Except, from my understanding, for the fact that we have no idea what counts as āreal estate investmentā funds yet. On one hand, it seems likely that funds investing residential real estate would be disqualified. But this runs a spectrum. For example, agricultural funds would invest in real estate (the underlying land) as well as most hospital funds, industrial funds, etc. If anyone has any clarity on this issue, Iād happily buy you a Super Bock the next time we are in Portugal.
1 Like
Indeed. For what itās worth, I spoke to someone from an agricultural land fund a while back, and they and their lawyers were completely convinced theyāre in the clear.
1 Like
I am also waiting to hear on the implementing rules and regulations of the new law on what qualifies as a āreal estate investment.ā After we have clarity on this, interested investors can then proceed with the Fund investments. Also, since SEF will be disbanded, I am thinking the new agency might play a huge role in defining real estate investments.
Does anyone have any insight on the āreal estate investmentā fund change on might mean for people who have already applied? Does this means we might get an initial 2 year permit but not get renewed? If thatās the case, why target funds and not people who purchased actual real estate?
Your suggestion is as plausible as any. No one has any insight because the regulations havenāt been drafted. Best thing now is to wait for the regulations to see what is required. I donāt know how long it takes to draft regulations. Last time there was a change (albeit less significant) it took about 4 months for things to start moving as I recall.
if they do not renew real-estate investment (fund or else) Gov will face law suite from peoples from 2019 till date
4 Likes
Agree. And we may base our cases on the first paragraph of the current law
Can you kindly highlight what does the first paragraph of the current law state. Thank you
I meant the first from two contradicted each other:
ā2 -O disposto no nĆŗmero anterior nĆ£o prejudica a possibilidade de renovaĆ§Ć£o das autorizaƧƵes de residĆŖncia para atividade de investimento quando essas autorizaƧƵes tenham sido concedidas ao abrigo do regime legal aplicĆ”vel atĆ© Ć data da entrada em vigor da presente lei.ā
=
2 - The provisions of the previous paragraph are without prejudice to the possibility of renewing residence permits for investment activity when such permits have been granted under the legal regime applicable up to the date of entry into force of this law.
2 Likes
It seems like a logic error according to the descripstion in the law passed by the parliament and the president.
I think they should modify this as soon as possible if there is no misunderstangding in portuguese.
Thank you very much
My reading of that language is that it only protects those who already have a permit. If you applied before the law was passed, there is no renewal protection, which means you could get a permit, but not be able to renew it.
Itās said D2 is the replacement of GV when it comes to the renewal.But those applicants who transferred from GV to D2 should remain the residence requirements as GV does.This is my opinion.
1 Like
I mean those who selected properties before the law was passed.
If that interpretation is implemented it would lead to court action from those prejudiced by SEFās delay in processing their applications prior to the law passing.
It also seems to go against the precedent set when the ālimitsā where changed at end of 2021 (ie capital transfers raised from ā¬1m to ā¬1.5m) and were intended to be renewed at the āoldā limit.
Your interpretation makes logical sense. I hereby nominate you to be the head of the new SEF.
1 Like
I think you need to stop panicking about the law being retroactive. The original proposal in February was retroactive. This was pointed out by the industry, lawyers etc, and that it would clearly lead to huge numbers of lawsuits. They then changed the law so that it was not retroactive, and didnāt actually abolish the GV completely which was their original plan. They made statements saying that the law wasnāt retroactive. Thereās no reason not to believe that intention given the big changes to their proposals from spring to the final version.
However, as many have pointed out there remain logic issues, contradictions, omissions etc. in the final law. Given that the whole concept of the law is populism and itās not firmly grounded in economic policies that would actually help the housing crisis, itās hardly surprising the drafting is low quality. But I think you all need to take comfort that the intention is that itās not retroactive and it will be sorted out in the regulations and how itās applied. Iāve not seen any lawyer suggest otherwise (correct me if Iām wrong here). Worst case thereāll be delays whilst itās clarified and youāll end up with a visa called something else if you invested in an abolished category. (Although this makes no sense in the context of the final law either and I personally wouldnāt be surprised if they get rid of this detail).
But I really donāt think you need to worry that your life savings are at risk.
13 Likes
100%. I feel like this thread is drumming up extraneous FUD where no more needs to exist. The law is passed, the intention is no retroactivity in any circumstance, every lawyer seems to agree (including mine). Letās move on.
Maybe we should close this topic. If actual news comes out that SEF blocks someoneās renewal because of the law, we can discuss it then. Otherwise us pretending to be lawyers and promoting interpretations that contradict real, actual lawyers is a strange way to spend time at best and causing a ton of anxiety at worst.
3 Likes
O que serĆ”, serĆ” - what will be, will be
The futureās not ours to see
Go offline and drink some tea 
3 Likes
You are so correct. Banks here make fixed rate mortgages difficult to obtain. Mortgages are amortized based on age, so a 30 year fixed rate mortgage is almost unknown to a common borrower. BUT they were happy to grant variable rate mortgages and now they are all going up. People are trying to sell ABSOLUTE ruins at exorbitant prices. Sale signs have sprung up like mushrooms and the government is cutting off benefit programs for foreign investors right and left.
The ābuildingā I pass every day is suddenly for saleā¦I call it a building because it has 3 wallsā¦no roof, no floors, no stairs but hey, maybe I can squeeze money out of some foreigner.
Today I saw a stone barn in the middle of nothing and they were asking 100,000.
Like a banana republic, the promises of today can change tomorrow.