The European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs has table‑d a sweeping set of measures that would effectively curtail, and in many cases prohibit, residency‑by‑investment (often called “golden visa”) and citizenship‑by‑investment (CBI) schemes across the EU.
Core elements of the proposal
- 50 % tax on program revenues – Any income generated by a member state’s CBI or residency‑by‑investment program would be taxed at half the amount, removing the financial incentive for governments to run such schemes.
- Visa‑free travel conditionality – Countries that operate investment‑migration programmes could lose EU visa‑free access for their citizens, and candidate states such as Montenegro could be blocked from EU accession on this basis.
- Ban on lobbying – Private associations would be prohibited from lobbying the EU on CBI or residency‑by‑investment policy, effectively silencing industry advocacy.
- Prohibition on advisory services – Firms that assist governments in designing or implementing investment‑migration programmes would be barred from providing those services, ending the advisory market that many jurisdictions rely on.
- EU‑wide licensing – Practitioners would need an EU‑level licence, subject to bi‑annual review by the European Commission, adding a layer of regulatory oversight.
- Marketing restrictions – Promotion of any investment‑migration programme would be forbidden, preventing countries from advertising their “golden visa” options.
- Undercover sting operations – The EU would conduct periodic covert investigations to detect firms that breach the new rules.
- Pre‑approval of applications – The host state would have to obtain consent from all other EU members before granting citizenship or residency, giving any member the power to veto an application.
- Physical‑presence checks – Authorities could conduct “house calls” to verify that investors actually reside in the property they purchased or leased under the programme.
- Limited investment categories – Only certain types of investments—particularly those classified as “green” or “digital‑growth” projects—would be allowed, narrowing the range of qualifying options.
The committee approved the draft with 61 votes in favour, 3 against, and 5 abstentions. The European Parliament is scheduled to debate the measures, with a vote expected between 7 – 10 March.
Countries likely to be affected
- Current EU members with active programmes: Malta, Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Latvia, Bulgaria.
- Non‑EU states seeking accession: Montenegro, whose EU bid could be jeopardised because of its CBI scheme.
- Third‑party jurisdictions that market EU‑linked visas: Any non‑EU country whose investors rely on EU visa‑free travel could face restrictions.
Potential impact
- Revenue loss: A 50 % tax could halve the fiscal benefit that countries currently derive from these programmes. For example, small island states such as Antigua and Dominica have reported that 10‑20 % of their GDP comes from CBI schemes; similar losses would be felt in EU members that depend on the same model.
- Reduced attractiveness for investors: Visa‑free travel and the ability to obtain EU citizenship are primary draws for high‑net‑worth individuals. Removing these benefits would likely diminish demand.
- Administrative burden: The requirement for EU‑wide pre‑approval and bi‑annual licensing would add significant bureaucracy, potentially deterring both governments and applicants.
- Legal uncertainty: Until the Parliament votes, the proposals remain drafts. Their passage is not guaranteed, but the strong committee support suggests serious momentum.
Practical considerations for prospective applicants
- Timing: If you are considering an EU residency or citizenship by investment, the window to apply before any restrictions take effect may be narrow.
- Jurisdiction selection: Programs in countries with strong political backing (e.g., Portugal, Spain) may have a better chance of surviving the reforms, but all EU members would be subject to the same rules if the measures pass.
- Risk assessment: Weigh the potential loss of visa‑free travel and the possibility of future revocation against the benefits of the investment.
- Alternative options: Non‑EU programmes (e.g., Caribbean or Pacific CBI schemes) remain unaffected by these EU proposals and may become more attractive if EU restrictions are enacted.
The outcome of the upcoming parliamentary vote will determine whether the EU moves to dismantle the investment‑migration market or retains a more limited, regulated version of it. Stakeholders are advised to monitor the debate closely and consider acting promptly if they wish to secure an EU residency or citizenship under the current, more permissive framework.
