agreed.
and please sign this petition - https://peticaopublica.com/pview.aspx?pi=PT115859 - rather than the petition hosted on https://justice4ptgvinvestors.com/
i mean, you can sign the petition on https://justice4ptgvinvestors.com/, but please do sign the more âofficialâ petition at https://peticaopublica.com/pview.aspx?pi=PT115859
i donât think either petition is really that âofficialâ, but at least https://peticaopublica.com/pview.aspx?pi=PT115859 has ~4300 signatures.
what is the portugal resident? it doesnât seem to be staffed by real journalists.
â EU long-term status will be shortened from five to only three years.
The only category excluded from benefiting from the facilitations that arise from the amended law on EU long-term resident status are those who hold a residence permit solely on the basis of an investment scheme in any of the Member States.
The LIBE Committee has also shown its support for the plans to include periods of legal residence in different Member States, as well as to take into account the time spent in the EU for purposes like seasonal work, study periods or vocational training, and even temporary protections, when calculating a personâs complete period of stay in the EU.
Other simplifications foreseen by the draft law are as follows:
ââ-
Concerning, specifically the line saying this would apply to any visa holders *except those who hold a visa granted via investment.
We were already considering ditching our GV application (still no pre-approval since dec 2021) and going with the digital nomad visa.
My thinking is that even IF the GV stay requirement isnât changed, we will all be rejected at the end of our journey when it comes to getting citizens ship because we didnât spend 183 days in the country for five years. It just feels like thatâs the way citizenship is trending and this article confirms that the GV visas wonât be treated like *real residence visas.
The GV visa never promised citizenship or permanent residency and both will be based on the laws at the time. I can easily see the government saying you need to spend the 183 days in country to apply. Especially given Costaâs remark about GV investors not getting âspecial treatmentâ and needing to meet the same requirements as other types of visa holders.
I have no idea what the tax implications for us would be living in PT 183 days per year. We are early 40s, self- employed and earn a high income. We live in CA so already pay almost 50% of earnings to taxes (state and federal combined) but I think it would be even worse if we were also a tax resident in PT. Some research to be done.
Itâs amazing to think that, in theory, we could apply for the digital nomad visa and get approved via a US consulate and bypass the SEF for the entire first part and be able to live and move freely in the Schengen zone before we would even get our pre-approval.
Curious if anyone else is toying with the idea of changing paths? I know most GV canât do the 183 days in country, which is why we all took this route. It wouldnât be ideal for us either BUT, I feel like we could figure it out 3 years. Weâre so far deep in this thing that I feel like we need to keep trying but it feels like the GV, whether it changes or not, wonât lead to where we all want it to.
End of golden visa threatening âŹ34 million in cultural projects - The Portugal News
I would move to Nevada before becoming tax resident / moving to PT. Then at least you save the state income tax.
(not a tax pro)
This isnât really any different than the current situation. If you read the EU long term resident regs, it basically already says that - you canât get a EULT permit unless you are boots-on-ground for a really significant period of time anyway. So anyone doing RBI wasnât going to be eligible for EULT in the first place.
What they appear to be doing is changing this to say âlegal residenceâ as opposed to âboots on groundâ, shortening the time frame, then excepting RBI. That gets rid of a separate EULT-only time-of-boots-on-ground to be calculated separately from that associated with the residence permits issued by the country, which actually sort of makes sense since the EULT figuring requires a lot of fussing on the part of whoever has to issue it. (TL;DR, itâs complicated.)
Does this mean that something like HQA visa will qualify if Portugal argues itâs ânot RBIâ?
Whoa, there. Freedom of the press, even when you do no agree with what they write, is one of the most critical elements of a democracy. Calling into question the qualifications of the people who write news articles all holiday weekend is not cool.
my apologies. that came across as harsh - i get forwarded articles from the Portugal Resident frequently and donât find them to be informative or insightful. but i realize thatâs probably not their goal - itâs more light reading and advertising for services that might be interesting to expats.
A long article by Jose Ribeiro e Castro, a senior constitiutional lawyer, partner at the PMCM law firm and former leader of the Peopleâs Party, and an MEP.
He argues that
(1) the housing crisis is not the fault of the ARI,
(2) that the ARI scheme could be better managed to promote more positive outcomes,
(3) that ARI applicants are not corrupt money launderers as they are often portrayed, and if there is concern about that, then we should be equally concerned about capital transfers more generally, and
(4) that perhaps the government is caving in to EU pressure.
He concludes by proposing that the scheme be brought to an end sensibly, from the entry into force of the new law, and with existing applicants having their permits issued and renewed as originally intended.
On what basis you suggest that GV is not legal residence in Portugal? Is this your lawyer opinion? I assume Golden Visa will not be included in the amendment because there is no incentive to reduce requirement to 3 years.
Appreciate any comments to clarify this!
On the other hand appreciate any feedback from the multiple stakeholders on the forum of anyone obtaining PR or citizenship based on GV ( other than the announcement 2 years ago on EDGE website.
There is a difference between âlegal residenceâ and âtime spent physically in the countryâ. The two are distinct in both PT and EU law. Itâs like tax residence and taxation.
So a GV is legal residence, but it doesnât mean youâre in the country. EULT has always been associated with time-in-country not legal residence.
What Jeff said above. I guess âsort ofâ my lawyer opinion but more just me thinking about the current state of the world and how laws can, and do, change. Iâm happy we are hearing so many thoughts because weâre seriously considering dumping our GV and trying to do 3 years (6 months per year) if the article I posted becomes a reality. Of course this is a scary prospect, to start over, even though we donât have pre-approval yet, so Iâm curious how everyone else is seeing this situation. Our ultimate goals is free access to the Schengen zone for us and our kids. We want the path that leads to that. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
I think we may end up being allowed to renew our visas with limited time in country but at the end of 5 years I fear we may be rejected for citizenship and/or permanent residence because we didnât do the time. Costa used the words âGV investors donât deserve special treatmentâ and the EU is making it clear that they also believe time spent on the ground is what equals free access to the shengen zone.
Of course this is all just me thinking but all signs point to this being the trend. I feel that the Portuguese government may honor our original contract because itâs unconstitutional not to and they will renew our visas for five years but that it wonât end up giving us what many of us want at the end.
Only time will tell but as I was doing research over the weekend I came across some articles that GV applicants were being rejected for citizenship because they couldnât prove ties to Portugal. Yes, even owning the property and doing the minimum seven days per week in the country. This article was published last year. The decision ended up being reversed but it makes you realized that citizenship/permanent residency has different requirements and is separate from the five years that proceed it and it will depend on what the law is at that time. It feels like countries are making it harder and not easier.
The lawyer who went into detail about this issue made it clear that we should all be collecting evidence over the years to prove our connection to Portugal. For example, enrolling kids in local schools, purchasing season sports tickets, giving charitable donations and spending more than the required time in the country. She said that while right now 7 days in country and maintaining your investment is enough, in the future it may not be so⊠if the laws change. What will be enough? This is where it feels like playing by the same rules as everyone else (tax residency) may become an issue. Itâs also what Costa clearly wants even though he may not be able to force the issue. So how to fix this? Fine, renew their visas but no citizenship at the end.
I guess the question is, will that be enough or will there be a rule that you had to be 183 days each year/tax resident like all the other people who did their time, aka no special treatment.
This is exactly why I am trying to get our money back. So the government begrudgingly gives GV holders their âmandatoryâ 5 yearsâŠthe winds of change are blowing in the EU, and IMO making it less and less likely the GV results in permanent residence and/or citizenship.
Why wouldnât we instead just get a cheaper visa and spend half the year in Portugal until we have permanent residence and freedom of movement / work in the EU (if the current suggestions become policy)? It would be a pain but we could probably make telecommuting work.
Hi Ohbee
I think you could write a letter to the museum who was the recipient of your generosity and advise that you were so excited to donate, but now the government has revoked the agreement so regrettably you have no choice but to request your money back unless the government changes its policy. They in turn will put pressure on the government to stop this madness.
Interesting article talking about huge backlogs in processing of current citizenship applications which potentially adds years to the procesd
I have already done this! No response yet. And I am not very hopeful that a museum will refund a donationâŠthey gain nothing by doing so, and there is no legal responsibility for them either.
Yes, that one has been circulating today. A couple of lawyers have said itâs not correct to suggest that regular nationality claims take up to eight years: processing times remain in the order of one to two years, sometimes less than one. It seems the backlog mentioned in the article isnât necessarily citizenship claims, and numbers have been temporarily inflated by the nationality process for Sephardic Jews which was changed in August 2022 and led to a flood of applications (apparently these are handled separately).
See also How to Qualify and Apply for Portuguese Citizenship â Nomad Gate
I read it as, the entire pile may take 8 years. But individual applications wonât necessarily take that long.
Regardless, ouch! The PT government does not seem very good atâŠgoverning.
26 posts were merged into an existing topic: Portuguese Citizenship application after 5 years of Golden Visa