Insurables — Australian business risk, sourced and dated

Why the same trade is licensed in one state and not another

In short

  • Whether a building trade needs a licence at all is decided state by state, and the answers split sharply for trades most people assume are treated the same everywhere.
  • Carpenters and painters are plainly unregulated occupations in three jurisdictions — their own regulators say so directly — while other states licence or register the same work.
  • The split does not track how risky the work looks from outside. Western Australia registers painters at a strikingly low threshold while leaving carpenters and tilers unregistered as trades in their own right.

A carpenter who has only worked in a state that licenses carpentry can be genuinely surprised to learn that three other jurisdictions do not regulate the occupation at all. It is not a grey area or a technicality — the regulators in those states say plainly, in their own guidance, that the trade is unlicensed.

This page is about that split: which states leave which trades unregulated, and why the pattern is not simply "safer trades get more regulation."

The trades named as unregulated

Tasmania’s own guidance states that painters and decorators are among the occupations not regulated in the state and do not require an occupational licence, and separately that carpenters are not licensed in Tasmania — though anyone wanting to manage or certify building work still needs a builder’s licence for that separate function.

The ACT’s current material is just as direct: painter licensing is not currently required, and trades like carpenters and bricklayers do not currently need a licence. The territory notes this is a position under review rather than settled permanently, so it is worth checking the current status rather than assuming it will stay this way indefinitely.

The Northern Territory licenses fewer building trades than any other jurisdiction. Its own guidance states that the only building trades that need to be licensed there are electricians and plumbers — carpentry and painting sit outside the licensing system entirely.

The split does not track visible risk

It would be reasonable to assume that whichever trades look more hazardous from outside get regulated more consistently. That is not the pattern. Western Australia registers painters, at a level well below the general building-trade threshold that applies to most other work there — but it does not separately register carpenters or tilers as trades at all.

A painter and a carpenter working side by side on the same WA renovation can be in genuinely different regulatory positions: one working under a registration regime, the other under none, for work of comparable scale and comparable risk to a homeowner.

What "unlicensed" does and does not mean

Where a trade carries no licence or registration, that answers only the question of whether a regulator checks competency to practise. It says nothing about whether the work is exposed commercially — a contract can still require cover, a homeowner can still have a claim if the work is defective, and a residential warranty scheme can still apply to the project regardless of whether the trade doing the work is licensed.

The trap is treating "unlicensed" as "unregulated in every sense." It usually just means the regulatory question has moved somewhere else — to the person managing or certifying the work, to the contract, or to the scheme covering the project — rather than disappearing.

Questions

If carpentry is unlicensed in a state, can anyone call themselves a carpenter there?
For the trade itself, generally yes, in the states where it is stated as unregulated — there is no licence to hold or lose. Managing or certifying building work is usually a separate, regulated function that still needs its own licence, even in a state where the trade itself is open.
Does an unlicensed trade in one state stay unlicensed if the business works interstate?
No. Licensing status is set by the state where the work is being carried out, not by where the business is based or what its home state requires. A trade that is open in one jurisdiction can require a licence the moment the same business takes on work in a different one.
Why would a state deliberately leave a building trade unregulated?
The published reasoning is not detailed on this page, because it was not part of the verified research behind it. What is confirmed is which trades sit in which position in each jurisdiction, not the policy reasoning behind each choice.

Sources

Related