Portugal Golden Visa - The New Law of 2023

No laws have changed at this point, next step is more debate on the 30th. Until any law actually passes, itā€™s all speculation.

1 Like

Thank you. hope everything will be okay for everyone

1 Like

Is it safe to start the application process now?

Letā€™s see when thatā€™ll happen :joy::joy:

1 Like

Again, no-one knows, but there must be a significant risk that any applications made now will not be allowed to proceed to final approval. Most people on here have been suggesting that if you still want to apply, try to minimise non-recoverable expenses, and avoid any long-term commitments that you canā€™t get out of.

My advisor asked me to pay a fee to apply for a bank account first as that takes the longest and then when it comes to investing, the project I am looking at offers a refunds if the gv process is cancelled by the government.

2 Likes

A bit surprised - for me, the bank account was free, and took the least time of the whole process (2 days). Getting personal documents together was the time-consuming bit.

Do treble-check the refund guarantee (ideally get it reviewed by an independent lawyer) - someone further up in this thread was saying the guarantee offered by Mercan, for instance, didnā€™t seem to cover the scenario they were most concerned about, ie a law passed with retrospective effect. (Iā€™m not a lawyer myself and obviously I donā€™t know your circumstances.)

Good luck

3 Likes

@Lonsin There is an excellent article in the Articles section of this site that attempts to answer this very question. Click on (in the header) Articles ā†’ Portugal ā†’ Golden Visas ā†’ Portugal ->Portugal Golden Visa Guide.

This comes down to several factors: Your nationality and residency, whether you can go in person or not, which branch you go to, etc. In general Iā€™ve heard things have gotten trickier over the past year or so.

I believe that referred to the side letter that Mercan provided at the time (I think prior to any comments about the law possibly trying to apply retroactively). The buyback clause in the investor agreement is pretty clear, though:

  1. OBLIGATION TO PURCHASE

5.1.

The First Party has the right to oblige the Second Party to repurchase the Share and the Second Party has the obligation to acquire the Share, following the verification of one of the conditions below, (ā€œBuy Backā€):

5.1.1. Rejection of the ARI on the concession stage, either i) for reasons not attributable to the First Party or ii) for reasons attributable to the First Party;
5.1.2. Approval of the permanent residence permit;
5.1.3. Acquisition of Portuguese nationality; or
5.1.4. 6 (six) years after the execution of the purchase public deed for the acquisition of theShare.

In the situations referred to in clauses 5.1.1 i), 5.1.2, 5.1.3 and 5.1.4 the repurchase price shall be ā‚¬ 350,000.00 (three hundred and fifty thousand euros).
In the situation referred to in clause 5.1.1 ii), in case the first Party exercises the Buy Back before the deadline set forth in cause 5.1.4., the repurchase price shall be ā‚¬ 280,000.00 (two hundred and eighty thousand euros).

Itā€™s pretty clear to me that any retroactive application of the law is a reason ā€œnot attributable to the First Partyā€ (i.e. investor), meaning they would buy back the property at the full price.

5 Likes

Doesnā€™t seem to cover if the ARI is not renewed. Youā€™d have to wait the six year.

Yes, in regards to renewals itā€™s less clear, but I canā€™t imagine that it would be the case that the government will block renewals for those investing in hotels because the hotel isnā€™t made into long term residences. But weā€™ll know more soon enough.

2 Likes

It would definitely be much more interesting to most on this forum if SEF would report statistics for each stage of the GV process, rather than only the final stageā€¦

2 Likes

If we could get everyone to keep this up to date, weā€™d have it all at
our fingertipsā€¦

4 Likes

Given the current state of the ARI situation, I found this article tone-deaf, especially coming from OECD.

3 Likes

Well, this seems interesting. Marcelo describes the governmentā€™s proposals on housing as ā€œunworkableā€, ā€œinoperable, from start to finishā€ and essentially an exercise in propaganda. Doesnā€™t sound like heā€™s going to rubber-stamp the plans.

https://jornaleconomico.pt/noticias/marcelo-arrasa-pacote-mais-habitacao-do-governo-e-inoperacional-1009050

7 Likes

Itā€™s a good indicator.

5 Likes

Thanks for sharing @cj807 :+1:

1 Like

The Housing Law always was going to suffer in the implementation stage - for example, who will be in charge of identifying vacant properties? How will the municipality or government prove the property is vacant? Does the government have legal man power to enforce any of this law, or will each case drag on for years? For dilapidated property that is lying vacant, will the government initially fund the renovations, and hope to adjust it against future rental income (which may or may not manifest)? Where will the money come from to renovate these properties - from taxes? Where will the government get the manpower to execute such a scheme - builders, contractors, surveyors, lawyers, etc?

The devil is always in the details, so quite rightly said, a power point presentation is a long way off from something that is actually deliverable!

2 Likes

Can someone explain to me the powers of the PT presidency?

I was under the assumption that the legislature (ministers) lead by the prime minister had all the legislative power, does the president need to sign off on legislation?

My understanding is that the President can veto legislation as it stands, and send it back to parliament for reconsideration. Parliament can then override the veto by majority vote, although in some cases a 2/3 majority is required. (In the current parliament the PS has an absolute majority of MPs, but obviously overriding the veto is more tricky if you are running a minority government).

The President can also refer a bill to the Constitutional Court - if the Court decides the bill is unconstitutional, the President is obliged to veto it and send it back to Parliament.

So itā€™s not an absolute veto, but it would delay the process, and presumably it carries a degree of political authority.

2 Likes