Still electioneering and dog whistle politics, I know.
But concerning that this has progressed from off-the-cuff comments by AntĂłnio LeitĂŁo Amaro last week to an actual AD (PSD+CDS) electoral programme statement (from page 143 here):
Reviewing the requirements for granting Portuguese nationality, particularly with regard to foreign citizens, extending the minimum time of residence and effective presence in national territory, eliminating the possibility of legal residence being considered for the purposes of counting this time requirement.
Good news is that itâs front page on IMI Daily, home of many GV peddlers. Hopefully will freak them out enough to get on the phone with all their political and legal friends.
PS. Donât you just love politicians? On page 215 of this same manifesto, AD say the following⊠pot kettle black??? Page 215 is basically criticising their own proposal on page 143âŠ
The disregard for protecting the confidence of investors, especially foreign investors, observed by socialist governments and leaders who⊠are now multiplying legislative initiatives and announcements that unilaterally and even retroactively break with commitments and regimes of the Portuguese state, as has happened with local accommodation licences, residence permits for investment, tax rules such as those for non-habitual residents.
That IMI headline is clickbait - it doesnât really stand up to scrutiny once you dig into the details.
The AD party platform says they want to tighten the rules for acquiring Portuguese citizenship in general. That could mean longer residence requirements, more time physically present in the country each year, and excluding any time spent in irregular status. But that section doesnât call out Golden Visa holders at all. Given that Portugal has broader migration management issues, and GV residents are a small and well-documented group, itâs entirely possible these changes are aimed elsewhere.
Whatâs more relevant for most people on this forum is that the platform specifically criticises retroactive changes made by the previous government to the Golden Visa program, using it as an example of how investor trust was damaged. The only time the GV program is mentioned, itâs to highlight that the government shouldnât be changing the rules after people are already approved.
So thereâs acknowledgment that retroactive changes create legal and reputational problems. Thatâs the point I was trying to argue yesterday. We donât yet know how theyâll reconcile these two positions, but it does suggest they understand the legal and political risks of targeting people who entered under the old rules and the damage that would do to Portugalâs reputation as a place to invest.
By the same token⊠the 2024 amendment to Portuguese Nationality Law (Lei OrgĂąnica 1/2024, March 5, 2024) - which adjusts the residency period calculation - also doesnât call out Golden Visa/ARI holders at all.
Do we really get to be so selective which Nationality amendments apply or donât to GVs?
This is a policy document, not legislation. I made a probabilistic assessment, not a selective one. And as I made clear, my main point was the platform reinforces ADâs objections to retroactive changes in GV requirements for those already approved. Iâm not sure how much clearer they can be on that point. I think this thread is getting a little ahead of itself on very little info.
Large relative to what? I would argue this is just election pandering and not to fret too much, ADâs polling numbers are getting worse by the day and it looks like PS will probably take the election and will get dibs on trying to form government.
I would wait until the election is over before doing anything.
