Category: News

  • Local USCIS Offices Extend Suspension of In-Person Services Until At Least June 3

    In a continued response to COVID-19, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will extend its public closure of local field offices and Application Support Centers (ASCs), suspending in-person services now until at least June 3. The original suspension took effect on March 18 and has been extended twice, most recently through May 3.

    During the temporary suspension, USCIS will not conduct in-person biometrics appointments at ASCs or green card or naturalization interviews or naturalization ceremonies at local field offices. The agency will continue to provide limited emergency services only in certain circumstances.

    Foreign nationals with appointments scheduled during the closure will receive cancellation and rescheduling notices by mail. Green card and naturalization interviews, naturalization ceremonies and biometric service appointments will automatically be rescheduled after USCIS local offices resume in-person services. In some cases, biometrics rescheduling should not be necessary given USCIS’s announcement that it would process Form I-765 Employment Authorization Document renewal applications using biometrics previously collected from applicants.

    USCIS Service Centers, where most immigration benefit applications and petitions are adjudicated, are not affected by this suspension.

    What this means for employers and foreign nationals

    The continued suspension means that the final adjudication of applications requiring interviews and/or biometrics – including applications for adjustment of status, initial Form I-765 applications requiring biometrics, and nonimmigrant extensions and changes of status on Form I-539 – may be delayed until in-person services resume. Delays in Form I-539 processing could also delay employment authorization applications for H-4, L-2, and E nonimmigrant spouses.

    Fragomen is closely monitoring U.S. immigration operations during the COVID-19 response and will provide updates as the situation evolves.

     

    Source: fragomen.
    Published: 24 April 2020

  • EB-1 Current for All Countries Except China and India; Modest Advancement for Most Others; USCIS to Honor Final Action Dates for Employment-Based Categories

    A closer look

    According to the State Department’s May Visa Bulletin, cutoff dates for issuance of an immigrant visa will be as follows:

    • EB-1: All countries except for China and India will become current on May 1. China will advance by five weeks to July 15, 2017, while India will advance by three months to August 1, 2015.
    • EB-2: China will advance by one month to October 1, 2015, and India will advance by one week to June 2, 2009. All other countries will remain current.
    • EB-3 Professional and Skilled Workers: All countries except India and China will remain at January 1, 2017. Cutoff dates for China and India will advance, with China moving ahead by one month to May 15 2016, and India moving ahead by more than five weeks to March 1, 2009.
    • EB-5: Most countries will remain current. China will advance by more than six weeks to July 1, 2015; India will advance by nine months to October 1, 2019; and Vietnam will advance by just under two months to April 1, 2017.

    Employment-Based Priority Date Cut-offs for May 2020

    USCIS has announced that it will honor Final Action dates for adjustment of status filings in May. To be eligible to file an employment-based adjustment application next month, employer-sponsored foreign nationals must have a priority date that is earlier than the date listed below for their preference category and country. This is the second consecutive month that USCIS has chosen the Final Action Dates chart, after several months of honoring the Dates for Filing chart.

    The May Final Action Dates chart is current for EB-1 countries worldwide, after several months of retrogression.

    Impact of Presidential Proclamation

    This week’s Presidential proclamation temporarily suspending the entry of certain immigrants limits the issuance of immigrant visas by U.S. Consulates abroad for the next 60 days. However, the practical impact of the order is likely to be very limited, as most routine immigrant visa services have been suspended at U.S. Embassies and Consulates abroad since mid-March as part of the State Department’s COVID-19 containment measures.

    If the Presidential proclamation remains in place when full services resume, consular officers will refuse immigrant visa issuance to applicants who were outside the United States as of 11:59pm EDT on April 23, 2020, have not been issued an immigrant visa or similar U.S. travel document, and are not otherwise exempt. Applicants exempt from the proclamation include, but are not limited to:

    • Foreign nationals seeking to enter on an immigrant visa as a physician, nurse or other healthcare professional, as well as their spouse and unmarried children under 21;
    • Applicants for EB-5 immigrant visas;
    • Spouses of U.S. citizens;
    • Children under 21 of U.S. citizens and prospective adoptees in the IR-4 or IH-4 visa classifications;
    • Foreign nationals whose entry would further important U.S. law enforcement objectives;
    • Members of the U.S. armed forces and the spouses and children of such individuals;
    • Foreign nationals seeking to enter as Special Immigrants in the SI or SQ classification, and the spouse and children of such individuals; and
    • Foreign nationals whose entry is in the U.S. national interest.

    Final Action cut-off dates for May 2020

    EB-1

    China: July 15, 2017

    India: August 1, 2015

    All other countries: Current

    EB-2

    China: October 1, 2015

    India: June 2, 2009

    All other countries: Current

    EB-3 Professionals and Skilled Workers

    China: May 15, 2016

    India: March 1, 2009

    All other countries: January 1, 2017

    EB-3 Other Workers

    China: July 15, 2008

    India: March 1, 2009

    All other countries: January 1, 2017

    EB-4

    El Salvador, Guatemala Honduras: August 15, 2016

    Mexico: May 1, 2018

    All other countries: Current

    EB-5

    China: July 1, 2015

    India: October 1, 2019

    Vietnam: April 1, 2017

    All other countries: Current

     

    Source: fragomen.com
    Published: 24 April 2020

  • COVID-19 Could Bring About a Migration Crisis. Here’s How We Can Avoid It

    Closing national borders is a natural response to the coronavirus pandemic, and governments stand on firm legal ground when they do so. But the virus was never going to be stopped at national frontiers, and now containment policies pose another menace: a new migration crisis.

    Recent viral epidemics – SARS in 2003, H1N1 in 2009, Ebola in 2014, Zika in 2016, and HIV – illustrate that travel restrictions failed to control the spread of the pathogen. The World Health Organization has acknowledged that travel bans from affected areas rarely contain deadly viruses.

    Instead, such restrictions translate fear into national-security policy and ramp up anti-migrant sentiments. They lead to extreme nationalism and insularity, which some world leaders have sought to stoke and exploit. In March, for example, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said in an interview with Kossuth Rádió, “Our experience is that primarily foreigners brought in the disease, and that it is spreading among foreigners.”

    This is a common refrain. Scapegoating foreigners for all “evils,” including public health concerns, is nothing new. In the 1830s, the British and Americans dubbed cholera an “Irish disease.” This is similar to Donald Trump’s description of COVID-19 as a “Chinese virus.”

    It is increasingly evident that COVID-19 will cause a global recession that will shrink most economies. And it is equally evident that the consequences for employment, income, and equality will disproportionately affect migrant workers.

    Migrants create more economic value than many seem to think. They take the most difficult and dangerous jobs – including jobs that place them on the front lines in the fight against COVID-19. A Migration Policy Institute study published in March found that 17% of the 156 million civilian workers combating the coronavirus virus are “foreign born.” In the US, 29% of physicians, 38% of home health workers, 23% of retail-store pharmacists, 22% of scientific researchers, and 34% of those providing vital transportation were born in another country. Britain’s National Health Service would crash instantly without foreign-born doctors, nurses, and other medical staff.

    Despite this, migrant communities are most vulnerable to the economic fallout of the pandemic. Spain, Italy, and the UK have closed detention centers without addressing the health-care concerns of the needy people who were held there. Worse yet, the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, which host about 25 million workers, have “closed off” some localities where migrant workers were previously allowed. By forcing more migrants into already-crowded detention centers, the authorities are creating new COVID-19 hotspots.

    In a pandemic, people often cross borders for health services. In 2008-09, faced with cholera, Zimbabweans left home to seek medical services abroad. Three years later, the Ebola outbreak forced Ugandans to cross borders for help.

    A holistic, nuanced approach that acknowledges migrants’ economic contributions is optimal. In 2005, the World Health Organization adopted the International Health Regulations. These guidelines emphasized controlling the spread of disease, while minimizing the adverse effects of travel and trade restrictions. To avoid a migration crisis, countries must integrate migrants into the national pandemic strategy, not only as affected people, but also as individuals who can fight the spread of the coronavirus.

    Bangladesh is a case in point. It is currently hosting 1.1 million Rohingya who were forcibly displaced from Myanmar. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the Bangladeshi government and the humanitarian community established the Annual Joint Response Plan to protect the Rohingyas in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

    The plan takes a “whole of society” approach that includes both the Rohingyas and local people from neighboring villages. Health facilities were set up in the vicinity of the camp, and the Bangladeshi government has also suspended import taxes for supplies and equipment to fight COVID-19.

    The pandemic is an unprecedented emergency that demands such exceptional responses. A government must consider the vulnerabilities of refugees and migrants, in addition to legitimate public concerns, balancing national interests and humanitarian responsibilities. It’s a challenging task for any government, especially when the economy is shrinking, and mastering it requires innovative forms of international collaboration.

    In 2015, the United Nations adopted a new framework for sustainable development based on the principle that no one should be left behind. The 2030 agenda promised human rights for all and explicitly included refugees among “all nations and peoples and all segments of society.” The same principle must be upheld, without distinction or discrimination, during this critical time for our civilization.

    The strategy to defeat COVID-19 must emphasize inclusiveness, courage, and collaboration. Countries must stand together, work together, and fight together to avoid spurring a migration crisis while mitigating the challenges they face. Unity is the only way forward.

    Source: weforum.org
    Published: 17 April 2020

  • Malta Joins Cyprus in Standing Up to Eur. Commission: MIIP More Valuable Than Ever Right Now

    The IMIDaily reported that the government of Cyprus had rejected another round of European Commission demands for a “phasing-out” of citizenship by investment programs among EU member states, responding that Cypriots saw “no reason why it should be stopped”.

    On Friday, the government of Malta, having received the same request, issued a statement politely indicating that, while it would be happy to listen to suggestions from the Commission as to how their Malta Individual Investor Programme (the MIIP) might be improved, it had already decided to renew the program once its current iteration expires.

    The government of Malta is engaged in discussions with European institutions with regards to the Individual Investor Programme, and has communicated its decision that, once the current scheme reaches its maximum limit, a revised programme will be launched.

    The government has begun discussions with stakeholders, all of whom have reiterated their belief in such a programme.

    Citizenship is a matter of member state competence. However, the government of Malta remains open to ideas that could further improve the programme. In fact, Malta was a catalyst for the creation of the ‘Expert Group on Investor Citizenship and Residence schemes.’ This group is led by the European Commission, and Malta, together with other countries, actively participates in this forum and has proposed ideas on how similar programmes can be strengthened.

    This programme is proving to be a valuable contribution to Maltese society in challenging times. The majority of the investment generated from this programme has been retained, only to be used in the event of the country facing unexpected challenges, as has recently happened with COVID-19.

    The importance of such a programme for an economy that has suffered from a devastating pandemic is growing, rather than diminishing.

    Malta’s citizenship programme has a high level of due diligence and is the only one with an independent regulator. As a result, applicants rejected by Malta try in other countries.

    As regards to media reports on the license held by the law firm in which the Prime Minister, Robert Abela, had a stake, it is worth reiterating that this licence was revoked on the day of his appointment as Prime Minister, the 13th of January 2020.​

    The European Commission has long attempted, to no avail, to “encourage” its member states to discontinue both citizenship and residence by investment programs, citing hypothetical security concerns and claiming such programs pose a money laundering threat in spite of investment migration’s position as the most strictly controlled – and smallest – stream of EU immigration.

    The Commission has also delivered veiled threats to prospective EU member states, aimed at preventing them from opening such programs of their own. In December, then-European Commissioner for Justice, Vera Jourova, hinted that the planned Albanian CIP could jeopardize the country’s EU membership chances.

    The Commission’s efforts did not succeed during Malta’s and Cyprus’ high-growth years of 2015-19. As Europe now faces what may well turn out to be the most comprehensive period of economic distress in living memory, chances that countries would forego billions of euros worth of unencumbered state revenue to mollify Brussels are slimmer still.

     

    Source: imidaily.com
    Published: 27 April 2020

  • Trump’s Green Card Ban May Free Up More Employment Visas

    President Donald Trump’s order banning green cards for overseas foreigners is aimed at protecting American jobs, but it may actually increase the number of employment-based green cards available while keeping out children and the elderly.

    Trump’s proclamation, signed Wednesday, will prevent noncitizens abroad from moving to the U.S. on new immigrant visas for the next 60 days, though the order could extend beyond that depending on economic conditions, according to the White House. Trump said it will “ensure that unemployed Americans of all backgrounds will be first in line for jobs as the economy reopens.”

    However, in reality, the order primarily limits categories of family-based immigration and as a result may actually end up making more visas available to would-be immigrants coming to the U.S. for job offers in the future if unused family visas roll over.

    “Grandmas and kindergartners were two of the big groups that were kept out in the order,” said Greg Siskind, a founding partner of immigration firm Siskind Susser PC. “What does that have to do with the job market?”

    “Maybe they’re taking jobs away from babysitters,” he added jokingly, referencing the ban of green cards for American adults’ parents.

    The order may actually open up more slots for immigrants to move to the U.S. based on job offers next year.

    Employment-based green cards are capped at 140,000, and family-based green cards are capped at roughly a quarter-million, though each year varies slightly based on the previous year’s figures. Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, including parents, spouses and minor children, are not capped.

    If the employment-based visa cap isn’t reached at the end of the year, those extra numbers can go toward family visas, and vice versa.

    A 60-day pause on green cards overseas may do little to alter the makeup of U.S. immigration long term, but if the ban is extended, “it’s going to actually remake the body of immigrants coming to the United States,” said Loren Locke, an immigration attorney at FordHarrison and former consular officer.

    Unlike foreign relatives, immigrants getting green cards through their jobs are more likely to already be working in the U.S. on visas. Since Trump’s ban does nothing to stop immigrants already in the U.S. from becoming permanent residents, it leaves employment-based immigration mostly intact but curbs family-based immigration. Unused visas, from the family side, could then become extra employment-based immigrant visas next year.

    In a normal year, this so-called visa spillover between the employment and family categories is relatively minimal, said William A. Stock of Klasko Immigration Law Partners LLP, former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

    The last time he saw significant spillover was in the wake of the 2008 recession, when jobs were hard to come by and many people were reluctant to move internationally.

    According to an analysis conducted by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, the proclamation could affect around 26,000 visas monthly, or 52,000 over 60 days. The order exempts broad categories of green card seekers, including foreign-born spouses and minor children of citizens, certain health care workers, members of the U.S. armed forces and foreign investors.

    Last year, nearly half a million immigrants moved to the U.S. on green cards issued abroad, and more than 1 million people became permanent residents in total.

    Boundless Immigration, a technology company that helps immigrants get green cards, found that 93% of family-based immigration in the capped categories, which include adult children and siblings of U.S. citizens and relatives of U.S. permanent residents, comes from abroad.

    Conversely, roughly four times as many employment-based green cards went to immigrants becoming permanent residents from within the U.S. than to those applying from abroad in fiscal year 2019, according to data published by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

    Immigration restrictionist organizations say the proclamation didn’t go far enough to curb employment-based immigration.

    Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said in a Thursday letter to Trump that the order “does not deliver” for millions of Americans who have lost their jobs during the pandemic and urged the president to limit temporary work visas as well.

    “Quit placating to business interests and reliance on a corrupt, flawed system that harms American workers,” he wrote.

    Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies, another group that pushes to limit immigration, wrote in a Thursday blog post that the proclamation “does nothing to curtail immigration” and “will provide little relief to Americans.”

    The Trump administration could seek to avoid rollover into the employment-category by trying to fill up the cap with more green cards for immigrants already inside the U.S. But there may not be enough relatives in the U.S. to fill the open slots, attorneys said.

    “The question is then, will the government be able to make up those lost visas with only people who are applying within the United States?” said Sarah Pierce, an immigration attorney and policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.

    Green card seekers waiting in line can advance in the process based on the date they filed their initial petition, and the U.S. State Department releases these dates, known as priority dates, in its monthly visa bulletin to announce who can now move to the next step.

    To fill up all of the family-based visa categories, the State Department would need to capture more green card applicants filing from within the U.S., to take the spots of the now-ineligible applicants who filed from abroad. The department could do this by moving up those priority dates and allow people who filed their petitions more recently to advance.

    “If the State Department wants to make sure all the green card numbers get used up in these categories … which is what Congress intended, then there are some levers that can get pulled to make that happen,” Siskind said.

    A State Department official told Law360 on Friday that the department considers “reasonable estimates of number use, and takes into account other legal and operational factors” when setting priority dates, and that “the department will continue to do so in the upcoming months based on the best information available at that time.”

    The department could run into additional challenges if they went that route. Pierce noted that if and when the green card ban was lifted, the department would then need to backtrack dates to avoid a rush of filings at once from everyone who missed their turn during the suspension.

    And it’s unclear if the Trump administration would even want to make room for more family-based immigration to avoid additional employment-based visas. While the president has publicly called to curtail all legal immigration, he has frequently voiced a preference for a merit-based immigration system and referred to family-based immigration by the slur “chain migration.”

    “Even if it were legally possible, why would the Trump administration do that?” said Doug Rand, Boundless’ co-founder who previously worked on immigration policy under the Obama administration.

    The executive order, while largely ineffective in helping unemployed Americans get their jobs back, could be an effort to slash the immigration system in a way that Congress has yet to permit.

    In 2017, Republican Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of Georgia introduced a bill, known as the RAISE Act, that would have cut green card levels in half, including by scrapping the diversity visa program and making it harder for U.S. citizens to sponsor their foreign parents.

    Trump officially endorsed the bill, saying it will prioritize immigrants “based on the skills they bring to our nation while safeguarding the jobs of American workers,” though the proposal has gained no traction in Congress.

    “This is, administratively, exactly what Tom Cotton’s RAISE bill would have done legislatively,” Stock said.

    Rand said that he didn’t believe that Trump’s green card ban’s favoring of high-skilled employment-based immigration over family-based immigration was accidental.

    “They tried to do it through Congress, they failed. They tried to do it from the public charge rule, and that was just gearing up. And here came the pandemic, and it gave them the excuse to do it,” he said.

     

    Source: law360.com
    Published: 24 April 2020

  • New Trump Immigration Order Does What Congress Rejected In 2018

    Donald Trump has issued a proclamation that would block indefinitely immigrants in categories the administration failed to eliminate in a bill before the U.S. Senate in February 2018. Economists consider the justification for the president’s action devoid of serious analysis and unconvincing. U.S. citizens will no longer be able to obtain immigrant visas for a parent, adult child or sibling, and the proclamation contains a lit fuse in the form of a 30-day review of H-1B and other temporary visas. In effect, the Trump administration has used the COVID-19 crisis to rewrite immigration law without passing a bill through Congress.

    The presidential proclamation contains nearly identical provisions on legal immigration to those of a White House-designed bill the U.S. Senate rejected on February 15, 2018, which it voted down on a “cloture motion” 60-39.

    The legislation, like the proclamation issued on April 22, 2020, would have eliminated the ability of U.S. citizens to sponsor a parent, as well as adult children and siblings (the family preference categories). It also ended the Diversity Visa lottery. (See page S1036 here.) The U.S. unemployment rate in February 2018 was only 4.1% when the administration attempted to stop immigrants from entering the United States in the same categories as were included in the April 22, 2020, presidential proclamation.

    Originally, based on early discussions, the 2018 legislation was to represent a compromise between Democrats and Donald Trump to provide permanent legal protection for individuals brought to America as children, particularly those granted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). However, press reports indicate White House adviser Stephen Miller intervened to ensure any administration-supported bill contained a “wish list” of immigration restrictions that Democrats would be unlikely to support. Miller is credited with drafting the new proclamation.

    “Congress considered and rejected legislation that would have cut the same family-based visa categories that President Trump targets in the executive order,” said Lynden Melmed, a partner at Berry Appleman & Leiden and former chief counsel for USCIS, in an interview.

    The proclamation states, “The entry into the United States of aliens as immigrants is hereby suspended and limited subject to section 2 of this proclamation.

    Sec2Scope of Suspension and Limitation on Entry. (a) The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall apply only to aliens who:

    “(i) are outside the United States on the effective date of this proclamation;

    “(ii) do not have an immigrant visa that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation; and

    “(iii) do not have an official travel document other than a visa . . . that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation or issued on any date thereafter that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission.”

    With a few exceptions, this means anyone who needs to obtain an immigrant visa (for permanent residence) outside the United States will be blocked from doing so. That means other than spouses and children (under 21) of U.S. citizens, family immigration to the United States is eliminated while the order remains in effect. That includes the parents, adult children and siblings of U.S. citizens but also the spouses and children of lawful permanent residents.

    Employment-based immigrants who cannot adjust their status inside the United States will be prohibited from obtaining permanent residence, unless they are in the EB-5 Immigrant Investor category or “a physician, nurse, or other healthcare professional; to perform medical research or other research intended to combat the spread of COVID-19; or to perform work essential to combating, recovering from, or otherwise alleviating the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak . . . and any spouse and unmarried children under 21 years old of any such alien who are accompanying or following to join the alien.”

    Also exempted from the ban are prospective adoptees, “any alien whose entry would further important U.S. law enforcement objectives,” members of the U.S. Armed Forces, Iraqi and Afghan translators coming on Special Immigrant Visas, aliens considered in the “national interest,” and spouses and unmarried children under 21 of those allowed into the country as immigrants.

    While the presidential proclamation lists an end date of 60 days, in reality, the measure is likely to continue so long as Donald Trump is president. “This proclamation shall expire 60 days from its effective date and may be continued as necessary,” states the order. “Whenever appropriate, but no later than 50 days from the effective date of this proclamation, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Labor, recommend whether I should continue or modify this proclamation.”

    What is the immediate impact of the president’s order? “The near-term impact is minimal because immigrant visa processing is already paused,” said Lynden Melmed. “But looking ahead, it signals that the administration is doubling down on its effort to reduce overall immigration levels.”

    The proclamation does not affect H-1B visa holders or foreign nationals in other temporary visa categories. However, a follow-on order could bring new restrictions, as stated in Section 6: “Within 30 days of the effective date of this proclamation, the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall review nonimmigrant programs and shall recommend to me other measures appropriate to stimulate the United States economy and ensure the prioritization, hiring, and employment of United States workers.”

    What will happen after the 30 days is unclear. “A regulation to overhaul the H-1B visa category has to be near the top of the list, but they will struggle with the economic analysis and finding a way to make it more difficult to obtain a visa without hampering economic recovery or public health,” said Melmed.

    Still, based on other immigration measures and trade policies viewed by economists as harmful, simply because an action represents poor policy is no guarantee it will not be enacted. “The 30-day review allows the administration to say it’s doing something while providing the opportunity to dominate the news cycle again in 30 days if they think they need to,” said William Stock of Klasko Immigration Law Partners in an interview.

    Will the proclamation survive judicial scrutiny? “The proclamation is carefully drafted as a broad but temporary use of the president’s authority to ‘suspend entry’ of foreign nationals when deemed harmful to the interests of the United States,” said Stock. He notes it is modeled closely on the suspension of entry proclamation that the Supreme Court held to be a valid use of the president’s authority under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act in Hawaii v. Trump (i.e., the “Muslim travel ban” case). Providing exceptions and a discretionary mechanism for consular officers to issue immigrant visas “in the national interest” were highlighted by the Supreme Court when it upheld the third version of the travel ban.

    “The ban will certainly be challenged, however, as too broad of an assertion of the authority granted the president under Section 212(f),” said Stock. “I predict that early courts to hear challenges will strike it down, but that higher courts may step in and allow the policy to go into effect while it is being litigated, as we saw recently with the administration’s new public charge rule.”

    Economic research finds the premise of the executive order – that reducing legal immigration would lower the U.S. unemployment rate – is flawed. “Having more immigrants reduces the unemployment rate and raises the labor force participation rate of U.S. natives within the same sex and education group,” according to a National Foundation for American Policy study by Madeline Zavodny, an economics professor at the University of North Florida (UNF) in Jacksonville and formerly an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. (Emphasis added.) “Immigrants may boost consumer demand, start their own businesses, and reduce offshoring . . . of manual-labor intensive jobs in the U.S.”

    “The President’s immigration ban is backed by zero analysis of its effects by recognized labor economists,” noted economist Michael Clemens of the Center for Global Development. “No research estimating its short-term effects on employment. No research estimating its long-term effects on the American economy.” Clemens called it, “The largest immigration policy change in U.S. history, carried out by one-man diktat, explicitly to affect the economy – without releasing a single serious analysis of what those economic effects might be.”

    Mark Regets, a labor economist and senior fellow at the National Foundation for American Policy, found it surprising the executive order makes the ability of green card holders to change jobs or occupations sound sinister because the government can’t control it. “Interesting that they make into a negative one of the ways immigrants make the economy more flexible and agile,” said Regets.

    “There’s not much of a virus-related justification in the text of Trump’s order,” said Regets. “Based upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Homeland Security it is basically set to continue forever.”

     

    Source: forbes.com
    Published: 23 April 2020

  • What Investment Migration looks like for Asia’s Private Clients in a Post-Covid-19 World

    Dominic Volek is a regular speaker on the Hubbis wealth management event circuit in Asia, and usually a regular globetrotter for business and leisure. But little did he, or we, imagine that our latest interview would have to be conducted via video link to his family home in Singapore. All businesses around the world are seeking to understand what impact the Covid-19 crisis will have on their customers and their operations, and Volek, who is Southeast Asia Head of investment migration consultancy Henley & Partners, stepped up to the plate in early April to offer his insights on what the world of citizenship and residence by investment might look like in the foreseeable future.

    Volek begins by noting that most of Henley & Partners’ clients are very wealthy and travel regularly. Henley had already onboarded many such clients when Covid-19 hit and was ready to submit many client applications for investment migration programs around the world. He reports that for those clients that were in the process of gathering the relevant documents and source of funds information they might need for their chosen application, the lockdown has actually helped them accelerate what is often a protracted process, as those customers are normally pulled hither and thither by pressing family or business matters.

    On the less positive side for clients of Henley & Partners, the European programs generally require applicants to physically travel to their chosen country of citizenship or residence to give their biometrics, or have certain appointments and, obviously, those steps cannot be taken at this time.

    The World on Pause

    He cites the example of healthcare facilities in countries such as Bangladesh or Indonesia, which might be considered below the high standards expected by wealthy global citizens. “If very wealthy individuals from such countries have permanent residence or citizenship in one of the Tier-1 countries, for example, Singapore, Australia, the UK or Canada, they and their families might feel considerably more assured in the future,” Volek observes. “Accordingly, clients from some of the region’s emerging countries will likely see this as another good reason to consider the migration options that we offer around the globe.”

    Other clients, Volek reports, might focus more intently on obtaining the right to live or reside in countries that offer remote lifestyles, for example by buying a farm in New Zealand and applying for permanent residence-by-investment (RBI) in such places. “My own brother, for example, has a farm in the middle of Namibia, so it is just a family of four on a vast 48,000-hectare farm, now that I would say really is isolating,” he reports.

    Many motivations

    Volek explains that there are many reasons why private clients take up one or more investment migration options, aside from those he’d just mentioned. There might be political or economic problems in their home country, or they simply wish to have a ‘Plan B’, to safeguard against such issues emerging later on.

    The motivation might also be more lifestyle-driven, perhaps due to education plans for their children or grandchildren, or maybe even for future retirement plans. And as investment migration can also cater to the whole family including parents and more distant family members, the solutions on offer are rather comprehensive.

    Highlighting family members’ education, whether for boarding schools abroad, or university, in either case, the spouse might want to spend part of the year in an overseas home nearer to the children. Student visas end when the student graduates and therefore in most cases, they have no legal right to remain in the country. Often those children want to stay on for a few more years to gain work experience, or stay even longer in order to become a permanent resident or even citizen of that country. Family investment migration is often greatly sought after whereby instead of studying under a student visa, more and more families are starting under an investor visa like the UK Tier 1 Investor Visa or the Australian Significant Investor Visa whereby the time that they spend in that country while studying is already counting towards their permanent residence and/or citizenship, and therefore settlement rights at the end of their studies.

    At the other end of the spectrum, retirement into a different lifestyle and environment has great appeal. For those in Asia, citizenship of a European Union country is a great draw, as it offers unfettered access and settlement freedom to any of the 27 member states (now excluding the UK).

    Passport control

    Another core motivation for many people in Asia is the relative weakness of their own passports from a travel freedom perspective. Singapore, Japan, Korea, as well as Australia and New Zealand are very high up the ranks of the annual global Henley Passport Index, which measures how many countries a passport holder can visit without a prior visa. Even Malaysia has an excellent passport from a travel perspective, while other passports in the region, including those from several ASEAN countries, are far more limited in terms of their visa-free travel potential.

    Some countries, such as Indonesia, do not permit dual citizenship, so it is a much bigger decision for an Indonesian to take up citizenship of another country, because to do so they would need to renounce their Indonesian citizenship.

    The Plan ‘B’

    Political persecution at home, economic instability, or fear of family members’ kidnapping might also drive clients to consider a worst-case Plan B scenario. “Certainly, once this pandemic which has shaken the whole world is past its peak, I would expect there to be more clients looking closely into all the possible worst-case scenarios and planning for it accordingly,” Volek comments. “If there is anything that Covid-19 has taught us, it is the power of preparedness.”

    He also notes the typical private client is cash-rich but time-poor. Most clients do not actually move to the country in which they obtain alternative residence or citizenship, or at least, not before they retire, as generally their motives are driven by additional freedom and flexibility for themselves and their families.

    Volek highlights how RBI is the less complicated option for Henley & Partners clients, whereas CBI is, understandably, the more demanding and expensive option.

    CBI programs confer on the successful individual, and their families, the same rights as ordinary citizens of those countries; the solution is permanent and includes voting rights and passports with little to no physical presence required. The great advantage of CBI is that it bypasses the traditional route of an HNW individual and the entire family relocating to another country in order to naturalize as citizens.

    In fact, Volek notes that CBI is still a relatively new concept, and that there are just over ten countries currently with specific legislation in place that allows an individual – as long as they pass the due diligence and anti-money laundering checks – to invest and become a citizen of that country.

    Plenty of choice

    Henley today offers a virtual smorgasbord of program options to its clients. “Most of our competitors focus only on one or two markets and are able to offer three or four programs,” he reports, “but we are fully global and can tailor our recommendations from the world of programs out there, then narrow them down as to those we are comfortable with from a due diligence perspective, and lastly filter them through to suit each particular client, their financial situation, their hopes, the family and so forth.”

    Volek briefly explains that the more traditional RBI and CBI options for Asia’s private clients have historically been the UK, the US and Canada and Australia, as well as New Zealand. While those are typically more expensive, time consuming and complicated to obtain nowadays, there are many alternative programs out there. Current programs endorsed by Henley & Partners around the world include 11 CBI programs and 18 RBI alternatives, spread across North America, the Caribbean, Europe and Asia Pacific.

    In Europe, the top three CBI destinations are Austria, Malta and Cyprus. “They offer outstanding travel documents but the real attraction there particularly for UHNWIs is that they are members of the EU,” he explains, “so not only are you getting an insurance policy and a high-quality passport, but you and your family are getting settlement rights throughout the European Union, in other words, 27 countries after Brexit.” Another favourite country for Henley & Partners for RBI is Portugal, with its Golden Residence Permit program. Outside the EU, but still in Europe, Montenegro and the Republic of Moldova represent the more recent CBI options launched.

    The Caribbean, is where the whole concept of CBI began years ago, and this option is today very much about getting a better travel document, with only about USD100,000 to USD200,000 as a donation to the selected government required, resulting in a second or alternative citizenship within six months and with that, a passport offering visa-free access to the whole of the Schengen, Singapore, Hong Kong, the UK and many more destinations.

    Working with the wealth industry

    Volek takes a step back from the gloom of the current environment to imagine a more positive time and to explain how the firm works with the wealth management industry.

    “As investment migration opens a world of opportunity from lifestyle to education and retirement and even to domicile and estate planning optimisation, these types of conversations have been growing in importance for the wealth community as private banks and other providers seek to expand their client relationships to a much broader, more holistic conversation. And we think that will be even more so the case in the aftermath of Covid-19.”

    For many years, Henley & Partners has worked with many intermediaries across the Asia Pacific region, and of course plans to continue that approach in the years ahead. “We estimate that about a third to perhaps a half of all of our clients are referred to us through various intermediaries, typically financial firms, private bankers, independent asset managers, family offices, trust firms, lawyers, accountants and others,” he elucidates.

    “Of course, there are concerns,” he admits. “For example, a private banker might say that if they introduce their clients to us, the worry is that they might later lose some of the assets they have under management, given that substantial investment in property or other host government investments might be required for certain programs. But in response, we say that it is better for these banks to introduce clients to us and have their clients professionally supported throughout, rather than having those clients trying to do it themselves or working through some less reputable company. In other words, we offer the stamp of authority and credibility that aligns with the image these private banks wish to portray.”

    Opening more doors

    Moreover, Volek remarks that in tough market conditions and amidst a falling commission and fee environment – which most certainly pre-existed Covid-19 – new revenue streams are valuable. “We have a structured, proven, properly-documented process for what we call our Introducer Program, and for successful referrals that end up with a successful RBI or CBI application, for the individual and probably for their wider families as well, we are also happy to work with intermediaries on a fee-sharing basis.”

    Volek notes that the investment migration industry is not yet regulated, so while Henley & Partners is the global leader and pioneer of the business with the largest global footprint, others can purport to offer a similar service but in reality, generally fall far short of the professionalism required.

    Keep it professional

    “These are not easy processes,” he explains, “there is a lot of due diligence required on the clients to make sure that they are indeed suitable for their chosen country’s offering. There is an intense amount of work required to make these applications successful. We have more than 300 people around the world and we offer the professionalism and track record that will reassure clients that the great effort they need to put in to achieve successful applications will be rewarded.”

    Moreover, as barriers to this industry can be low – competitors can simply set up a website and appear to offer a proper service – there is very considerable risk of losing fees paid, or worse, fraud. “Not only might some of the people out there not be professional, but even worse there is a major security risk to the end-clients as there is a lot of detailed personal and financial information involved in such applications,” he cautions.

    A port for every option

    Henley has over 30 offices established around the world. “Wherever we offer one of these programs, whether it is Portugal, Australia, UK, or Canada, we have a local office and a team on the ground,” Volek reports. “We keep all information and all processes within the firm; this is vital to the success we offer clients and to the security of their data. And we have the track record too, with more than two decades of success.”

    Moreover, Henley also works with governments around the world on their CBI or RBI schemes. The Henley private client business sits alongside the other key element of the firm’s business, the government advisory practice, wherein the firm strategically advises governments on the design, set-up and implementation of their investment migration programs.

    The government connection

    “To date,” Volek explains, “we have helped governments raise more than USD8 billion in foreign direct investment. We are the pioneers and industry leaders in both the private client and government advisory sides of the business.”

    He reports that, for example, in 2019, Henley was appointed as one of the exclusive marketing agents and helped Montenegro introduce its new program. “This is a competitive environment for these governments around the world,” he observes, “so they must tailor their programs to suit their situations and price them appropriately.”

    Malta, by way of example, as an EU member offers one of the most attractive CBI programs, whereas countries such as Montenegro, which is less developed economically and which is not yet part of the EU, must pitch their offerings to appeal to certain market segments. “With foreign direct investment in ever greater demand and particularly now due to the Covid-19 outbreak,” Volek comments, “I think there will definitely be more changes coming, and there will be more programs launching, and they must all be priced and structured competitively.”

    Private and public combined

    This dual-pronged approach to Henley & Partners business covering the private and government clients would never have come about had Henley not adopted the highest possible standards.

    “We like to believe we set the standards for this industry,” Volek reports. “The branded financial intermediaries and the big private banks are comfortable with the way that we operate because we run ourselves like a regulated business. We have very clear risk and compliance policies, very strict onboarding requirements for clients in terms of the due diligence – sometimes this involves enhanced due diligence for politically exposed persons or individuals from high risk jurisdictions, we are experts at AML checks, all of the key elements that the banks or financial intermediaries would be looking at when onboarding the clients, we do the exact same.”

    Additionally, Henley has invested in very advanced IT infrastructure. “Secure IT platforms are essential,” he reports, “as these are very wealthy clients, often very prominent in their home or other countries. There is a lot of very confidential personal information, financial information, family information, and so forth, so everything must remain rigorously confidential and secure.”

    Finally, Henley was founded in Europe, the HQ is still there today, and the company is therefore fully GDPR-compliant which both their clients and the intermediaries they work with like.

    Lines in the sand

    Volek also reassures intermediary partners that the firm never crosses the line in the sand to offer services that any of its introducers might offer. “We stick precisely to our area of expertise, we never seek to offer any financial, tax, trust or other advice,” he reports. “Some of our partner intermediaries ask us why we do not leverage our incredible pool of clients, but our position is absolutely clear – we stick to our core business so that we do not have any conflict to work with intermediaries in many different areas. This also then puts us in a position to reciprocate referrals of our clients back to our trusted intermediaries whenever the opportunity presents itself.”

    Volek advises clients to move briskly with applications if they are already considering such moves. “Once the application is submitted to a government,” he notes, “it is submitted under the rules and regulations at that time, but as things might change, it is best to get ahead. We have very clear processes in terms of expediting the documentation and application, so we can move fast. And remember, some of the more complex and expensive applications for some of the top destination countries can take a long time from the successful application to the successful granting of CBI or RBI. Better, therefore, to lock in the opportunity today.”

    The benefits of speed

    There are already indications that some of the more popular RCBI programs are set to evolve. For example, Portugal’s Golden Residence Permit program will soon adapt its rules on which of its real estate markets around the country are acceptable for investment as part of the process. “Quite possibly Lisbon and/or Porto, which have been the recipient of significant property investment sums from their programs, will be taken off the list as those markets have become too saturated,” he reports. “The government will likely redirect investment towards less buoyant market segments and regions in the country.”

    “But whatever the specifics of any country’s program, we know from experience that these programs are consistently changing requirements, either investment amounts, or eligible investments, or the process and timelines,” he elaborates. “The other risk, of course, is that there could be changes in the residency requirements which might require applicants to potentially spend more time physically in that country than currently, whereas some of them ask for only a few days there each year, which is not onerous at all. So, the risk of change is always there.”

    More change ahead

    He adds that in the post-Covid-19 environment, there are likely to be more changes coming; some countries might fast-track their backlog, others might make their programs more appealing, some might go the other way and close the door. “But,” Volek says, “we are fairly optimistic that the foreign direct investment that flows into countries through these programs will become even more appealing to those host nations.”

    Volek also notes that the relationships with the wealth industry are so important that Henley & Partners also has a Global Head of Intermediary Services, Stephan Vogl, based out of Zürich. “He works with our regional and country specialists around the globe,” Volek reports, “and what we’ve noticed is that there is demand for a two-way flow of introductions, so it is far from simply a one-way relationship with the intermediaries we partner with.”

    He elaborates on this point, noting that the more business the firm does in the emerging markets, for example, in Asia, the more opportunity we have to reciprocate referrals as well.

    “And for those firms that are not permitted to take referral fees, for instance the Independent Asset Managers (IAMs) here in Singapore,” Volek reports, “we can adopt more of a strategic cooperation agreement to the benefit of these firms and their clients, whereby to help them gain kudos from working with us to provide ideas and solutions to their important clients, we might also offer the end-clients a discount on our fees as a result of their referral. We can also learn more about those advisory firms and how we might be able to refer our clients to them, where appropriate.”

    More growth ahead

    Volek closes the discussion by remarking how investment migration had grown from a very small base to a global industry in the past two decades. “Virtually every wealthy individual will be considering such options at some stage,” he says, “and there is little doubt in my mind that after this global pandemic ends, the impetus for these programs will grow again, with rising demand from the private clients, as well as growing interest amongst governments worldwide seeking to bolster their finances.”

     

    Source: hubbis.com
    Published: 22 April 2020

  • Statement by the Investment Migration Council – 27 April 2020

    Following a thorough investigation into the reasons that led to a temporary suspension of Dr Jean-Philippe Chetcuti from membership of the IMC introduced on the 26 September 2019, the IMC has decided to remove the suspension and close the investigation. The IMC established that Dr Jean-Philippe Chetcuti has not acted against IMC Codes in the case that was subject to investigation

  • Immigration to US to be Suspended Amid Pandemic, Trump Says

    President Donald Trump has said he will sign an executive order to temporarily suspend all immigration to the US because of the coronavirus.

    On Twitter, he cited “the attack from the invisible enemy”, as he calls the virus, and the need to protect the jobs of Americans, but did not give details.

    It was not clear what programmes might be affected and whether the president would be able to carry out the order.

    Critics say the government is using the pandemic to crack down on immigration.

    Immigration has traditionally been a strong campaigning theme for Mr Trump, but has taken a back seat during the pandemic and in the lead-up to the November election.

    Mr Trump’s announcement late on Monday comes as the White House argues the worst of the pandemic is over and the country can begin reopening. The restrictions on people’s movement, implemented by many states to curb the spread of the virus, have paralysed parts of the economy.

    Over the last four weeks, more than 20 million Americans have made jobless claims. That amounts to roughly as many jobs as employers had added over the previous decade.

    The US has over 787,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19 and more than 42,000 deaths, according to a tally by Johns Hopkins University, which is tracking the pandemic globally.

    It was not immediately clear who could be affected by Mr Trump’s decision or when it could come into force, and the White House has not commented.

    According to the New York Times, citing several people familiar with the plan, a formal order temporarily barring the provision of new green cards and work visas could be one way of implementing the measure; the administration would no longer approve any applications from foreigners to live and work in the US for an undetermined period of time.

    Last month, the US suspended almost all visa processing, including for immigrants, because of the pandemic.

    The US has already agreed with both Canada and Mexico to extend border restrictions on non-essential travel until at least mid-May.

    Travel has also been sharply restricted from hard-hit European countries and China, though people with temporary work visas, students and business travellers are exempted.

    On Monday, the US said it would continue to expel migrants it encounters along the border with Mexico for at least another month.

    In recent weeks, emergency powers have been used to expel thousands of undocumented migrants on the US border with Mexico. The public health measure lets officials override immigration laws, expediting removal processes.

    Last year, just over one million people were granted lawful permanent resident status in the US. The top countries of origin were Mexico, China, India, the Dominican Republic, the Philippines and Cuba.

    More than half of those, though, were cases of “adjusted status from within the US” – meaning they were already there – and only 459,000 arrived from abroad. The latter group would be the ones presumably affected by an immigration ban.

    When it comes to refugees, there were 30,000 people admitted into the US in 2019, most of them from Congo, Myanmar, Ukraine, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Syria.

    Donald Trump’s efforts at governing by social media should always be taken with a sizable grain of salt. His track record on following through on Twitter directives is decidedly mixed. The details of his temporary ban on all immigration, announced a few hours before midnight on Monday, will shed considerable light on the breadth – and legality – of his actions.

    Still, it is no secret that the president, and several key advisers, have long viewed immigration not as a benefit to the nation, but as a drain. And the text of his tweet, that the move is necessary not only to protect the nation’s health but also “the jobs of its great American citizens”, only emphasises this.

    There is little doubt the proposal, in whatever form it takes, will be vigorously opposed by pro-immigration groups, some business interests and the president’s ideological adversaries. That is probably just fine with a man who loves drawing political battle lines and goading his opponents whenever possible.

    Four years ago, the president campaigned on an aggressive anti-immigration platform, including a total, if temporary, ban on all Muslims entering the country. Now, with an uphill re-election fight looming, he has found a similarly combative measure to champion.

     

    Source: bbc.com
    Published: 21 April 2020

  • Strategic Investors Seek Long-Term Wealth Preservation Through European Real Estate — Linked Investment Migration Programmes

    Unprecedented and highly volatile global conditions triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic are driving high-net-worth individuals to reassess the concept of secure investment value and how best to safeguard their families and their wealth against future shocks.

    The virus is devastating countries in rapid succession — from struggling developing nations to global giants, no nation is being spared. Against a background of significant projected instability, investors with foresight are already engaging in their post-pandemic planning and reassessing their wealth portfolios by opting to diversify via real estate–linked investment migration programs.

    Leading international citizenship- and-residence-by-investment advisory firm Henley & Partners says before the World Health Organization announced the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic, applications for Portugal’s popular Golden Residence Permit Program were on the rise. The first quarter of 2020 saw a 25% increase in interest in the program, with actual applications up by almost 50% compared to the same period in 2019. According to the latest Portuguese government data, 95% of Golden Residence Permit Program applicants have invested their funds in real estate as opposed to capital transfers or business, injecting approximately EUR 5 billion into the country’s economy over the past eight years.

    Henley & Partners CEO Dr. Juerg Steffen says acquiring alternative residence or citizenship enables wealthy individuals to diversify their portfolios via a resilient investment solution, while at the same time contributing significantly to the economic well-being of the countries that offer programs. “Investment migration is a win—win solution for global investors and sovereign states alike. High-net-worth individuals favor European real estate—linked programs as they offer a unique hybrid investment opportunity that includes multiple yields from real estate, with all its traditional upside, as well as an alternative residence and/or citizenship with the option to relocate if they need too.”

    In the recently published Henley Passport Index Q2 Update, FutureMap founder Dr. Parag Khanna predicts that the pandemic will prompt many to reconsider their global mobility options. “The combined effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on public health, the global economy, and social behavior may augur deeper shifts in our human geography — and our distribution around the world. As the curtain lifts, people will seek to move from poorly governed and ill-prepared places to more proactive countries with greater resilience and better medical care.”

    Real estate has traditionally been seen as an investment with staying power that demonstrates decades-long returns. Real estate–linked investment migration has the additional advantage of enhancing one’s options for relocation or retirement, or both. The potential gains from investment migration–linked real estate over the lifetime of the investment are trifold: the core value of the asset, rental yields, and global access as an ultimate hedge against market and political volatility.

    Year-on-year applications for Cyprus’s real estate—linked investment migration program reveal an even sharper trajectory than Portugal’s, increasing by 250% in the first quarter of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019, generating substantial inflows of wealth and, more significantly, job creation across the socio-economic scale for the country.

    Dr. Steffen foresees that once the COVID-19 crisis has been curbed and travel restrictions lifted, global mobility and international access will continue to be essential hedges against asset-value volatility and wider market challenges. “Real estate—linked investment migration is a long-term proposition that over and above the obvious benefit of providing a home in an alternative location of your choice, secures access to new markets, top educational institutions, more secure healthcare systems, and a suite of investment and personal opportunities for both present and future generations.”

    Dr. Steffen concludes that real estate—linked investment migration programs, especially in Europe, are a reliable back-up plan for turbulent times, providing investors with unparalleled safety, security, stability, and opportunity, including access to major money markets. “At this time, when markets are being dealt heavy blows, it is vital to remain calm and make strategic long-term decisions. As a tried-and-tested hedge against volatility, securing alternative residence or citizenship through property purchase is one of the safest, smartest, most sustainable investments you can make right now.”

     

    Realestate linked investment migration options

    Portugal A growing international hub for real estate investment

    The minimum real estate investment requirement for the Portugal Golden Residence Permit Program is EUR 350,000, and the permit enables one to apply for full citizenship after five years. All real estate sectors have witnessed a significant growth through foreign investment across all markets, ranging from large institutional investors to high-net-worth individuals, including Golden Residence Permit applicants. According to Managing Partner of Henley & Partners Portugal, Luis Infante, “Portugal will continue to be a hot spot for real estate investment.”

    Cyprus real estate investment creates a Mediterranean base

    In terms of citizenship-by-investment, Cyprus offers one of the most sought-after programs in the EU, with an option to commit at least EUR 2 million to the purchase or construction of real estate. Along with most other EU member states, Cyprus also offers permanent residence-by-investment at a lower price point. The most affordable qualifying investment for the Cyprus Permanent Residence Program is the purchase of real estate with a total market value of at least EUR 300,000 plus VAT.

    Turkey and Greece see a significant uplift

    In the period leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic, the real estate markets in other parts of Europe were also attracting considerable foreign interest, with much attention concentrated on nations offering residence- and citizenship-backed property options. Last year, for instance, almost 46,000 foreign nationals invested in real estate in Turkey following a decision to reduce the minimum investment threshold of its citizenship-by-investment program from USD 1 million to USD 250,000 late in 2018. Early 2020 saw the trend for foreign real estate investment in the region continue, with almost 4,000 overseas buyers purchasing houses in Turkey in January alone. To date, approximately 5,000 investors have acquired Turkish citizenship via investment, making it one of the most popular programs in the world despite the relatively modest power of the Turkish passport, which gives its holders visa-free or visa-on-arrival access to 111 destinations, according to the latest Henley Passport Index rankings. In Greece, where residence-by-investment is available through the purchase of property priced at EUR 250,000 and upwards, demand has been equally significant.

     

    Source: henleyglobal.com
    Published: 21 April 2020

Pin It on Pinterest

Skip to content