Question: EC Resident: Loss & withdrawl of status.

How to? Read other's experiences. Find useful advice on shipping, immigration, residence permits, visas and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 858
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Question: EC Resident: Loss & withdrawl of status.

Post by network_engineer » Thu May 11, 2006 10:19 am

Hi all,

Article 9 of Chapter II, point 1(c) states thus: 1. Long-term residents shall no longer be entitled to maintain long-term resident status in the following cases: (c) in the event of absence from the territory of the Community for a period of 12 consecutive months.

What if the alien needs to work on a time specific project, say, for 13 months in Ireland (which has not ratified the Directive but is a EU country)? Obviously, the aliens travels & resides in Ireland a separate work/residence permit but at the end of the period, is the EC Long Term status still valid?


Another issue with regard to the Finnish Permanent Resident Permit vis-à-vis the EC Long-Term Resident permits – I had posted earlier that the authorities intend to cancel the [earlier held] Finnish PR permit [sticker] when the alien is granted a EC long-term resident status and replace it with the permit [sticker] as guided by the directive.

Now, what if the applicant has to move to a non-EU country for a period of thirteen months for a work-related project? Based on Article 9 of the EU Directive, the immigrant’s Long-Term status is lost. However, according to the Alien’s Act, his Finnish permanent resident status is still valid. Now the practical question: How can the alien return to Finland without a valid permit [sticker in his passport]? Even with a valid permit [sticker] it is not the easiest adventure! :lol:


PS: My apologies as in the earlier post, but I believe somebody somewhere might appreciate knowing these details!



Question: EC Resident: Loss & withdrawl of status.

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

astrolite
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: The Backwater Town aka Salo

Post by astrolite » Thu May 11, 2006 10:43 am

I'm also very interested to know the answers to network_engineer's questions.

As Finland is late in implementing this Council Directive, what happens then if the permanent resident alien moves to another EU country which has ratified the Directive (so, not Denmark, UK or Ireland) with the initial intention of staying there temporarily due to work reason, but then later on decides to stay on in that country for a longer period?

Can this alien apply for Long Term Resident Status via the second country on the basis that he has already lived in an EU member country for at least 5 years? Or does he have to fly all the way back to Finland to apply? Or must he collect another 5 more years of residency in the second EU member country & maybe need to pass a language test to be eligible to apply for the status?

User avatar
nomad_alien
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:41 am
Location: Klaukkala

Crazy

Post by nomad_alien » Thu May 11, 2006 12:02 pm

I find this crazy.....you can get a 5 year work/residence permit for any country in the EU.....but you stilll have to apply for a VISA to go there????

Another excellent demonstartion of political brain power at work :roll:

User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 858
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

To answer astrolite & nomad_alien

Post by network_engineer » Thu May 11, 2006 12:38 pm

astrolite: To answer your question, my understanding, based on point 2 of Article 15, Chapter III of the directive, is that:

The alien can stay in the second member state, provided that they have (a) stable and regular resources which are sufficient to maintain themselves and the members of their families, without recourse to the social assistance of the Member State concerned. For each of the categories referred to in Article 14(2), Member States shall evaluate these resources by reference to their nature and regularity and may take into account the level of minimum wages and pensions;

(b) sickness insurance covering all risks in the second Member State normally covered for its own nationals in the Member State concerned.

See also point 4 in the above referenced section.

nomad_alien: Your point is very interesting, i.e. an alien can work or reside there, but needs a visa. This point is still being debated. At least the Finnish authorities seem to be of that notion that the immigrant would need a visa, e.g. a migrant holding a EC Long-Term resident permit would need a visit e.g. to Estonia (which is an EU member state, but not part of the Schengen area).

But I could be wrong.

Anybody have answers or opinions on my question :?: :(

Cheers.

User avatar
sinikettu
Posts: 2769
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:16 pm

Post by sinikettu » Thu May 11, 2006 1:20 pm

In most of these complicated "immigration/EU" regulations there are two sides.

1: That which is written and clear/legalised/passed/documented and understood.

No problems.

2. That which is still being debated by individual member states and/or are not yet clear/legal/documented and understood.

Note the word "or"..

The old rules apply until 2 = 1.

As you clearly illustrate..."clear" the new instruction are not yet!

So...In practice...
The Guys who sit in those boxes at the airport arrivals follow instructions as per 1. Until 2= 1.


Seeking answers or opinions on an Internet BB such as this, is at best a way of passing time, but is in reality, just a waste of time..Unless there are any members of the "Eduskuntatalo select committee on Immigration" as members.
People do not become more irritable as they grow old - they simply stop making the effort to avoid annoying others.

User avatar
daryl
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:04 pm

Post by daryl » Thu May 11, 2006 2:32 pm

I have commented on this matter elsewhere, but now this thread seems to be focusing on some outstanding issues of interest.

Ages and ages ago, I pointed out that the Ministry of the Interior has a phobia about public consultation, especially in this area of public policy, but that it would be a good idea to demand an audience with the committee preparing national implementation of this Directive. Nobody took me up on this suggestion. I also suggested that it would be fairly simple to secure an audience with the relevant parliamentary committee(s) when the bill reaches Parliament. Again no response.

In the light of this, I get the feeling that for all the steam that has been discharged on this BB, nobody really cares enough to get actively involved in this process. Indeed nobody has even taken the trouble to request the minutes of the Interior Ministry committee.

I exempt sy and network_engineer from these remarks, as I know that they have been actively testing the new system and filing formal complaints of bureaucratic obstruction.

The mismatch between the conditions for losing a Finnish permanent residence permit and EC long-term resident status is one outstanding question. Network_engineer's example of 13 months in Ireland is not problematic IMO, because the Reoublic of Ireland is an EU Member State (even though it is not a party to the new Directive), so the 13 months are not "absence from the territory of the EU". To lose EC long-term resident status in Finland, one would have to spend six years in Ireland. A problem would then arise because Ireland is not a party to the Directive, and therefore could not issue a corresponding status to the immigrant concerned.

Instead the real question arises in the case of 13 months spent in St Petersburg or some other place that is outside of the territory of the EU. This would entail lapse of EC long-term resident status in Finland, but not of a permanent residence permit. This is a question of substance that needs to be considered as part of Finland's implementation of the Directive.

Another interesting question concerns travelling restrictions on holders of EC long-term resident status. When such a person enters another Schengen State, for example, and then three months later claims rights of mobility under the Directive in that State, is it conceivable that infringement of travelling restrictions could become an issue? My immediate feeling about this is to encourage a challenge to any such restrictions in the European Court of Justice. The Directive evidently intends to stipulate sufficient conditions of establishment for a period longer than three months. These become meaningless if further conditions may be imposed for shorter periods, as every period longer than three months begins with a period shorter than three months.

This is not necessarily something that Finland must consider as part of the process of implementing the Directive from the POV of immigrants in Finland, but it is a significant matter in which the ECJ will inevitably create law unless the Member States introduce a fair and reasonable system of free mobility for holders of EC long-term resident status.

daryl
Wo ai Zhong-guo ren

User avatar
sinikettu
Posts: 2769
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:16 pm

Post by sinikettu » Thu May 11, 2006 2:50 pm

daryl wrote:In the light of this, I get the feeling that for all the steam that has been discharged on this BB, nobody really cares enough to get actively involved in this process. Indeed nobody has even taken the trouble to request the minutes of the Interior Ministry committee.

I exempt sy and network_engineer from these remarks, as I know that they have been actively testing the new system and filing formal complaints of bureaucratic obstruction.

daryl
True...but this is only an Internet BB/chat box.. not "EX Pats Liito Ry"...

Perhaps there should be an ."EX Pats Liito Ry".....but most of the poster here are just passing time or seeking social contacts or have basic request about housing/employment/education..how to do x? ...

Very few have an Imigration problem and, with the possible exception of daryl..even less have the knowledge to answer their question with anything which could be assumed to be accurate advice on the subject, especially this area where the EU complicates the issues.

But daryl I take my hat off to you for your attempt to clarify that which is far from clear.
People do not become more irritable as they grow old - they simply stop making the effort to avoid annoying others.

sammy
Posts: 7313
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:38 pm

Post by sammy » Thu May 11, 2006 3:03 pm

sinikettu wrote:But daryl I take my hat off to you for your attempt to clarify that which is far from clear.
I was just about to say the same - so, Daryl :thumbsup:

Daryl, just as a sidenote, are you familiar (I suppose you are but it doesn't hurt to ask) with the Monitori magazine?

http://www.mol.fi/monitori

http://www.mol.fi/mol/en/01_ministry/08 ... /index.jsp

Quoting from Prime Min. Matti Vanhanen in the latest Monitori issue (sorry only in Finnish!):
Lupakäytäntöjä yksinkertaistettava

Suomen ongelma on ennen muuta se, että emme ole tarpeeksi houkutteleva maa ulkomaalaisille ilmaston, kielen ja hankalien lupakäytäntöjen takia. Kaikki ovat tervetulleita, mutta varmasti helpointa on houkutella tulijoita lähiympäristöstä ja luultavasti väkirikkaimmista maista, joissa on riittävä koulutustaso.

Meidän on yksinkertaistettava maahantulo- ja työlupakäytäntöjä. Hallinto olisi keskitettävä. Tällä hetkellä menettelyt on hajautettu eri pisteisiin ja toimijoille ja järjestelmä on sekava. Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden jäämistä Suomeen on jo helpotettu myöntämällä heille jatko-oleskelupa työnhakua varten kuudeksi kuukaudeksi.

Tämä kaikki vaatii myös reipasta asennemuutosta meiltä suomalaisilta.

User avatar
daryl
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:04 pm

Post by daryl » Thu May 11, 2006 3:37 pm

sinikettu wrote:
daryl wrote:In the light of this, I get the feeling that for all the steam that has been discharged on this BB, nobody really cares enough to get actively involved in this process. Indeed nobody has even taken the trouble to request the minutes of the Interior Ministry committee.
True...but this is only an Internet BB/chat box.. not "EX Pats Liito Ry"...

Perhaps there should be an ."EX Pats Liito Ry".....but most of the poster here are just passing time or seeking social contacts or have basic request about housing/employment/education..how to do x? ...
You are right, of course, but the tone of much of the discussion on this particular topic suggests that contributors have more than a passing interest in this matter. Indeed we know that sy and network_engineer have already applied for the new permit.

Anyway, no sooner said than taken back... One forum member has just sent me a copy of the draft government bill on this very topic that was recently circulated for comments. I have just put the document on my fidisk and posted a new thread with a link to the document.

daryl
Wo ai Zhong-guo ren

User avatar
Hank W.
The Motorhead
Posts: 29973
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
Location: Mushroom Mountain
Contact:

Post by Hank W. » Thu May 11, 2006 3:47 pm

Tällä hetkellä menettelyt on hajautettu eri pisteisiin ja toimijoille ja järjestelmä on sekava.
Yeah, like Sweden has the thing working - a person getting a residence permit gets automagically a 'personnummer' and doesn't have to jump around different offices. And the personnummer is taken care of by the tax office...
Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.

User avatar
daryl
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 7:04 pm

Post by daryl » Thu May 11, 2006 3:50 pm

sammy wrote:Daryl, just as a sidenote, are you familiar (I suppose you are but it doesn't hurt to ask) with the Monitori magazine?

http://www.mol.fi/monitori

http://www.mol.fi/mol/en/01_ministry/08 ... /index.jsp

Quoting from Prime Min. Matti Vanhanen in the latest Monitori issue (sorry only in Finnish!):
Lupakäytäntöjä yksinkertaistettava

Suomen ongelma on ennen muuta se, että emme ole tarpeeksi houkutteleva maa ulkomaalaisille ilmaston, kielen ja hankalien lupakäytäntöjen takia. Kaikki ovat tervetulleita, mutta varmasti helpointa on houkutella tulijoita lähiympäristöstä ja luultavasti väkirikkaimmista maista, joissa on riittävä koulutustaso.

Meidän on yksinkertaistettava maahantulo- ja työlupakäytäntöjä. Hallinto olisi keskitettävä. Tällä hetkellä menettelyt on hajautettu eri pisteisiin ja toimijoille ja järjestelmä on sekava. Ulkomaisten opiskelijoiden jäämistä Suomeen on jo helpotettu myöntämällä heille jatko-oleskelupa työnhakua varten kuudeksi kuukaudeksi.

Tämä kaikki vaatii myös reipasta asennemuutosta meiltä suomalaisilta.
I am a former member of the editorial board of Monitori, and I also used to prepare translations for Monitori Plus. :)

Our revered PM (bless his little cotton socks) is chanting the government mantra here and carefully avoiding some of the main contentious issues (such as how to centralise this branch of public administration). On the other hand, it is gratifying to see just how much the government mantra has changed in the last 15 to 20 years.

I think it is not a little ironic that Vladimir Putin expresses his concerns about population decline in Russia while next door Matti Vanhanen refers to attracting (adequately educated) wretched refuse from the teeming shores of Finland's neighbouring regions.

Just goes to show that no matter how carefully the government mantra is formulated, events just have a habit of changing the context.

daryl
Wo ai Zhong-guo ren

sammy
Posts: 7313
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 2:38 pm

Post by sammy » Thu May 11, 2006 4:02 pm

daryl wrote:I am a former member of the editorial board of Monitori, and I also used to prepare translations for Monitori Plus. :)
:) I was expecting something like this, thus the tone of my question :lol:

Anyway, though I do not have your expertise in the legal etc. issues on immigration policy etc., it is obviously true that talk like that does have mantra-like qualities - hasn't this been an unavoidable feature of politics throughout the ages :) (Cato did not specify in detail as to HOW Carthago should be destroyed... and yet...) It would be silly and naive, I believe, to think that the Mr Blessed Socks doesn't know this himself...

But as you said, it can not be a bad thing if the mantra has changed. Keep up the good work :)

User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 858
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Post by network_engineer » Thu May 11, 2006 7:42 pm

Hi,

astrolite: I apologise, I overlooked your queries in the second paragraph of your posting.

Chapter III, Article 23 states thus:

1. Upon application, the second Member State shall grant long-term residents the status provided for by Article 7, subject to the provisions of Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6. The second Member State shall notify its decision to the first Member State.

In other words, if the alien has resided in the second member state for five years, then yes, the alien can apply. However, the permit issued for the first state is rendered invalid (based on Article 9, point 4)

With regard to language requirements, the answer seems to be yes, i.e. normal conditions as above.

However, interestingly, it seems (based on Article 15 (Conditions for residence in a second Member State), if you already have an long term permit, while the foreigner may not be subject to integration measure, the Directive states that the third-country national may be required to attend language courses.

Cheers.

Cheers.


Post Reply