Age Pension recipients will be able to spend more time travelling overseas before their payments are cut, under a major change included in the Federal Budget.

Age pensioners will be able to spend 12 weeks travelling overseas before their payment is impacted.

Age Pensioners will be able to spend double the amount of time travelling overseas before their payment is reduced. That’s thanks to a Centrelink rule change hidden in the Federal Budget papers released overnight.

The Federal Government revealed it will increase the time pensioners can spend overseas from six to 12 weeks before their pension supplement is impacted. This change will kick in from September 20, 2026.

After 12 weeks of travelling overseas, pensioners will see their supplement stop altogether. If they are moving overseas permanently, their supplement will stop immediately upon departure.

Will this reduce the pension for people living in Thailand by about $30 PF?

Do people in Thailand receive it?

45 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Will this reduce the pension for people living in Thailand by about $30 PF?

Do people in Thailand receive it?

After 12 weeks out of AU you will no longer receive any supplement.

Edited May 16May 16 by Nemises

2 minutes ago, Nemises said:

After 12 weeks out of AU you will no longer receive any supplement.

I'm not on the pension.

So those that receive it will lose about $30 P/F?

That's disappointing to say the least.

2 minutes ago, Will27 said:

So those that receive it will lose about $30 P/F?

More like $100 P/F

5 minutes ago, Nemises said:

More like $100 P/F

I thought living overseas you only get the basic supplement of $30 P/F.

Interested to hear from Aussies in Thailand.

3 minutes ago, Will27 said:

I thought living overseas you only get the basic supplement of $30 P/F.

Interested to hear from Aussies in Thailand.

I am in Thailand. Because I travel back to Australia from Thailand every 12 weeks, the new rules mean I’ll pocket an extra $100 per fortnight compared to expats who stay away long-term.

Edited May 16May 16 by Nemises

3 minutes ago, Nemises said:

I am in Thailand. I briefly go back to AU to every 12 weeks so that means I will be better-off by $100 P/F when the new legislation begins.

I was talking about the people who pretty much stay in Thailand all year round, which I think would apply to the majority of people on here.

I've just had an email from a mate who said he will lose the basic $30 P/F supplement.

2 minutes ago, Will27 said:

I was talking about the people who pretty much stay in Thailand all year round, which I think would apply to the majority of people on here.

I've just had an email from a mate who said he will lose the basic $30 P/F supplement.

For those who never return to Aus, yes about $30 P/F.

25 minutes ago, Will27 said:

I thought living overseas you only get the basic supplement of $30 P/F.

Interested to hear from Aussies in Thailand.

Maximum Overseas Base Rate: $1,100.30

• Plus Basic Pension Supplement: +$30.10

• Your Total Overseas Fortnightly Payment: $1,130.40
  

Edited May 16May 16 by LosLobo

54 minutes ago, Will27 said:

I was talking about the people who pretty much stay in Thailand all year round, which I think would apply to the majority of people on here

That’d actually make for an interesting off-topic discussion. I personally only know one Australian who never goes back — and that’s mainly because he doesn’t really have the financial means anymore and doesn’t have strong family or friendship ties there.

Sure, there are definitely many like him, but there are also plenty who regularly return to see family, friends, handle business, or just recharge. Plus Australians have the advantage of Thailand being relatively close and convenient compared to Europeans or Americans doing the same trip.

So I’m not sure I agree with your “majority” claim without seeing some actual numbers behind it 🤔

2 minutes ago, Nemises said:

That’d actually make for an interesting off-topic discussion. I personally only know one Australian who never goes back — and that’s mainly because he doesn’t really have the financial means anymore and doesn’t have strong family or friendship ties there.

Sure, there are definitely many like him, but there are also plenty who regularly return to see family, friends, handle business, or just recharge. Plus Australians have the advantage of Thailand being relatively close and convenient compared to Europeans or Americans doing the same trip.

So I’m not sure I agree with your “majority” claim without seeing some actual numbers behind it 🤔

It's just my opinion based on the Aussies I know here.

Which obviously isn't a huge sample size.

Quite a few on here have posted they haven't been back in years.

I know a few who go back every few years for a catch up, but the rest don't go at all.

I don't know of any who go back every 3 months like yourself.

10 minutes ago, Will27 said:

It's just my opinion based on the Aussies I know here.

Which obviously isn't a huge sample size.

Quite a few on here have posted they haven't been back in years.

I know a few who go back every few years for a catch up, but the rest don't go at all.

I don't know of any who go back every 3 months like yourself.

Fair enough — your sample size is probably as good as mine 😄

Although once the new 12-week pension supplement retention rule kicks in, there may suddenly be a few more Aussies discovering their love of regular trips back home every few months 😂

13 minutes ago, Nemises said:

Fair enough — your sample size is probably as good as mine 😄

Although once the new 12-week pension supplement retention rule kicks in, there may suddenly be a few more Aussies discovering their love of regular trips back home every few months 😂

Surely the cost of returning to Oz will outweigh the benefit of the supplement? (I know, I shouldn’t call you Shirley)

8 minutes ago, G Rex said:

Surely the cost of returning to Oz will outweigh the benefit of the supplement? (I know, I shouldn’t call you Shirley)

Don’t call me Shirley 😄

And it probably depends where in Oz you’re flying to, whether you want direct or are happy with a layover, and whether you’re flying full-service or embracing the “luxury” of a budget carrier with knees touching your ears for a few hours 😂

Plus it’s not just about grabbing the supplement. It’s also a change of scenery, catching up with family and mates, attending major sporting events, and of course returning with high-end duty free perfumes for Mrs N and a suitcase packed with more affordable Aussie chocolates, cheeses and other essentials 😄

On 5/13/2026 at 4:31 PM, Nemises said:

Age pensioners will be able to spend 12 weeks travelling overseas before their payment is impacted.

So return before 12 weeks.

Is there a rule for length of stay in Australia?

Would it be possible to stay for a couple of days in Australia and fly out for another 11 weeks, 6 days, keep doing this for the year?

2 hours ago, G Rex said:

Surely the cost of returning to Oz will outweigh the benefit of the supplement?

Apart from the extra $2,400 yearly pension supplement, once you factor in the “essential supplies” run — perfumes, chocolates, cheeses and other survival items — the numbers can stack up pretty quickly.

Then there’s free doctor visits, free X-rays, PBS scripts that cost less than a Chang, and the FX savings from bringing cash back. Some expat credit cards even throw in complimentary travel insurance for 3+ months, which can save an absolute fortune compared to Thailand cover.

Add in concerts and major sporting events, plus the excitement from the grandkids when Pop turns up unexpectedly at their school assembly, footy game or dance concert, and it becomes more than just “flying back for the supplement.”

For some expats, the 12-weekly return to Australia is actually a surprisingly sound financial and family strategy 😄

34 minutes ago, Cricky said:

So return before 12 weeks.

Is there a rule for length of stay in Australia?

Would it be possible to stay for a couple of days in Australia and fly out for another 11 weeks, 6 days, keep doing this for the year?

Yes 😄 You could technically fly back to Thailand the same day if you wanted. Just enough time for a quick Medicare check-up, stock up at Woolies/Coles with chocolates, cheeses and “essential” supplies, grab some duty free perfume for the boss… then back on the plane for another 11 weeks and 6 days 😂

Here's a Yahoo/Finance article re the changes

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/centrelink-age-pension-rule-change-for-thousands-of-aussies-travelling-overseas-230447391.html

Correction… it’s actually a $2600 yearly supplement, not $2400 😅

And I just remembered another bonus of the “return every 12 weeks” strategy…

No more 90-day reports 🥳

On 5/16/2026 at 5:22 AM, Cricky said:

Would it be possible to stay for a couple of days in Australia and fly out for another 11 weeks, 6 days, keep doing this for the year?

Not according to the yahoo article 2 posts up. I read it as saying you can do it once per year.

The change means around 68,000 recipients who travel overseas for between six to 12 weeks each year will receive higher payments.

Around 24,000 recipients who travel for more than 12 weeks, will get the higher amount for the first 12 weeks of their travel.

6 minutes ago, treetops said:

Not according to the yahoo article 2 posts up. I read it as saying you can do it once per year.

AI reads it differently to you.

AI:

“From the article and the current Centrelink rules, there does not appear to be a limit on how many separate overseas trips you can take per year on the Age Pension. The new rule simply means you can keep receiving the full Pension Supplement for up to 12 weeks per trip before it gets reduced/stops.

So in theory, if someone did:

• 11 weeks overseas

• return to Australia

• then leave again for another 11 weeks

…the 12-week clock would restart each time you returned to Australia, because the portability period is counted from the day you depart Australia for each absence.

The rules currently discussed by Services Australia and in the Yahoo article don’t mention any annual cap like:

• “only once per year”

• “maximum 12 weeks total per rolling year”

• or “cumulative overseas days”

That kind of rolling annual limit exists for some payments like DSP, but not for the Age Pension.

One important catch though:

If Centrelink decided you had effectively moved overseas permanently rather than just travelling repeatedly, they could assess you differently. The article notes that permanent overseas moves lose the supplement immediately.

So practically speaking:

* Multiple trips a year: apparently allowed

* Full supplement each trip: likely yes for the first 12 weeks

* Permanently living overseas while briefly “touching back” into Australia: that’s where scrutiny could happen

The new 12-week rule starts from 20 September 2026.

Edited May 17May 17 by Nemises

16 minutes ago, Nemises said:

AI reads it differently to you.

Depends on what AI you use.

8 minutes ago, treetops said:

Depends on what AI you use.

Fair enough mate, there seems to be a lot of different interpretations floating around 😄 I’m heading back to Oz soon after the new rule kicks in, then returning again less than 12 weeks later — so I’ll report back here with what actually happens in real life 👍

ChatGPT:

From what’s currently published, it appears the new rule is based on each overseas trip, not a yearly limit or cumulative cap. So if you return to Australia — even briefly — and then leave again, the 12-week period would likely start again from your new departure date. But I can’t find any official wording yet that says how long you must physically stay back in Australia for the clock to reset.

The closest official wording says the supplement resumes from “the date of return to Australia” once you’re back and eligible again.

There are also plenty of discussions online where people say Age Pensioners can travel “as often as they like” and the supplement simply reinstates on return, but that’s community discussion rather than official policy.

So at this stage, your “few days back in Australia” idea may work under the wording currently available — but until Services Australia publishes the detailed operational rules after the September 2026 change, nobody can say with 100% certainty whether there’ll be a minimum stay requirement.

On 5/16/2026 at 4:37 AM, Nemises said:

Apart from the extra $2,400 yearly pension supplement, once you factor in the “essential supplies” run — perfumes, chocolates, cheeses and other survival items — the numbers can stack up pretty quickly.

Returning back to Australia every 3 months could also go to the 6 weeks you MAY have to spend in Australia every year to still be deemed a resident for tax purposes.

So, returning every 3 months may not only see one retain their supplement/s, but also possibly escape having 30% non resident tax withheld from their pension in the future.

On a side note, why do you think the government has extended this? Could it be they know the 183 days outside Australia is on its way????

Edited May 19May 19 by KhunHeineken

22 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Returning back to Australia every 3 months could also go to the 6 weeks you MAY have to spend in Australia every year to still be deemed a resident for tax purposes.

So, returning every 3 months may not only see one retain their supplement/s, but also possibly escape having 30% non resident tax withheld from their pension in the future.

On a side note, why do you think the government has extended this? Could it be they know the 183 days outside Australia is on its way????

Interesting points, but perhaps the tax residency discussion is better suited to a separate thread. This one was really intended to focus specifically on the pension supplement changes 👍

2 minutes ago, Nemises said:

Interesting points, but perhaps the tax residency discussion is better suited to a separate thread. This one was really intended to focus specifically on the pension supplement changes 👍

That's why I said, "On a side note."

My point being, returning to Australia every 3 months MAY see aged pensioners save / keep more than just their supplement/s in the future.

Returning could be worth thousands of dollars more than just the supplement/s money. It's worth considering, and forming a strategy, not only for retaining the supplement/s, but also for the inevitable changes to tax residency laws, keeping in mind that the pension is deemed an income at law.

3 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

That's why I said, "On a side note."

My point being, returning to Australia every 3 months MAY see aged pensioners save / keep more than just their supplement/s in the future.

Returning could be worth thousands of dollars more than just the supplement/s money. It's worth considering, and forming a strategy, not only for retaining the supplement/s, but also for the inevitable changes to tax residency laws, keeping in mind that the pension is deemed an income at law.

Understood, but the tax residency topic is probably substantial enough to deserve its own thread. This discussion was mainly intended to stay focused on the pension supplement changes themselves 👍

3 minutes ago, Nemises said:

Understood, but the tax residency topic is probably substantial enough to deserve its own thread. This discussion was mainly intended to stay focused on the pension supplement changes themselves 👍

Sure, but as other's have pointed out, the loss of supplement/s money may not justify the the return to Australia every 3 months, based on a cost versus reward analysis.

The whole game MAY change where it definitely becomes justified should one have 30% of their pension withheld if / when the residency laws change.

So, those ruling it out, solely based on the loss of supplements, should also consider the potential loss of 30% of their pension, and whether that would change their stance, thus, the idea you put forward takes on further significance, so, totally on topic.

Edited May 19May 19 by KhunHeineken