2016 saw an unfortunate amount of terrorist attacks in Europe, making immigration regulations tighter and creating a tougher challenge for those wanting to reside in Europe. This month, we speak to Emmanuel Ruchat who sheds some light into the business side of immigration law in Belgium, France and Switzerland.
Has the effect of the UK voting to leave the European Union impacted your work and your clients’ queries? If yes, what has been the effect and how have you had to manage the change?
We received a lot of applications to Belgian or French citizenship from British citizens living in these countries. The volume of work for such cases increased by 25%. In parallel, a number of SME located in UK also asked us an assistance to “transfer” their head office in Belgium or in France in view of keeping their right to free movement and to export in comfortable conditions.
What have been the recent regulatory developments in immigration law in Belgium, Paris and Geneva? Are there any developments that you are apprehensive about?
In France, the government has clearly been open to foreign investors who wish to obtain residents and citizenship. The former ‘card for an exceptional economic contribution’, which was clearly too selective (you would need to invest 10 million EUR or to create 50 jobs) was replaced in November 2016 by a hopeful and promising ‘talent passport’ making it easier to reach these goals. Odds are that the next government will make it even easier and more efficient for similar frameworks.
In Belgium, the field has been deeply impacted by two series of events: first, the law changed in 2012 about citizenship, requiring 5 years of residency for all applicants and in 2015 with the 6th Reform of the State, leading to a transfer of competencies to regions for professional immigration. These changes result in an adaptation of our practice in terms of strategy, for example, the need to start a business before applying for residency, a particular region that has adapted this is Wallonia, whereas Brussels clearly became a place to avoid. Second, the terrorist attacks in March 2016 in Brussels probably discouraged a number of potential applicants from the Middle East, with the result that those who persevere have in fact good chances to succeed. We generally assist our clients to set up a company and to apply for a professional card, or for a work permit if they can be posted from their country.
In Switzerland, things are different. A vote in February 2014 first led to fears that the country would close its borders, even to neighbours and to all EU and or Schengen States. The final result led to appear that the government will manage to limit the consequences of this vote; nevertheless, the ticket to immigrate to this country remains expensive and difficult for businessmen. Only two main solutions exist: either you are a very wealthy person, so we can negotiate a tax lump sum (broadly speaking, leading to calculate taxes on your expenses rather than on your income), or you are sent as an employee in an existing subsidiary.
How has immigration law changed for businesses in Brussels, Paris and Geneva changed since you began practising in the sector?
As mentioned, terrorism resulted in more restrictive conditions and probably a deeper analysis of applicants’ profiles. Also, the economic crisis of 2008 changed the attitude of banks towards foreigners. The assistance of an attorney is more useful than ever, even for small and easy steps such as opening a bank account. Compliance laws have complicated the process. We really wish that the US will infuse a simplification on this level, after having complexified it for eight years. In any case, people seeking for an assistance in immigration law should make the difference between attorneys and so-called “consultants” who just sell them hazy packages.
You have Business Management and Business Law masters; how have these helped you advance when dealing with clients?
Having a masters in law, whatever the specialization is (business or not) is required in order to be an attorney-at-law, yet we think that business immigration is advantageous, because it implies true concerns of ethics and of mutual trust (with clients and with administration) that must be carried out by attorneys. The fact that my masters were business oriented helped me in choosing the kind of companies we can use as tool for foreigners, depending on their project and to know how these companies can work and evolve, what are the liabilities, etc. My knowledges in management brought me essential notions in accountancy, which I think should be mandatory for every lawyer.
As a Thought Leader, what is the most challenging aspect of your current role as Managing Partner and how do you overcome that?
Creativity is probably the biggest daily challenge, as I think it is – or should be – for every lawyer. Rules change often and it is our mission to adapt our recommendations accordingly, even when they become more binding and restrictive, like they are at the present time.
Are there any changes you wish you could make to legislations in professional immigration law, and why?
Obviously, I am in favour of a clarification, yet it could arise from a clear ‘golden passport’ system similar to other countries like Cyprus or Malta, but with a smaller investment. I have seen so many great businessmen, nice people, being treated by the administration as if they were gangsters, that an objective criterion, like the level of investment appears appropriate. Also, a bigger transparency in administration decision making, and mainly in banks, with appropriate and efficient recourses, is suitable. I must say that France is clearly on the right way on these levels.
What is the most common type of dispute you deal with in professional immigration law, and can you offer any advice on how businesses can avoid such dispute?
The only litigations we have in this field are related to unjustified refusals to grant residency or to renew it. As in regards to renewal issues, we always recommend our clients to keep their commitments, including those included in their first applications, and not to forget that a minimum of involvement is expected from them by the country.
Do you have experience with cases in different fields of law?
Yes. The fact that the majority of our clients are based outside EU led me to know people who have interests in EU without the need to immigrate. Generally, they are either people under sanctions by EU, or people sued before criminal jurisdiction. These two fields of law became major activities for me.
Are you planning to extend your activity in other countries?
Canada, and particularly Quebec, is currently a good answer both to some European clients (mainly French) who want to establish a business in a stable part of North America and to our American clients who do not wish to be resident in Europe but are afraid by some “uncertainties” in their country. We should be opening an office in Montreal, hopefully in 2017.
Food for Thought:
What’s most important to you?
Freedom.
What do you feel you couldn’t live without?
Silence! (As well as freedom, of course.)
How do you measure your success?
Number of clients of course!
