We applied for the Golden Visa about six years ago, but only got our first two-year residence cards this year. We passed the language test, but too late for the May 2026 deadline under the old citizenship rules, so we never applied. Permanent residence is still possible at the 5-year mark, but we plan to take our money out because PR is not worth it. As far as I know, nobody has tried renewing their card after redeeming the investment, so this is a bit speculative. If we try it anyway, what proof should we collect? Do we still need to spend 14 days in Portugal for every two years of the card? And if AIMA refuses, what kind of legal action should we consider? Any thoughts would help. Thank you!
This has been discussed a few times before - see below.
In short you should maintain/hold your GV investment until you actually have a Permanent Resident card (or citizenship) in your hand.
Can’t renew a GV Temporary Residency without the underlying investment.
Thank you. I know this is not allowed in practice. But a legal route looks plausible? I really do not want to tie my investment to Portugal any further.
I don’t trust the Portuguese legal system to deliver any kind of justice for us. In my personal experience suing for the GV, we were denied yet others with far fewer ties to PT were accepted. I suppose if you want to play the judge lotto, well it’s your money…
Instead of submitting a PR request 5 years + 90 working days from your initial GV application, and then wasting another two years waiting for the PR appointment and/or eventually getting rejected (because you haven’t accumulated 5 years “on the cards”), you should discuss with your lawyer whether the following might work. Pls take this with a grain of salt—I haven’t tested this strategy in court.
-
Obtain a CdT. It will most likely say your legal residence started on [the effective date of your first residence card], which is not what you like.
-
Then your lawyer files an Action for Recognition of Rights (Ação Administrativa Comum). Or an Ação de Reconhecimento de Direitos e Interesses Legitimamente Protegidos under Article 37.º, n.º 1, alínea f) of the CPTA (Código de Processo nos Tribunais Administrativos).
In this lawsuit, your lawyer asks the court for two specific orders:
1. Declaratory Judgment on Retroactivity: Declare that under the law, your 5-year legal residence period initiated retroactively 90 working days after your initial GV application.
2. Preemptive Order for PR Scheduling (Condenação à Prática do Ato Devido): Order AIMA to immediately open an appointment slot and process your Permanent Residency application.
3 Likes
Thank you! Sounds like a real plan!
not a bad idea, but be prepared to wait 1+ years for CdT.
The lawsuit step will take a long time as well.
Compared to the “urgent lawsuits” (intimação para proteção de direitos, liberdades e garantias) forum members have filed to force AIMA to schedule biometrics appointments or issue cards, the type of administrative law lawsuit in step 2 is deemed “less urgent” by the court, so will be part of the backlog of 100k+ lawsuits against AIMA.
Do you even need the CdT? Could try go straight to lawsuit for PR scheduling on the basis of being 90 days + 5 years from application, and therefore eligible for PR if the state did not delay you, on the principle that “the state may not benefit from its own delays”.
1 Like
Not clear how all this talk of PR answers the original question?
I don’t think CdT is relevant to PR. I have my CdT and it specifically says it only gives the count applicable to nationality law (the old one at the time I applied).
Depends whether @Vichy means not worth it at all, or not worth it if they have to wait 5 years from first card (but still worth it if the legal attempt to count from application + 90 days succeeds)
1 Like
The problem is without PR, if the OP is determined to unwind his investment after 5 years after initial GV application, then he’s basically rolling the dice: AIMA will likely refuse to renew his residence card, and then he can fight the decision in court while having his residency lapsed. Then if he loses in court, he has no GV and no PR (which is fine—cutting losses in a bad investment is a logical decision many of us will consider down the road).
All I’m trying to say is getting a CdT and then fighting it in court is less risky, compared to unwinding the GV investment and then fighting AIMA’s rejection for GV renewal.
I see. Going straight to lawsuit is certainly better.
I’ll speak to lawyers over the next 6-12 months and share anything I find out. My investment is tied up (by contract) for another 2 years anyway.
Yes. I don’t think PR is worth another 5 years (in reality gonna be more years). I am determined to cut my losses. But of course I want to explore my best options before I exit, given how much money/efforts I have spent on it.