Category: News

India’s wealthy have topped a list of people seeking to relocate abroad through visa programmes that offer citizenship or right of residence in other countries in return for investments.

There was very little Rahul (name changed) didn’t have going for him, when he made the tough call to leave India six years ago. He is the second generation scion of a well-heeled Delhi-based family. They have a flourishing exports business with a monopoly in what’s typically called a ‘sunrise sector’- an industry that has great future prospects.

But he left it all behind and moved to Dubai in 2015, to look after the company’s overseas expansion. He also got a citizenship by investment in one of the Caribbean nations. Harassment by tax authorities in India’s Enforcement Directorate was a key reason, he says.

“I could see it becoming a problem for someone who had businesses spread across the world,” he told the BBC. “With a foreign passport, the red-tape has reduced substantially. I am less worried about being slapped with a random tax demand.”

‘Tax terror’ has been a routine gripe among Indian corporate tycoons. When the founder and owner of India’s largest coffee chain, Cafe Coffee Day died in 2019, he accused a former director general of the income tax department of harassing him. But the government has continued to tighten its noose around business owners in recent years.

According to one report, tax searches by India’s income tax department have more than trebled in the last few years.

The government has argued this is being done to eradicate “black money – illegal cash, hidden from the tax authorities – and improve tax compliance. But critics say the overreach is also often on account of pressure on bureaucrats to meet revenue targets.

But hounding by the taxman was just one reason for his move, says Rahul. His decision was also prompted by a growing trend of “divide and rule politics” in India, he told us. He didn’t want his kids to grow up in India’s increasingly polarised environment.

Many others in his circle of wealthy friends were also renouncing their citizenship or resident status, he added.

These claims are borne out by figures from the wall-street investment bank Morgan Stanley. A 2018 bank report found that 23,000 Indian millionaires had left the country since 2014.

More recently, a Global Wealth Migration Review report revealed that nearly 5,000 millionaires, or 2% of the total number of high net-worth individuals in India left the country in 2020 alone. And Indians topped a list compiled by the London-headquartered global citizenship and residence advisory Henley & Partners (H&P), of those seeking citizenship or residency in other countries in return for monetary investments.

Covid-19 has been a big driver of what was an ongoing trend of wealthy Indians seeking to “globalise their lives and assets” according to H&P. So much so that the firm set up its office in India in the middle of the lockdown last year to cater to growing demand.

“I think they [clients] are realising they don’t want to wait for the second or third wave of the pandemic. They want to have their papers now that they are sitting at home. We refer to this as the insurance policy or Plan B,” Dominic Volek, Group Head of Private at Henley & Partners told the BBC on a video call from Dubai.

According to Mr Volek, the pandemic could be a game changer, because it is making the wealthy think about migration in a more holistic fashion. It is no longer just about visa-free travel, or ease of access to global markets, but about wealth diversification, better healthcare and education, to protect against the uncertainties brought about by the pandemic.

Countries like Portugal, which runs a ‘golden visa’ programme as well as countries like Malta and Cyprus are preferred destinations for India’s well heeled, according to H&P.

This exodus of big money is not necessarily permanent in nature – people merely invest money in another country as a fall-back option rather than take out all their money from their home country and cut business ties. But it doesn’t bode well for a developing nation like India, say experts.

“When this happens, they remove themselves, their entrepreneurial ability and their income and wealth from the tax base. This is likely to be detrimental in the long run. Their exit sends a poor signal about the ‘doing business climate’ in India,” says Rupa Subramanya, Distinguished Fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

Andrew Amoils, Head of Research at New World Wealth, a Johannesburg-based wealth intelligence group, told the Business Standard newspaper: “It can be a sign of bad things to come as high-net-worth individuals are often the first people to leave – they have the means to leave unlike middle-class citizens.”

Source: bbc.com
Published: 14 April 2021

Recently, President Biden unveiled a $ 2 trillion infrastructure plan to fix roads and bridges, while boosting research and tackling climate change. Calling it a “once-in-a-generation investment in America,” he introduced the plan to address the inequalities exposed by the pandemic and to heal America’s economy from the bottom up. More recently, Biden specified how he would raise the money through higher corporate taxation. But could there be a better more creative way?

How Much Is That?

If you are anything like me, you’re not entirely sure just how many zeros there are in a trillion. I had to look it up, and it’s 12 zeros. In other words, President Biden’s infrastructure proposal would cost exactly $ 2,300,000,000,000. It has been estimated that $1 trillion worth of one dollar bills stacked one on top of the other would measure 109,220 kilometres. Put another way, if you stacked up all the dollars in President Biden’s plan one on top of another, they would reach half way to the moon. That’s a lot of money. While Biden has set out his corporate tax proposal as a way to fund it, he has indicated he is open to suggestions on this theme.

Raising Taxes Has Been Proposed

It seems to me there are basically three ways America could pay for President Biden’s plan. The first way is to raise taxes. Biden argues that for those taxpayers making less than $ 400,000 per year there would be no tax increase. Instead he has proposed to raise taxes on large corporations and high net worth individuals. It is clear that Republicans want none of that and will fight tooth and nail to oppose the plan. Let’s face it, rich people and big corporations just don’t want to pay for this proposed program. With the Democratic majority in both Houses, Biden may be able to shove the plan down their throats. Or he may not. That drama will play out in the weeks ahead. But let’s keep an open mind about this.

A Second Alternative

A second alternative would be to go further in debt, increasing the federal debt from its current $ 21 trillion to $ 23 trillion. This would be like drawing down even more debt on a federal credit card that has long ago already exceeded its limit. So far, with interest rates at record lows, going into debt has been workable. The challenge there is the day when holders of American dollars lose confidence in them. That’s when interest rates will start rising and the federal debt will become unmanageable. Until then though, just printing more money could work. This would be the lazy way out of the challenge, seemingly the least painful way immediately, but likely to cause a terrible hangover down the road.

But there is a third way. And this fits with the already mentioned Biden’s willingness to consider alternatives.

Paying For Infrastructure Repairs Using Immigration

The third way would be to adapt an investor immigration program to pay for at least some of the infrastructure plan. The current U.S. EB-5 investor immigration regional center program includes a component in which foreign investors invest $ 900,000 for a period of five years on a project approved by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). Each application must create at least 10 new jobs and enables such an investor and his or her family to immigrate to the United States permanently. Out of about one million applicants who immigrate to the United States each year, current allowances allocate only 10,000 slots to such foreign investors and their family members. However, it would not be hard to imagine how this program could be altered to help pay for Biden’s plan over a period of time. That would mean we would get the same result Biden proposes, without it costing Americans as much since the cost would be paid by new foreign investment brought into the country.

Suppose, for example, we agreed to increase the number of investor-related visas coming into the United States per year from the current 10,000, to say 100,000. Assuming each family on average has four persons, that would mean there would be 25,000 investors coming into the country under such a scenario. If each investor invested $ 900,000 and created 10 new jobs as required under the EB-5 program, that would mean the EB-5 program could generate $ 22.5 billion in revenues and 250,000 new jobs per year.

To be more exact, Biden’s plan calls for over $ 2 trillion in investment to be spent and paid for over 15 years. Using that as a measuring stick and assuming the $ 900,000 per investor would remain the same under the USCIS program, it would mean we would aim to attract some 375,000 investors to the United States over 15 years and earn just under $ 340 billion. However, if you spread this effort out over say a 40-year time frame, such an effort would exceed $ 1 trillion in investments.

Long Term Thinking

There are about 15 million millionaires in the world today outside of North America. This plan would call on attracting less than 10% of them to America over the next 40 years. That may not be easy, but maybe it could be done. The key thing is that such a program would generate 10 million new jobs for Americans. Assuming such a program was ongoing, the amounts invested would be repaid with ongoing investment over time. Further, this doesn’t even consider what other investments each such family would make in America as they buy houses, send kids to schools and spend money on consumer goods.

Maybe these assumptions about the EB-5 program are too unrealistic or miss the mark in some way. Even so, they do illustrate how the EB-5 program could help defray at least some of the costs of Biden’s proposal if used in combination with other ways of funding it. By tinkering with the various options available, a package may be created that will impose less of a burden on U.S. taxpayers and spur the economic recovery at the same time. It is worthwhile to consider these alternatives in this context.

Source: forbes.com
Published: 8 April 2021

Dominica’s newly launched Work in Nature visa offers a wide range of benefits including a healthy work-life balance in a nation that has globally accepted health and safety protocols.

Dominica is engaging digital nomads under a new visa programme – Work in Nature (WIN) Visa – that allows relocation to work remotely and live in the “Nature Isle of the Caribbean” for up to 18 months.

The newly launched Work in Nature (WIN) Visa is in addition to the Citizenship by Investment Programme (CBI) where successful applicants enjoy travel freedom to over 140 countries and territories, invest and contribute to the socio-economic development of the island.

WIN Visa is an added facet to the tourism product and economic growth, seeking out alternative ways to travel, conduct business and live for an extended period. This also complements a healthy work-life balance in a country that has globally accepted health and safety protocols amongst the natural beauty of the island.

The WIN visa programme offers individual and family options. The family bundle programme encourages children to attend school on the island. Applicants must make a non-refundable application fee of $100. The visa fee family is $1,200 while the visa for singles is $800.

Applicants must be at least 18 years of age and of good character with no criminal record. In addition, they must expect to earn an income of $50,000 or more over the next 12 months or have a means of supporting themselves, their spouse/partner and any dependants. Upon application, a response is expected within seven days.

Dominica now joins the Caribbean islands of Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Montserrat, BVI, Cayman Islands, etc., with similar programmes.

According to the minister of tourism, Denise Charles “, this is one of the initiatives which will help boost our tourism industry in our phased tourism recovery approach, while providing a safe environment for persons to work remotely in a tropical environment. Stakeholders and island partners have all collaborated to provide an attractive programme which also helps to create the opportunity for economic recovery.”

Dominica thrives on the protection and preservation of the environment, and following hurricane Maria, pledged to become the world’s first climate-resilient nation. Known as the “Nature Isle of the Caribbean,” the topography is mountainous with an abundance of rivers, ideal to relax and rejuvenate.

Dominica is a luxury destination with international hotel brands operating sustainably. Likewise, Dominica has been ranked as the best destination for second citizenship by experts at the Financial Times’ PWM magazine, over the last four years, thus maintaining the attractiveness to foreign investors making a socio-economic contribution to the development of the island.

The WIN VISA programme and CBI offers immense opportunities and wider options to work remotely, invest and live in the “Nature Isle of the Caribbean,” hassle-free.

Source: menafn.com
Published: 26 March 2021

Aiming to prevent self-serving developers from “recycling”, Turkish authorities say a single property may henceforth only be used once to qualify for citizenship.

On Monday this week, Turkey amended its Guideline Regarding the Regulation on the Application of the Turkish Citizenship Law, bringing changes to the rules for property transactions between foreigners, particularly as it pertains to the acquisition of citizenship under the country’s CIP.

Section G of the new Guideline, headlined “Transactions Between Foreigners”, introduced a slew of new conditions for both the property and the purchaser in cases involving citizenship applications.

Properties subject to sales or preliminary sales agreements, according to LP Legal, an Istanbul-based law firm:

• Must not be registered in the land registry on behalf of foreign real persons, including the foreign person’s spouse or children.
• Should not be among the properties transferred to a Turkish citizen/company after 12.01.2017 by the foreign real person who wishes to acquire citizenship, or its spouse and children, or by a foreign real person of the same nationality.

However, if the property registered in the name of a foreign real person is transferred to a Turkish citizen/company after 12.01.2017, a foreign real person of a different nationality is able to acquire citizenship with said property.

The property to be acquired by a foreign real person that is subject to the sale or preliminary sales agreement should not be registered:

• On behalf of the company where the foreign real person himself/herself, his/her spouse and children is a partner or manager.
• On behalf of the company subject to Article 36 of the Land Registry Law (with foreign/international capital) where same nationality real person is a partner.

After a property has been used to acquire citizenship through a title deed transfer or a preliminary sales contract, the same property or any share of the property cannot be used to acquire another citizenship.

LP Legal offers a practical example to illustrate the effect of the new rules:

M, a foreigner, has concluded a preliminary sales contract for the full shares of a property in Istanbul for US$252.000 and has undertaken not to sell or release the property for three years. This has been annotated in the Land Registry and M has received a conformity certificate. Upon the conclusion of the three-year annotation period, and even if the owner of the property changes, the same property cannot be used by someone else to acquire Turkish citizenship. 

Another example, to illustrate what would happen in the case of acquisition of a partial share in a property:

A, a foreigner, has purchased a half share of a property for US$255,000 and has annotated not to sell the property for 3 years, and has received a conformity certificate in order to acquire Turkish citizenship. Even after the three-year annotation period, the same share cannot be used to acquire citizenship by a different foreigner through title deed transfer or preliminary sales contract, even if the owner of the share changes. 

Should the foreigner who acquired Turkish citizenship through a property investment sell that same property back to either the company or Turkish individual from whom they originally purchased it (unless in cases of court-mandated property transfers), the “certificate of conformity that forms the basis for the acquisition of citizenship of the foreign person and his/her family will be re-evaluated,” writes LP Legal.

A similar re-evaluation would take place if “the foreigner who acquired Turkish citizenship revokes the annotation of the preliminary sales contract from land registry record of the property and sells it to a third person.”

Read LP Legal’s full opinion on the amendments here.

“Kick-back systems and projects designed to be recycled”

“In a nutshell,” writes Ahmet Şener, Managing Partner of Turkey-based Smart Citizenship, a provider of Turkish CIP services, “the government is making a flurry of changes to limit what qualifies and what doesn’t and is bringing into play some limitations aimed at preventing nationals of the same country from building a ‘Ferris wheel’ of CBI eligible investments.”

Şener speculates that the changes may have been a Tax Office initiative.

“I think they’ve caught wind of kick-back systems and projects designed to be recycled among same-country nationals to provide an endless supply of CBI-eligible projects while limiting the funds that actually reach Turkey. The former issue is huge and important and has already resulted in revenue-losses for the Turkish economy.”

Though sympathetic to the motives behind the amendments, Şener says he would have preferred “to use this as an opportunity to strengthen the ecosystem rather than making illiberal changes that will result in reduced program desirability.”

Source: imidaily.com
Published: 25 March 2021

British officials estimate 300,000 Hong Kongers could arrive in the next five years.

It could yet become one of the biggest policy decisions of Boris Johnson’s premiership.

The U.K. prime minister’s offer of a route to citizenship to potentially millions of Hong Kongers — in response to China’s imposition of a draconian national security law on the former British territory — was a major statement about the U.K.’s post-Brexit foreign policy. But its domestic ramifications could also prove to be highly significant and the Labour opposition is warning the government needs to do much more to prepare.

Although the numbers likely to use the new visa route — which opened at the end of January — are uncertain, potentially hundreds of thousands of people from one of Asia’s most dynamic cities could be set to start new lives in post-Brexit Britain.

Some experts have spoken in terms of a wave of migration that could mean social and economic change for the U.K. on a similar scale to the accession of Central and Eastern European countries to the EU in 2004. That event — which triggered the movement of close to 600,000 Poles and thousands more from other countries to the U.K. over the following eight years — transformed the labor market and boosted the economy but also fuelled anti-immigration politics that played a significant role in the Brexit vote.

Others predict the numbers coming from Hong Kong to the U.K. will be significantly lower than that — and either way, the demographic impacts and political context are very different. For one thing, the policy has cross-party backing and majority support among the public, according to polling.

“There’s a huge amount of uncertainty,” said Alan Manning, former chair of the government’s independent Migration Advisory Committee from 2016 to 2020. “In particular, in this case, how the political situation in Hong Kong is going to evolve, over which the U.K. has very little power. … The very big numbers [that some predict] are really what you would get if there is absolute meltdown and anarchy in Hong Kong. That’s really in the hands of the Chinese government.”

Economic impetus
The Home Office’s central estimate is that nearly 300,000 Hong Kongers will take up the new visa route over the next five years, out of a total 5.4 million people potentially eligible to come — 2.9 million British Nationals Overseas (BNOs), 2.3 million of their dependents, and 187,000 18-to-23-year-olds who have at least one BNO parent.

Manning said that if he had to estimate, he would predict the numbers would be toward the lower end of the government’s projections.

“I would be very surprised if it was comparable to EU accession” of Eastern bloc countries, Manning said.

To start, the total number eligible to come is significantly smaller than the population of the “EU-8” eastern European states that joined the EU in 2004, making their residents eligible to live and work in the U.K. “In the case of the accession countries, the U.K. was an attractive place because these were poorer countries,” Manning added. “Hong Kong is a richer country. There is not that economic impetus to migration, which is a very powerful one.”

Another historical comparison has been drawn to the migration of tens of thousands of Asian citizens from Uganda and Kenya to the U.K. in the late 1960s and early 1970s — when many residents were expelled or forced out by punitive policies.

Again, the situation this time is different, Manning said. China appears to actively want to prevent Hong Kongers from leaving. Therefore, much will depend on whether a significant number of people outside politics and activist circles begin to feel that life in Hong Kong is intolerable.

“The take-up of the [BNO] passport might be quite a lot bigger than the actual use of it,” Manning said. “So that it’s just there as an option in case things get really bad.”

‘Immediate threat’
Simon Cheng, founder of the expatriate community group Hong Kongers in Britain, said that whether his fellow citizens decide to come will depend on factors such as age, political involvement and career prospects. He agrees with the Home Office estimate that hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers could arrive over the next five years, he said.

Younger people on “the frontline of pro-democracy protests” would be most likely to feel an “immediate threat,” he said. Many others are “not on the frontline but dissatisfied with the political reality in Hong Kong.”

Cheng’s group carried out a small survey of 315 Hong Kongers and found that those inclined to move to the U.K. were mostly working professionals, often in fields like financial services. Nearly three-quarters had a university degree.

The Home Office has estimated that tax receipts from new arrivals, many likely to work in well-paid sectors, suggest a net benefit to government finances of between £2.4 and £2.9 billion over five years.

The Labour party says the government is neither doing enough to prepare the British society for the arrival of Hong Kongers nor making it easier for the least well-off among them to use the visa program.

In a letter to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government shared with POLITICO, three shadow ministers said they are “increasingly concerned that there appears to have been little or no planning done for the integration of BNO visa holders into British society.”

The letter was signed by Stephen Kinnock, shadow minister for Asia and the Pacific; Holly Lynch, shadow minister for immigration; and Steve Reed, shadow secretary of state for communities and local government.

“This is a significant movement of people which presents many opportunities but also challenges that will need to be managed effectively,” they wrote, adding that government should work with local authorities to head off problems for Hong Kongers in “settling, integrating, accessing the labour market and using public services.”

Unless the government reduces financial barriers, the BNO visa route will only be available “for the rich,” they warn, pointing to the fact that a family of two adults with two children would need to pay almost £16,000 up-front to meet the requirements.

The nature of the work many Hong Kong migrants will do and the fact they will be coming from a major global city means that those who do settle are very likely to gravitate toward the U.K.’s urban centers — London above all. According to property investment firm BuyAssociation, Liverpool and Manchester have also seen “strong interest” from prospective Hong Kong migrants.

Perhaps the most relevant precedent is the 1990s migration to Vancouver, Canada, which became a popular destination for hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers uncertain about their future ahead of the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to China.

“They were nervous about what the future held and wanted to have an option,” said Manning. “But then things didn’t turn out so badly, quite a few actually went back.”

The ties forged with Canada by that migration make it another potential destination, along with Taiwan, which topped a Foreign Policy magazine survey of Hong Kongers’ preferred destinations should they leave home. Canada and Australia both scored better than the U.K.

However, Cheng said that tensions between China and Taiwan would make it a less appealing destination, and predicted that historical ties — and the BNO passport route — would make the U.K. a popular choice for those seeking a new life.

A government spokesperson said that while the cost of the Hong Kong BNO visa had “been set lower than many other visa routes,” it was “only right that those who benefit from our immigration system contribute to its cost.”

They added that the government was working to “ensure appropriate plans and support are in place to welcome Hong Kong BN(O) status holders and their immediate family members to the UK,” and working “closely” with local authorities “to prepare education, work and housing for new arrivals”.

Source: politico.eu
Published: 1 March 2021

Several pieces of recently introduced federal immigration legislation could weave new strands into the already complex web of the U.S. immigration system.

The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, which was proposed by the Biden administration and congressional Democrats, is the most comprehensive. This bill would eventually allow most undocumented immigrants — about 3.4 percent of the current U.S. population — to become citizens.

Other narrower pieces of bipartisan legislation such as the 2021 American Dream and Promise Act and the Farm Workforce Modernization Act would provide protections and, in some cases, a path to citizenship for specific groups of undocumented immigrants. Those groups include Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, or “dreamers,” who were brought to the United States illegally as children; immigrants who are eligible for temporary protected status (TPS); and agricultural and essential workers.

Nearly 14 percent of the U.S. population is foreign-born

As it was introduced to Congress in mid-February, Biden’s comprehensive bill would make dreamers, TPS holders and some immigrant farmworkers — the same groups covered by narrower legislation — eligible for permanent residency immediately and for naturalization after three years.

The process would be more lengthy for other undocumented immigrants. Under the proposed framework, they could immediately apply for a new status as “lawful prospective immigrants,” seek permanent residency after five years and then apply for citizenship three years later. As is the case with the rest of the immigration system, all granted statuses would be contingent on background checks and payment of applicable fees and taxes.

Biden’s bill, which also contains other immigration-related provisions, is unlikely to pass. Democrats hold thin majorities in both chambers of Congress, and Republicans do not support a broad path to citizenship for all undocumented immigrants. But the bills with narrower protections are an opportunity for bipartisan compromise. Democrats hope this piece-by-piece approach to immigration will offer a better chance of success.

One provision stays true for the proposed plans and current policies: All immigrants must hold a permanent resident status, known informally as a green card, for a period of time before applying for naturalization. U.S. immigration laws provide different paths for people to apply through family, employment, refugee or asylum status, or other special provisions.

Currently, spouses of U.S. citizens are the only immigrant group with a three-year wait period between legal permanent residency and citizenship. All other immigrants must have a green card for at least five years, though the requirements to get a green card vary.

Biden’s proposal would create four new paths to citizenship

Even if official immigration initiatives are limited to dreamers, farmworkers and TPS holders, it could also open a path to citizenship for their immediate family members in the future. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that more than 500,000 spouses and minor children could be sponsored by these groups under existing U.S. immigration laws if they became citizens.

Undocumented immigrants don’t share the same privileges
According to a recent report from the Migration Policy Institute, 60 percent of undocumented immigrants in the United States have lived in the country for a decade or more. Two-thirds of working-age immigrants are employed, while 30 percent are not in the labor force and only 5 percent are unemployed.

“The key point is that while unauthorized immigrants are often characterized as living ‘in the shadows,’ it’s more nuanced for many of them,” said Jessica Bolter, associate policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute and author of the report. “They go to work each day, attend meetings at their children’s schools, go home to their families … just like U.S. citizens, it’s just that they have to look over their shoulders while they’re doing these things.”

But undocumented immigrants do not have access to major federal public benefits programs like food stamps, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. They are not eligible for health-care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act or to purchase unsubsidized health coverage. This is also the case for dreamers and TPS holders, whose access is very limited.

Since 1996, green-card holders have been required to be a legal resident for five years before accessing federal benefits. That requirement is waived for some green-card holders who have worked in the United States for 40 quarters.

Humanitarian immigrants, such as refugees, asylum seekers and victims of violence and human trafficking, are exempt from the five-year requirement and are able to access federal public benefits immediately. All other immigrants and visa holders are ineligible.

Even with immigrants’ limited access to public benefits, there is still a cost associated with providing them. In 2016, George J. Borjas, a professor of economics and social policy at Harvard, estimated that the cost of services provided to legal immigrants exceeded the amount they paid in taxes by at least $50 billion annually.

On the other hand, Borjas also argues that immigrants bring other economic gains, which ultimately offset that cost.

Bolter, from the Migration Policy Institute, echoed that argument. “Unauthorized immigrants make up significant shares of the workforce in industries such as construction, accommodation and food services, and manufacturing,” she said. “These are critical industries that would face serious challenges if they were to lose the part of their workforce that is unauthorized.”

U.S. has a long history of immigration changes
In 1960, 9.7 million immigrants made up 5.4 percent of the total U.S. population. Since then, the country’s foreign-born population has grown immensely, driven by a series of immigration initiatives passed in the 1960s.

In 1962, the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act, championed by President John F. Kennedy, was passed to assist people fleeing conflict.

In 1965, the Immigration and Nationality Act (also known as the Hart-Celler Act), was approved by Congress. It created the basis for the system we have today, switching from a national-origins quota that favored Northern Europeans to a system that gave preference based on categories such as family, skilled workers and refugees.

The act changed the demographic makeup of the country by allowing immigrants from Africa, Latin America and especially Asia, who had been barred from entry under past policies. Implementation was delayed for several years, so the size of the foreign-born population didn’t start increasing until after 1970.

By 2018, 44.8 million immigrants lived in the United States, making up 13.7 percent of the nation’s population, according to Pew Research.

Foreign-born population in U.S. increased rapidly after 1960s immigration laws

More recently, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an immigration policy implemented via executive action by the Obama administration in 2012, allowed qualifying undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children to apply for temporary deportation relief and a two-year work permit.

The Trump administration attempted to end DACA in 2020, when it was about to phase out, but a Supreme Court ruling restored the policy. Biden signed a presidential action on his first day in office to “preserve and fortify” DACA.[Biden extends protective status to thousands of Venezuelan migrants]

Another subgroup of undocumented immigrants who would be eligible for green cards under the proposed plans are those with temporary protected status (TPS), who are fleeing conflicts or natural disasters in 11 countries designated by the U.S. government.

In 2017, the Trump administration started eliminating TPS for nationals of six countries. The administration argued that TPS was not designed to grant long-term residency to foreigners who may have arrived illegally or overstayed their visas and that the “extraordinary conditions” that brought them to the country no longer existed. This decision was challenged in court by immigrant advocacy groups, so no action has been taken yet.

Even though changes in immigration law would create new pathways to citizenship for millions of immigrants, past data indicates that the majority of them may never become citizens. The vast majority of eligible green-card holders in any given year don’t apply for citizenship.

Although the total number of naturalizations has been trending upward for decades, only about 10 percent of eligible immigrants apply to become citizens each year, according to Department of Homeland Security data. In total, less than half of the 35 million immigrants who were granted green cards since 1980 had been naturalized by 2019.

Immigration initiatives still uncertain
Over the past two decades, attempts to legalize undocumented immigrants have been largely unsuccessful. In 2013, bipartisan immigration legislation was introduced in the Senate by a group known as the “Gang of Eight,″ among them Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) The legislation proposed a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants living in the country and border security and visa tracking improvements. It also included improving the agricultural worker program, business immigration changes and fast-tracking green cards for graduate visa students in the STEM fields.

The bill passed the Senate 68 to 32 with 14 Republicans joining all Democrats. It was never accepted by the Republican-led House of Representatives, which largely opposed the measure. Among the Republican senators who voted for the immigration bill in 2013 were Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska).

Biden’s current immigration bill has not received public support from any Republican so far, and it seems unlikely to pass since GOP voters supported the hard-line immigration policies that were a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s administration and campaign.

The House will not vote this month on comprehensive immigration legislation but will instead focus on the reintroduction of the American Dream and Promise Act and the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, CNBC reports. Versions of both bills passed in the chamber in 2019.

Democrats and advocates see the current moment as an opportunity to bring immigration changes to the forefront.

“The reason we have not gotten immigration reform over the finish line is not because of a lack of will,” Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who is sponsoring the U.S. Citizenship Act in the Senate, said in an online news conference. “It is because time and time again, we have compromised too much and capitulated too quickly to fringe voices who have refused to accept the humanity and contributions of immigrants to our country.”

Source: washingtonpost.com
Published: 12 March 2021

The perfect storm of Covid and Brexit has seen an unprecedented surge in future pandemic prepping – it includes having multiple citizenships.

There was a time when procuring multiple passports and citizenships was the stuff of airport thrillers not real life. It was a discreet deal between two sets of lawyers behind closed doors. It certainly wasn’t talked about openly.

Today, investment migration is a global industry – a pretty mainstream and transparently marketed lifestyle choice for High Net Worth Individuals, benefiting all parties involved.

A leader in the world of matchmaking private investors with willing sovereign states, London-based Henley & Partners, has just published the results of in-depth data analysis, showing that the way different countries have managed the Covid crisis is having a big impact on who wants to become a citizen where.

Historically these programmes have appealed to very rich people from post-colonial countries yet to develop the diplomatic trade relations that provide visa-free travel. Immigration policy in the UK and France mean it’s a lot easier for a Nigerian businessman to take his family to Disneyland Paris on, say, a St Lucian passport than a Nigerian one. But now the rest of the world is catching on to such benefits, particularly the UK and the US.

“Our clients want to know they’ve got somewhere to go that’s safe,” says Paddy Blewer of Henley & Partners. “They’re asking ‘Who’s got great healthcare?’, and ‘How can I live there?’ People actively want to know what the primary health care is like and even how many intensive care beds they have.”

According to Henley & Partners’ research (in collaboration with Deep Knowledge Analytics which specialises in forecasting technological megatrends), Canada comes out top in terms of health management and risk-readiness, with New Zealand and Australia in second and third place. There are four European countries in the top ten – Switzerland, Austria, Italy and the UK (in tenth place).

“It’s no coincidence the first nation to preemptively close its borders with the US a year ago tops this assessment,” comments Greg Lindsey, Director of Applied Research at NewCities, a global non-profit organisation encouraging collaborations between city residents, businesses, academic institutions and governments.

“True to form, Canada’s quiet competency, deference to authority and historic ‘garrison mentality’ – as seen in five provinces walling themselves off from the rest of the country with great success – culminated in the best overall score.”

Interestingly, the US ranks 16th on the list and Henley says migration citizenship enquiries by Americans has risen by more than 200% in the last year. Anecdotal accounts from clients show that even the richest people with the swankiest health insurance appreciate the importance of a country’s primary healthcare system being strong.

“Yes, you might, after three or four days get moved to that private hospital that feels like a six-star hotel, but you could be dead by then,” says Blewer. “After years of failed public-health policy and a lack of joined-up thinking between federal and state governments, the US is simply not ready to manage a serious pandemic or other volatile event.”

Investment Migration isn’t, however, the quick fix, ‘pay the money and jump the queue’ situation it might appear. Applying for a migration residency or citizenship takes a minimum of three months for Caribbean countries and a lot longer for many others, giving the relevant governments time to establish that you’re not a money launderer or a terrorist. And, of course, you still have to abide by its quarantine laws when you get there.

A few years ago, the most common applicants were individuals or families that had either made wealth or inherited it but were from parts of the world where they felt effectively trapped by their nationality. Today, the biggest movement is happening as a result of Brexit and Covid and also the fact that the industry is getting bigger and more sophisticated in the way it works.

“In the second half of last year, when it became clear that we were getting a hard Brexit, we began to get hundreds of calls from Brits who had always assumed they’d be able to retire to wherever they wanted, or at least move to their second homes in Europe. They were asking for help,” says Blewer.

“Then there’s that family with five luxury safari lodges in Kruger, all of which have now been closed for a year. With all their assets in South African rand, they are now going to think about diversifying their portfolio in other parts of the world.”

So how do you go about getting one? “First we ask people what they really want out of it,” says Blewer. In other words, do you have global business aspirations, are you seeking a home in the sun or simply a safe haven in a crisis. This will also help establish whether you need residency or a citizenship. A residency allows you to live somewhere for an agreed amount of time, albeit usually with the option to extend it, sometimes permanently. A citizenship, once granted, is for life.

Residency by investment is the most common option among Brits, especially in Portugal and Greece. Each country has different criteria but, for example, in Greece, purchasing a government-approved property can be enough to get you a five-year visa, after which you can then apply for permanent residency. It also means you can travel freely anywhere within the Schengen area.

In Portugal, after five years as a resident, you can take a language exam and become a citizen. What’s in it for Portugal? It’s often as simple as the country wanting to attract the right sort of affluent person, say, a successful Indian tech developer, who will enjoy the Mediterranean lifestyle, set up an office and employ locals.

Malta’s Granting of Citizenship for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment involves a cash injection of at least €738,000 to the Maltese government followed by three years as a resident, at which point citizenship is granted.

According to Henley & Partners, it’s now very common to have a ‘portfolio’ of citizenships, to match your global aspirations, with APAC (Asia-Pacific) residency bolt-ons possible for countries like Australia, New Zealand or Thailand.

Personally, I’d be very happy with just one: St Lucia. And there are several ways I could do it. One is simply by buying a property there worth at least US$300,000. Another, on offer until the end of 2021, requires you to invest US$250,000 in St Lucia Government Bonds for five years, at which point the capital is repaid to you as is standard in bond investment, so minus the fees, you’re getting a lifelong citizenship to one of the Caribbean’s loveliest islands, for free.

Source: telegraph.co.uk
Published: 25 March 2021

British National (Overseas) passport holders can now apply for a special visa to work and study in the UK for up to five years

Hong Kong residents bought four times as many luxury London properties in the previous year amid an expected immigration surge.

Property buyers from Hong Kong purchased 8 per cent of homes sold in London’s wealthiest areas in 2020, according to a report by Hamptons International – four times 2019’s figure.

And they became the joint second most common buyer nationality in Prime Central London, tied with Middle Eastern buyers and behind those from the EU, the estate agent said.

The trend comes as the Government’s new visa pathway for Hong Kong residents opened in January, following China’s tightening of national security laws.

Hong Kong’s British National (Overseas) passport holders can now apply for a special visa giving them the right to work and study in the UK for up to five years, after which they will be able to apply for settlement, and seek citizenship after a further year.

“The bespoke new Hong Kong BN(O) Visa route recognises our historic and moral commitment to BN(O) status holders in Hong Kong, giving them the option to live in the UK if they decide that is an appropriate choice for them,” the Home Office said.

Around 2.9 million Hong Kong residents currently hold BNO status, with a further estimated 2.3 million eligible dependants.

The Home Office predicts more than 300,000 BNO status holders will come to the UK over the next five years.

James Dempsey, Sales Director at BuyAssociation, said they have seen a “big upturn” in property investors from Hong Kong in the UK market.

“Compared to the past five, six years, our Hong Kong office has grown significantly in transactions over the past year,” Mr Dempsey told The Telegraph.

“It’s not just the city centres, it’s branched out as well,” he added, with locations such as Birmingham and south Manchester also of key interest to buyers.

One estate agent in south Manchester told Mr Dempsey that six in 10 viewings they are holding are with Hong Kong buyers, with residents expressing interest in local schools and Ofsted reports.

Typically the Hong Kong market dips after Christmas, Mr Dempsey said, but this was not the case this January and interest remained level as the new visa programme came into force.

“Ultimately, I think we’ll see a continued increase over the next six to 12 months and certainly as the BNO arrangements progress,” he added.

Source: telegraph.co.uk
Published: 1 March 2021

The significant global volatility driven by Covid-19 has led to a spike in affluent entrepreneurs and international investors building diversified domicile portfolios through residence- and citizenship-by-investment in a bid to overcome the limitations and risks of being restricted to a single residence. In the past eight months, Henley & Partners has seen a 32% increase in the daily average number of enquiries compared to the first six months of 2020. The shifts in the predominant nationalities of entrepreneurs who are interested in investment migration are eye opening — with the most astonishing being a 192% leap in enquiries from US citizens in 2020 compared to the previous year. Nowhere close to that, but no less remarkable, there was a 34% increase in enquiries from Canadians, a 30% rise in enquiries from Australians, and 29% and 26% more enquiries from UK and French nationals, respectively. Ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UNHWI) and their families from some of the world’s most advanced economies are opting for an integrated investment migration portfolio of complementary citizenship and residence options, both to create optimal value and mitigate risk in terms of where they can live, work, and invest.

Dr. Juerg Steffen, CEO of Henley & Partners, says that while a single alternative residence or citizenship will always be an asset, investing in a suite of different domiciles worldwide will hedge against manifold levels of volatility, creating an enhanced combination of value and yield. “It’s a case of not putting all your eggs in one basket. The majority of options include the whole family, and many extend to parents and others even to grandparents. The more jurisdictions you and your family can access, the more diversified your assets and opportunities, and the lower your exposure to country-specific risk and global volatility. For decades, it has been accepted best practice to invest in different regions and different asset classes, from equities to real estate, to spread the risk and find the greatest value. But what about where you reside? The same principle applies. In an increasingly unpredictable world, you need to diversify your geographical domicile options to guarantee and enhance long-term success by securing access to top quality education and healthcare, for example. You also need to reduce your exposure to risks such as higher crime, increased tax rates, political instability, social turmoil, poor governance, or unexpected policy changes. Entrepreneurs and investors recognize that having a diversified portfolio of residences and/or citizenships can add impetus to their wider wealth planning and legacy management strategies to protect against further downside and to create new value and enhance wellbeing for the entire family.”

The mounting interest in securing multiple options for domicile is a world-wide phenomenon. Dominic Volek, Group Head of Private Clients at Henley & Partners, says the desire for UNHW families to secure global access and have a range of choices has skyrocketed. “This isn’t just about vital risk management and hedging potential volatility. This is about taking a truly global perspective, and the best way to do that is to have a diversified portfolio of domiciles — a range of locations where you, your family and extended family, and your assets can be based. HNW and UHNW investors from emerging and developed economies alike are seeking out alternative business, career, educational, and lifestyle opportunities on a worldwide scale, broadening their option base and transcending the constraints imposed on them by their countries of origin to improve the resilience of their portfolios and ensure physical and financial longevity and legacy.”

“Our clients are realizing the compounded and multi-generational benefits of acquiring several citizenships and/or residences to expand the future potential for their global families”, says Volek, who goes on to provide some examples. “An Indian UHNW entrepreneur residing in Dubai, with family businesses in Southeast Asia, India, and the Middle East and real estate in Europe, where they wish to acquire residence, at the same time would like their children to be able to live and study in the UK in a few years’ time, so while applying for the UK Investor Immigration Program they also apply for the Portugal Golden Residence Permit Program because after five years as a legal resident of Portugal, where the physical presence requirement is limited, they and their children can be eligible to apply for Portuguese citizenship, which would then provide them with settlement freedom throughout the EU.”

In terms of options for extended families, Volek says, “We are seeing more UHNW investors wanting to include their siblings, parents, and grandparents in their investment migration applications. There are many options that cater for large, multi-generational families, and the beauty is that family members don’t necessarily have to be in the same location. For example, a successful tech entrepreneur could apply for Australia’s Global Talent Independent Visa, or any of Australia’s residence-by-investment options for that matter, to obtain permanent residence there. His children, meanwhile, have their sights set on studying in Europe, so they also apply for the Greece Golden Visa Program, which has no residence requirement. And since December 2020, minors may apply for a Greek Golden Visa as a main applicant through purchasing real estate or opening a time deposit bank account in Greece, so they might consider that option for their children. The retired parents, on the other hand, would prefer to live in Thailand, so they also apply for the Thailand Elite Residence Program, which has an option that includes dependents, which may include legitimate parents, stepparents, a spouse (including by civil union), children, and stepchildren.” Volek goes on to say that the Thailand Elite Residence Program is a top choice for supplementing any investment migration program. “Thailand is a safe, prosperous country with an excellent quality of life and there is no minimum stay requirement,” he says.

Volek mentions that certain investors apply for more than one option because they have immediate requirements, which can be met by a certain program, but looking ahead they have a different program in mind.

As Dr. Steffen points out, “Before Covid-19, affluent investors chose where to reside based on somewhat predictable factors such as quality of life, access to education, and travel freedom. Now the big drawcards include safety and security, access to first-class healthcare with strong capacity, reliable infrastructure, pandemic preparedness and management, good airlinks, and most importantly — better prospects for their children and grandchildren and a safe and comfortable retirement for their parents and grandparents. Building a varied investment migration portfolio can hedge against ongoing risk and uncertainty and facilitate both wealth portfolio and holistic lifestyle diversification that creates significant new value and positive optionality. Developing a strong investment migration portfolio takes careful planning and it takes time. You don’t want to wait until it’s too late. You want to take a strategic approach, not a mad dash to the fire exit when things go wrong in your current place of residence.”

Source: henleyglobal.com
Published: 9 March 2021

The president inherited a complicated puzzle: a convoluted immigration system designed to do the exact opposite of what he wants it to do.

Since he took office, President Joe Biden has sworn to overhaul draconian Trump-era policies, crafting a kinder, gentler immigration system where everyone — from refugees to asylees to students to billionaire CEOs — is welcome.

There’s just one problem: Despite the massive immigration package he introduced on Day One and the flurry of executive orders that soon followed, Biden’s policies have yet to catch up with his rhetoric.

To be sure, Biden inherited a complicated puzzle — a convoluted system designed to do the exact opposite of what he wants it to do. He’s only been in office for six weeks. And much of his energy has been focused on battling the pandemic. But he’s also being hampered by conflicting policies, staffing vacancies at the top, and in some instances, inaction.

Foreign students who have been admitted to U.S. colleges this fall are struggling to secure visas, threatening to deprive U.S. colleges of billions of dollars for the second year in a row.

Refugees who expected to be admitted to the country after Biden proposed increasing the admissions cap have been turned away after the administration failed to make it official.

And Biden’s administration has not withdrawn from court cases former president Donald Trump was pursuing to keep immigrants out of the country.

Biden is staring down a lengthy immigration to-do list, including items related to the pandemic, which is compounding one of the country’s most contentious and complicated issues, according to interviews with more than half a dozen current and former administration officials and immigration advocates who work with the White House.

Millions of immigrants — from those fleeing chaos at home to wealthy foreign investors — face problems either getting into the country or confusing and contradictory policies once they get here. Most of the attention has been on the crisis at the southern border, where migrant numbers have surged and unaccompanied children are being housed in shelters. But a myriad of other problems abound.

“The fact that European billionaire CEOs who have been vaccinated can’t enter the U.S. but people can cross the southern border shows the lack of coherency of the policies of the administration,” said a former Obama official who is in touch with the Department of Homeland Security.

Biden will be forced to make some highly consequential decisions in the coming weeks — whether to reopen the United States’ borders with Mexico and Canada by March 21 and whether to lift a ban on most foreign workers by March 31 — but he’ll likely make them without his top staff in place.

He hasn’t named nominees to lead the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection and Citizenship and Immigration Services, leaving some staffers and immigration advocates concerned about the delay, according to two people familiar with DHS deliberations on immigration.

And the Senate has once again delayed confirming Biden’s nominee for attorney general, Merrick Garland, last week, postponing the hiring of the high-ranking Justice Department official who will focus on dismantling Trump’s immigration policies.

“Part of it, the frustration is that a lot of folks in immigrant communities, the average person doesn’t understand the intricacies of how the federal government works, staffing, confirmations,” said Marielena Hincapié, the executive director of the National Immigration Law Center. “They just want change.”

It was always going to be difficult for Biden to fulfill his pledge of reversing Trump’s restrictive immigration policies because of the lengthy regulatory process, legal challenges to his executive orders and a recalcitrant Congress that already dodged this issue. But in some areas, Biden’s team has yet to act.

The Department of Homeland Security is compiling a list of policies they can challenge in the courts. (Overturning those policies without the courts is a complicated process.) These are policies created under Chad Wolf, Trump’s last acting Homeland Security secretary after a federal judge and Congress concluded he was not lawfully serving in the role since he lacked Senate confirmation. If they succeed, 50 policies could be impacted — everything from dramatic fee increases, including a first-ever fee for asylum applicants, to more questions on the citizenship test. But those challenges have yet to be made, according to Hincapié and the former Obama official.

The new secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, has asked for patience, saying he learned after his swearing-in on Feb. 2 that the Trump administration had “dismantled” the nation’s immigration system.

“We did not have the facilities available [nor are we] equipped to administer the humanitarian laws that our Congress passed years ago,” he said at a briefing at the White House last week. “We did not have the personnel, policies, procedures or training to administer those laws. Quite frankly, the entire system was gutted.”

Trump reshaped virtually every part of the U.S. immigration system through executive action, policy guidance and regulatory change.

In total, he made more than 400 changes to immigration policy in the last four years, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank. The Immigration Policy Tracking Project, run by former Obama Homeland Security official, Lucas Guttentag, puts that number closer to 1,000.

Biden has made fighting the coronavirus, which is still infecting tens of thousands and killing 2,000 Americans each day, his top priority. After he helps bring the pandemic under control, he plans to tackle several issues, including the economy, infrastructure, gun restrictions and immigration.

In addition to Trump’s changes, the circumstances surrounding immigration on the ground have changed, making it impossible for Biden to try to just return to pre-2016 policies.

“[Dismantling and distorting the immigration system] was the single minded mission of the Trump administration agenda,” said Guttentag, an immigration professor at Stanford Law School.

And Trump succeeded, he said. But Biden’s unprecedented barrage of early actions clearly demonstrates his commitment to addressing the shambles he inherited, he said.

“But I think the administration also rightly recognizes that immigration is not the only issue facing the country,” Guttentag said, “and right now we have both a genuine pandemic and an economic crisis that demand attention.”

On his first day in office, Biden released a massive immigration package and signed several immigration-related executive orders to halt construction of the border wall, end a ban from some majority-Muslim nations and restart a program to protect so-called Dreamers.

Cass Sunstein, a top Obama official who worked with Biden decades ago on Capitol Hill, was hired as a senior counselor at DHS to put in place Biden rules and regulations that could withstand legal challenges.

But Biden has yet to address a series of issues: He punted on whether high-skilled workers should be given preference if they are being hired at companies paying more money instead of through a random lottery. He hasn’t fulfilled a campaign promise to tackle the massive backlog at immigration courts that doubled under Trump. (Even with the backlog, many of those cases were denied.)

And last month, he called for a review of the so-called public charge rule that makes it harder for immigrants who rely on public benefits, such as Medicaid, to obtain permanent residency in the country.

“I think it’s very, very harmful to immigrants who become fearful that using any kind of program would jeopardize their green card even if they have every legal right to access them,” said Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), who will help push immigration legislation through the House.

“I’m very anxious about it, so I would have liked to have a straight rule to rescind it.”

Biden will be forced to make decisions on some issues, including the closure of the southern border and granting visas to more than 100,000 foreign workers. But it’s not clear when — or if — he will act at all on others, including fighting court cases and changing the refugee caps.

An administration official said no timeline or update is available for changes to the refugee cap but that the administration is in close touch with Congress on the issue. “While no firm numbers have been finalized, the president’s view is clear: This program will reflect the generosity and core values of the United States while benefitting from the many contributions that refugees make to our country,” the official said.

One of the most pressing issues Biden faces: to allow temporary migrants, such as students, easier access to visas, even though many consulates and embassies are closed. Only 43 of 233 processing centers for guests are processing routine cases, according to the State Department.

Groups representing U.S. colleges had a virtual meeting last week with Esther Olavarria, deputy director of the Domestic Policy Council for Immigration, and Tyler Moran, special assistant to the president for immigration for the Domestic Policy Council, according to the former Obama official and a higher education official familiar with the meeting who is not authorized to speak for the colleges.

“International students we have admitted for the fall of 2021 will be in the process of evaluating offers of admission over the next two months,” said Katherine Newman, chancellor for academic programs for the University of Massachusetts system. “If they are not certain that they will be able to secure visas to the U.S., they are likely to look toward other countries that make the process easier and more reliable.”

International students used to make up nearly 1 in 10 students in the University of Massachusetts system. The loss of foreign students cost the system more than $17 million dollars in revenue in the 2019-2020 academic year.

Before Trump came into office, nearly 500,000 new foreign students came into the United States in a year, pumping billions of dollars into small and large schools across the country. That number slowly declined under the former president and plummeted last year.

Julie Stufft, acting deputy assistant secretary for visa services, acknowledged the problems in securing visas last week. She said her office is working to solve the problem, though those who plan to reside in the U.S. permanently take precedent. Some immigrants from select countries, including China and much of Europe, are still banned from traveling to the U.S. due to the pandemic.

Gregory Chen, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the Biden administration deserves credit for pursuing many of the reforms he had pledged to do during the campaign. But, Chen said, “The jury is still out on whether they are going to be successful in implementing those policies.”

Source: politico.com
Published: 9 March 2021