In recent weeks, immigration has dominated the political and social debate in Portugal. Regardless of individual opinions, whether one believes there is or isn’t a problem, whether immigration should be more restricted or not, whether it is a valuable asset or a structural challenge, there is one thing we can all agree on: we want the Portuguese economy to continue to grow. And ideally, we want it to grow without the negative externalities that, according to a significant portion of the population, may have been caused by high levels of immigration.

For that growth to happen, it is crucial to distinguish between regular immigration and value-added immigration, the kind led by entrepreneurs and business leaders who choose Portugal to invest, create jobs, and pay taxes. This is a very different profile. These immigrants are not here to fill existing vacancies, compete for minimum wages, or strain public services. In many cases, they launch entirely new sectors, create jobs that wouldn’t otherwise exist, and contribute to the technological transition and internationalization of the Portuguese economy.

According to data from Startup Portugal, 30% of startups incubated in the country were founded by foreigners. And 60% of those companies are born with an international model from day one. Additionally, it is estimated that immigrants contributed €1.1 billion in taxes in 2023 (Source: Observatório das Migrações). Programs like the Startup Visa and the Tech Visa have already contributed to this dynamic: According to other official statements, the Startup Visa has received over 1,500 applications since 2018 (leading to 98 startups and 151 jobs), and the Tech Visa, launched in 2019, allowed more than 500 certified companies to issue over 8,000 hiring authorizations for highly qualified foreign professionals.

Lets be clear: These are people who come not to seek opportunities, but to create them.

If we agree on this, we must urgently reflect on the conditions we offer these business leaders. Now that we are discussing a new immigration model, we need to remember that we cannot treat them with the same restrictive framework applied to other types of immigration.

Yes, we should be rigorous and demand quality and commitment. The is no question about that. No question at all. But can Portugal afford to be less attractive than other European countries when competing for the same founders, the same startups, and the same investment? Do we want to remain a destination of value, or are we willing to take the risk of scaring away those who chose to be here for economic, cultural, and strategic reasons?

While we discuss imposing 10 years of residence for access to citizenship and limiting family reunification, just to name a few, countries like Ireland (5 years), Estonia (8 years), France (5 years), and the Netherlands (5 years), all facing the same immigration challenges, offer special regimes for foreign founders and investors, with easier access not only to residence permits, but also to family mobility and business support (Sources: national immigration services of each country) and, unfortunately, the truth is that even small differences in access to residence or nationality can significantly affect where top business leaders decide to build their businesses.

Let me be perfectly clear: this is not about ideology, it’s about competitiveness. It’s not even about whether 10 years is too long or not. It’s about understanding that it is 5 years longer than other countries with bigger economies and bigger market opportunities. It’s about understanding that these countries are the ones that immigrants usually think of when they think about Europe and, even being naturally immigrant attractive and having faced immigration waves a lot of times in the past, are more than willing to accept these specific immigrants because of all the value they bring, even by giving better conditions than the ones we are considering right now. At the end of the day, it’s about understanding that each additional year we add, may mean the difference between attracting or losing a company willing to invest and create (not use) value in Portugal.

Entrepreneurs who come to Portugal, build companies, generate jobs, develop technology, and export Portuguese products are not a problem. They are part of the solution, and we should not be ashamed to say so.

But is it really that serious?

Will Portugal stop receiving immigrant entrepreneurs? No. Portugal still has several competitive advantages: relatively low salaries for the quality of its workforce, excellent internet infrastructure, a strategic location between the U.S. and Central Europe, and a high level of English proficiency among the population, just to name a few. These remain strong assets. But the number will decrease. That represents millions of euros that could be flowing into the Portuguese economy and won’t. Once again, can we afford that?

But is the time to obtain a passport really that important? Aren’t we just excluding those who only came to become European citizens five years later and then move elsewhere? Yes, it is important, and no, we are not.

First, because again, we’re not talking about regular immigration. Countries like the U.S., or even Angola, among the PALOP nations, continue to tax their citizens regardless of where their income is earned. For these entrepreneurs, obtaining a European nationality is essential to avoid unfair double taxation from countries with which they no longer have any real economic connection. Each additional year means another year of paying taxes that neither Portugal nor the entrepreneur benefits from.

Second, because those other countries also have their own programs to attract foreign entrepreneurs. If the sole objective were to obtain a European passport, the most qualified immigrant entrepreneurs, the ones we most want to attract, would apply directly to those countries. They don’t, because Portugal offers clear competitive advantages. But if we suddenly become less competitive in terms of access to nationality, the risk of them changing their minds becomes real.

What matters is not the absolute time but the relative time compared to the competition. And the truth is, in today’s global market, every year counts.

A real-life example: Gohar

Full disclosure: I am the CEO of Second Wings, a company that works daily to attract top international investors to Portugal, helping them adapt their business models to the Portuguese and European contexts. This naturally makes me a stakeholder in this debate. But it also gives me a privileged position to observe the real impact that even the suggestion of legislative change has had on the country’s attractiveness.

One of the clearest examples is Gohar Rehman Mirza. Founder of Ensmile, he applied for Portugal’s Startup Visa after being accepted in 12 of the 20 countries he submitted his project to. He chose Portugal for several reasons: simplicity of the process, strategic location between Europe and the U.S., quality of the workforce, high English fluency, and the possibility of obtaining a residence permit and, later, European citizenship to expand his business globally.

Though at the time he may have seemed like just another Pakistani entrepreneur with an untested idea, his application was immediately approved without needing corrections. He secured support from one of Portugal’s largest incubators, received IAPMEI’s endorsement, and obtained both his visa and residence permit within months. The project took off. Leveraging his existing operations in Pakistan, he opened a factory in northern Portugal, hired over 70 people, reached over €14 million in annual revenue, and now contributes more than €60,000 per month to Portuguese Social Security. Each year, he pays hundreds of thousands of euros in taxes (Source: internal data from Second Wings and Ensmile).

Today, he has already applied for Portuguese nationality. It’s true that only five years have passed, but would it have made sense to risk him not coming at all? To lose all the capital and value he’s already generated here? Especially when he uses private healthcare, his children attend private school, and he’s creating revenue streams that will likely prevent him from ever needing a public pension. Can we really say he’s taking more than he’s giving? Are we supporting his life here, or is it the taxes he pays as a business leader that are helping sustain the country’s welfare state, which he now proudly considers his own?

Current Status and Next Steps

Portugal spent years positioning itself as the “Silicon Valley of Europe.” We invested time, resources, and reputation in building that image. Whether or not one believes it was worth it, it has undeniably yielded results. We cannot now squander that accumulated capital, and yet, even if this was not the original intent of the measures, since news began circulating about potential changes to the nationality law, the impact has been immediate. International media treated the proposals as confirmed facts, creating panic among many investors. False information has been spreading, such as claims that the new law would permanently prevent family reunification or allow arbitrary deportations and, although untrue, these narratives are seriously damaging Portugal’s image.

Fortunately, since the Constitutional Court declared several of the proposed measures unconstitutional, part of the lost confidence has slowly been restored.

We have not gone back to the position of strength we once held, because reputational damage is not repaired overnight, but at least there is now a perception that the worst has passed. Investors who were on the verge of walking away have paused to reconsider, and some of the panic created earlier in the year has subsided.

Still, the biggest risk remains the perception of instability. In today’s global market, perception often weighs more than facts. Headlines announcing sweeping restrictions are loud and dramatic, headlines saying “nothing has changed” are quiet and easily missed. This means that many international business leaders continue to believe that Portugal is moving towards a much more restrictive model, when in fact that is not the case anymore.

Until now, it has not been possible to fully debate these issues, everything is still very recent. But with a new Foreigners Law being prepared and up for discussion in September, now is the time to face them head-on..

The worst mistake we could make now would be to go back to square one and reopen the same cycle of uncertainty. Once trust is lost, each round of instability makes it harder to win back.

One important clarification made by the Court was that positive differentiation for strategically valuable visas, those aimed at founders, investors, and highly qualified professionals, is not unconstitutional, unlike several of the other contested provisions. That confirmation matters, because it shows that Portugal can, within the boundaries of the Constitution, design rules that are demanding but still attractive to the kind of immigration that creates jobs, technology, and exports.

If these mechanisms are legally possible and economically beneficial, then the real responsibility is to make sure they are preserved and strengthened in the legislation ahead. Failing to do so would mean turning away growth opportunities that bring more to the Portuguese economy than they ever take away. Losing them would not only slow down development but also undermine the fragile recovery of confidence we have only just begun to rebuild. This is not about making unfair exceptions or allowing people to enter the country without meeting requirements. It’s about recognizing distinct profiles.

If we want to attract the best founders, the most promising projects, and the highest-impact investments, we must ensure a clear, attractive, and, above all, competitive legal framework when compared to other European countries.

Portugal should, like other countries, create a specific and transparent pathway for foreign entrepreneurs, with demanding but fair criteria, and with benefits aligned with the value they bring. This includes rethinking the timelines for citizenship, family reunification rights, and the stability of current regulations.

Most of all, we must restore trust in Portugal’s predictability and seriousness as an investment destination. The reputational damage from poorly communicated proposals can take years to repair. And in today’s globalized world, the best opportunities go to the best-prepared destinations. Let’s make sure we are one of them.