# Spanish immigration rules



## The Skipper (Nov 26, 2014)

Can anyone explain to me how Spain appears to be getting around EU freedom of movement rules? I have been listening this morning on BBC radio and TV to discussions about the latest UK immigration figures and politician after politician says the same: there is no way that any country within the EU can put restrictions on freedom of movement of people within the community. But isn’t that what Spain is doing with its rules on residency: ie, anyone wanting to live here must show they have sufficient income and savings so as not to be a burden on the State, including the provision of approved private health insurance? Perhaps the UK could learn a trick or two from the Spanish government!


----------



## Pazcat (Mar 24, 2010)

To be honest it is the same in most EU countries, not just Spain.


----------



## JulyB (Jul 18, 2011)

The Skipper said:


> Can anyone explain to me how Spain appears to be getting around EU freedom of movement rules? I have been listening this morning on BBC radio and TV to discussions about the latest UK immigration figures and politician after politician says the same: there is no way that any country within the EU can put restrictions on freedom of movement of people within the community. But isn’t that what Spain is doing with its rules on residency: ie, anyone wanting to live here must show they have sufficient income and savings so as not to be a burden on the State, including the provision of approved private health insurance? Perhaps the UK could learn a trick or two from the Spanish government!


It's true for most countries in Europe, and the fact that the UK haven't bothered to follow their lead basically just illustrates how useful it was for the UK government to have the EU as a whipping boy for their own failed policies. 

But Spain is not stopping people coming in, just making it clear that they have to support themselves when they do. And that goes just as much for Spanish people trying to move to Germany or whatever. You don't just get handed stuff on a plate.


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

The Skipper said:


> Can anyone explain to me how Spain appears to be getting around EU freedom of movement rules? I have been listening this morning on BBC radio and TV to discussions about the latest UK immigration figures and politician after politician says the same: there is no way that any country within the EU can put restrictions on freedom of movement of people within the community. But isn’t that what Spain is doing with its rules on residency: ie, anyone wanting to live here must show they have sufficient income and savings so as not to be a burden on the State, including the provision of approved private health insurance? Perhaps the UK could learn a trick or two from the Spanish government!


Yes the UK could perhaps learn a thing or two - not only from Spain though.

The freedom of movement rules aren't exactly 'freedom to move anywhere you like'. When an EU citizen wishes to move to another EU country, they are 'exercising treaty rights'. 

Those rights are that you can study, live or work in another EU country. That country can insist that you can support yourself (among other things) before allowing you to register. Once you satisfy the government that you are exercising treaty rights, you have the same rights as a national. 

Those rights will vary from country to country. 

Britain doesn't insist on registration though. It's optional. Once registered however, an EU citizen would have access to the NHS & other benefits, because they are residence based. In fact they can access these even without registering, simply because they are EU citizens living in the UK legally.

This is a link for EU citizens wishing to register in the UK https://www.gov.uk/eea-registration-certificate/overview


----------



## Pesky Wesky (May 10, 2009)

The freedom of movement in the EU "thing" is a directive.

Look at this which explains what a directive is



> A *directive* is a legal act of the European Union,[1] which requires member states to achieve a particular result without dictating the means of achieving that result. It can be distinguished from regulations which are self-executing and do not require any implementing measures.  Directives normally leave member states with a certain amount of leeway as to the exact rules to be adopted. Directives can be adopted by means of a variety of legislative procedures depending on their subject matter.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_(European_Union)
Spain isn't doing anything it shouldn't and as others have pointed out other countries have also taken their own measures in this area.


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

Pesky Wesky said:


> The freedom of movement in the EU "thing" is a directive.
> 
> Look at this which explains what a directive is
> 
> ...


Exactly

And should an EU citizen choose to register in the UK, the requirements aren't so very different to those in Spain

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/506065/EEA_QP__guide-to-supporting-documents_v1_3_2015-12-04_KP.pdf


----------



## The Skipper (Nov 26, 2014)

Very interesting replies. Thank you. I obviously know more about Spanish immigration requirements than I do about the rules of my native country! So, it's not quite as easy to become a UK resident as many politicians make out!


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

The Skipper said:


> Very interesting replies. Thank you. I obviously know more about Spanish immigration requirements than I do about the rules of my native country! So, it's not quite as easy to become a UK resident as many politicians make out!


Well actually it pretty much is, for an EU citizen, because Britain doesn't insist upon registration.

However if Britain did do so, it wouldn't be quite so straightforward, because they would have to prove their reason for being there, including that they can support themselves.

And for a non-EU national it's _very_ difficult - even if you are married to a British citizen.


----------



## The Skipper (Nov 26, 2014)

xabiachica said:


> Well actually it pretty much is, for an EU citizen, because Britain doesn't insist upon registration.
> 
> However if Britain did do so, it wouldn't be quite so straightforward, because they would have to prove their reason for being there, including that they can support themselves.
> 
> And for a non-EU national it's _very_ difficult - even if you are married to a British citizen.


So, let me get this right, the UK has in place a system that could introduce a fair amount of control over the numbers of EU citizens wanting to live there but it chooses not to use it? In the meantime, we are leaving the EU in large part because the majority of UK citizens were angry over immigration numbers. And were're being told the UK can't have a "soft" Brexit because that would mean it would have no control over immigration - even though there is a system in place that could introduce some measure of control, but the government chooses not to use it! Sounds like the script from an episode of Yes Minister!


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

The Skipper said:


> So, let me get this right, the UK has in place a system that could introduce a fair amount of control over the numbers of EU citizens wanting to live there but it chooses not to use it? In the meantime, we are leaving the EU in large part because the majority of UK citizens were angry over immigration numbers. And were're being told the UK can't have a "soft" Brexit because that would mean it would have no control over immigration - even though there is a system in place that could introduce some measure of control, but the government chooses not to use it! Sounds like the script from an episode of Yes Minister!


Pretty much - yep.


----------



## siobhanwf (Mar 20, 2009)

Pazcat said:


> To be honest it is the same in most EU countries, not just Spain.


Same in Portugal but medical insurance not required.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

Pazcat said:


> To be honest it is the same in most EU countries, not just Spain.


And it complies with EU rules.


----------



## Pazcat (Mar 24, 2010)

The crucial part to this is that any country can set it's own rules up to a point but what they can't do is discriminate against any EU citizen. 
So if the UK want to use the same system as Spain for example then the same rules must apply to all UK citizens, basically you can't say to an EU citizen you must pay for benefits but us who was born 'ere don't have to pay.

One of those "Having a cake and eating it" things.


----------



## The Skipper (Nov 26, 2014)

Pazcat said:


> The crucial part to this is that any country can set it's own rules up to a point but what they can't do is discriminate against any EU citizen.
> So if the UK want to use the same system as Spain for example then the same rules must apply to all UK citizens, basically you can't say to an EU citizen you must pay for benefits but us who was born 'ere don't have to pay.
> 
> One of those "Having a cake and eating it" things.


But isn't that what Spain is doing? Am I right in thinking that all Spanish citizens benefit from free State health care but British citizens who retire early to Spain (ie, before they are eligible for an S1) must have private health insurance?


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

The Skipper said:


> But isn't that what Spain is doing? Am I right in thinking that all Spanish citizens benefit from free State health care but British citizens who retire early to Spain (ie, before they are eligible for an S1) must have private health insurance?


Before October 2012 Spanish nationals didn't have automatic right to healthcare.

When the law was changed, Spain had to treat EU citizens already here the same as Spanish nationals, so anyone who was already a registered resident on the date it was passed (April 24 2012) also has the right to healthcare. 

There have been claims that this isn't quite 'legal', & that it should be extended to anyone who moves here, but nothing seems to have come of those claims so far.


I don't know if it would be possible for the UK to do something similar - since what they'd be doing is removing a right, rather than adding one, if you see what I mean.


----------



## The Skipper (Nov 26, 2014)

xabiachica said:


> Before October 2012 Spanish nationals didn't have automatic right to healthcare.
> 
> When the law was changed, Spain had to treat EU citizens already here the same as Spanish nationals, so anyone who was already a registered resident on the date it was passed (April 24 2012) also has the right to healthcare.
> 
> ...


Yes, we benefited from the 2012 change in the law but never did quite understand how they stopped newcomers from enjoying the same rights as Spanish nationals.


----------



## rspltd (Jul 5, 2016)

Perhaps this is yet another example of Spain's infringement with EU rules. In 2015 it was the third most persistent infringer.


----------



## Pazcat (Mar 24, 2010)

Well I wouldn't be surprised if it is an infringement but don't know enough about it.

If it is then there is a high profile EU court case for any takers?


----------



## davexf (Jan 26, 2009)

Hola, 

I think you may have missed a trick in that it is not the government that is the problem, it is the judges that decided immigrants had the right to benefits - and everyone sat up and took notice because they too want the land of milk and honey. 

Davexf


----------



## gus-lopez (Jan 4, 2010)

The Skipper said:


> Can anyone explain to me how Spain appears to be getting around EU freedom of movement rules? I have been listening this morning on BBC radio and TV to discussions about the latest UK immigration figures and politician after politician says the same: there is no way that any country within the EU can put restrictions on freedom of movement of people within the community. But isn’t that what Spain is doing with its rules on residency: ie, anyone wanting to live here must show they have sufficient income and savings so as not to be a burden on the State, including the provision of approved private health insurance? Perhaps the UK could learn a trick or two from the Spanish government!


No it is a perfectly legal EU regulation that can be used by any country, UK included, to keep track of foreigners living in a country. What you have to remember is that Spain requires you to APPLY to register. If you cannot meet the requirements, you can still stay as under EU rules you cannot be thrown out. Being unable to meet the requirements means that Spain has no responsibility towards supplying the person/s with any sort of assistance/benefits whatsoever.
The UK could have done the same years ago. When asked why they didn't a spokesman said " what is the point ? It costs money to set up & if they cannot meet the criteria we still cannot throw them out ? "
He couldn't seem to understand ,like all the politicians, that failure would mean that they would have no legal reason to pay any assistance/benefits/housing whatsoever.


----------



## gus-lopez (Jan 4, 2010)

The Skipper said:


> Yes, we benefited from the 2012 change in the law but never did quite understand how they stopped newcomers from enjoying the same rights as Spanish nationals.


Spanish nationals never had the right before January 2012 when universal healthcare was introduced. Basically the same as the UK. As Xabiachica has stated it was Spains reluctance to want the 750k illegals to have the right that meant we eventually ended up with the 24th April 2012 law. You also have to remember that it took them about a dozen attempts to word it in such a way as to meet EU rules. Which it barely does. +It is full of loop holes.

Spanish nationals get the right to full healthcare by virtue of the fact that they are Spanish nationals & born here. Those EU citizens coming after the introduction are required to meet the requirements to REGISTER.
Once registered, & certainly after you have renewed at 5 years as a "permanent registered resident " there is nothing legally stopping you in binning the private healthcare & applying as 'sin recursos'. The post 24th April 2012 law is only a requirement for registration .


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

gus-lopez said:


> No it is a perfectly legal EU regulation that can be used by any country, UK included, to keep track of foreigners living in a country. What you have to remember is that Spain requires you to APPLY to register. If you cannot meet the requirements, you can still stay as under EU rules you cannot be thrown out. Being unable to meet the requirements means that Spain has no responsibility towards supplying the person/s with any sort of assistance/benefits whatsoever.
> The UK could have done the same years ago. When asked why they didn't a spokesman said " what is the point ? It costs money to set up & if they cannot meet the criteria we still cannot throw them out ? "
> He couldn't seem to understand ,like all the politicians, that failure would mean that they would have no legal reason to pay any assistance/benefits/housing whatsoever.


They can however throw out EU citizens who have insufficient funds to live on and are not working (legally). Of course, it can be somewhat more difficult to catch up with those people. France does do this, eg. with Roumainians (that said, they come back again).


----------



## gus-lopez (Jan 4, 2010)

EverHopeful said:


> They can however throw out EU citizens who have insufficient funds to live on and are not working (legally). Of course, it can be somewhat more difficult to catch up with those people. France does do this, eg. with Roumainians (that said, they come back again).


No they can't . Not under EU rules. There is no requirement under European legislation to actually have any money/healthcare /anything. It only becomes necessary when a country requires you to register. The offence, & fine (300€ in Spain, 69€ in Greece), is for "failing to apply to register" not for not being able to register. As I said before they cannot throw you out as EU rules are quite specific in that no EU state 'confers' residency on a citizen but the citizen chooses to be a resident of that state. 
Many countries , UK included, do not require registration. For most ,who offer no benefits to their own citizens ,it isn't a problem but for the likes of the UK , whose citizens enjoy huge benefits, a registration scheme should have been in place from the outset to deny any unable to support themselves from being entitled to any assistance.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

gus-lopez said:


> No they can't . Not under EU rules. There is no requirement under European legislation to actually have any money/healthcare /anything. It only becomes necessary when a country requires you to register. The offence, & fine (300€ in Spain, 69€ in Greece), is for "failing to apply to register" not for not being able to register. As I said before they cannot throw you out as EU rules are quite specific in that no EU state 'confers' residency on a citizen but the citizen chooses to be a resident of that state.
> Many countries , UK included, do not require registration. For most ,who offer no benefits to their own citizens ,it isn't a problem but for the likes of the UK , whose citizens enjoy huge benefits, a registration scheme should have been in place from the outset to deny any unable to support themselves from being entitled to any assistance.


But there are tremendous issues with the application of the directives and EU countries do in fact continue to expel (beyond their respective borders) EU citizens who are not employed and do not have sufficient resources to not be a burden on the state. It is, of course, complicated by the conflict within Directive 2004/38/EC which provides that:



> For stays of over three months: the right of residence is subject to certain conditions. EU citizens and their family members — if not working — must have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. Union citizens do not need residence permits, although Member States may require them to register with the authorities. Family members of Union citizens who are not nationals of a Member State must apply for a residence permit, valid for the duration of their stay or a five-year period.





> Restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence: Union citizens or members of their family may be expelled from the host Member State on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. Under no circumstances may an expulsion decision be taken on economic grounds. Measures affecting freedom of movement and residence must comply with the proportionality principle and be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the individual concerned. Such conduct must represent a sufficiently serious and present threat affecting the fundamental interests of the state. Previous criminal convictions do not automatically justify expulsion. The mere fact that the entry documents used by the individual concerned have expired does not constitute grounds for such a measure. Only in exceptional circumstances, for overriding considerations of public security, can expulsion orders be served on a Union citizen if he/she has resided in the host country for ten years or if he/she is a minor. Lifelong exclusion orders may not be issued under any circumstances and persons concerned by exclusion orders may apply for a review after three years. They also have access to judicial review and, where relevant, administrative review in the host Member State.


Free movement of persons | EU fact sheets | European Parliament

As a consequence of that, various EU countries (including in particular Belgium, but also France) are expelling EU citizens who are not employed and do not have sufficient resources. That's a situation that will likely continue for at least a number of years because the EU cannot deal with all the petitions. So the Directive that was supposed to increase the right to free movement is for all intents and purposes relatively meaningless and requires review. Until a review occurs (or there is a new Treaty) EU countries are pretty much going to apply it as they see fit, but presumably in accordance with the way it has been transposed (correctly or not) into their own legislation.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

EverHopeful said:


> They can however throw out EU citizens who have insufficient funds to live on and are not working (legally). Of course, it can be somewhat more difficult to catch up with those people. France does do this, eg. with Roumainians (that said, they come back again).


The legality of expelling the Roma was highly disputed though. As I recall, Sarkozy was condemned by the European Parliament because it is illegal to expel people on ethnic grounds, but he said it was because they were living in illegal settlements and therefore breaking the law.


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

gus-lopez said:


> No it is a perfectly legal EU regulation that can be used by any country, UK included, to keep track of foreigners living in a country. What you have to remember is that Spain requires you to APPLY to register. If you cannot meet the requirements, you can still stay as under EU rules you cannot be thrown out. Being unable to meet the requirements means that Spain has no responsibility towards supplying the person/s with any sort of assistance/benefits whatsoever.
> The UK could have done the same years ago. When asked why they didn't a spokesman said " what is the point ? It costs money to set up & if they cannot meet the criteria we still cannot throw them out ? "
> He couldn't seem to understand ,like all the politicians, that failure would mean that they would have no legal reason to pay any assistance/benefits/housing whatsoever.


The main reason UK didn't do anything to make immigration from the EU more difficult is_ because the British economy benefits from these workers. _ Whatever yardstick you use, they contribute far more than they take.


----------



## 95995 (May 16, 2010)

Alcalaina said:


> The legality of expelling the Roma was highly disputed though. As I recall, Sarkozy was condemned by the European Parliament because it is illegal to expel people on ethnic grounds, but he said it was because they were living in illegal settlements and therefore breaking the law.


It's continued under the current government (not much attention paid now though with the 'migrant' crisis). I suspect they use begging, theft, etc etc as the excuse.

Belgium has also been roundly criticised.

Doesn't make much difference because the EU is simply not in a position to really do anything about it.

(I don't know how the Directive has been transposed into law in Spain BTW.)


----------

