Malta’s Golden Passport Scheme

Context

The European Court of Justice has ruled Malta's citizenship-by-investment scheme illegal, stating that granting citizenship in return for payments violates EU principles. This decision also affects similar programmes in Cyprus and Bulgaria and shifts attention toward legal residency-by-investment routes.

Golden Passport vs. Golden Visa – A Legal Distinction

Golden Passport refers to citizenship-by-investment (CBI) schemes where individuals acquire full nationality rights through lump-sum payments or investments.
Golden Visa is a residency-by-investment (RBI) scheme allowing individuals to reside (not immediately naturalise) in a country, with potential citizenship after meeting time-based and integration requirements.
The ECJ ruling prohibits CBI in EU states but permits RBI as long as it aligns with national and EU standards.

Malta’s Citizenship Scheme: Features and Revenue

Malta required a €600,000 donation, property purchase, and voluntary contributions for citizenship.
Since 2015, the programme generated over €1.4 billion, funding public housing, sports infrastructure, and healthcare.
Applicants contributed over €10 million in philanthropy.
The court found that many recipients had limited ties to Malta, violating principles of genuine link under EU citizenship rules.

Broader Implications and Legal Trends

The ruling impacts Cyprus, Bulgaria, and any other EU CBI programmes, urging states to revise migration policies to align with EU security, transparency, and anti-money laundering frameworks.
Countries like Portugal, Greece, Spain, and Italy continue to run legal RBI schemes, requiring real estate, innovation, or business investments.
Post-ruling, investment migration is evolving towards “transformational migration” that emphasises long-term economic contribution over transactional passport sales.