As citizenship by investment (CBI) schemes continue to attract attention in Europe, the recent opinion of Advocate General (AG) Anthony Collins in European Commission v Malta has emerged as a critical development. This case, focusing on Malta’s "Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment" scheme, presents key legal issues that will impact both Malta and other EU Member States, including Cyprus, which previously ran similar programs.

What’s Inside the Guide:

1. The Legal Framework Behind CBI Programs

AG Collins’ opinion revolves around the core issue of EU citizenship and the interplay with national sovereignty. He concluded that EU law does not require a “genuine link” between an investor and a Member State for the purposes of citizenship. This section of the guide explains how national sovereignty allows countries to define their own rules for citizenship while respecting broader EU principles under Article 20 TFEU. We also cover the Commission’s argument that Malta’s program undermines the integrity of EU citizenship and mutual trust between Member States.

2. National Sovereignty in Granting Citizenship

One of AG Collins’ central findings is that Member States retain full authority over who qualifies for national citizenship. The Treaty of Maastricht’s Declaration No. 2 reinforces that nationality decisions are the sovereign right of each Member State. This section explores how AG Collins confirmed that Malta’s citizenship scheme, despite granting EU citizenship, aligns with national laws, provided it does not conflict with overarching EU obligations like security or fundamental rights protection.

3. Implications for Other EU Countries

AG Collins’ opinion could serve as a legal precedent for other EU countries with CBI programs, including Cyprus. Although Cyprus recently ceased its CBI program, the legal framework examined in this case will have broader implications for future policies. We provide an in-depth look at how the absence of a required “genuine link” for investors could allow Member States to maintain similar programs with fewer restrictions, while still adhering to EU law.

4. Potential Policy Shifts and EU Scrutiny

Although AG Collins’ opinion leans in favor of national discretion, the increasing scrutiny of CBI programs across the EU—due to concerns around security, money laundering, and the commodification of EU citizenship—means that future reforms may be on the horizon.

Conclusion

AG Collins’ opinion marks a pivotal moment in the legal landscape for CBI programs, affirming the rights of Member States to operate such schemes while highlighting the importance of compliance with EU principles. As scrutiny around these programs increases, it’s essential for investors, stakeholders, and legal professionals to stay informed on the latest developments. This guide offers a thorough overview of the key issues and prepares you for what may lie ahead.

Read the full guide here and stay informed on the latest developments.