Express Entry Reform in Canada: What Changed and Who It Affects

The Express Entry reform, officially announced late last week, shifts priority toward candidates already in Canada — by increasing the weight of Canadian work experience and waiving LMIA for some job offers — while leaving conditions for candidates applying from abroad largely unchanged.

In short

• The weight of Canadian work experience in CRS is rising, with the points ceiling going up to around 150 for a principal applicant.
• Job offers are returning to the CRS score, and LMIA is waived for some offers and high-wage occupations on the IRCC list.
• Language thresholds and proof of funds requirements weren’t changed by the reform.
• Candidates outside Canada don’t take part in the Canadian experience channel, but may face more competition if the domestic pool claims more spots.
• Candidates with a weaker profile should focus on a job contract with a Canadian employer rather than counting on pool scores.

What exactly changed in Express Entry

The reform introduces two key changes: the weight of Canadian work experience in CRS score calculations increases, and the scale itself gets a higher ceiling — roughly 150 points for a principal applicant; for a candidate with a partner the ceiling is also raised, but the exact figure is worth checking on the official IRCC page before applying. In the coming days this will affect scores for many candidates already in the Express Entry pool: the recalculation isn’t finished yet, and some profiles haven’t received updated figures.

Job offers and the LMIA waiver: how the job offer factor now works

The job offer criterion is returning to the Express Entry scoring system — but this isn’t a new requirement, it’s the restoration of something that already existed before. A job offer counts for all candidates, regardless of whether they’re in Canada or applying from abroad.

The job offer criterion is returning to the Express Entry scoring system — but this isn’t a new requirement, it’s the restoration of something that already existed before.

In practice, the advantage still lies with those already in Canada: it’s easier for their employer to issue a job offer, because the candidate is already embedded in a working relationship and seen as a known quantity. This is reinforced by the LMIA waiver for some job offers — the reform removed part of the paperwork and cut a chain of approvals that employers previously had to go through. The goal is to encourage more employers to issue job offers quickly to people already in the country.

For candidates already in Canada, a job offer can offset weaker parts of a profile: 12 months of Canadian work experience sometimes doesn’t fully compensate for age or the nature of work history before the move, and extra points for a job offer can close that gap.

The LMIA waiver applies specifically to occupations on the high-wage occupations list published by IRCC — without a labour market impact assessment, it’s easier for an employer to put together an offer for those roles.

What stayed the same: language requirements and proof of funds

Based on the published reform materials, the minimum language test thresholds for Express Entry remain unchanged — no separate changes on this point have been announced. Many candidates, including immigration consultants, expected these thresholds to be lowered, but the status quo appears to hold. In particular, profiles that don’t reach level 7 (CLB/NCLC) across all four language abilities at once shouldn’t expect any leniency: the reform didn’t open a separate path for them.

Proof of funds requirements also haven’t changed. The reason priority goes to candidates already in Canada is tied to this very requirement: candidates inside the country aren’t required to prove funds at all, since their information is considered more reliable. There was an expectation that the reform would bring clearer criteria for assessing proof of funds — in practice, some applicants are refused because their proof of funds is deemed insufficient, which feels like an unfair consequence of general caution around documentation. However, the reform introduced no clarifying framework on this point.

candidates inside the country aren’t required to prove funds at all, since their information is considered more reliable

Qualitative factors remain an advantage either way: working in a skilled occupation, holding legal employment status under Canada’s immigration system, and strong language test scores continue to work in a candidate’s favor regardless of what the reform changed.

How a high-wage job is defined under the new rules

A job is considered high-wage if its salary exceeds the median wage for that occupation in Canada — the exact coefficient is worth confirming on the official IRCC page, where the current definition is published. For candidates already working in Canada, this matters: if the occupation’s NOC code or the actual salary falls within that threshold, the factor becomes an advantage in the score calculation.

For candidates outside Canada, this criterion barely plays a role: it operates within the Canadian work experience channel, which these applicants aren’t part of. That means this threshold doesn’t affect them — neither as a benefit nor as a penalty.

How the reform affects candidates outside Canada

Candidates applying from outside Canada don’t take part in the Canadian work experience channel — so the increased weight it carries in CRS doesn’t directly affect them and creates no penalty for them. An indirect effect is possible through the system’s overall logic: the number of invitations in each selection round is tied to a single annual immigration target. If the pool of candidates inside Canada ends up being more competitive and claims more spots, the need for candidates from abroad could theoretically decrease. This is a projection, not an announced consequence of the reform: competition among applicants outside Canada could rise if the admission target ends up being met more heavily through the domestic pool than before.

The effect isn’t the same for every profile, though. For candidates with a strong profile — high scores in language, education, work experience — the reform doesn’t meaningfully change their odds of an invitation: such applicants stay competitive regardless of where they’re located, including outside Canada. The reform will be felt more by those whose profile is weaker on one or more points of the CRS grid — it’s for them that increased competition outside Canada actually matters.

What candidates with a less competitive profile can do

A candidate with a less competitive CRS profile will need to bet not on pool scores but on a different entry route.

A candidate with a less competitive CRS profile will need to bet not on pool scores but on a different entry route.

1. Study permit. This is the first option for those not yet in Canada. But a study permit alone isn’t enough to build the Canadian work experience that counts toward CRS — a work permit is also needed.
2. A direct job contract. If the path through a study permit isn’t workable, the alternative is securing a job offer from a Canadian employer. Job offers and work contracts are set to become more common — this is the route candidates with a weaker profile should prioritize first.
3. A deliberate strategy, not improvisation. Landing a contract with an employer requires a job-search tactic planned in advance — without one, the odds for a candidate with a weaker profile drop even further.

Entry route for a candidate with a weak CRS profile

• Study permitFirst step for those not yet in Canada
• Work permitrequiredNeeded in addition to the study permit to build Canadian work experience
• Job offer from a Canadian employerMain option if the study permit route isn’t available
• A deliberate job-search strategyrequiredWithout one, the chances of landing a contract drop even further

What still counts as an advantage regardless of the reform

Despite the reform, some factors behind a competitive profile haven’t changed and continue to work the same way as before:

• a skilled occupation with verified work experience — remains an advantage when applying;
• legal employment status under Canada’s immigration system — still counts as a plus;
• high, competitive language test scores — continue to provide an edge, even though the minimum thresholds stayed the same.

Keeping these conditions unchanged effectively amounts to an additional concession in favor of those already working in Canada: their profile still rests on the same strengths it did before the reform.

Frequently asked questions

Does a candidate already in the pool need to resubmit their profile to get the new CRS score?

There’s no direct indication that resubmitting a profile is necessary. Based on the description of the reform, the score recalculation should happen automatically for profiles already in the pool, but as of this publication it hasn’t been completed yet — some profiles haven’t received updated figures.

Does the LMIA waiver apply to all occupations or only to the high-wage occupations list?

The LMIA waiver doesn’t apply to all job offers — it specifically applies to occupations on the high-wage occupations list published by IRCC. For other jobs, the LMIA process appears to remain unchanged.