That’s not very nice…
2 Likes
Portuguese Authority is not simple. I do not underestimate their capacity. In my opinion, they are extremely clever. They know all tricks. If they fear that giving rejection to the application could lead to a lawsuit, then they will only realease the negative outcome of the citizenship’s application after 5 years. Then the person has to wait 5 years just to receive a rejection and the total time since the first GV card up to that point is already 10 years. So, he now has 3 options after receving rejection : 1) re-apply immediately or 2) lawsuit or 3) do both re-apply and lawsuit.
I think that it is highly likely that the person, after having been rejected, will go for re-apply option only. It’s already exhausting and costly.
3 Likes
That only works if you can reapply. What if they change the law again to say you need to physically live in Portugal to count the 10 years residence? Then even after 10 years, many GVs will be disqualified.
1 Like
Of course, if law changes, then there are too many possibilities to consider. It might change to what you said. It might even explicitly state that: GV will not lead to citizenship regardless of how many years of GV you have had. Or it might reduce from 10 years requirement to 5 years requirement…..who knows…
This is a very interesting suggestion. I only applied for my GV in Aug 2025 (and still haven’t received my first resident card), so I still have over 4yrs to wait, before taking any action, but this certainly gives me a new approach to consider.
2 Likes
I’ve been following this topic. My conclusion is this: under current legislation (until any changes are made), ARI investments entitle you only to a residence permit – that’s all. Legally speaking, ARI does not grant citizenship or any other benefits. All that comes later, through the standard procedure, once certain conditions have been met, for anyone who has lived here legally for five years, has learned the language… In other words, that is a different provision of the law. Personal opinions and promises – including those on the SEF website, from estate agents and touts – are irrelevant; only the provisions of the law matter. This is the fact guaranteed by law: the reality is merely a residence permit. This constitutes the full extent of the Portuguese state’s commitments to ARI participants. Everything else is a derivative result – citizenship and so on. The law promised a residence permit in exchange for investment; take it, demand it, fight for it; asking for anything else is superfluous. They have the right to change, revoke or complicate this at their discretion. Unfortunately for ARi participants, this has almost happened.
4 Likes
The thing is there are many Golden Residencies, like Italy or Greece that are cheaper and faster than Portugal. Portugal profited by advertising theirs as the best path to citizenship - then after taking our money, removing the part that attracted the investment in the first place. So scammy.
12 Likes
I’ll preface by saying im not a GV holder, but by advertising it on SEF, they have set an expectation IMO, they can and should be sued for not keeping to what they advertised.
11 Likes
I’m in the same boat. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out. But I consider their decision to be legitimate. The courts won’t help us. By law, the Government didn’t promise citizenship, only a residence permit; we all, myself included, wanted to obtain citizenship easily. By and large, we’re only entitled to claim some compensation (if any) for the lack of a residence permit after 90 days, and that’s it; as for the path to citizenship, they can set a timeframe of 5, 10 or 50 years at their discretion, and amend the criminal code and other legislation. That is a separate issue and does not concern ARI. That is what I am talking about. Of course, Portugal was the easy route; we all took a risk, and that’s how I see it. At least nothing is lost; for those who are keen to live legally in Portugal with a residence permit, they don’t need a passport. I don’t think any of us would want to stand for parliament or work in local government
Greece, for 250,000, will force you to stay there for almost seven years without leaving (I’m 100% sure the infrastructure of that country isn’t for everyone) and learn their language and history well. In that case, France is better, with its five years without investment and much better living conditions, or Germany
2 Likes
I am certain that the responsibility for understanding the law lies solely with us. Estate agents, somebody from the SEF or any other organisation no will face punishment. This is the reality we must accept
2 Likes
This reasoning can be used for any victim of fraud. Just blame the victims.
8 Likes
Exactly. I don’t think the blame is on us, building expectations based on things written on government websites and spoken by a wide community.
5 Likes
Considering that GV holders, by an expressed government admission, were deliberately deprioritised in their residency processing, the culpability lays squarely with the Portuguese government. As you are well aware, many of us have been waiting for over 4 to 5 years (and counting!) for our first residency title after making the required investment. Not only our ability (as you put it - not right) to apply for the citizenship would be affected, our right to permanent residency has already been violated in the worst possible way. Recall that our wait time for the first card towards the 5-year stay requirement is counted only under the current citizenship law. That was what kept our hopes in the GV programme alive!
For D7 type of visa, your count towards the residency starts almost from day one, with no investment requirement. For GV, you must first wait five years for your first card, and only then count additional five years towards the permanent residency card, all whilst keeping your sizeable investment in the country active! In my particular case, I have been living in Portugal for over 3.5 years, and received my first card barely a year ago. All the time I have spent here up to the first card (plus a year prior to the move) will be completely wiped out. For my wife, it is even worse. How exactly is that not considered to be a breach of legitimate expectations?
22 Likes
You are mixing “acquired rights principle” with “legitimate expectations principle”. Yes, GV only entitles you to a residence permit. It does not promise you citizenship. But the legal principle of “legitimate expectations” is applicable precisely for such situations. Here, residency is the acquired right, and citizenship is “legitimate expectation”. As per the legitimate expectations principle, the judge will consider whether GV investors or D7 residents made “life decisions” (investment or moving to a country) with a “legitimate expectation” of gaining a citizenship. This is the whole point of “legitimate expectations” concept.
Even Jorge Miranda, father of Portuguese constitution, clearly mentioned in his opinion article that, failing to provide grandfathering to existing GV investors and residents violates legitimate expectations principle.
Do you think that Jorge Miranda is unaware of the very simple fact you mentioned? Is he unaware that GV only provides residency and not citizenship?
16 Likes
This is evidence of discriminatory treatment, shows how they profited from the investment and broader economic capture, and strengthens the case for winning the lawsuit.
13 Likes
I think we should all sue AIMA for monetary damages over this, I an in this since 2015 My losses in opportunity costs alone exceed €2 million.
Is there such a thing as a class action lawsuit in EU courts, International Court of Justice, or (least trustworthy jurisdiction) Portuguese courts? This is such an obvious violation of rights, with so much money scammed from international investors, and so many families and professional lives ripped apart that there HAS to be a legal reckoning imposed on the culprits. Even the investment funds and law firms who marketed this racket should be held to account, unless they cooperate fully with satisfactory remedies for the thousands of GV victims.
Anyone arguing the nonsense that “you paid for a residency, not citizenship” is ignoring the material facts and representations made. Look at all the marketing material we were peddled. In our family’s case, our older child will age out, so the whole family will be ripped apart. We have read so many sad stories and individual stories from investors who invested over HALF A MILLION DOLLARS, E A C H. We’re not refugees, or work visa migrants, we are high net worth investors who expect predictable contracts and results when we meet our end of the bargain.
5 Likes
4 Likes
i dont see why US courts would have jurisdiction…
Explained here:
6 Likes