SHARE
COPY LINK

EUROPEAN UNION

‘Shady characters’: Will EU countries now put an end to ‘golden passport’ schemes?

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine European countries are coming under pressure to end backdoor routes to EU citizenship which are deemed to be unfair and "shady". This week MEPs in the European parliament made their opinions on the scheme clear.

The European Union is considering changing rules to make it easier for non-EU nationals to move within the bloc.
The European Union is considering changing rules to make it easier for non-EU nationals to move within the bloc. (Photo by FREDERICK FLORIN / AFP)

The European Parliament on Wednesday called for the phasing out of citizenship by investment programmes operated by some EU countries and for EU-wide regulation on so-called ‘golden visas’ offered to wealthy individuals. 

Such schemes pose a threat to European security and democracy as they can be used “as a backdoor” to the EU for “dirty money”, MEPs argued during the debate.

Members of the European Parliament have been calling for the termination of ‘golden passport’ schemes since 2014, but the issue has become more prominent in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, because of the number of Russian citizens acquiring rights in EU countries through this route in recent years. 

The resolution passed by the parliament with 595 votes to 12 and 74 abstentions says golden passports should be phased out fully. 

The background…

The market of golden passports and visas developed rapidly since the 2008 financial crisis, as countries have sought to incentivise foreign investment

Three EU countries – Bulgaria, Cyprus and Malta – offer citizenship in exchange for a financial investment. Currently, however, Bulgaria is considering a government proposal to end the scheme, Cyprus is only processing applications submitted before November 2020, and Malta has just suspended the processing of applications from Russian citizens.

In addition, 12 EU countries (Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands and Portugal) grant residence permits on the basis of investments, the so-called ‘golden visas’. 

Each national scheme has different rules regarding minimum investment requirements, which range between €60,000 in Latvia and €1.25 million in the Netherlands. These can be through property ownership or contributions to public projects. 

A European parliament study estimates that, from 2011 to 2019, the total investment associated to these schemes has been of €21.4 billion. 42,180 citizenship or residence applications have been approved under such programmes and more than 132,000 people have benefited, including family members of applicants. 

Dutch MEP Sophie IN’t Veld, the European parliament rapporteur, said that “when governments are selling passports or visas, what is actually bringing in the cash is… the little blue and yellow logo on them” – in other words, the EU flag.

‘They are designed for shady business, shady money and shady characters’

Getting citizenship of one EU country of course means the freedom to live and work in all 27 member states, so one country’s passport policy affects everyone in the Bloc. 

Benefits include the right to move to other EU countries, exercise economic activities in the single market, vote and stand as candidates in local and European elections, receive consular protection outside the EU and travel visa-free in many other states around the world. 

Residence also ensures economic rights and the possibility to be joined by family members. 

All this bypassing standard citizenship requirements, which typically involve a period of residence and a “genuine connection” to the country, such as family links, or integration conditions, such as speaking the language and knowing the culture. 

“Passports and golden visa schemes are not about attracting any meaningful legitimate investment in the real economy of Europe. They are designed for shady business, shady money and shady characters,” Sophie IN’t Veld said during the debate.

A picture taken on March 8, 2022 shows European Union’s and Ukrainian flags fluttering outside the European Parliament in Strasbourg, eastern France. (Photo by Frederick FLORIN / AFP)

Security risks

In an earlier analysis, the European Commission found that such programmes pose risks regarding security, money laundering, tax evasion and corruption due to weak vetting procedures. 

For instance, EU countries offering citizenship by investment usually request clean criminal records from applicants or their country of origin, which are difficult to verify especially in case of a conflict. But Malta can waive the requirement “where the competent authority considers such a certificate impossible to obtain”. 

Cyprus, which is not part of the border-free Schengen area, is not connected to the Schengen Information System that allows member countries to share security information.

In addition, EU member states consult on applications for short-stay visas issued to citizens from certain third countries, but they do not consult for citizenship by investment programmes and do not inform each other of rejected applications, the Commission noted.

Media investigations also highlighted how the schemes have been linked to corruption and crime. Journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was murdered in Malta in 2017 following her investigations into corrupt politicians and money laundering through the citizenship by investment programme, MEPs reminded. 

Brexit-backing billionaire Christopher Chandler, born in New Zealand, was reported to have acquired EU citizenship using the Maltese scheme in 2016.

In 2021 Cyprus revoked the citizenship of 39 foreign investors and 6 members of their families, after it emerged that insufficient background checks had been carried out for over half of the 6,779 passports issued under the scheme between 2007 and 2020. 

‘It is not fair to Ukrainians at this point’

The parliament said on Wednesday that these schemes are “discriminatory and lack fairness” as they contrast “dramatically with the obstacles to seeking international protection, legally migrating or seeking naturalisation through conventional channels”. 

MEPs also called on the European Commission to propose, in 2022, EU-wide regulation on residence by investment schemes. These should include stricter background checks on applicants, their family members and the sources of their funds, minimum residence requirements, investments that truly benefit the economy of the country, and proper scrutiny of intermediaries helping people acquiring rights trough these channels.

“It should not be enough to just buy a house or a villa. The investment must be in the real economy and in line with the climate and social objectives of the Union,” said Sophie IN’t Veld. 

It is “very difficult for small countries whose revenue streams depend on this… I understand it is painful but it is not fair to European citizens, and Ukrainians at this point,” the rapporteur said.

Despite the vote in the European parliament EU powers on this issue remain limited because the rules on the acquisition of citizenship are defined at national level rather than in Brussels. 

The European Commission, however, has already launched a legal action at the European Court of Justice against Cyprus and Malta because “the granting of EU citizenship for pre-determined payments or investments without any genuine link with the member states concerned undermines the essence of EU citizenship”.

What about Russian nationals obtaining golden status?

Russian nationals account for 45 percent of those who have acquired citizenship in EU countries using this route, followed by Chinese nationals and people from the Middle East (15 percent for each group). Chinese investors account for over half of residence permits issued in this way.  

In consideration of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the European Parliament also appealed EU countries to stop operating citizenship and residency by investment schemes for Russian nationals with immediate effect and to re-assess whether those who benefited in the past have links to the Putin regime. 

In the first round of sanctions against Russia, the leaders of the European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States committed to “limit the sale of citizenship… that let wealthy Russians connected to the Russian government become citizens… of our countries and gain access to our financial systems.”

This article is published in cooperation with Europe Street News, a news outlet about citizens’ rights in the EU and the UK. 

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

VISAS

Ask the expert: What are the French immigration laws for ‘pacsé’ couples?

The French civil partnership known as Pacs is an alternative to marriage - but the situation is complicated if you're hoping to get a French visa or residency permit through being pacsé with a French or other EU national, as immigration lawyer Paul Nicolaÿ explains.

Ask the expert: What are the French immigration laws for 'pacsé' couples?

In a 2018 judgement, the Conseil d’Etat, France’s highest administrative Court, put an end to a long-running controversy as to whether or not an individual, signatory of a civil partnership under French law (Pacs) with a European citizen could be considered as a family member of the latter and therefore benefit from favourable EU regulations on immigration.

One of the core principles of the European Union has always been to facilitate the movement of European citizens within the territories of the Member States. And obviously, expatriation is a much more attractive option if family members are allowed to remain united without time limit and with rights equivalent to those of local citizens.

These assumptions form the basis of the European directive 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.

This regulation gives a precise definition of a “family member” that includes the spouse, the descendant, the ascendant in a state of dependance, and also “the partner with whom the Union citizen has contracted a registered partnership, on the basis of the legislation of a Member State, if the legislation of the host Member State treats registered partnerships as equivalent to marriage and in accordance with the conditions laid down in the relevant legislation of the host Member State”.

In other words, if a civil partnership, implemented by an EU Member State such as France, confers on its signatories the same status and the same rights and obligations as a marriage contracted in the same country, then civil partners must be considered as spouses under the EU aforementioned directive, and therefore benefit from the right to move and reside freely within the EU.

Quite logically, the issue was raised concerning the French civil partnership implemented in 1999 and called Partenariat civil de solidarité (Pacs).

After all, Pacs and marriage have in common the same obligation of common life, a commitment to mutual material support and the same consequences on taxes. In the meantime, unlike marriage, Pacs contracts have little to no effect on parentage, nationality, property, and inheritance and are much easier to rescind.

READ ALSO What are the differences between Pacs and marriage?

The first answer given to that question by the French legislative power in 2006 was that Pacs and marriage were not equivalent.

In the following years however, several administrative Courts have ruled otherwise, in contradiction with French national law, and considered that the most important aspects of a Pacs contract make it roughly similar to a civil marriage.

The final word belonged to the Conseil d’Etat, France’s highest administrative Court, which in 2018 overturned this position and definitely ruled that, due to the essential differences between Pacs and marriage, only married spouses are considered family members under EU law.

In practical terms, the main outcome of this legal controversy is that non European nationals cannot apply for a French visa or residence card as family members of an EU citizen, simply due to the fact that they signed a Pacs contract with an EU national.

Of course, other solutions exist for them but, undoubtedly, they do not benefit from EU law and remain under a much less favourable status than spouses of EU citizens residing in France.

READ ALSO What type of French visa do I need?

Their main option is to apply for a residence card under the status vie privée et familiale (private and family life), but in this case préfectures require the proof of a stable and continuous common life of at least one year.

If you find yourself in this situation, be careful to submit your application file through the appropriate procedure. Any confusion, even due to the préfecture itself, could induce frustrating delays and put you in a precarious situation.

Paul Nicolaÿ is a French lawyer based near Paris and specialising in French immigration and nationality law – find his website here.

SHOW COMMENTS