The government has today published a statement and consultation on proposals for earned settlement.  The Immigration White Paper published in May 2025 confirmed that a consultation would be launched before the end of the year.  However, according to Alex Finch Business Immigration Partner at Constantine Law,  the accompanying statement published today is more thorough than might have been expected and represents another strong statement of intent on the part of the Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood.  Alex comments, “These proposals are a bold attempt to meet the political moment.  Given the magnitude of the changes, it is notable that there is no foreword from the Prime Minister.”

The statement outlines the parameters, and potential policy options, of a reform to the current system for settlement in the UK.  According to Finch, the proposals will require a fundamental re-engineering of the UK immigration system.  Some proposals, for example granting settlement subject to a restriction on claiming public funds, will require primary legislation and therefore the input of Parliament.

The statement sets out:

• Clarity that certain cohorts will be protected, and consultation is not invited in these cases.  For example, family members of British citizens and those on the Hong Kong BNO visa scheme, will remain on a five-year pathway to settlement.  The government also makes clear point that they will not countenance the proposals suggested by Reform, of taking away settlement from those already granted it; a proposal the Home Secretary branded as ‘un-British’.

• The government is proposing to apply the changes to everyone in the UK who is on a temporary pathway to settlement.  There is bad news for some of those already here. There is particular concern around the arrival of a large cohort of workers under the Health and Care visa from 2022 onwards, and their dependants, who are referred to as “likely to present significant fiscal costs to the UK”.  They are due to start being granted settlement from 2027, and for this cohort ,the government is considered an even longer baseline qualifying period of 15 years.

• Beyond special cases, the key proposal is that the system will operate on a ‘time adjustment’ model.  There is a baseline qualifying period of 10 years for settlement, but that period can then be longer or shorter, based on the particular characteristics of the migrant.  This process will produce winners and losers.

• A baseline for settlement generally, is that the applicant must have achieved B2 Level under the Common European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR) (as opposed to B1 as currently).  They must have not have a criminal conviction and must have passed the Life in the UK test (as now).  There will be a new contribution requirement, that the applicant has had annual earnings above £12,570 for a minimum of 3 to 5 years (subject to consultation) or an alternative amount of income.

• Looking at options for faster settlement, where the applicant has earned a taxable income of at least £125,140 for the previous three years, they can earn a reduction of seven years, obtaining settlement in the UK after three years.  Where they have earned a taxable income of at least £50,270 for the previous three years, they can earn a reduction of five years, obtaining settlement in the UK after five years (as under the current rules).

• Being in receipt of public funds at any time during the route to settlement would increase the qualifying period by five years and being in receipt for more than 12 months would increase it by 10 years.  These increases would not affect those in the majority of routes leading to settlement, which already prevent recourse to public funds; the main route that currently permits recourse to public funds prior to settlement is refugee status.

• These main proposals produce knock-on policy questions with no obvious answer. Under the current rules, the child under 18 of a worker may relocate with them to the UK, provided they first apply before they turn 18.  They will then qualify for settlement after five years, provided they remain unmarried and dependent on the main migrant (who must also qualify).  But if the period to settlement is to be increased to 10 years, or possibly 15 years in the case of low-skilled workers, the ‘child dependent’ might not qualify for settlement until shortly before they turn 33 years old.  Clearly, the existing rules of continuing family ‘dependency’ will not transpose to the new approach.  While it is not realistic to require dependent children to qualify for settlement on the same basis as their parents, it is suggested that a ‘cut-off point’ might be reached at which point they might ‘be expected to qualify for settlement in their own right’.

Alex Finch added, “These proposals will produce winners and losers.  For many, there will be unwelcome news in that the government clearly proposes to apply the new rules to those already in the UK.  For higher earners who may earn settlement in only three years, the proposals will be very welcome.  It is good news that the main thresholds for settlement after five years is set at £50,270 per year, the current threshold for the higher rate of income tax.  But there are ominous signs for those sponsored in roles below RQF6, however, with the suggestion that they may only qualify for settlement after 15 years.

“The focus of the statement is on the contribution of the individual.  But that is hard to reconcile with the reality of international migration, in which it is often families, not individuals, who move countries together.  This produces policy dilemmas.  A proposed criterion for settlement, after a baseline qualifying period of 10 years, is earning a minimum income to make national insurance contributions.  But will that apply to the spouse and children of a high earner who themselves qualifies for settlement after only three years?”