossings, not migration. When identifying travellers as PLT, OAD only considers the duration of the current trip – it does not take into account how long the traveller had been in or out of Australia before that trip started or after it ended.

This means that when OAD is classifying a cross-border movement as PLT, it cannot account for whether someone has changed their country of usual residence. This can result in counting the same person multiple times.

Let’s look at another example:

Example 2

An international student studying in Australia for 3 years, who makes return trips to their home country to visit family every year while living here:

  • OAD classifies the student as a visitor, as they are on a temporary visa.
  • When they first arrive, they state their duration of stay on their passenger card as 3 years. This counts as 1 PLT arrival in the OAD data.
  • After 10 months of study in Australia, they head home to visit family for a month. This is counted as a short-term departure in the OAD data because it had been less than 12 months since their previous arrival. 
  • When they return after visiting family for a month, they have 2 years left of their university course. The student declares a 2 year stay on their passenger card. This counts as 1 PLT arrival in OAD.
  • With this pattern continuing each year, by the end of their course when they move back home, they have been counted as 3 PLT arrivals and 0 PLT departures. 

PLT has therefore counted the student once when they initially migrated here but has also counted them twice when they were already living here. 

Example 2 shows us that OAD can’t account for the country of residence status of a traveller before including them in the PLT figures, thus counting the same person multiple times.

Graph 1 shows the combined effect of examples like this. It highlights how many people who are already resident in Australia are counted as PLT arrivals in OAD data and also how many people are included in PLT arrivals but actually stay in Australia for less than 12 months.

Reason 3 – The “overcounting” of arrivals and departures in PLT data doesn’t “net out”

Despite the above limitations, it might be tempting to assume that the limitations of how people are identified in these movements is addressed in the use of a “net” measure (that is, the difference between PLT arrivals and PLT departures).

However, as we’ve seen from the two earlier examples, this isn’t the case. They don’t consistently balance out in the same way that net overseas migration will “net out”. This isn’t an issue when OAD is used for its intended purpose of analysing travel and tourism trends, but it is a major problem if used as a proxy for migration.

Let’s look again at our Australian citizen in Example 1. When they arrived for their two week stay, they were counted as one PLT arrival. After the wedding, when they travel back to the UK, OAD has no information on how long they will be gone for. The duration of time away from Australia will have to be imputed as either short-term or long term. People in this situation who are imputed as short-term will not have their departure included in PLT, which means the PLT arrivals and departures will not net out to 0. In NOM data, by contrast, their two week stay will not be enough for them to trigger the threshold of the “12 out of 16 month” rule and they won’t be reflected in NOM.

This inherent unbalanced net outcome is even clearer when we look at the student in Example 2. Throughout their studies in Australia, they would be counted as 3 PLT arrivals and 0 PLT departures, despite only migrating here once and then migrating away 3 years later. In NOM data, by contrast, the student would be identified consistently and only show up twice using the “12 out of 16 month” rule – as an arrival when they moved to Australia at the start of their studies, and a departure when they move back home at the end of their studies.

While these are just two specific examples of many possible cases, the overall effect is that PLT arrivals and departures are significantly higher than NOM arrivals and departures, as can be seen in Graph 2 and Graph 3. 

  1. Estimates for migrant arrivals from March quarter 2025 onwards are preliminary.
  2. Estimates have been rounded to the nearest 10.
  1. Estimates for migrant departures from March quarter 2025 onwards are preliminary.
  2. Estimates have been rounded to the nearest 10.

NOM calculates migration using the actual observed time people are in or out of Australia

Net Overseas Migration (NOM) only uses duration of physical presence in or out of Australia to classify overseas migrant arrivals and departures. It does not rely on OAD category of travel, passenger-declared information, country of citizenship or visa status.

The NOM method for estimating migration checks every Australian border crossing for a change in the traveller’s residency status. This is done by using the “12 out of 16 month” rule which examines the person’s travel history 16 months before the movement and 16 months after the movement. For example, to be counted as a migrant arrival, these checks will show that the person was not already living in Australia at the time of arrival and stayed here for a total of at least 12 months in the 16 months after the arrival. They are then counted in Australia’s population from the date of their arrival. This is very different to the inherently limited PLT classification in OAD which occurs at the point travellers are crossing the border.

NOM does not classify someone as migrating because of something they wrote on their passenger card, or because of their visa or citizenship status. 

For more on how the ABS derives NOM, see Overseas Migration methodology.

Using PLT as a proxy will overstate migration and to a varying extent

Using PLT as a proxy for net overseas migration will generally overstate migration. In the latest data, for the year to December quarter 2025 this was a material difference of 60% or 179,570 people.

Not only is net PLT higher than NOM, apart from during the COVID-19 pandemic when border travel was heavily restricted, its relationship with NOM also varies to a considerable extent. When the difference is small, this is more coincidental than useful.

  1. NOM estimates from March quarter 2025 onwards are preliminary.
  2. Estimates have been rounded to the nearest 10.

The ABS advises that you should use migration statistics for directly measuring migration. Using OAD data for migration analysis, without also using additional information specifically related to migration and some statistical modelling, will provide an inaccurate and misleading indication of migration.

Back to top of the page