Migrating to the UK- what are the options in 2021 onwards?

Hello,

Given the current hostile environment, and more inward looking focus for the UK, how does one manage to migrate to the UK in a non family related way and without having the £million start up/ investor visas categories? For eg, what are the realistic options if one comes as a student, or is it as employee on a Tier 2?

Also, is there a way for a person who has an ILR to sponsor their parents to live with them here in the UK? Is that an option or is the family visa only for children and spouses?


Thanks for your help.

If you haven't already studied the government guidance:
https://www.gov.uk/student-visa
https://www.gov.uk/skilled-worker-visa
https://www.gov.uk/uk-family-visa/parent
For experts here to comment further it would be useful to have more details about the persons' circumstances.

Londoner0 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:10 pm

Given the current hostile environment, and more inward looking focus for the UK, how does one manage to migrate to the UK in a non family related way and without having the £million start up/ investor visas categories? For eg, what are the realistic options if one comes as a student, or is it as employee on a Tier 2?

At the moment, the two main routes to long-term migration to the UK would be Skilled Worker visa and the spousal visa routes, both of which would need to be sponsored; by a company (for the former) or person (for the latter) meeting specified requirements, such as the Minimum Income Requirements (for the latter).

The Student visa does not lead to ILR, except on a 10 year Long Residence pathway and is quite expensive for overseas students, especially given that there are limits to how long they can work.

Londoner0 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:10 pm

Also, is there a way for a person who has an ILR to sponsor their parents to live with them here in the UK? Is that an option or is the family visa only for children and spouses?

The UK does not do chain migration. One can't pull one's family to the UK after getting ILR or British citizenship. The family visas are generally restricted to spouses and children. The requirements for adult dependent relatives are very onerous and the success rate after appeals is about 20% (i.e. even after appeals, 80% of applications get rejected).

Thanks for the reply.

I appreciate that UKVI does not do chain migration, but it's interesting to see why not. For example what if the said parents though in good health can't retire elsewhere, but are financially stable, have assets and properties in the UK already amassed in the last 30 years, so they would not be a burden to the UK in anyway what so ever. Why are they so anti- parents migration? Is there a particular reason?

Your question is a bit naive, I suppose. UK, as many other countries, is in general very - VERY - protective and limiting the immigration. Older people come with potentially higher expenses (e.g. healthcare) for the country while their input into the economy in most of the cases is limited. So why would the country be interested in investing into old people from abroad while their own population is getting older and older?

With no disrespect intended, I am fully aware of the burdening costs of aging, but no where did I write that my elderly parents would be a burden to the state. If anything they would be the opposite as they have always had private healthcare, have an extensive property portfolio in the UK amongst other assets so far from being a burden I assure you. And if you look at other countries, where one has the spending capacity they welcome them with open arms. Its simply about money which is what UKVI thrives on in any case. In fact the UK used to have a "Retired Person of Independent Means" visa for this such category which they stopped doing in 2019, but instead from what I gather have no problem inviting the very aged and unwell individuals under Category M who will become a burden on the state, just seems a bit daft that the UK would eliminate a contributing individual vs non contributing. Perhaps you are the naive one in this case?

Londoner0 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:26 pm

With no disrespect intended, I am fully aware of the burdening costs of aging, but no where did I write that my elderly parents would be a burden to the state. If anything they would be the opposite as they have always had private healthcare, have an extensive property portfolio in the UK amongst other assets so far from being a burden I assure you. And if you look at other countries, where one has the spending capacity they welcome them with open arms. Its simply about money which is what UKVI thrives on in any case. In fact the UK used to have a "Retired Person of Independent Means" visa for this such category which they stopped doing in 2019, but instead from what I gather have no problem inviting the very aged and unwell individuals under Category M who will become a burden on the state, just seems a bit daft that the UK would eliminate a contributing individual vs non contributing. Perhaps you are the naive one in this case?

First of all, I never said anything about your parents. I was trying to generalise - same as UK Gov will be doing. In general someone who’s older requires more money and can bring less with their relocation. Some countries that are a bit pourer than UK (Cyprus, Spain would be examples) offer passports or permanent residency for investments of a certain amount (and we are not talking millions). I suppose UK decided this isn’t their path and focused on attracting young professionals and entrepreneurs - it’s ultimately every countries’ call.

Secondly, I’m not sure I know what category M is? Do you mean partner visa? I suppose in most of the cases those are rather young people that can give birth to new British citizens.

Lastly, don’t take my comment personally - I never intended to offend you or your parents. Good luck with your plans! There’s nothing wrong with willing to have your parents close to you but it’s hardly possible now in the UK

Londoner0 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 10, 2021 8:27 pm

I appreciate that UKVI does not do chain migration, but it's interesting to see why not. For example what if the said parents though in good health can't retire elsewhere, but are financially stable, have assets and properties in the UK already amassed in the last 30 years, so they would not be a burden to the UK in anyway what so ever. Why are they so anti- parents migration? Is there a particular reason?

While I am not privy to government policy discussions, I can make a few educated guesses.

The UK has historically been averse to inward immigration. And that precedes Brexit by decades. Before the UK had even joined the EEC (as then), governments of both hues had passed laws restricting immigration from the then source of immigration, the Commonwealth. The dislike of immigration is not a recent development.

So why does the UK even have an immigration policy? In one word: labour (no, not the political party). The UK has a shrinking labour force and needs workers. Which is why, with very few exceptions, such as the Global Talent visa, the bulk of inward immigration is oriented towards the Skilled Worker visa. The spousal visa (and the dependents visa for Skilled Workers) is oriented at retaining workers already in the UK who may leave because their spouses are abroad.

But to control demand, the thresholds of the two routes (and their fees) have been set at levels that are high enough to deter high demand.

Allowing older retired people to move to the UK will not serve the main purpose of UK immigration policy: workers/people of working age.

Also, keep in mind the philosophy of the NHS: that healthcare can't be refused at the point of need. Yes, the NHS does charge visitors at 150% of cost, but that is after treatment. And there are consequences for non-payment (no more visits to the UK). Whereas for somebody already resident in the UK, it would be harder to exclude them from the UK. Also, the cost to the NHS of a retiree will likely be much more than somebody of working age. The UK already has an increasing old population and I suspect it does not want to add to the aging population.

If you are intent on bringing your parents somewhere close, I recently became aware (from the Europe immigration forums) that both Portugal and Spain offer long term residence visas for people with passive income (such as retirement income). That may be something you may want to look at.

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:59 am

Also, keep in mind the philosophy of the NHS: that healthcare can't be refused at the point of need. Yes, the NHS does charge visitors at 150% of cost, but that is after treatment.

Treatment can be refused if not paid in full before treatment.

Payment is required in full and in advance of treatment where clinicians consider the need for treatment to be non-urgent (meaning it can wait until the patient can reasonably be expected to return to their country of residence). Where clinicians consider treatment to be immediately necessary or urgent, it will be provided even if the patient has not paid in advance and the patient will be asked for payment afterwards.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-entitle ... -treatment

JB007 wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 16, 2021 10:35 pm

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 16, 2021 7:59 am

Also, keep in mind the philosophy of the NHS: that healthcare can't be refused at the point of need. Yes, the NHS does charge visitors at 150% of cost, but that is after treatment.

Treatment can be refused if not paid in full before treatment.

Payment is required in full and in advance of treatment where clinicians consider the need for treatment to be non-urgent (meaning it can wait until the patient can reasonably be expected to return to their country of residence). Where clinicians consider treatment to be immediately necessary or urgent, it will be provided even if the patient has not paid in advance and the patient will be asked for payment afterwards.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-entitle ... -treatment

That payment up front, began in England from 23 October 2017.

Some countries have a reciprocal medical treatment for visitors agreement with the UK.

To add to my earlier post on the reason for the UK allowing inward immigration due to an aging population, Robert Colvile, a columnist at the Sunday Times, makes a not dissimilar point in the Sunday Times yesterday (though not about immigration, but about the budget announced last week).

The budget is more proof that Britain is turning into an elderly care system with a state attached

He highlights that the largest increase in the Budget for the past few years have been for "welfare (up from 2.9 per cent of GDP to 4.8 per cent), pensioners (3.4 per cent to 5.8 per cent) and above all the NHS, which has more than doubled from 3.4 per cent to 8.4 per cent of GDP." (though the time period for the stats is unclear from the text of the article).