How do banks assess casual, part-time and non-standard income for home loans?

There’s no single test. Under responsible lending rules (ASIC RG 209), a lender has to make reasonable inquiries into your income and reasonably verify it, then form a view on whether you could meet your repayments without substantial hardship. RG 209 doesn’t prescribe one formula for casual, part-time, commission, bonus or overtime income — it leaves lenders to assess the reliability and likely continuity of that income themselves. That’s why two lenders can look at the same payslips and reach different conclusions: the RG 209 obligation is the same for everyone, but how each institution weighs variable income is its own policy, and policies vary between institutions.

Serviceability is the term lenders use for whether your income can support the loan repayments — it’s the whole-picture assessment RG 209 requires, not a single ratio.

How is casual income assessed?

Casual employment usually means no guaranteed hours and no paid leave, so the income itself moves from pay period to pay period. A lender assessing casual income under RG 209 is looking for reliability — whether the earnings have been consistent over time and whether there’s a reasonable basis to expect them to continue at a similar level. How long a history a specific lender wants to see, and how it weighs that history, is set by that lender’s own policy and varies between institutions.

Two casual roles can look very different to a lender: steady weekly hours in the same job for two years reads very differently from hours that swing widely month to month, even though both are technically “casual” on a payslip. That distinction is part of why a blanket rule doesn’t exist — the underlying reliability, not the employment label, is what’s actually being tested.

How is part-time income assessed?

Part-time employment usually carries a fixed roster and the same leave entitlements as full-time work, just for fewer hours — so the base income is generally more predictable than casual earnings. Lenders still apply the same RG 209 reliability test to it, and a part-time base wage is typically easier to evidence than casual shifts because the hours and pay rate are set out in the employment contract. As with casual income, how much history a lender asks for is a matter of that lender’s own policy, not a fixed rule.

Where a part-time role sits alongside a second job or irregular extra shifts, the non-fixed component is assessed the way other variable income is — see the sections below.

How are commission, bonuses and overtime assessed?

Commission, bonuses and overtime sit on top of a base salary and move with performance, business conditions or rostering — they’re not guaranteed the way an ordinary salary is. Prudential guidance published by APRA for banks (APG 223) tells lenders to treat this kind of variable, non-salary income more cautiously than base pay, generally applying some discount to reflect the chance it won’t continue at the same level. How large that discount is, and how much payment history a lender wants to see before counting it at all, is a matter for each institution’s own credit policy — RG 209 and APG 223 set the obligation to assess reliability, not the number.

Does this apply to other non-standard income too?

Second jobs, gig-economy work, irregular freelance income and other one-off earnings are all assessed against the same underlying question a lender has to answer under RG 209: is this income reliable and likely to continue. Self-employed income in particular usually involves its own evidence requirements (tax returns, business financials) that go well beyond what a PAYG payslip shows, and is a large enough topic that it deserves its own treatment rather than a paragraph here.

The common thread across all of it is that the label on your income — casual, part-time, commission, freelance — matters less to a lender than the pattern behind it.

What can strengthen a non-standard income application?

A longer, more consistent track record in the same role or industry generally works in your favour, though exactly how long is “enough” is set by each lender’s policy, not by a regulator. Clear documentation — recent payslips, bank statements showing the income actually landing, and where relevant a letter from your employer confirming the arrangement — helps a lender verify what RG 209 requires them to verify.

None of this is a checklist that guarantees an outcome. As at July 2026, RG 209 and APG 223 remain the current regulatory framework governing how lenders assess this kind of income, but within that framework each lender sets its own thresholds, discounts and evidence requirements — which is exactly why the same income can be viewed differently from one lender to the next.

Which lender is right for your income mix?

That isn’t a question this article can answer for you. It depends on your specific combination of casual, part-time, commission, bonus or overtime income, how long you’ve had it, and which lenders are actively competing for your kind of application at the time you apply. A licensed mortgage broker who tracks current lender policies is better placed to match your circumstances to a lender than any general guide can be.

For the mechanics of how banks build up a borrowing capacity figure from income like this, see our guide to how banks calculate borrowing capacity — this post doesn’t rebuild that one. The same assessment also weighs your living expenses against the HEM benchmark and applies an interest rate buffer on top of whatever income is counted. For the deposit side of the equation, see our guide to how much deposit you need for a first home in Australia.