# Withdrawal agreement. Part 2



## tebo53 (Sep 18, 2014)

I've just come across this on another expats forum. A very interesting and detailed explanation of the withdrawal agreements. It may clear up some misunderstandings. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/withdrawal-agreement-explainer-for-part-2-citizens-rights

Steve


----------



## stevesainty (Jan 7, 2011)

This has recently been published by House of Lords



https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld5802/ldselect/ldeuaff/46/46.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1K9kgH40kV7hHZREZw8wWD0ips9EN2_usUwJxz7zGJyyYh-DrX4wvA5lI



Interestingly there is a paragraph that relates to swallows.

"187. Not all UK citizens who spend time living in the EU are covered by the Withdrawal Agreement. A group representing British multi-country residents explained that UK citizens who are mainly resident in the UK, but who also own homes in EU Member States, had “largely been overlooked and left unprotected by the Withdrawal Agreement”. As free movement had now ended, and visa-free travel under the Agreement was only permitted for a maximum of 90 days, second home-owners had the choice of either “registering (or retaining their current registration) as a resident and hope the host country allows them to keep using their home freely … or use their home as a tourist and comply with the requirement to be absent for specific periods in between visits (90 days in a rolling 180)”. In short, second homeowners tend to spend too much time in Europe to qualify as tourists, but not enough to qualify as residents."


----------



## Barriej (Jul 23, 2012)

stevesainty said:


> This has recently been published by House of Lords
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Problem is the EU as a whole will not agree to make the Uk a 'special case' and allow for an extended visa (in my limited opinion that is). Because they would have to make it worldwide and it would be seen as a victory by the Uk (even if its not being pitched that way).

First off the first sentence is wrong, they are not living they are long term tourists who only pay non res tax and who claim their home as the UK. And in fact are overstayers.
And the last sentence in the paragraph quoted above is also clearly wrong. The 'law or rule' is quite clear, spend or intend to stay more than 90 days, you are supposed to register as a resident. 
I know its a rule etc that is not enforced (seems like most of the stuff the EU does is ignored anyway) but its a benefit of being a member of the club. 
But you have to be paid up member of said club to use the facilities. Which the UK is no longer. 
I also thought OUT meant out, not linger outside the fire exit hoping one of your mates would let you sneak in the back way.

What I might see happening is that certain EU countries may try to implement a longer stay visa for those 'swallows' but not he EU as a whole. As to the legality of this, who knows?

And to be blunt here yet again, I cannot see that this is in the UK's interest. Only in Spains and possibly a couple more EU countries maybe. 
And what will they want in return???
The Uk already gives ANY 3rd country citizen a 180 day visa free travel to the Uk so what does the Uk stand to benefit in all this?
If anything its going to cost the country for the 'swallows' with two homes to spend their OAP in another country and not where it was issued.

My 2c anyway.


----------



## Joppa (Sep 7, 2009)

Barriej said:


> What I might see happening is that certain EU countries may try to implement a longer stay visa for those 'swallows' but not he EU as a whole. As to the legality of this, who knows?


There is nothing to stop any EU country offering a visa to third country nationals, as other than Schengen rule for short-stay visitors, long-term visa (called Type D in EU parlance) is a sovereign matter within the competence of a member state. Hence the differing requirements for and benefits of NLV and golden visa between Spain, Portugal, Greece and Malta, for example.


----------



## Barriej (Jul 23, 2012)

Joppa said:


> There is nothing to stop any EU country offering a visa to third country nationals, as other than Schengen rule for short-stay visitors, long-term visa (called Type D in EU parlance) is a sovereign matter within the competence of a member state. Hence the differing requirements for and benefits of NLV and golden visa between Spain, Portugal, Greece and Malta, for example.


Agreed and that sounds fair, however can an EU country specify which 3rd country the visa will apply to (i.e. only the UK), or will it have to be open to all?

I think this is going to be the deciding factor here.


----------



## Joppa (Sep 7, 2009)

Barriej said:


> Agreed and that sounds fair, however can an EU country specify which 3rd country the visa will apply to (i.e. only the UK), or will it have to be open to all?
> 
> I think this is going to be the deciding factor here.


While there is nothing in EU regs to rule out country-specific visa by member states, in practice EU state is only going to offer something new if it's also in their own interest, or there will be reciprocal offer by UK. Youth mobility visa (used to be called working holiday visa) is a good example.


----------



## stevesainty (Jan 7, 2011)

Apart from personal opinions about rules are rules and this is how it is, what are your thoughts about this paragraph being included in a House of Lords committee report? Will it provoke any discussion in UK government circles? There are a lot of disgruntled people who have second homes in Spain, and have, before Brexit, have enjoyed relatively unfettered access to these second homes regardless of the letter of the law. Not all of them voted to leave EU, and, if concessions were granted by Spain, would it actually cause any harm, and, perhaps be a cause of some good in Spain however small.


----------



## tardigrade (May 23, 2021)

Although I do not need a visa (french passport) I as an American would feel discriminated against if there is any future positive treatment or change for Brits. You got what you got. If you do not like it, please feel free to vote out the government that is in power.
It has been said before - you can't have the cake and eat it too.


----------



## vianina (Feb 25, 2020)

tardigrade said:


> Although I do not need a visa (french passport) I as an American would feel discriminated against if there is any future positive treatment or change for Brits. You got what you got. If you do not like it, please feel free to vote out the government that is in power.
> It has been said before - you can't have the cake and eat it too.


That’s great advice for a contingent of expats who as a rule don’t have the vote.


----------

