Advisory: Family Income

The Migration Advisory Committee is a theoretically independent unit of the government that provides ministerial research.  They came out today with a report that concluded that a minimum income of somewhere between GBP 18,600 and 25,700 was a good number to use. 

They pointed out that using those numbers could reduce family immigration by 45 - 63% (which is the central platform of the coalition government currently running the show). 

What happens next?  Well, it needs to go to a Parliamentary committee who will take oral and written evidence from various experts.  After that it will be sent to the drafters who will hammer it into a bill, and then the bill will be laid before Parliament.  Then it gets three readings in each house and blah blah blah blah. 

The whole process usually takes a long time, and thus won't affect anybody in the pipeline.  This is about entry clearance and not ILR or LTR.

*BUT* if you were planning to apply sometime in 2012, and especially after April 2012, and your income is below GBP 18K then you *might* be well advised to consider your options for acceleration.  Note that I didn't write that you *have* to accelerate; but rather that you should consider it...

are they likely to be able to put into practice the changes before april though transpondia given that we are already in novemember now.  As you say these parlimentary things take a long time and after it has been approved in parliment it has to be approved in the lords is that right .

Love pads 

But noted we definitely intend to apply before april now as my son is not earning that figure, and he doubts his pay rise will cover it lol x

So this is just for spousal visa and not ILR or Citizenship?

My heart is in my stomach. This will be impossible for me to meet as the Spouse. We are trying so hard to get DHs application in by March, but in reality I can see us having to apply after April 2012.

Together as a married couple working we could meet this. But if they rely on the sponsor then nope. Where does this leave people like us?

I don't wish to return to the USA, after a horrible bout of depression 5000 miles away with no family apart from my DH, making the leap to move over here was a huge leap. My daughters are now happily settled in school in the UK surrounded by family that love them. Unfortunately their Daddy is waiting for a house to Short Sale in the US, before applying.



Feel sick to my stomach as melodramatic as this might seem. They are playing with peoples lives and families.

So this is just for spousal visa and not ILR or Citizenship?

I thought it was - the original consultation made reference to Leave to Remain applications, and letters from Damian Green recently also said it would be for ILR - but in this document they just seem to be talking about entry, and actually suggest different figures may be required for in-country applications (figures they haven't reseached at this stage).

UKBA have always been very careful not to refuse in-country people based on maintenance, probably because it would likely lead to a lot of successful Human Rights appeals.

PresumAbly they have peeps in the HO working out right now how high they can raise the income threshold without losing a court challenge (which would be a disaster for them).  I find it hard to believe they could get away with a figure that excluded half the working UK population, especially when most people are younger when they marry and earning lower salaries.

I am just VERY thankful we have Transpondia to give advisory's and thankful to this forum for which I feel I would be clueless. At least we can attempt to plan for eventualities ... although with the UKBA/Government who really knows whats around the corner. Sometimes it feels like that just pull ideas out of a hat .. like a bad magician in a backstreet cabaret   

I am just VERY thankful we have Transpondia to give advisory's and thankful to this forum for which I feel I would be clueless. At least we can attempt to plan for eventualities ... although with the UKBA/Government who really knows whats around the corner. Sometimes it feels like that just pull ideas out of a hat .. like a bad magician in a backstreet cabaret   

Yeah with a bit of luck they will all saw themselves in half and we can sleep easier at night 

Here is the link .... http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/aboutus/workingwithus/mac/family-migration-route/family-migration-route.pdf?view=Binary

I'm confused (again).  Does this mean you actually have to have a job *in hand* before you land (and one that pays that salary)?  I thought it was enough to have savings and property enough to see you through a couple of years, plus decent prospects (which would describe us).
Does this figure apply to the couple, or just the applicant, or just the spouse?
Second, how can they just pull a figure out of a hat and expect one size to fit all?  We (for example) have property free and clear, therefore no mortgage or rent, and don't even have (or want!) a car -- so we could live on a fraction of that.
Let's hope for an outbreak of common sense.

PresumAbly they have peeps in the HO working out right now how high they can raise the income threshold without losing a court challenge (which would be a disaster for them).  I find it hard to believe they could get away with a figure that excluded half the working UK population, especially when most people are younger when they marry and earning lower salaries.

I noticed the committee put that caveat in - this research is entirely basic on economic reasoning, but they understand there are also moral and legal issues when deciding these things. I'd be shocked if it's 25k. Might even be a bit lower than 18k, you never know.

Welsh Girl:   You could always have your husband apply for his visa in March 2011 - remember its for 27 months, so he'd have 2-3 more months to sort his affairs in the US before moving over.   Just a thought.

Hang on peeps.  It's way too early for people to be flipping out.  

The best thing at this point is to be informed, to take it on board, put it on your radar, understand what's going down, and ONLY IF APPROPRIATE, assess your current strategy with a view towards timing.

We will *absolutely* brief the House of Lords before they do anything.  That's a 100% sure.  That doesn't mean that a locomotive with a head of steam will get derailed, but for sure we'll muddy up the waters.

What is a person supposed to do when there is no "strategy" to assess?  What if your plans are long range? 

An income limit this high will prevent people from retiring back home. 

I can't tell you how distressing this is to me. 

What is a person supposed to do when there is no "strategy" to assess?  What if your plans are long range? 

Everybody in the world with serious intent to immigrate here has a strategy, be it ill-formed or ill-advised or sound or unsound or practical or well-informed or illegal or legal and strongly defensible or proactive or reactive or even *nascent*, it's still their strategy.  Even if they don't know it. 

In about the last 8 years, most UK-Yankee spouses seem to adopt a reactive strategy.  You can't blame them, it's the first time they have ever engaged formally with a foreign government.  But that's a generalization on my part.

In your case, based upon your comment, the thing to do would be to get your strategy nailed down.  Lock in.  After that you can see if there's something to be done to accomodate the new proposals from the coalition government.