āThe Socialist Partyās proposal keeps the conversion to D2 [Entrepreneur] visas, but I donāt think that was intentional,ā says Monteiro. āIt wouldnāt make sense considering the spirit of the changes. I just think that whoever made this document, wrote it with their feet rather than their hands,ā she adds sardonically.
1 Like
Two more things from the PS proposals that I hadnāt spotted earlier. In relation to Law 23/2007:
-
Article 77(3) amended to read āThird-country nationals who are the subject of restrictive EU measures may be denied the granting or renewal of a residence permit.ā ie no citizens of Russia or Belarus
-
Article 3(1)(d)(vii) amended to EXCLUDE investment funds like IMGA or BPI Portugal as eligible ARI investments - only venture capital funds will be allowed.
Also a provision about the re-evaluation of investments every two years: āThe investment activities foreseen in paragraph d) of the present article require evaluation every two years as to its impacts on scientific and cultural activity and on the promotion of foreign direct investment and job creation.ā
4 Likes
If i understand correctly, allowing only investment in Venture or Private Equity funds for future applicants is a big change, and, if done correctly, could have a positive impact on start-up funding in PT.
A smart move for the country IMHO, good optics for PT as investment destination.
Iām not sure potential GV applicants will be happy tho
2 Likes
I agree: standing back from personal considerations, itās a logical and defensible policy. The investment options theyāve left in are unarguably good for the country.
1 Like
What does this mean for property investors who will apply before this bill becomes law (lots of folks are rushing to get that in), or for property investors who applied already/will be renewing their existing gv based on that investment?
I thought the govt made a big deal about how any changes wonāt be retroactive till law goes into effect and any current/pending/renewal applications will be protected under original rules. Did all that language and protections get removed?
1 Like
Possible need to switch for renewal. Or before, if they actually make the cutoff Feb 2023.
2 Likes
No one really knows. They may be fine, maybe not. Lawsuits may be needed. Itās best to follow the path of least resistance IMO, which is NOT real estate.
1 Like
As an imga investor, guess Iāll need to invest in something a little more exciting come renewal time maybe
Not a terrible change, and reasonable investment methods for sure. I donāt think businesses starting in Portugal are going to be super competitive, given the business culture, but Iād love to be wrong
1 Like
Perhaps the periodic reviews are for what investment types are allowed with new applications? Basically so they donāt need to change the law, just release new guidance from the sef or whatever?
Similar to how investors that apply under one minimum investment amount presumably can continue with the lower amount, presumably your investment is ok for the renewals even in a legacy investment type?
2 Likes
Chris - where do you a reference to the proposed alteration? Page no and Artigo?
Fundos de investimento ou fundos de capitais de risco come under (vii). I do not see a reference to a modification of (vii) in the PS document. Thanks in advance.
2 Likes
They seem to have updated the document after it was first published. Hereās the current version:
C19-PS-Updated.pdf (331.5 KB)
See page 19.
H/T to @cj807 for spotting the update!
3 Likes
Thanks Thomas. Good catch! I hadnt realised there was an updated doc.
1 Like
Yes, a new version was put up sometime in the late afternoon. The only change is the amendments to Article 3(1)(d) as follows:
2 Likes
I really hope so, because thereās no way Iām getting my money back early from a fraction of a Mercan hotel building!
1 Like
Does it apply retroactive ? Thats quite idiotic. If it is the case I would just exit this thing ASAP. Pretty much all other options are risky and lock the funds with no exit strategy in the worst case.
This is the big question, and I donāt think anyone knows the answer. The draft legislation remains self-contradictory.
For example, for pending applicants, existing applications āremain validā but then seem to be subject to various new tests. So are they valid or not?
For permit holders, the new provisions ādo not prejudice the possibility of renewalā. But then thereās a test every two years to see if your investment is promoting foreign direct investment. So are renewals OK or not?
And then what, if anything, will the Constitutional Court have to say about it all?
Lawyers donāt seem to be able to answer the question, and usually tell me to stop worrying about it when I ask - itāll apparently all be sorted out. But weāre weeks into this process, and nothingās changed, so Iām sceptical.
3 Likes
Maybe theyāre right, but itās also in their interests for you to believe thereās no problem and continue to use their services to invest and apply for GVā¦
4 Likes
Plus they will be preventing people from Russia and Belarus from renewing, so that shows they have at least some plan to prejudice the possibility of renewalā¦
2 Likes
For what itās worth, my lawyers (both immigration and real estate, separate guy unrelated to immigration), seem to be under the impression that retroactive legislation is unconstitutional, and therefore whatever the PSD may want to do, any such ex-post-facto changes on existing ARI investors would be subject to a court challenge that is almost certain to rule against the retroactively provisions. IANAL but just quoting what I was told. Hopefully thatās correct.
4 Likes