Hi there I am a Dec 22 applicant and still awaiting analysis, this is what I have sent to the President (but in Portuguese):
Your Excellency,
I write as an individual investor and lawful resident applicant who responded in good faith to the Portuguese State’s invitation to participate in the Autorização de Residência para Investimento (ARI), commonly known as the Golden Visa, under the legislation in force in 2022.
In July 2022, I invested in Portuguese property in reliance on the legal framework then publicly promoted as a secure and transparent route to residence and, in due course, eligibility for the Non-Habitual Resident (NHR) tax regime. In December 2022, I formally submitted my ARI application, which remains pending due to administrative delays beyond my control.
I wish to express my deep respect for the Portuguese Republic’s sovereign right to amend its laws. My appeal is not against reform itself, but against any retroactive or transitional change that defeats justified reliance on the legal commitments in force at the time of my investment and application.
- Protection of Legal Certainty and Legitimate Expectations
The Constitution of the Portuguese Republic enshrines, at Article 2, the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations (confiança legítima) as essential components of the rule of law. The Tribunal Constitucional, in decisions such as Acórdãos 575/2014, 602/2016, and more recently 128/2024, reaffirmed that the State must not frustrate justified reliance or destroy legal stability without compelling justification and proportionate transition.
When the Portuguese Government invited foreign investors through the Golden Visa programme, it did so on the express assurance that those who acted lawfully under the regime would be governed by the legal conditions then in force. Retroactive alteration of those terms — for instance by denying renewals, changing residence-period requirements, or altering the pathway to citizenship — would directly contradict the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, which has consistently protected acquired rights (direitos adquiridos) and legitimate expectations of residents.
- Administrative Delay and the Linked Expectation of NHR Status
My investment decision and ARI application were also made in reliance on the NHR tax regime, which was, at the time, a central feature of Portugal’s attractiveness to new residents. The NHR was explicitly presented by State agencies and professional advisers as complementary to the ARI programme — the fiscal component of the same strategic policy to attract long-term investment and human capital.
Because my ARI application remains under analysis, I have been prevented from formally registering for NHR. This delay is entirely attributable to administrative backlog, not to any omission on my part. In such circumstances, it would be contrary to the principle of good faith in administrative action (Article 266(2)) for the State to benefit from its own delay by subsequently abolishing or denying access to NHR for those who were already irreversibly committed to Portugal under the earlier framework.
To remove the NHR regime for individuals in this situation — who have already invested and applied under the pre-existing legal and fiscal environment — would amount to a retroactive deprivation of legitimate expectations, contrary to Articles 2, 103(3), and 266(2) of the Constitution and the reasoning in Acórdãos 575/2014 and 128/2024, which affirm that the State may not frustrate lawful reliance or profit from its own administrative delay.
- Proportionality, Equality, and International Credibility
Any change that penalises applicants still awaiting ARI decisions would create unequal treatment between investors whose files happened to be processed earlier and those delayed by State action. Such disparity would conflict with the constitutional principle of equality (Article 13) and the Court’s demand for proportionality (Article 18(2)) in legislative reform.
Moreover, Portugal’s international reputation as a stable, rules-based European democracy depends on honouring the commitments made under its own legal regimes. Foreign investors, professionals, and families have acted in good faith on the strength of those commitments. Retroactive disruption would undermine confidence not only in migration and tax policy, but in the broader predictability of the Portuguese legal order.
- My Respectful Request
I therefore respectfully urge Your Excellency, in your constitutional capacity as guardian of the Republic’s fundamental values, to ensure that any legislative changes affecting the ARI or NHR regimes:
Include explicit transitional provisions safeguarding all those who made qualifying investments or submitted ARI applications before the introduction of the new law;
Preserve the legitimate expectations of applicants prevented from completing NHR registration solely due to administrative delay;
Be subject, where necessary, to preventive constitutional review to ensure conformity with Articles 2, 13, 18(2), 103(3), and 266(2) of the Constitution and with the jurisprudence of the Tribunal Constitucional;
Reaffirm to both citizens and the international community that Portugal remains a State where legal certainty, fairness, and good faith guide the conduct of public power.
- Closing
Your Excellency, I chose Portugal because it is admired for its constitutional integrity, warmth, and stability. I remain committed to investing, living, and contributing here. I ask only that the Republic uphold the principle that those who acted lawfully under its laws should continue to be governed by them.
With the highest respect and confidence in your stewardship of the Constitution,
