The clown show ain’t over… For me, the 5-year mark (from application date) will be hit end Oct 2026. So the longer this circus goes on, the better. I cannot for the life of me think of an instance of any civilized society where it takes 4.5 years for the residency card to be issued for high-value migrants (just got that in Feb) … The only consolation I have is that my real estate investment is doing quite well.
3 Likes
I don’t have the residency card now, let’s say I will have it next year, add 10 years to be eligible for nationality, and 2 more years for nationality application approval, total at least 13 more years of suffering the stress in dealing with the bureaucracy delays and de-functioning of how this government. What else they are going to change in 13 years? increase minimum stay requirements? And I really don’t want to visit the country every year as it makes me feel disgusting, it’s time to sell my investment and look for the alternative.
5 Likes
There is none that allows citizenship without presence.
1 Like
You are underestimating the suffering…
2 years for nationality application approval? In what world? 
5 Likes
Hi, any idea if the permanent residence eligibility, based on the new law, has increased from 5 to 10 years also and will it be from application date or card issuance date. Thank you
1 Like
It has not increased and remains 5 years. It is based on the first card issuance date (neither of these points ever changed and seemed to be overlooked in all the citizenship revisions back and forth)
1 Like
Thank you James. I hope it remains overlooked.
2 Likes
Is there still hope? I am in the same boat and finish 5 years in December 2026. Have you looked at early citizenship application?
Not overlooked. Different law.
By overlooked I just meant they did not make an attempt to change PR. They were just focused on citizenship. PR in under the Immigration Law and they did not adjust it when they removed manifestation of interest last year.
2 Likes
Yes its infuriating being a victim of government abuse. Ive lived in Nigeria, Turkmenistan, Russia … tell me about it. Maybe there is a bigger picture here, that citizenship-by-investment schemes are increasingly being seen in the West at large as a kind of fraud, and governments are, one by one, quietly stepping back from them. It could be we are swimming against the tide of history here.
1 Like
Just for context, other countries do this too. Im a Brit married to a (naturalised) Russian. We lived in UK 5 years, she had a Residence Permit, we owned a house. Now, suddenly, they dont renew it. Not a NO, but not a YES either. We are in Limbo for a whole year. I’m 100% Brit from birth, no other citizenship, we were married in UK. This is how UK treats us. Which is why we are in Portugal. Which doesnt make Portugal’s failings any more justifiable, but gives some context. I believe the USA is now playing hardball with people who thought the had complied with all the rules but are now being loaded onto planes. Its not just Portugal, the world is not as permeable as it was.
5 Likes
This is very true. It is also why I think it is very unlikely that in 10 years golden visas without physical residence will get citizenship. The tide has clearly turned against such programs.
3 Likes
Should’ve gone for Vanuatu.
1 Like
Vanuatu would have been a better choice.
1 Like
Not sure yet but unlikely. From what I’ve read and seen, it doesn’t look very likely that they would approve an early application so would rather bet on this “legislative” process getting further protracted …
1 Like
The UK has always been particularly horrendous when it comes to immigration. Those of us on the periphery of Empire know this. I do think a lifetime of having to deal with immigration authorities may have made the risk of immigration policy/laws changing more obvious to some of us than others - again, a pox on HMHO and its “commercial partner” who top the arbitrary & capricious visa list; honorable mention to the USA secondary immigration interrogations; shoutout to Canada’s 18 month work permit delays, etc etc. Not excusing the PT government at all, but for me it is the ecosystem of scuzzy immigration facilitators that actively discounted the known risks who should really get burned in this debacle.
On the end of GV’s, it’s always been an option for the very rich to low key obtain residency in exchange for investment, with various perks and tax exemptions and ultimately citizenship. My bet is that it’ll just go back to that.
What is the “override majority” for this law?
I am pretty optimistic that the socialist President will not promulgate this law as is.
But what majority the parliament needs to override the president’s veto? 1/2 or 2/3?
2 Likes
They can overcome a veto with 2/3 which they have with PSD+Chega+IL. The law already passed parliament with a 2/3 majority. If vetoed and the same majority confirms the law then the president is forced to promulgate it. Veto at most buys a delay.
Unless we can persuade IL the supposedly “pro business” party to vote against it (they are a small party but a king maker in this situation since PSD+Chega don’t have 2/3 on their own)
6 Likes
I see some users suggesting to open a class action lawsuit, but this is the wrong path to follow. What we (GV investors and D-visa holders) can and should do is as follows:
Firstly, the law change does not include any grandfathering, but also it does not specifically say that there is no grandfathering. It just says that the residency requirement for naturalization is 10 years, that is it. Which is perfectly OK and lawful. Any country can pass such law.
The catch is here: In Portugal, every judge has the power --and the duty-- to refuse to apply a law if they believe it violates the Constitution (see Article 204 of the Constitution).
So, once you fulfill 5 years as resident (GV holder or D-residency), even if it is AFTER the new law passes, just go ahead and apply for citizenship. It will NATURALLY BE REJECTED. This is your legal “trigger” to act.
Once you receive the rejection decision based on the new law, you can file an Administrative Lawsuit. Your argument will be that, application of the NEW LAW to you violates the Constitution (Principle of Protection of Trust - Legitimate Expectations). Mind the difference: the new law is NOT unconstitutional, application of the new law to you IS unconstitutional. You moved to Portugal and built your life under the legal expectation that 5 years was the requirement. Citizenship is not a privilege (as parroted by some), it a right – anything set out by a law between a state and individual is a “right” by definition, and any right cannot be altered/removed mid-game against the legitimate expectations principle.
Now, you have a administrative lawsuit against the decision of the rejection of your citizenship application. Your claim is NOT that the new law is unconstitutional, it IS constitutional. Your claim is that the application of the new law to you is unconstitutional. As mentioned above, the judge can (and I believe he/she WILL) use their power as per Article 204 of the Constitution, and decide that application of the new law to you unconstitutional and that your citizenship application should be governed by the old law.
The important thing is, this ruling will apply only to YOU. So everyone will separately open an Administrative Lawsuit, once they receive the decision of rejection. This will add only 1 year to the process, which is much better than the 5 years. Needless to say that, once one person wins this lawsuit, it will set a precedent for all other lawsuits.
So, a class action lawsuit for this situation is definitely the wrong path to follow. You cannot cancel a law by opening a lawsuit. But you can easily have your citizenship application be evaluated as per the previous law, as the Constitution Article 204 allows this.
Please discuss this with your lawyers. It would be helpful if you could share their comments here.
15 Likes