Discussion of the potential unconstitutionality of the proposed GV law changes

For those counting on “promises” and constitutionality, it’s important to note that it will likely only apply to pending applications and those who are able to renew before the law passes.

The law never promised the renewal requirements will be constant for 5 years, let alone in perpetuity. That’s part of the reason that the permits are issued for 2 years at a time and not 5 years.

Countries change their visa regimes all the time. As long as they don’t retroactively revoke issued permits, they can change renewal requirements at anytime.

This isn’t unique to Portugal. The US did the same thing to the EB-5 investors: Congress approved EB-5 authorization a year at a time, and when the authorization lapsed for nearly a year all pending applications were put on hold. When it was resumed, adjudication standards changed.

It was some unscrupulous consultants that promised that you could renew your way to citizenship. Ethical lawyers I spoke to emphasized that GV renewal requirements and citizenship application requirements can change; only the initial permit is guaranteed. The deal as expressed in law was: “in exchange for your investment, you get a 2 year GV. if the law remains unchanged in 2 years because we continue to value your investment, we will offer you a 2 year extension.”

5 Likes