Is The UK About To Reopen The Golden Visa Program?

If you don't learn from history, you're bound to repeat it. The British Government should think about this when considering bringing back an investor visa route to the UK. There's plenty of evidence that these programs can go wrong, causing national security issues with little economic gain. So, it's crucial to look at past mistakes and figure out what could be different this time. 

Big Ben London

The idea of bringing back an investor visa scheme is surprising to those who remember the UK’s previous “Tier 1 (Investor)” route, which was shut down in February 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine. A Government review showed that the scheme was linked to money laundering and national security risks, with the immigration minister at the time admitting there was “little evidence that this type of passive investment programme offers an effective model for delivering material value to the UK economy”. 

Given all this, how can the UK make sure a new investor visa path doesn't open the door to criminals and state threats, or is it just too risky for the questionable benefits?  

The most pressing need for any new system would be to ensure applicants aren’t a big threat to the UK. Back in 2015, our analysis showed that the UK’s Tier 1 Investor visa was being targeted by people from high-risk areas and hostile states. These concerns were proved right when several cases popped up of Tier 1 visas granted to people later investigated or sanctioned by UK authorities, including:  

• members of the Prince Group, now labeled by the UK Government as a transnational criminal organization 

• the Hajiyev family from Azerbaijan, whose assets were targeted by the NCA using the UK’s first unexplained wealth orders 

• Roman Abramovich and nine other Russian oligarchs, now sanctioned due to their connections to Vladimir Putin 

These visa holders got into the UK because of major flaws in the applicant screening systems. Between 2008 and 2015, there was a period of ‘blind faith’ where no one was specifically responsible for applicant checks—the Home Office thought the private sector was handling due diligence, while the private sector assumed it was the Home Office’s job. As a result, the UK Government handed out thousands of visas to people they knew very little about.  

More worrying for the current UK Government should be what happened next. Checks were outsourced to the private regulated sector, but a big investigation by the Times and Channel 4 found this didn’t offer much protection, as ‘professionals’ welcomed high-risk applicants without a second thought. 

Any new system would probably still rely heavily on the private sector to do anti-money laundering checks on applicants. How would the Government make sure these checks are better than those under the old system? 

English Country House

While some might think an “invitation only” system is the way to reduce risks, this approach brings its own set of challenges. 

If officials alone are responsible for assessing investors and sending out invitations, this discretion opens up the risk of undue influence and inducements from those seeking an invite. The Hinduja scandal that led to Peter Mandelson’s second resignation is a reminder of how easily allegations can arise over quid pro quos, even if they turn out to be unfounded. 

Safeguards would need to be in place to reduce corruption risks if this approach were taken. 

Another issue is that risk isn’t static. In a changing world, an investor considered safe one day can quickly become a financial or security risk when new information comes to light or circumstances change. 

If the Government relies on wealth managers and law firms to identify potential visa recipients, this again exposes the system to the weaknesses of private sector anti-money laundering regulation, especially when financial incentives for those involved in finding applicants are strong. Lessons from past experiences matter here. Dolfin Financial, a big player in the Tier 1 visa sector, had to shut down after the UK’s financial watchdog found major issues with its measures against economic crime. What steps, if any, could the Government take to prevent another Dolfin from letting in questionable applicants? 

The invite-only investor visa route seems to be a reaction to reports of a millionaire ‘exodus’ from the UK, put out by a firm advising clients on residency and citizenship schemes. This report got a lot of attention, with analysis by the Tax Justice Network, Tax Justice UK, and Patriotic Millionaires UK revealing nearly 11,000 articles echoing these claims. However, their research also found the claims of an exodus to be unfounded. The original authors of the report have now retracted the claims in its initial report. Is this a solution looking for a problem? If the Government wants to attract talent and investment, other routes are available that focus on skills and success, rather than access to £5 million.  The UK is at a crucial point in its fight against illicit finance, and its efforts will soon be under global scrutiny. The UK currently holds the Presidency of the global anti-money laundering standards body, the Financial Action Task Force, meaning it will be responsible for key priorities in combating illicit finance globally during this period. The UK itself will undergo a FATF review over the next 18 months to assess and grade its own anti-money laundering measures. In 2023, FATF published a report warning of the risks posed by citizenship and residency by investment schemes. Any move by the UK to reintroduce such a scheme could undermine the UK’s FATF Presidency as well as its own evaluation. 

Additionally, the UK is hosting a global summit in December aimed at combating illicit finance. At a time when other countries are closing their citizenship by investment schemes, the UK introducing a new investor visa route might lead to questions about Britain’s credibility in the global fight against money laundering. 

The risks associated with investor visa schemes are now well recognized, threatening the UK’s national security, financial system, and its credibility as a leader in combating illicit finance. In 2025, Transparency International co-signed a letter to the Chancellor urging a reconsideration of the proposals to introduce a new scheme. With this in mind, it may be wise for the next Prime Minister to explore new ways to attract investment to the UK.