Una Mullally: State must terminate ‘golden visa’ scheme

As countries scrambled to de-Putinise themselves from the swirl of Russian money that flows through European capitals, Ged Nash of the Labour Party asked the Minister for Justice, Helen McEntee, what was going on with our golden visa programme in relation to Russian nationals. McEntee responded that she had recently instructed that the Immigrant Investor Programme (golden visas) no longer be open to Russian applicants.

The vast majority of people who pay €500,000 or more to buy Irish residency through this programme are Chinese millionaires. Closing the scheme off to Russian applicants was practically a symbolic gesture. The Department of Justice said that since 2012, when the scheme was established as part of a suite of bucket-shaking measures to get some cash into our then-imploded economy, just three Russian nationals had applied to buy residency. In contrast, Britain issued 2,581 “golden visas” to Russian citizens over a decade or so.

The criteria for buying an Irish golden visa is you have a net worth of at least €2 million and invest in one of four options

While the Irish scheme is called an Immigrant Investor Programme, these kinds of schemes largely fall into two categories; Residency by Investment (RBI, golden visas, as in our scheme), and Citizenship by Investment (CBI, golden passports). The criteria for buying an Irish golden visa is that you have a net worth of at least €2 million, and that you invest in one of four options; an Irish enterprise (€1 million investment), an Irish investment fund (€1 million), a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) at €2 million, or an endowment investment or “philanthropic” payment of €500,000 to “a project of public benefit”. Most investments here have been in social housing, nursing homes and hotels.

The European Parliament has repeatedly expressed concern about both golden visa and golden passport schemes. Recently, the Dutch MEP, Sophie in ’t Veld, drafted a proposal report to the European Commission. This report included points such as imposing at least a 50 per cent tax on revenues countries raise through residence investor programmes (golden visas), prohibiting private associations from lobbying the EU on such policy, prohibiting such private entities from “assisting governments in implementing residence by investor programmes” and prohibiting the marketing of investment migration programmes. The European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs voted overwhelmingly to approve those proposals in the report.

Una Mullally: Out of the pandemic, into a whole new age of flux

---

Una Mullally: Ukraine crisis will not be solved by macho posturing against Irish neutrality

---

Una Mullally: Labour must become the party of childcare

---

Una Mullally: Blame for The 2 Johnnies controversy lies squarely with 2FM

---

Back in October of 2020, the European Commission issued letters of formal notice to Cyprus and Malta regarding their golden passport schemes. Since then, Cyprus ended its CBI scheme, and the conclusion of Bulgaria’s one is under consideration. In Malta, they’ve suspended the CBI programme for Russian and Belarusian citizens.

In a recent European Parliament plenary session, which took place between March 7th and March 10th, MEPs spoke emphatically against golden passport and golden visa schemes. “The request in the parliament’s report to phase out citizenship by investment schemes is fully in line with the commission’s priorities,” the European commissioner for justice, Didier Reynders, said.

You can buy EU residency in some member states for €500,000 – a lot of money for an ordinary person but peanuts for organised crime

“This is not only about Russia and not only about this terrible war,” the European commissioner for home affairs, Yiva Johansson said. “EU residence, EU citizenship are among our greatest assets, giving access to our union, our area of freedom, security and justice, treasured around the world, and this valuable commodity is sold cheaply. You can buy EU residency in some member states for €500,000 – a lot of money for an ordinary person, but peanuts for organised crime. It’s time to act.”

Spanish MEP Ernest Urtasun said, “I can’t remember how many times this parliament has already called for an end to these citizenship and residence by investment scheme programmes, and they continued to be there . . . and we know all the problems associated with money-laundering, with crime, and we know that the OECD, for instance, has signalled that these schemes are misused very frequently to undermine the common reporting standard and due diligence procedure. So, we really need to stand united and say, this needs to stop.”

These MEPs are making general points regarding the misuse of such schemes. The Department of Justice will no doubt point to stringent oversight regarding our programme. But there’s still little logic coming from the Government regarding why it still exists. When the Irish golden visa scheme was introduced, it didn’t take off immediately. It was only when the economy began to turn around that it became popular, slightly undercutting the entire reason for it: that we needed fast cash at that moment of economic emergency.

There is no reason for this programme to exist now. It should be scrapped. It undercuts the essence of fairness and logic – whatever you think about immigration “control” – if there’s one rule for some and another rule for others based on how rich you are. Leaving aside the complexities of responding to refugee crises, and the issues different crises raise regarding human tribalism (or indeed, racism and xenophobia) when it comes to whom we choose to extend empathy to, it is unethical to have various criteria for immigration for one cohort of people outside of the EU, yet allow others outside the EU to dispense with that criteria when they happen to be millionaires.