Statute Details
- Title: Skills Development Levy (Exemption) Order 2014
- Act Code: SDLA1979-S258-2014
- Legislative Type: Subsidiary legislation (Order)
- Authorising Act: Skills Development Levy Act (Cap. 306)
- Enacting Formula (Power Source): Powers under section 4(3) of the Skills Development Levy Act
- Commencement: 1 April 2014
- Key Provisions: Section 1 (Citation and commencement); Section 2 (Exemption)
- Current Version Status: Current version as at 27 Mar 2026
- Notable Amendments (from timeline):
- SL 258/2014 (1 Apr 2014)
- S 470/2016 (w.e.f. 3 Oct 2016)
- S 385/2017 (w.e.f. 11 Jul 2017)
What Is This Legislation About?
The Skills Development Levy (Exemption) Order 2014 is a targeted piece of subsidiary legislation made under the Skills Development Levy Act. In plain terms, it carves out specific categories of workers—primarily students—who are employed for particular training or during particular school periods, so that no Skills Development Levy (“SDL”) is chargeable in respect of them.
The SDL is a statutory levy imposed on employers to fund workforce skills development. However, not every employment relationship should trigger SDL in the same way. This Order recognises that certain student employment arrangements are either part of approved training pathways or are short-term holiday employment that does not meaningfully undermine the SDL framework. Accordingly, the Order provides exemptions to reduce compliance burden and avoid charging SDL where the policy rationale for the levy is weaker.
Although the Order is short, it is practically significant for employers who hire students from specified institutions, and for overseas tertiary students required to undergo short training in Singapore. It also affects employers of registered students from schools registered under the Education Act during gazetted school holidays.
What Are the Key Provisions?
Section 1 (Citation and commencement) is straightforward. It provides that the Order may be cited as the Skills Development Levy (Exemption) Order 2014 and that it comes into operation on 1 April 2014. For practitioners, this matters when determining whether SDL exemptions apply for employment periods starting before or after the commencement date.
Section 2 (Exemption) is the core provision. Section 2(1) states that no skills development levy shall be chargeable in respect of three main categories of students/employment scenarios.
First category: matriculated or registered students employed for training approved by the institution (Section 2(1)(a)). The exemption applies to a student who is a matriculated or registered student of any of the listed institutions and who is employed for training that is approved by the institution in question. The institutions listed include, among others, the Institute of Technical Education, Nanyang Polytechnic, Nanyang Technological University, National University of Singapore, Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Republic Polytechnic, Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore Management University, Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore University of Technology and Design, Temasek Polytechnic, and Singapore University of Social Sciences.
For legal and compliance purposes, two elements must be satisfied: (1) the person must be a matriculated or registered student of one of the specified institutions; and (2) the employment must be “for training” and that training must be “approved by the institution.” Employers should therefore ensure that there is documentary evidence of the institution’s approval of the training arrangement (e.g., approval letters, training programme documentation, or confirmation from the institution).
Second category: overseas tertiary students required to undergo short training in Singapore (Section 2(1)(b)), subject to a condition in Section 2(2). The exemption covers a matriculated or registered student of an overseas tertiary education institution who, during the course of studies at that institution, is required by the institution to undergo training in Singapore for a period of not more than 6 months. This is a policy-driven exception for short-term training placements.
However, Section 2(2) imposes a procedural condition that is easy to overlook: the exemption under Section 2(1)(b) is subject to the condition that the employer submits to the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency a letter issued by the overseas tertiary education institution confirming two matters: (a) that the student is a matriculated or registered student of the institution; and (b) that the student is required by the institution to undergo training in Singapore.
Practitioners should treat this as a compliance gating requirement. Even if the substantive criteria (overseas student status and training duration not exceeding six months) are met, the exemption may not be available unless the required confirmation letter is submitted to the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency. In practice, employers should implement a process to obtain the letter before the employment begins (or at least before SDL is assessed) and to retain records demonstrating submission.
Third category: registered students employed during gazetted school holidays (Section 2(1)(c)). The exemption applies to a registered student (other than a student who has completed “A” level examinations) of any school registered under the Education Act (Cap. 87) who is employed during the gazetted school holidays. This is a narrow exemption aimed at student holiday work, while excluding those who have completed “A” levels—likely to prevent the exemption from extending to students who have effectively transitioned beyond the school system.
Key interpretive points for practitioners include: (1) the school must be registered under the Education Act; (2) the student must be a “registered student” and must not have completed “A” level examinations; and (3) the employment must occur during “gazetted school holidays.” Employers should therefore verify the student’s status and ensure that the employment dates align with the official gazetted holiday periods.
Amendments and practical impact: The timeline indicates that the Order has been amended by S 470/2016 (w.e.f. 3 Oct 2016) and S 385/2017 (w.e.f. 11 Jul 2017). While the extract provided does not reproduce the full amendment text, the current wording shows that the overseas training exemption is explicitly conditioned on submission of a confirmation letter to the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency, and the list of institutions and/or drafting details reflect the post-amendment position. For legal work involving historical SDL assessments, counsel should check the version applicable to the relevant employment period and confirm whether the employer’s conduct complied with the then-current requirements.
How Is This Legislation Structured?
The Order is structured as a short instrument with an enacting formula and two substantive provisions.
Section 1 addresses citation and commencement. Section 2 sets out the exemptions. There are no additional parts or schedules in the extract. The operative content is therefore concentrated in Section 2, with Section 2(2) providing the key administrative condition for the overseas student training exemption.
Who Does This Legislation Apply To?
The Order applies to employers who would otherwise be liable to pay SDL in respect of employees. The exemption is framed as “no skills development levy shall be chargeable” in respect of specified categories of students. Accordingly, the practical effect is that employers may be relieved from SDL liability for those particular workers, provided the statutory conditions are met.
The beneficiaries are specific categories of students: (a) matriculated or registered students of listed local institutions employed for approved training; (b) matriculated or registered overseas tertiary students required to undergo short training in Singapore (up to six months), subject to a confirmation-letter submission; and (c) registered school students (excluding those who have completed “A” levels) employed during gazetted school holidays. Employers should therefore assess each worker’s status and the nature and timing of the employment against the statutory criteria.
Why Is This Legislation Important?
Although the Order is brief, it has real compliance and cost implications. SDL is a levy that can affect employer payroll costs and budgeting. Where exemptions apply, employers may avoid SDL charges for qualifying student employment. Conversely, if exemptions are claimed without meeting the statutory conditions—especially the administrative condition for overseas training—employers may face SDL assessments, penalties, or disputes during audits.
From a practitioner’s perspective, the Order is also important because it demonstrates how Singapore’s SDL regime balances workforce development funding with practical recognition of education-related training and short-term student work. The exemptions are not blanket; they are carefully tailored to training approved by institutions, limited-duration overseas training, and holiday employment within the school system.
Finally, the Order’s amendment history underscores the need for version control in SDL disputes. For employment periods spanning 2014 to 2017 and beyond, counsel should verify the applicable version and confirm whether any procedural requirements (such as submission to the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency) were in force at the time. Good record-keeping—student enrolment status, training approval documentation, employment dates, and submission evidence—will often determine whether an exemption can be sustained.
Related Legislation
- Skills Development Levy Act (Cap. 306) (authorising Act; provides the SDL framework and the power to make exemption orders)
- Education Act (Cap. 87) (relevant for identifying “registered” schools and the student categories tied to school registration)
- Skills Development Levy (Exemption) Order 2014 (this Order; subsidiary legislation)
- Legislation Timeline / Amendments (for identifying versions and amendments such as S 470/2016 and S 385/2017)
Source Documents
This article provides an overview of the Skills Development Levy (Exemption) Order 2014 for legal research and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult the official text for authoritative provisions.