If one does not meet the jus sanguinis (citizenship by descent) requirements for a Portuguese citizenship, the alternative route is jus soli (citizenship by right of birth or residence). In the EU, jus soli is based on a minimum of 5 yearsâ physical residence and language plus several other requirements set by the country.
As you already know, for a fee, the Portugal GV provides (renewable) 2-year residency cards - enabling a citizenship (and/or PR residency) application to be made at the end of a 5 year official residency period, if the other citizenship requirements are fulfilled.
Since the delays in getting a residence card can now be counted in years, the new law (when passed) intends to redress this by enabling the residency count to be initiated from the beginning of the residence application. This should mitigate the negative consequences of the residency card issuance delays for those applying for citizenship. In short, the amendment to the citizenship law - when published and in force - will require that AIMA consider the years of wait as part of its Contagem de tempo â if a residence permit was eventually granted. Until now the date for the Contagem de tempo was the date on the first card (see the posts before and after this one: SEF documentation for residency extensions counting towards 5-year citizenship timeline - #18 by Mr.E)
One unknown is the date that will be the marker for the approved residency period â and no doubt this will differ by type of residency application. In the case of GV, other unknowns are how fees and physical residence will be dealt with by AIMA, as the 7-14 day boots-on-ground residency requirement on a GV residence card normally applies from the date of the first residence card, and not before.
Hence the speculative nature of the discussion on these issues, to which nobody has an answer, yet.
This is undoubtedly (potentially) good news for all of us and goes a large way to redress the unfairness of the unlawful SEF/AIMA delays to every step of our GV applications.
Our goal from the outset was to give ourselves life options with (a) living permanently in Lisbon; and (b) getting Portuguese/EU citizenship as two strong outcomes. On these two criteria, I was happy to make the investment in the GV through a Portuguese VC back in 2021 when we didnât actually have a fixed plan to relocate. We are doing so now in 2024 and potentially can apply for citizenship from 2026. These are acceptable outcomes despite all the nonsense along the way.
I do wonder if the EU will take issue with this potential new accommodation for PTâs broken residency process.
If (?) the 7/14 requirements donât apply during the wait, and it continues to take 3-4 years to get the first residence card on a GV⊠well thatâs 60-80% of that âminimum of 5 yearsâ physical residenceâ that you were not physically resident. Perhaps not even âmaking an effortâ to be with 7d/year. That seems a long way from the spirit of jus soli
I think the EU has bigger fish to fry. The difference between 35 days presence and say, 21 days presence, is negligible compared to the difference of both those to the 1000+ days presence required by non-Golden visas.
If the new citizenship law starts taking effect, AIMA will have to issue cards with zero delays in order to avoid the problem that you mentioned (60-80% of the 5 year physical residence are not physical residence).
I think it is the progress. And it is the compensation for all people that have been treated badly by SEF for no reason. I wish this law goes for real, then AIMA has to work.
In the case of the GVs, the EU view is that the right of residency is not acquired by boots-on-ground - the real meaning of jus soli- but bought.
Somehow, I wouldnât count on the EU to fight in the GV corner on this one!!
Indeed. The EU will just have another reason to dislike this GV. And instead of shutting them down (as the EU wants), PT is relaxing residency requirements here.
Donât get me wrong⊠I highly appreciate being credited for years spent in this stupid queue. But those who see GVs as âcitizenship for saleâ wonât.
I think EU is only pretending. They do not deliver serious actions and does not have ability to maintain their strict control for long period of times. In the past, they did show that they disliked the RBI program. The Ireland residency by investment had to close. But now the Irelandâs program is back. Spanish GV is never shut down. Italian GV is never shut down. So is Portugalâs GV. Even the Maltaâs one shot payment for citizenship is never shut down. Sanctions against Russia seems getting saturated i.e. getting more lossen.
Dear @minimaxr, I can only comment as per my knowledge & experience⊠To apply for the citizenship one needs to show his/her 5 years of residency and that is done via the CertidĂŁo de Contagem do Tempo that used to be taken from SEF (todayâs AIMA).
The key question is the start day of that period, in the past it was more or less in sync with the issuance date of the first card - or it could be a week before the issuance date as it happened in my case. I can see that with the new change they will redefine the date that will be used as the starting date - which is great news for many⊠As with many changes, most probably they will also need to clarify few questions such as if one would need to spend corresponding time in Portugal later on⊠E.g. if you waited for 2 years after your initial application to get the card, do you later have to spend the corresponding 2 weeks as well in Portugal or are those two years just added to your âcontagem de tempoâ without any condition⊠I think the latter might be the case, as this change seems to be introduced to compensate for the process times that seems to get ever and ever longer.
In my mind even a year is way too much to process an application in post Covid times when things are happening online across the world. Yes there is the backlog but we know from D7 visas that if wanted things can progress very quickly.
But bear in mind that there is no âEU citizenship lawâ that is enshrined in the EU treaties that mandates or overrides the laws governing citizenship of the member states. Each member state is currently free to make itâs own citizenship laws. These laws vary from one state to the next. They differ between Italy, France, Poland, etc. Some countries require 7 years (Greece?) physical residence, while others only 5. And so on. If it so happens that âjus soli is based on a minimum of 5 yearsâ physical residence âŠâ across many member states, I think this is more down to the evolution over time of a somewhat similar approach/attitude, as opposed to anything mandated at EU treaty level that binds the member states.
The EU has voiced opinions as to various aspects of member statesâ citizenship and residence laws - e.g. it wasnât happy with âcitizenship by investmentâ programmes, the proposal regarding residence being transferable across member states, etc. But each member state continues to set itâs own citizenship rules. Portugal allows and continues to allow GV investors to apply for citizenship after 5 years of âlegalâ residence, not âphysicalâ residence. How Portugal chooses to define âlegal residenceâ is still a matter for Portugal. Iâm not an EU constitutional lawyer but this is my lay personâs understanding of things as they currently stand.
We agree. There is a minimum, and for some countries the residence period required is double the EU minimum. Citizenship is under national jurisdiction and it is the prerogative of each Member State, having due regard to Union law, to lay down the conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality.
I donât think Portugal would run into issues with the EU for this change given that you can soon apply for citizenship after as little as 3 years of residency in Germany:
If the EU requires five years of physical residence, how would ARI ever have led to citizenship unless you lived in PT? This seems like the wrong rabbit hole.
Iâm just saying that instead of closing its RBI programme (as the EU wants), PT is moving in the opposite direction by relaxing residency requirements further.
Appreciate that countries are free to make their own citizenship laws. But PT relies heavily on EU funds, and I could see the EU saying âif you want this money, you need to play by our rules.â
The 7/14 thing just seems like a pretext anyways. People doing the GV are clearly not residing (physically) for five years (other than those who actually live there, which I assume is a small minority). So the difference here is just a few weeks of on-the-ground time as someone else has pointed out previously, which is basically a long vacation.
I understand what you were saying. But honestly it is difficult to see what exactly EU wants. All members like Portugal Spain Italy⊠will look around and see if their neighboorâs program has been shut or not. They actually learn from each other. In case of Portugal, they only need to look at Spain. As long as the Spanish GV is there, they will keep their own GV and think that it is OK under EUâs opinion.
Letâs get realistic. This discussion is downright counterproductive. The EU has other problems to address such that 2,000 ARI applicants is not exactly their primary concern.
Huge surge in Germany asylum applications, up 51% last year
January 6, 2024
The number of people applying for asylum in Germany last year rose to 351,915, an increase of 51.1% compared with the year before.
The largest number of asylum-seekers came from Syria, with 104,561 applications, followed by Turkish citizens with 62,624 asylum pleas and 53,582 Afghans, Germanyâs Federal Office for Migration and Refugees said Monday.
