The Real Cost of an Immigration Breach: What New Zealand Employers Stand to Lose
Immigration breaches are rarely the result of bad intent. Most arise from a misunderstanding of visa conditions, an administrative gap, or the assumption that a worker’s documentation was someone else’s responsibility to verify. Whatever the cause, the consequences are the same — and in 2025, INZ issued over $395,000 in penalties to employers across New Zealand. The numbers are rising sharply, and no employer is exempt from scrutiny.
Find on this page
Enforcement Is Accelerating
The Immigration Employment Infringement Scheme, introduced in April 2024 under the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Act, gave Immigration New Zealand (INZ) a new and efficient mechanism for dealing with employer breaches without requiring full criminal prosecution. The effect has been immediate.
15 Infringement notices issued in 2023/24 (partial year)
121 Infringement notices issued in 2024/25
700%+ Increase in notices in a single year
This is not a temporary enforcement surge. It reflects a structural shift in how INZ monitors and penalises employer non-compliance. Businesses that have not reviewed their immigration practices in the past 12–24 months are operating in a significantly higher-risk environment than they may realise.
What Triggers an Infringement Notice
INZ can issue an infringement notice — to any employer, accredited or not — for each of the following:
- Employing a person who is not entitled to work in New Zealand
- Employing a person in a role, location, or capacity inconsistent with the work-related conditions of their visa
- Failing to provide employment documents requested by an immigration officer within 10 working days
The third point is significant and often overlooked. An inability to produce documentation promptly is itself an infringement offence — separate from any underlying employment issue. If your records are incomplete or disorganised, a routine document request from an immigration officer can generate an additional notice on top of any substantive breach.
Sources of Breaches
The most common source of breaches is not wilful misconduct — it is inadequate monitoring of visa conditions.
A worker whose visa permits employment in a specific role with a specific employer in a specific location may, over time, shift into a different position, take on additional responsibilities, or work across multiple sites. Each of these changes can constitute a breach if the visa conditions have not been updated to reflect them.
Immediate Financial Penalties
| Breach | Individual | Company / Body Corporate |
|---|---|---|
| Employing someone not entitled to work, or outside visa conditions | NZD $1,000 per offence | NZD $3,000 per offence |
| Failing to provide documents within 10 working days | NZD $1,000 per offence | NZD $1,000 per offence |
Notices are issued per offence. A business employing five workers outside their visa conditions may receive five simultaneous notices — meaning a company could be looking at NZD $15,000 in penalties from a single enforcement visit, before any court proceedings are considered.
The Stand-Down List: When the Impact Goes Beyond the Fine
For many businesses, the financial penalty is not the most damaging consequence of a breach — the stand-down list is. Being placed on INZ’s publicly available stand-down list means you are unable to support visa applications for migrant workers for a defined period. For businesses that rely on international talent to fill roles where domestic candidates are scarce, this can bring recruitment to a standstill.
Stand-Down Periods for Immigration Employment Infringements
- Single infringement notice: 6 months
- Multiple infringement notices issued at once: up to 12 months
Stand-Down Periods for Court-Convicted Offences
| Court Fine | Stand-Down Period |
|---|---|
| Up to NZD $1,000 | 6 months |
| NZD $1,001 – $10,000 | 12 months |
| NZD $10,001 – $25,000 | 18 months |
| NZD $25,000 or more | 24 months |
During a stand-down period, existing migrant employees on open work visas may continue in their roles, and workers already holding an Accredited Employer Work Visa (AEWV) tied to your business may continue until their visa expires. However, you will not be able to support any new visa applications, and you will be unable to obtain or retain Employer Accreditation status.
INZ publishes the stand-down list publicly. The reputational consequences of appearing on it — with prospective employees, recruitment partners, and industry peers — extend beyond the regulatory period itself.
Loss of Accreditation — and the Difficulty of Getting It Back
Accredited Employer status is not simply suspended during a stand-down period — it is lost. Regaining accreditation after the stand-down ends requires demonstrating to INZ that the non-compliance issue has been fully resolved and that structural improvements have been made to prevent it recurring.
One path that does not work: closing the business and reopening under a new name. INZ tracks compliance history through key people associated with a business, not just the business entity itself. A compliance failure follows the individuals involved.
At the Most Serious End: Prosecution and Permanent Bans
For offences that go beyond the infringement threshold — exploiting migrant workers, providing false information to INZ, obstructing immigration officers, forging documents, or offences under the Crimes Act relating to slavery or migrant trafficking — the consequences move into criminal prosecution territory. Convictions resulting in imprisonment or home detention carry a permanent ban from supporting work visas. There is no pathway back from a permanent ban.
Even without imprisonment, conviction under a range of Immigration Act offences results in a permanent ban where the court finds the employer guilty regardless of the penalty imposed. These are not edge cases reserved for large-scale exploitation — they include offences such as helping a worker remain in New Zealand in breach of their visa conditions, which can arise from circumstances that employers may not initially recognise as serious.
Disputing a Notice Is Not Risk-Free
Employers who receive an infringement notice may dispute it through a Court hearing or request an internal review. However, employers considering a dispute should be aware that if liability is denied and the Court ultimately finds against you, the stand-down period is determined by the fine the Court imposes — which may exceed the standard infringement penalty. A dispute that is unsuccessful can result in a longer stand-down than accepting the original notice would have.
The Risks Are Real. Professional Guidance Reduces Them Significantly
Most immigration breaches are preventable. They occur when employers are navigating a complex, frequently updated set of rules without the specialist knowledge to anticipate where the risks lie. A worker’s visa conditions are not always straightforward to interpret, and the obligations attached to Accredited Employer status add further layers of responsibility that require active management.
At New Zealand Shores, we work with employers before problems arise — reviewing your current migrant workforce arrangements, identifying compliance gaps, and putting the processes in place that mean an infringement notice is not something you need to worry about. When hiring new migrants, we manage the process end to end so that the conditions are right from day one.
The cost of getting this wrong — in fines, stand-down periods, lost accreditation, and reputational damage — is significantly higher than the cost of getting it right with the right support.
Speak with our team before your next hire — or before your next compliance review. Contact New Zealand Shores today.
The cost of getting this wrong
The cost of getting this wrong — in fines, stand-down periods, lost accreditation, and reputational damage — is significantly higher than the cost of getting it right with the right support.
Speak with our team before your next hire — or before your next compliance review.
