Author: Niu Ltd

  • Brexit – Two months on

     

    The UK immigration landscape continues to be dominated by Brexit. The questions of ‘when’, ‘how’ and ‘what’ remain unanswered and some commentators are even starting to question ‘if’ Brexit will actually take place, although this may be wishful thinking. Whilst focusing on the possibility that Brexit might not actually happen may provide some comfort to many immigration practitioners, it is simply not an effective solution for the 3.6million EU citizens currently residing in the UK.

     

    So what does Brexit look like now?

    The initial assertions from the Brexit camp that Article 50 would be triggered immediately have cooled both by the passing of time and more measured comments delivered away from the rhetoric and furore of the referendum debate. The touted date for Brexit has been pushed further and further into the distance, and the latest timeframe appears to indicate that Article 50 will be triggered in 2017 ahead of Brexit in early 2019, however not many would bet against that date being pushed back further.

     

    Reported statements from the UK government suggest that the current plan for the Brexit discussions are to harness the spirit of Britain’s Olympic ‘world-beaters’ to draw up a blueprint for Brexit.  If ever there was a clear indication that no plan is in place – this is it. The referendum took place two months ago, and it appears that still nobody knows what Brexit will actually mean.

     

    So what does this mean for EEA nationals?

    Uncertainty is rarely a positive, but for EEA nationals the delays and confusion provide an opportunity to cement their position. There are two categories of EEA national who will be affected by Brexit, as follows:

     

    1. EEA nationals considering moving to the UK

     

    It is unclear whether the government will set a back-dated cut-off date from which EEA nationals will cease to be protected by free movement provisions.  However, the message from Westminster thus far is that those EEA nationals currently in the UK should be protected – both in the interests of fairness, and also as a safeguard to ensure that the status of British citizens living elsewhere in the EEA is not affected. The delays in triggering Article 50 alongside this reluctance to punish EEA nationals currently in the UK, would appear to give those considering the move to the UK an opportunity to do so as well as time to cement their position in the UK prior to any changes to free movement being made.

     

    2. EEA nationals currently resident in the UK

     

    At Mishcon de Reya, our advice to all EEA clients is to seek to formalise their position in the UK.  Those who have exercised Treaty Rights for the five year qualifying period should apply for Permanent Residence, whilst those who cannot satisfy the requirements to acquire Permanent Residence in the UK are advised to apply for a Registration Certificate in order to place them in the UK prior to any future changes regarding free movement.

     

    How Brexit will pan out, no one knows, but from an immigration perspective, the current delays mean that EEA nationals should not panic and should take the time to ensure that they are doing all they can to protect their position.

     

     

    Authors: Maria Patsalos, Partner & David Deane, Associate – Mishcon de Reya
    www.mishcon.com

  • EB-5 Regional Centers: An Indispensable Economic Development Tool in the 21st Century

     

    The EB-5 Regional Center Program (the “Program”) is responsible for tens of billions of dollars in capital investments and tens of thousands of American jobs. It is critical for lawmakers to understand the detrimental consequences to the U.S. economy if they allow EB-5 to lapse or expire.

     

    From 2005 to 2015, over $15 billion in foreign direct investment (“FDI”) flowed into the U.S. from across the world thanks to the EB-5 Regional Center Program. During this time, and especially in the years that followed the Great Recession, the Program became a potent economic development tool for diverse communities and industries across the country. More than $14 billion of the $15-plus billion (or 93%) in EB-5 capital was invested in the U.S. in the years following the financial crisis of 2008.

     
    Today, the EB-5 regional center industry needs to lead the stakeholder community in educating the government, media, and public about the important work going on across the country due to the Program—creating vital American jobs at no cost to taxpayers.  It is essential that the EB-5 regional center industry work toward reform, improvement and reauthorization of the Program to achieve a more efficient and sustainable program for the future and to ensure it can continue, without a lapse, to provide investment and jobs to American communities, both big and small.
    Thanks to our shared success in building this multi-billion dollar EB-5 capital market, regional centers will play an integral role in the U.S. economy for years to come.

     
    $18 Billion Reasons EB-5 Must Continue


    As the EB-5 regional center industry debates reform measures to include in reauthorization legislation, it is important that we understand the real world consequences of letting the Program expire, something some key lawmakers have publicly stated should happen. The industry knows that any outcome that results in a program lapse or expiration would be a disaster for the U.S. economy with lingering and irreversible damage.

     
    A lapse in the Program would mean that more than $18 billion in FDI (12% of U.S. FDI in 2015) that is already injected or waiting to be injected into the economy through EB-5 projects would be thrown into chaos—along with tens of billions of dollars in other project financing that is leveraged and reliant on the finance structure of EB-5 capital projects. Based on guidance from the federal government, investors with petitions already in the process would no longer have statutory basis for adjudication under the rules that governed the Program at the time of filing.
    Without the Program, investors will have no grounds for I-829 adjudication and will be left hanging in the balance, their petitions suspended in bureaucratic purgatory. Funding for affected projects would be halted and the U.S. would watch litigation destroy the potential for EB-5 capital to support hundreds of thousands of American jobs.

     
    Actions to Improve EB-5 Program Integrity


    Program integrity is a priority for Congress, as seen in various bipartisan bills. Some measures include background checks for regional center owners, banning participation by certain convicted criminals, forbidding foreign ownership of a regional center and addressing national security concerns related to EB-5. Overwhelmingly, the entire industry supports improved integrity measures to weed out the fraudsters, cheats and criminals while allowing the rest of the industry to contribute to the American economy through job creation and economic development. EB-5 is on the White House’s “unified regulatory agenda” to update the Program’s regulations for the first time since the early 1990s and this will occur as USCIS enhances its capabilities protecting program integrity.

     
    In the last few years, IIUSA has worked tirelessly to develop meaningful self-regulatory processes that hold its members and the industry to the highest standards of ethical business practices. IIUSA has a long history of supporting reforms that would improve program integrity, including those proposed by the legislative and executive branches. Following a process of constructive engagement and comprise, legislation that includes integrity measures are now under consideration as a single and broadly supported reform and reauthorization bill.

     
    Code of Ethics and Best Practices


    Since 2014, IIUSA’s membership has approved five new and updated several other best practices documents that strive to hold its members and the industry to the highest standards possible. This includes the Code of Ethics and Standards for Professional Conduct, which was approved along with an enforcement procedures process which include a vehicle to file complaints against bad actors. IIUSA also has recommended best practices for regional centers, anti-money laundering/know your customer efforts, engaging with sales intermediaries, and a securities law white paper. These, combined with the Code of Ethics and enforcement procedures, set a high bar for how the industry is expected to operate. Lastly, IIUSA keeps the industry informed of essential intelligence on compliance, market dynamics, and ever-evolving best practices through various education offerings.  Long story short, EB-5 is not a spectator sport.

     

    ‘Mend It, Not End It’


    The pieces of the puzzle are on the table and many of them are already in place for EB-5 reauthorization and reform.  As many supporters in the Senate stated in an EB-5 hearing earlier this year, Congress must “mend it, not end it.” During this hearing, we learned about the implications of even a short lapse in program authorization, something that would cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars—a shock the financial system cannot afford and one that would launch a litigation frenzy in which everyone loses. The onus is on the industry to use our collective voice to spur Congress to reform and reauthorize this vital part of the post-recession economy in the U.S.
    Years of success, advocacy, experience and relationship building have led us to this moment. The EB-5 industry and Congress are in an optimal place to negotiate durable reform that results in a stronger, more efficient EB-5 program.  The message for all of us to carry is simple: the EB-5 regional center program must be reauthorized without a lapse or countless communities, regional centers, and investors will face desperate times and years of protracted, expensive court proceedings.

     
    Author: Peter D. Joseph, Executive Director, IIUSA
    www.iiusa.org

     

  • Minors as EB-5 Investors

    As the EB-5 visa backlog for natives of China continues to increase, parents looking to use the EB-5 program to obtain U.S. permanent residence for their children are faced with the prospect of their children reaching the age of 21 prior to an EB-5 visa becoming available to them and their families. As a result, many are considering gifting the investment funds to their child, and letting the child be the EB-5 investor and Petitioner. We have been asked by clients and others if and how this can be accomplished. We provide a brief explanation below. For more detailed information, be on the lookout for the upcoming article on the topic co-authored by Klasko Partner Daniel B. Lundy and and Catherine DeBono Holmes of Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP.

    First, it is important to note that USCIS does not have an established policy regarding the approval of minors as EB-5 investors. While there presently is no specific prohibition, USCIS policy could change at some point in the future to disallow minor investors. As a result, we advise proceeding with caution, and limiting the number of minor investors in any given project.

    USCIS stated at a recent stakeholder meeting that there is nothing prohibiting a minor from being an EB-5 investor and petitioner, however, the investor must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the investment contract is valid and not voidable. In the U.S. contracts entered into by minors are typically void or voidable by the child when he or she becomes an adult. However, under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act, or UTMA (also known as the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act), a parent or guardian, acting on behalf of a minor child, can enter into a contract on behalf of that child, and that contract is not voidable. In order for such a sale to occur, the subscription agreement and operating agreement need to contain the following language on the signature page:

    ______________________ (NAME OF PARENT OR GUARDIAN) as custodian for ______________________ (NAME OF MINOR INVESTOR) under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act

    ______________________
    Printed Name of Parent or Legal Guardian

    ______________________
    Signature of Parent or Legal Guardian

    There are a few important points to remember. First, the parent(s) must gift the investment funds to the child. The child must receive the funds into an account of the child’s, or a joint account of the child’s and parent’s. Second, the parent at no point in time owns the limited partnership or limited liability company interest in the EB-5 investment company. Ownership vests directly in the name of the child. Third, although the parents are responsible for managing the asset until the child turns 18 (or 21 in some states), upon reaching this age, control automatically vests with the child.

    The purchase of an interest in the EB-5 company under the UTMA on behalf of a child results in a non-voidable investment contract, which should satisfy the current EB-5 requirements as interpreted by USCIS. Children under 14 may not be able to sign USCIS forms on their own behalf, and we generally recommend against accepting investors under 14. Even though there is no age limit set by law, regulation, or USCIS policy, our preference is to limit such transactions to cases where the child is 16 or 17 years old. 15 and 14 are not prohibited, but may, either now or in the future, meet with more resistance from USCIS, or potential negative publicity or political scrutiny. Keep in mind also that many of the banks holding EB-5 escrow accounts either will not accept deposits from minors, or do not have a policy on accepting such deposits, meaning that minor investors may have to waive escrow in order to make an investment. Because the trend of minor investors is a new development in the EB-5 industry, we expect that the landscape will continue to evolve.

    This topic will be discussed in detail at our September 9 EB-5 seminar in Philadelphia entitled “EB-5 at a Crossroads.”

     

    Source: Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP
    Posted: August 2016

  • Portugal’s Golden Residence Permit Programme (ARI) – as of the 31st July 2016

    To access the data sheet on the Portugal (GRP) program results as of 31st July 2016, please click here.

  • New digital visa application service now available worldwide

    The global roll out of the Home Office’s Access UK visit visa

    service is now complete.

    In 2014 the Home Office introduced a new digital application service for customers in China to apply for visitor visas online.

    Following its successful launch, Access UK has now been made available for customers applying to visit the UK in over 180 countries and 10 languages. Over half a million visitor visa applications have been received so far by the new service.

    Access UK means visa customers can:

    • make quicker visa applications using an intuitive online form
    • use easy-to-follow checklists and steps which list the documents required to make an application
    • apply flexibly using any mobile device

    Simon Peachey, UK Visas and Immigration’s Director of International Visa Operations, said:

    “I’m delighted to report that this global roll-out has been achieved on time and without compromising on the quality of the service.”

    The service will be rolled out to a further 13 lower volume locations over the coming weeks. Locations such as the Falkland Islands have unique application processes and are not yet able to use Access UK.

    Access UK will replace the Visa4UK website, as part of the Home Office’s commitment to making it more convenient, quicker and easier for customers to apply for visas.

     

    SourceHome Office and UK Visas & Immigration
    Posted: August 2016

     

  • Upset by Brexit, Some British Jews Look to Germany

    LONDON — Until Britain voted to leave the European Union, Philip Levine never thought deeply about his Jewish heritage.

    But looking for a way to ensure that he could still work and live in Europe once Britain leaves the bloc, Mr. Levine, 35, who was born in Britain and lives in London, decided to do what some Jews, including his relatives, might consider unthinkable: apply for German citizenship.

    He did so by employing a provision of German law that has been on the books since 1949 but that has been little used in recent years. It allows anyone whom the Nazis stripped of their German citizenship “on political, racial or religious grounds” from Jan. 30, 1933, to May 8, 1945, and their descendants, to have their citizenship restored. Most of those who lost their citizenship during that period were Jews, though they also included other minorities and political opponents.

    He is not alone in turning to the German law after Britain’s decision to end its membership in the European Union, also known as Brexit. Since the vote in June, the German embassy in London said it had received at least 400 requests from Britons for information about German citizenship under a legal provision known as Article 116.

    At least 100 are formal applications by individuals or families, said Knud Noelle, an embassy official. “We expect more in coming weeks,” he said, adding that the embassy normally receives roughly 20 such applications every year.

    The interest among British Jews is far greater than ever before, said Michael Newman, the chief executive of the Association of Jewish Refugees, who said that he, too, was considering applying for German citizenship. The association is based in London.

    “I don’t remember hearing of requests before” for German citizenship in the association’s 75-year-old history, he said. “It’s taken Brexit to do this. It was a game-changer.”

    The development is among the most surprising techniques being used by British and European citizens as they seek a second passport that would allow them to retain their ability to travel, work and live anywhere in the bloc even after Britain’s departure is complete sometime in the next several years.

    People from the Continent living in Britain, Britons living in Europe and Britons living at home but eager to retain the benefits of European citizenship are investigating their heritage, considering marriage, studying residency requirements and otherwise searching for legal paths to get around the effects of the British vote.

    “I didn’t realize how simple it is,” Mr. Levine said of the application process for German citizenship, adding that he had done it initially for practical reasons and because his brother brought it up. “It’s literally a back door” into Europe.

    Britain allows dual citizenship, and Jews interviewed for this article said they planned to keep their British nationality. They said they had no immediate plans to move to Germany, either. Rather, German citizenship would allow them to keep traveling visa-free inside the European Union and maintain other benefits of belonging to Europe.

    Many British Jews, especially the younger generations, are comfortable with Germany, which they say has done enough to confront its past.

    Richard Ferrer, the editor of Jewish News, which is based in London, said he did not plan to apply for German citizenship, but only because he was a “born and bred Brit.” Germany has done everything in its power to right its past wrongs, he said. “I’m very pro-German and I’m very happy with Germany,” he said.

    But if the process of applying for citizenship is straightforward, it is wrapped in complex questions of identity and statehood that tore Europe apart in the last century, one more unintended consequence of Britain’s decision to go its own way after more than 20 years in the union.

    In Mr. Levine’s case, his grandparents fled Germany in 1939, at the start of World War II. They kept their documents, including old passports and entry visas into Britain, which are necessary for the application process.

    About 70,000 Jews from Germany, Austria and the former Czechoslovakia arrived in Britain before 1939, Mr. Newman said. But they were regarded with suspicion by the British authorities. Many were held in internment camps in places like the Isle of Wight, often together with pro-Nazi Germans who had also decided to resettle in Britain.

    After the Nazi Party was declared the only legal party in Germany, the government passed a law to strip individual Jews of their German citizenship, with their names listed in the Reich Law Gazette. Jews living abroad lost their citizenship in November 1941. As deportations began and the first extermination camps were being built, Jews were stripped of their assets, leaving many stranded in Germany because their passports had been nullified.

    For some of the British Jews now applying for German citizenship, the process has led them to confront, for the first time, a painful family history. Some American Jews are going through the same process, albeit without the additional incentive provided by Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.

    Mr. Levine is an artist and uses his shaved head as a canvas for what he calls headism, artwork intended to raise awareness of mental health issues. He grew up feeling very British, but has also traveled extensively across Europe and has many German friends. His grandparents avoided talking about Nazi Germany — and he did not ask.

    Not long ago, for the first time, Mr. Levine held in his hands a passport belonging to his grandfather, a large red “J” stamped on the cover to signify “Jude,” German for Jew. His aunt, who kept the document, also showed him a Nazi government letter notifying his grandfather that one of his names had been changed to sound more Jewish.

    In the space of a couple of weeks, as Mr. Levine asked questions and dug around his family archives, what was originally a practical decision took on a more personal meaning.

    “My reaction became — I want to spite the Nazis,” said Mr. Levine, who asked some of his German friends to translate the letter because he does not speak German. They, too, expressed outrage over its contents. It was only then that he fully realized his part in history, he said, and felt that “now I can do something about it.”

    Thomas Harding is another Jewish Briton applying for German citizenship. “I feel much more comfortable about Germany and Germans,” he said.

    Thomas Harding is another Jewish Briton applying for German citizenship. “I feel much more comfortable about Germany and Germans,” he said.

    When Britain announced it was leaving Europe, “I felt really distressed,” he said. “I felt like I was losing something.”

    The great-grandson of Alfred Alexander, a prominent doctor in Berlin whose patients included Albert Einstein and Marlene Dietrich, Mr. Harding, 48, said that his desire for citizenship stemmed from a project to restore his great-grandfather’s home, which was seized by the Nazis and only recently returned to the family.

    The summer house, on Berlin’s westernmost border in Gross Glienicke, Germany, and near what used to be a Nazi airfield, was awarded a landmark status in 2014 and turned into a memorial for truth and reconciliation.

    The project was the focus of his recently published book, “The House by the Lake.” Villagers of Gross Glienicke had initially reached out to him for a separate project researching the village’s Jewish families, including his.

    In the beginning, “I still had a lot of antagonism toward Germany and the Germans,” Mr. Harding said. “I was very distrustful.”

    But as his relationship with the villagers deepened, work on the house progressed and a tentative friendship blossomed, “it gave me the confidence of walking through the door,” he said. “And they welcomed me through.”

    His attitude toward Germany brightened further when it began accepting hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees. “I was very grateful to the Germans, because I think it was incredibly brave, very difficult, very controversial, but the right decision,” he said.

    His sister, who lives in Germany and is married to a Syrian Kurd, brought over their Syrian relatives earlier this year.

    Mr. Harding said he felt a sense of wonder at how history is an endless repetition. “This is not about Germans or Jews or Syrians,” he said. “This is a human condition. This is going to happen all the time.”

    That all came to a head at 9 a.m. on June 23, he said, barely two hours after Britain finished tallying the vote to leave the European Union. “I thought, ‘O.K., I actually do not want to be apart from Europe,’” Mr. Harding recalled telling himself.

    “I love the fact that I’m not applying for citizenship — I’m having my citizenship restored,” he said. “It’s in the initial basic law when Germany was created. I just think that is so powerful.”

    Source: NY Times
    Posted: August 2016

  • IMF International Monetary Fund : Executive Board Concludes 2016 Discussion on Common Policies of Member Countries of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union

    On July 13, 2016, the Executive Board of the International IMF logo_2Monetary Fund concluded the consideration of the 2016 discussion on the common policies of member countries of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union.
    The regional recovery is gaining ground, supported by continued low oil prices, strong tourism arrivals, and robust citizenship-by-investment receipts. Three failed banks have been resolved with no spillovers to the rest of the region and fiscal management has improved.

    Executive Board Assessment
    Executive Directors welcomed the authorities’ progress in addressing key challenges and the regional economic recovery, which is gradually gaining ground supported by strong external demand, low oil prices, and buoyant citizenship by investment receipts. Risks to the near term outlook are balanced, but growth in the ECCU continues to be hindered by weak competitiveness, banking sector fragilities, susceptibility to natural disasters, and large public debt. In this context, Directors encouraged the authorities to press ahead with sound macroeconomic policies and structural reforms to decisively address these issues and strengthen the conditions for robust long term growth.

    Directors commended the decisive actions taken to strengthen the resilience of the banking system. In particular, they welcomed the passing of key banking legislation, and the successful resolution of three insolvent banks. With non-performing loans still elevated and credit continuing to decline, Directors stressed the importance of swift action to help banks clean up their balance sheets and resume lending. Specifically, they recommended quickly operationalizing the regional asset management company and moving ahead with regional foreclosure legislation. While Directors generally supported eliminating the minimum saving deposit rate, a few stressed the importance of accompanying this reform with measures to enhance the financial safety net and to avoid discouraging saving and reducing financial inclusion.

    Directors encouraged the authorities to promote consolidation within the regional indigenous banking system to strengthen its long run viability and help lower the risk of further withdrawal of correspondent banking relationships (CBRs) from the region. They agreed that efforts to strengthen frameworks for international tax cooperation and for anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism should be complemented by continued engagement with international partners in order to mitigate the risk of further loss of CBRs. Directors supported further work in this area by the Fund to assist its members, and encouraged increased global cooperation to address this issue.

    Directors welcomed the improvements in fiscal discipline, and emphasized that stronger action is needed to achieve the regional debt target of 60 percent of GDP by 2030. In particular, they recommended formulating detailed medium term fiscal adjustment plans and underpinning them with fiscal rules as well as continued enhancements to public finance management frameworks. Given the region’s vulnerability to natural disasters, Directors generally underscored the importance of internalizing those costs in the fiscal policy frameworks. They also encouraged the authorities to develop a strong, regionally accepted set of principles and guidelines for citizenship by investment programs in order to enhance their sustainability.

    Directors noted that the quasi currency board arrangement continues to serve the ECCU well by fostering price stability, and that international reserve levels exceed most of the Fund’s reserve adequacy benchmarks. To improve international competitiveness, they encouraged the authorities to pursue structural reforms that reduce the costs of doing business. In this context, Directors commended the initiatives to reduce energy costs-particularly investments in renewable energy sources-and recommended policies to moderate labor costs, improve resilience to natural disasters, and deepen regional collaboration.
    Directors recommended improving statistics and data provision in order to enhance economic analysis and better support policy making.

    Directors agreed that the views they expressed today will form part of their discussions in the context of the Article IV consultations with individual ECCU members that will take place until the next Board discussion of ECCU common policies.

    Source: IMF Communications Department
    Date: 12 August 2016

  • Portugal’s Golden Residence Permit Programme (ARI) – As of 30th June 2016

    To access the data sheet on the Portugal (GRP) program results as of 30th June 2016, please click here.

  • Second passport? The cost of this one will go up starting August 1

    Fees for getting a passport through the Dominica CIP will increase for individuals and families wishing to apply for citizenship
    News 27 June

    If you’ve been thinking of getting a second passport, one of the countries that offers this facility is hiking up the price.

    The cost of Dominica citizenship fees is set to increase starting 1st of August. This will impact all applicants who were planning to get a second passport of this country through investment programmes.

    The donation amount to participate in the Government Fund for the Dominica Citizenship by Investment Programme (CIP) will increase for individuals and families wishing to apply for citizenship via the government fund investment route, confirmed the government.

    The new price structure will be as follows:

    $175,000 for a single applicant (currently $100,000)

    $225,000 for an applicant and spouse (currently $175,000)

    $225,000 for an applicant and up to two children below 18 years (currently $200,000)

    $250,000 for applicant, spouse, and up to two children below 18 years (currently $200,000, plus $50,000 per additional dependent) and

    $50,000 for any additional dependent (this remains the same).

    As a citizen of Dominica, you have the advantage of international mobility. Currently, passport holders can use their citizenship for visa-free travel to over 90 countries, including to the United Kingdom, Singapore, Hong Kong and Ireland. Dominica will shortly also be able to offer visa-free travel to the European Schengen states.

    There is minimal taxation – no wealth, gift, inheritance, foreign income or capital gains tax in the country. The successful applicants get full residence status, with the right to live and work in Dominica and there is no requirement to reside in Dominica before or after citizenship is granted. The country permits dual citizenship.

    The Citizenship by Investment Programme allows foreign investors to obtain full legal citizenship and passports for an investor and their family where the investor has made a significant investment in Dominica which qualifies under the Citizenship by Investment Regulations.

    Currently, the qualifying investments are a contribution to the Government Fund of a minimum amount of $100,000 or the purchase of a property to the value of $200,000.

    Posted: 27 June 2016
    Source: emirates247.com

  • Portugal’s Golden Residence Permit Programme (ARI) – As of 31st May 2016

    To access the data sheet on the Portugal (GRP) program results as of 31st May 2016, please click here.

Pin It on Pinterest

Skip to content