It is online.
1 Like
You’re going to get all kinds of speculation but the bottom line is that no one knows.
Right now there is no new law. The legislature is in session and a revised version could be introduced at any moment but things seem to be on hold pending the ongoing presidential election. The presidential election runoff is scheduled for 8 February with the winner to be sworn into office on 9 March. Right now it would appear that the legislature is waiting to see who the next president will be before revising and reintroducing a nationality law.
2 Likes
de Sousa’s term expires on 9 March so that’s when the new president will be sworn in, not. mid-February. The runoff election isn’t until 8 February.
FWIW, there was nothing on LdN in the Assembly’s agenda through the end of Jan.
So it does not look like it may happen ‘any moment’. Let’s see what Feb shows when it’s agendized.
4 Likes
come on man, don’t selectively quote like that
I think there are 2 small things: reading the Constitutional Court decision (required by law) and reading of one of the petitions that got sufficient votes and argues for counting time since application.
2 Likes
Curious to hear who you ended up choosing as I am likely in the same boat (can apply for citizenship in June).
good advice, but note that unless the new, stricter nationalization law has grandfathering language added to it in 2026 (before it becomes law), even folks who submitted their ARI applications several years before 2026 will have to plan on passing 10+ years of legal residency before they can even begin process of applying for PR (or citizenship).
You’re referring to liability some Portuguese funds could be impacted by thanks to the U.S. government “going after them” for selling securities to American ARI investors before the Portuguese government doubles the residency requirement to 10 years or???
What are you referring to here in this post, Curi? I haven’t heard about this happening to American ARI investors. Would love more info to understand. Thanks
@glsmaf, @paulkrull5 I think @MB101 is just talking about FATCA reporting which makes it more of a pain for international funds to take on US investors vs investors of other nationalities.
Great, okay nothing beyond the normal. Thanks for clarifying!
No. I’m referring to the 33, 34 and 40 acts. The offering documents for some funds have unqualified benefits that include citizenship in 5 years. Those are in my opinion material misrepresentation that induced investments.
1 Like
Update below from today’s hearing on the 2 petitions…
Rather than try petition based on fuzzy “rights” and “fairness” grounds, I’d like someone to ask Parliament a very basic logic question:
- How can the State link the start date of Nationality counting to what is, in effect, a random number generator? (AIMA’s senseless, capricious and politically manipulated visa processing)
- Is that not a textbook example of being arbitrary? (which is unconstitutional)
- Done.
PSD and Chega oppose petitions regarding the counting of deadlines for nationality applications.
The petitions contain “very technical arguments mixed with political arguments,” stated MP Paulo Edson Cunha (PSD), recalling that the Constitutional Court did not consider a transition period necessary for those already in Portugal to adapt to the legal changes under discussion, nor did it require that the counting of deadlines be done from the date of the request.
…The lawyer [Priscila Correa, promoter of one of the petitions] criticised the “false narrative that immigration harms the country” and warned that she is gathering several complainants regarding applications for Residence Permits for Investment (ARI, the former ‘golden visas’), to file a complaint and seek compensation, because the “State was not effective in enforcing” the deadlines.
“Both the average immigrant and the high-net-worth investor are held hostage by the system,” he said, arguing that “the solution lies not in restricting rights,” but in “increasing Portuguese administrative efficiency.”
In the session of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms and Guarantees, the rapporteur for the petitions and Socialist MP Pedro Delgado Alves admitted that, “with the exception of some cases,” the Constitutional Court validated the interpretation that deadlines can only be counted from the date of the residence certificate and referred the decision of a transitional period to the legislator.
8 Likes
I thought PR was still 5 years but citizenship would be 10 years
5 years from first card, which could easily be 10 years from investing your money for GV. Absolute clown show.
1 Like
Another argument for fairness with regard to counting time from application date rather than receipt of permit - What about the fact that only primary applicants are getting appointments right now?! Based on the timeline we are hearing about from various attorneys, family member appointments could be many months down the road leading family members to get residency permits a year after primary applicants when we applied together as a family.
3 Likes
It’s as simple as “the Golden Visa law says that applications should be decided within 90 days from submission therefore date for counting time for citizenship should be no later than than submission date plus 90 days”. They need to be held accountable to their own damn laws.
22 Likes
100%. If my early application doesn’t work, I will be filing a case on the basis that they need to count from application date + 90 working days at the very minimum.
10 Likes
I am also filing for early citizenship, 5 year completes in Dec 2026 and part of my plan is to file case if they don’t approve citizenship on the grounds that new law needs 10 years from date of 1st card.
1 Like