The European Parliament wants a ban on the so-called Golden

The European Parliament wants a ban on the so-called " Golden passports ". According to the EP`s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), they are unacceptable from an ethical, legal and economic point of view, and also pose a serious risk to EU security. Moreover, MEPs from this committee want third countries that have visa-free access to the European Union and where similar " golden passport " schemes apply to also stop issuing them. As for " golden visas ", MEPs are proposing that they be regulated and offset by a tax at EU level. This is clear from the Draft Legislative Initiative Report, adopted by the LIBE Committee with 61 votes in favor, 3 against and 5 abstentions. The document contains a number of measures to address the problems of " citizenship and residence schemes against investment ". MEPs emphasize that " citizenship versus investment " schemes, where third-country nationals can obtain citizenship rights in return for investment, are " ethically, legally and economically unacceptable and pose a number of serious security risks ".. The so-called " golden passports " undermine the essence of EU citizenship and must be phased out, they insist. The text calls for a " significant percentage " of the investments made to be collected, which will continue to be collected until the " citizenship versus investment " schemes are abolished, and for an indefinite period as regards " residence versus investment " schemes, ie. called gold visas. MEPs regret the lack of comprehensive verification procedures and the fact that the current system allows for a consistent submission of applications in different Member States, relying on inspections carried out by non-state actors. Noting the difference in the severity of the risks associated with residence-for-investment schemes, which give foreigners the right to reside in return for a financial contribution, the draft report calls for common EU rules to harmonize standards and step up the fight against money laundering, corruption and tax evasion. MEPs demand: Rigorous comprehensive checks (including on family members and sources of funding), mandatory checks on EU justice and home affairs systems and verification procedures in third countries; reporting obligations by Member States, and requirements for minimum physical residence (for applicants) and active participation, quality, added value and contribution to the economy (for their investments). MEPs also envisage a " notification and consultation " scheme to allow other Member States to oppose the issuance of a " golden visa ". The report emphasizes that intermediaries for these schemes are neither transparent nor accountable, calling for a ban on their participation in " citizenship versus investment " schemes and for “strict and binding regulation” for " residence versus investment " schemes. MEPs want an end to marketing practices that use EU symbols or emphasize the benefits of EU citizenship, and they want a framework for sanctions. The text calls on the Commission to put pressure on third countries benefiting from visa-free travel to the EU, to abolish their " citizenship versus investment " schemes and to reform their " residence versus investments " schemes. " Being a citizen of or residing in the EU is at the heart of what the Union embodies: freedom and rights. Citizenship is a right, not a commodity that can be bought and sold. Member State governments sell what they do not. " Their cynical business threatens our common security, " said rapporteur Sofia in`t Veld. MEPs will discuss and vote on the report at the next plenary session (7-10 March). If approved by the plenary, the European Commission will have to make a legislative proposal or justify its decision not to do so. At least 130,000 people have benefited from EU citizenship or residence schemes in 2011-2019, which have brought in more than € 21.8 billion in revenue. There are CCI schemes in three Member States: Bulgaria (where the government has introduced a bill to end the scheme), Cyprus (currently only processing applications submitted before November 2020) and Malta. Twelve Member States have " residence versus investment " schemes, all of which differ in size and investment opportunities, as well as in standards for inspections and procedures.