By spending less than 182 days in PT and having a 2nd (main) home elsewhere.
As I understand, the Digital Nomad and Passive Income require >182 days in PT.
GV alone allows between 7 and 180 days.
Oh, you said âmore than 90/180 daysâ and âsecond home ownersâ. My understanding per the EY tax guide and other sources was that anyone owning a home in PT is potentially at risk of being labeled a tax resident (and presumably that risk would be increased if spending 90-180 days in-country rather than 7 days). Are you saying that owning an additional home outside Portugal eliminates / substantially reduces this risk?
I suppose there is a âriskâ but I am not sure who/how is going to trigger the âlabellingâ event other than the tax resident himself.
This is actually one good thing about the PT tax residency in that it is flexible and someone can claim to be the PT tax resident even with 7 days on the ground, in case they prefer to be such tax resident.
2 Likes
Yes, when the Portugal started GV program, naturaluzation by residency required 6 yrs. I think it was 2019 when Portugal decreased it to 5 for everybody and therefore for GV as well.
The talks about increasing the time as an election argument started because 1) waiting time was included by socialists and other parties which were against it view it and especially present it to public as a SHORTENING by about 2 years, so âthey want to compensateâ and 2) too many immigrants came during last 5 years and despite cumulatively they pay more social taxes than receive, those difference could not compensate even fraction of required investments to increase public services for newcoming 15% of population. Nobody did it in the past 10 years. There are queues and failure of services everywhere from hospitals to schools and of course AIMA first.
Not sure the government will change this time. Iâve heard thar AD may even increase its %. Also Chega will definitely increase.
I think it will take at least a year to pass the law if happens at all.
at 180 days you are getting into tax residency realm. Portugal literally has the d7 for this already, as do many other EU nations that have retirement visas, that donât require investing large sums of money/time.
they can certainly claim it, but in the end you can only be tax resident tax domicile of one country and that is usually the country you spend most of your time in. so you can claim to be a PT tax resident for the 7 days a year you spend in PT, but you will still end up being a tax resident tax domicile of wherever your primary residence is.
You should take the tax advice you brought and paid for not me on the InternetâŠbut many other advisors say PT tax residency starts at >182 days or a habitual residence (your home) in PT.
A GV alone doesnât require you to meet either of these two conditions. The other long term visas require >182 days ( presumably) for that very reason.
This is simply not true. You can be tax resident of multiple countries and must be very careful to avoid that condition if being a multiple tax resident is not to your advantage.
2 Likes
This is a categorically false claim. Anyone can have multiple tax residencies. On the other hand, in general you can only have one tax domicile.
American citizens are particularly aware of this, as they remain obligated tax residents of the United States no matter where else they live and pay resident taxes. There are many double-tax treaties in place to manage these overlapping tax obligations.
Here is a randomly-chosen tax firmâs blog post about the topic:
1 Like
As other folks already replied earlier, I can tell you for a fact someone can be a tax resident in an unlimited number of countries, willingly or not 
Otherwise, why do you think DTAAs exist at all?
3 Likes
Yeh, I mispoke, I meant tax domicile, in the end only one place can be your tax domicile, itâs exactly as others have mentioned why DTAs exist.
To my understanding âtax domicileâ is not a universally applied concept, i.e. only certain countries consider such status, e.g. UK is one such country and funnily enough Portugal is one other such country if we count NHR as a non-domiciled tax residency (although the exact term is not used).
1 Like
FWIW, Jornal de NotĂciasâ latest summary on where the various parties stand on nationality in their current campaigningâŠ
Criticizing the current Nationality Law, AD, Chega and IL propose reviewing the requirements for granting Portuguese nationality, introducing different limitations.
In the case of the PSD â CDS-PP coalition, the idea is to extend the minimum period of residence and effective presence in national territory, with the period of illegal stay no longer being considered.
Chega wants to limit the granting of Portuguese nationality to âthose who have a real connection to the country, namely those who know its history (âŠ), identify with Portuguese culture and traditions and who speak and write in Portugueseâ. In the case of binational citizens, it proposes that Portuguese nationality be withdrawn from those who commit violent crimes.
Liberals, on the other hand, advocate strengthening the criteria for effective integration, including language proficiency, basic knowledge of democratic institutions and the absence of a serious criminal record.
1 Like
Funny that summary makes Chega and Liberals sound the most reasonable, even though in reality I believe Chega is far right and likely the worst possible party for immigrants.
Iâd much rather just have to study B1 Portuguese, than have to wait 7 extra years, or have to physically move to PT.
2 Likes
The dog whistle is"Portuguese culture"
Yeah chega are the racists. Donât trust them, and donât expect them to join any coalitions, nobody wants to work with them
2 Likes
Iâm happy to eat bacalhau, but if they want to force me to convert to Catholicism, wellâŠ
2 Likes
For most people in any country in the world, what is important is how a political party is labelled by the MSM.
If by chance they find a statement from that party sounding most reasonable, they look back at the label and disregard the statement.
Just an observation
1 Like
I once saw a YouTube video where a Chega youth got interviewed during a protest. After explaining why Muslims, Asians, people who donât speak Portuguese, black people from former colonies, etc. are all problematic, he arrived at the conclusion that white Brazilians are OK. 
Have they actually given old-fashioned law and order a more serious try? If they claim MI people are dealing drugs or signing fake employment/rental contracts, then prosecute them, and deport them after sentence is served. For example, if Chega claims tiny shops in Martim Moniz each fraudulently âhiresâ dozens of South Asians / hundreds of people are registered at the same address through fake rental contract or attestation, these are not hard to catch, prove, or prosecute.
2 Likes
I am not sure what you mean here.
Are you asking why Chega (who are not in power as far as I know) are not applying law and order?
Not looking for a politically charged debate, just trying to understand your point.
Sorry I meant the Portuguese people / government should give old-fashioned law and order a more serious try.
Chega certainly is making the claim that MI immigrants break existing laws. A lot of Portuguese people, even ones who dislike Chega, seem to agree. Many Portuguese also seem to agree that Portugal has too many foreigners. So one would expect a competent government to remove the bad apples (who have broken existing laws) from the immigrant pool first, before the rhetoric turns the country toxic.