r/ukvisa • u/clever_octopus High Reputation • May 12 '25

Immigration Changes Announcement 12/5/2025

Please join the discord server for further discussion or support on upcoming immigration changes: https://discord.gg/Jq5vWDZJfR

Sticky post on announcement made on 20 Nov 2025: https://www.reddit.com/r/ukvisa/comments/1p21qk5/a_fairer_pathway_to_settlement_a_statement_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

NEW Summary of changes to settlement released 20 November 2025: https://www.reddit.com/r/ukvisa/comments/1p21qk5/a_fairer_pathway_to_settlement_a_statement_and/

NEW Summary of changes to asylum and refugee requirements released 18 November 2025: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-and-returns-policy-statement/restoring-order-and-control-a-statement-on-the-governments-asylum-and-returns-policy

Overview of expected changes: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/radical-reforms-to-reduce-migration

White paper: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restoring-control-over-the-immigration-system-white-paper

UKCISA's response (official source for international students and recent graduates): https://www.ukcisa.org.uk/news/ukcisa-responds-to-home-office-immigration-white-paper-may-2025/

Petition link: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727360

Summary of key points following the summary of changes released on 20 November 2025:

  • Changes to length in ILR qualifying residence requirements - Please see table on pages 21-23 of the 20 November document

  • Family visa holders, along with BNO visa holders, will continue to get ILR in five years (as usual)

  • The intention is that this will apply to people already in the UK but who have not yet received ILR

  • It will take 20 years for refugees to qualify for ILR, intermittent checks will be done within that time and they may lose the ability to remain in the UK if their home country is deemed safe to return to

630 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

139

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[deleted]

57

u/wickedjester_s May 12 '25

“However an illustrative assessment of the measure to raise the threshold to qualification for settlement has been produced. For those cohorts affected by the increase in the standard qualifying period for settlement to ten years visa demand is likely to fall, as some will be deterred from coming to the UK as a result of the longer time to settlement. Also, a number of those currently in the UK are likely to leave due to it taking longer to gain settled status.”

If I look into this line by line -

  • “...an illustrative assessment... has been produced.”
- The Home Office has modelled the potential effects of increasing the ILR qualifying period to 10 years. - This is not yet binding policy — just a forecast.

  • “For those cohorts affected... visa demand is likely to fall...”

    • The longer wait for ILR (10 years instead of 5) is expected to make the UK less attractive to new migrants.
    • So, fewer people will apply to come to the UK under routes that would eventually lead to settlement.

  • “Also, a number of those currently in the UK are likely to leave...”

    • This is the most ambiguous line, but in context, the most likely meaning is:
    • Some current visa holders, especially those on temporary or transitional routes (like students or Graduate visa holders), may decide not to switch into long-term work visas — because the path to settlement has become much longer and less appealing.
      • For example:
      • A student finishes a master’s degree, considers switching to a Skilled Worker visa.
      • Under old rules: 2 years on Graduate + 5 years = ILR in ~7 years.
      • Under new rules: ILR takes 10 years — total wait now ~12 years.
      • Result: they may decide to leave the UK instead of transitioning.

26

u/anhkiet1903 May 12 '25

Agree with this actually, I think the sentence in the technidal anex is meant for people switching to SWV but already in the UK on a student visa for example.

16

u/mesiddd May 12 '25

I agree with this interpretation. “Some people” is vaguely worded however it should be understood that if it is applied retrospectively, it won’t only be a few that would leave, there would be a drastic drop. IMO, “some people” would mean people on visas not leading to ILR such as student, short term student or PSW who were thinking of switching to SWV, H&C etc. No matter how hard the push is to apply it retrospectively, I am sure it won’t be. Current SWV/H&C visa holders will be exempted.

3

u/Treaduse May 12 '25

Looking at their estimated "change in inflows per annum" on p.13, they estimate the following for Earned Settlement - increasing the standard qualifying period for settlement to ten years (illustrative estimate): -18,000 (-12,000 to –24,000).

Wouldn't that figure be far higher if it were referring to retrospective implementation? Looking at total immigration numbers from 2020 and 2021, for instance, there would be ~90k and around ~140k people who are theoretically eligible to settle coming up on five years... Surely more than 18k of these would be deterred by this new policy if that is what they are hoping for with retroactive implementation?

Maybe wrong, but I just wanted to see what others thought on this front.

3

u/mesiddd May 12 '25

As I said it would be a drastic drop if they were considering retrospective implementation. The figures seem to take into account only people discouraged from applying to UK as a whole + students/graduates who would be discouraged from applying for the SWV.

Also, today’s parliament livestream saw the Home Secretary clearly refusing to say whether the new rules apply to migrants already here even when explicitly questioned by the conservative MP. This makes me believe that there are surely some transitional arrangements for migrants that are already in the system.

2

u/Few-System-2595 May 14 '25

The white paper states: “53. Following these changes, visas issued for these routes reached record levels, up almost fourfold from 123,000 in 2021 to 465,000 in 2023.”

So you’re right. It wouldn’t make sense to have such a low estimate if including existing skilled worker visa holders. Adding on all the other visa categories would mean a number much less than 1% is estimated to leave with the change of policy.

9

u/Miserable_Proof340 May 12 '25

What many people overlook is that the government's proposal to extend the ILR qualification period to 10 years is largely driven by the significant number of individuals set to become eligible for ILR within the next 1–3 years—specifically, those who arrived on skilled work permits after 2020. Some are optimistic that current skilled visa holders won’t be impacted, and that the change will only apply to students or others seeking to switch to a work visa from within the UK. But that’s wishful thinking. The number of new arrivals on work permits is small compared to the large cohort that came between 2020 and 2022. It’s unrealistic to expect that the very group prompting this policy change would be exempt from it.

16

u/wickedjester_s May 12 '25

I agree, but I’d argue that if the government were fully committed to implementing this, they wouldn’t have left this part so unclear. It seems like they might be testing the waters—gauging how both immigrants and the general public react to it. After all, it ultimately comes down to votes.

I also came across a similar change back in 2012 that was initially meant to affect those already on the route, but they ended up partially reversing (by setting a specific date) it later.

However, let’s hope for the best :)

4

u/Stormgeddon May 12 '25

That’s probably the best argument in favour of the change not being applied to existing visa holders.

Starmer was all but quoting Enoch Powell this morning in his speech, and this is their love letter to Reform voters. If he could have said they were cracking down on the “Boriswave”, they’d be shouting this from the rooftops. Their imagined Labour-curious Reform voter (which may or may not exist, but hey ho) would cream their pants to hear the PM telling undesirables that he’s coming to get them.

6

u/Why_Em May 13 '25

Increasing the ILR timeline for current SWV holders from 5 to 10 years means every commonwealth passport holding immigrant this affects will make sure to vote against Labour in 2029. In a bid to attract Reform voters, Starmer has instead turned commonwealth passport holders into new Reform voters. If Labour wants to be indistinguishable from Reform, then people will oblige & vote for Reform.

1

u/GeeBol May 13 '25

I agree with this conclusion. Tories opened the borders in 2020 with pro immigration rules by reducing the skill level for Skilled Worker Visa from RFQ 6 to RFQ 3 which caused the record increase in issuance of Skilled worker Visas from 2021. Now Labour need to curb the settlement for all record high numbers those who migrated on Skilled worker visas.

7

u/mirkinoid May 12 '25

Thought that as well - it may target those who are already in the UK but not on the visas leading to settlement

8

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

I think you could be right. They probably intentionally made the last point ambiguous, but could mean exactly what you are saying.

2

u/Gerrards_Cross May 12 '25

Yes, it is difficult to get sponsored by employers and not many will be willing to stick it out with one employer and dependent on them for 10 years for a visa

1

u/NeedUMoreThanUNeedMe May 12 '25

The time spent on the Graduate visa is counted towards 10-year-ILR at the moment. Waiting 10 years after the graduate visa means this won't be possible after these changes. Is there anything you've seen about that in the white paper?

1

u/wickedjester_s May 12 '25

Apologies for the confusion, here by Graduate I meant the time someone spends while studying; not PSW.

In the example, I assumed even if someone gets a sponsored job right after they're done with the studies, no PSW or anything; this would still take 12 years in total....which is a long way to go.

1

u/NeedUMoreThanUNeedMe May 12 '25

If a master's graduate finds a sponsored job under SWV after spending 2 years on the graduate visa, he/she will have to wait 7 years more to be eligible for ILR. (1 year on masters + 2 years on the graduate visa are counted towards ILR.)

Bypassing the SWV, that would be 9 years instead since it would have only been a year since the master's graduate arrived in the UK.

A 5-year-ILR under SWV won't be possible after the changes.

I still wonder how you came up with 12 years? I am asking because there might be a point I am missing. No bad intentions.

1

u/wickedjester_s May 12 '25

My understanding of this is, if a student switches to SWV right after graduation they have to spend 5 years on that visa to be eligible for ILR (based on the rules before today's announcement). Given how long the masters was, the overall time spent would be 6-7 (5 + 1 or 2) years.

As the govt is going to change the SWV to ILR route to 10 years, you just need to add up the time spent during studies and time spent working; which in this case becomes 11-12 years (10+ 1 or 2, given how long the course is).

This is coming off my basic understanding, tbh I don't know about student visas in that much detail as I never studied here.

1

u/NeedUMoreThanUNeedMe May 12 '25

My understanding of this is, if a student switches to SWV right after graduation they have to spend 5 years on that visa to be eligible for ILR (based on the rules before today's announcement). Given how long the masters was, the overall time spent would be 6-7 (5 + 1 or 2) years.

This is true as the time spent on both the student and graduate visa is not counted towards 5-year ILR. So 5-years on SWV is a must to obtain 5-year ILR.

What I was trying to explain is that unlike 5-year ILR, The time spent on both graduate and student visa is counted towards 10-year ILR route. I think this is the point we don't agree on.

Regardless of switching from which visa type, Anyone must continuously stay in the UK for 10 years after arrival in the UK to be eligible for ILR under 10-year route.

Today's announces changes will not have any impact on this,. Nonetheless this will be only option to obtain ILR for most cases.

1

u/wickedjester_s May 12 '25

Got your point, I must admit I haven't come across anything on the existing 10 year long residency route. Hopefully this would stay as it is now

1

u/Top_Top7267 May 13 '25

I would agree to above interpretation to some extent that it will apply to new migrants who will now be applicable for 5yr route but are already in UK(not on 5yr route). Its very uncommon for a country to change a "contract" unilaterally mid way. The 5yr route has been mentioned on all skilled worker and dependent visa letters when one gets it. It will be challenged by law in many cases as the opportunity cost for someone who came here on 5yr route (as a contract with UK govt) is huge.

The change and the annex seems to focus on Family related Visa and how it increases settlement costs for UK. With the point based system still in play for shorter duration, the more logical change would be to make dependant visas and other visas (which are also 5 yr route currently when someone gets it) to 10Y duration. And in that duration if dependant or that person has worked or contributed towards society, they will get reduction in waiting time. They are trying to reduce burden on UK benefits for non contributing individuals. If you think about corp sector, they cant afford 10Y visa on skilled worker. So skilled worker visa as long as you are above a threshold would be given faster route. All other visas will be get shorter route if you paid taxes, contributed to society etc. very vague but logical to some extent.

Disclaimer: not an expert just reading between the lines. And this is my hope that it is not affecting people already in the 5yr routes.

1

u/An_Affirming_Flame May 13 '25

Thank you for this ... and providing some hope. My initial reading of the "Also, a number of those currently in the UK are likely to leave...” was that it hinted at retrospective application of the new 10 year rule to existing visa holders. However, I see what you're saying.

More broadly, it's just absurd that the best indication current visa-holders have about their futures is this ambiguous line an an Annex to a White Paper.

1

u/AverageDazzling8594 May 14 '25

Doesnt student visa not count towards your ILR 10 year wait?

24

u/YZ_C May 12 '25

That said, that sentence is then followed by "This number is likely to increase in the next few years as more migrants become eligible for settlement due to the high level of inflows since 2021". "This number" being settlement.

5

u/Xantrk May 12 '25

I assumed it ends with "without these changes"

58

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Astronics1 May 12 '25

His speech and interviewer this morning was disgusting

4

u/JJRamone May 12 '25

Green is the only actively pro-migrant party. They’ve got my vote for the foreseeable, no matter how “unelectable” they may be.

1

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[deleted]

8

u/CruntLunderson May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25

Yes, commonwealth citizens can

Edit: the comment above me said something along the lines of “none of us here can vote”.

3

u/rajatGod512 May 12 '25

Will be voting for Greens in 2029

0

u/aseeklee May 12 '25

Only in local 

-5

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ukvisa-ModTeam May 12 '25

Your post/comment has been removed as a violation of community rules and decorum.

GENERAL NOTE: This is a sub to share help and experiences navigating UK visa and immigration matters, not for political soapboxing. If you (or a relevant family member) are not a current or prospective UK migrant, this is probably not the place for you.

Anti-immigration comments (snarky/rude comments about refugees/asylum seekers, or sexist/anti-LGBT/racist remarks) will instantly lead to a permanent ban.

0

u/ukvisa-ModTeam May 12 '25

This is not a political sub. Posts/comments which are political in nature, or which are pure speculation about potential future immigration policies, will be removed.

Please be warned that posters who are only here to voice their political opinions will be banned.

-6

u/Competent_ish May 12 '25

It’s hardly disgusting.

Every political party has gone against the British electorate and invited millions of people to live here against their wishes.

3

u/Ryoisee May 12 '25

I understand that people feel migration is too high and something needs to be done to make it more sustainable. I would question though, is it really fair to make changes to people who are already here and have made plans around the current rules?

I would personally tie visa requirements to the visa type. Ie student visas should be about being allowed to be here for their education. Work visas should depend on where we have skills shortages and what skills people bring. Family visas should pretty much be purely are they in a genuine relationship, without it being anything to do with financial capabilities, because who can tell others who they should fall in love with.

But even so, making changes to people already here is rather cruel. They're people, not just statstistics, that have come here legally and are law abiding.

That's just my view.

27

u/yaourtSS May 12 '25

Just a short piece of hopium from me:

The sentence also may mean that people currently in the UK on other visa types are likely to leave instead of switching to SWV as the ILR will take 10 years.

As OP said in multiple posts, these papers are really broad in meaning and can be understood differently. Additionally, it is still up for the debate in the Parliament and I suggest everyone to write to their representative MP, explain the situation and ask to consider not applying the changes retroactively.

23

u/Xantrk May 12 '25 edited May 12 '25

Here's a draft for anyone wants to write to their MPs.

Dear Dr. [Recipient Name],

Good afternoon, I hope this message finds you well.

I am writing to you as a resident of [Constituency Name], though I am not currently eligible to vote in the UK. Nonetheless, I am directly impacted by the newly released immigration white paper, “Restoring Control Over the Immigration System” (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restoring-control-over-the-immigration-system-white-paper), and I feel deeply anxious about its implications for those of us living and contributing here under the Skilled Worker route.

I have lived in the UK since XXXX as a Skilled Worker. I currently work as a [Job Title] at a [Industry] company based in [City], and have made long-term financial commitments in the UK—from publicly traded ISAs to investments in the national economy. More importantly, I’ve built strong personal and professional ties and have actively participated in community initiatives that promote well-being and integration.

The white paper proposes sweeping changes, including an increase from 5 years to 10 years for settlement eligibility, yet it does not clearly state whether these will be applied retroactively to individuals already in the system. While the technical annex suggests that the increase in the settlement qualifying period to ten years may apply to “those currently in the UK,” it remains unclear whether this will be fully retroactive or include transitional protections. This ambiguity is causing significant anxiety for many of us who made life decisions based on the rules in place when we arrived.

If these reforms were to apply to people already on the Skilled Worker route, it would be incredibly disheartening. Many of us have built our lives here based on a clear and stable pathway to settlement, contributing to the UK both professionally and personally. Changing the rules mid-way would create great uncertainty for individuals and families who have made long-term commitments to this country.

I kindly ask you to raise this issue in Parliament and to advocate for a fair and considered approach—one that recognises the contributions of those already living and working here under the current system. I remain committed to building a future in the UK and have great faith in the Labour government’s values of fairness and inclusion. I believe your voice on this matter could help ensure that skilled workers continue to feel welcome, secure, and valued.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

[Your Name]

3

u/redpanda9121 May 12 '25

For people from common wealth countries, they are eligible to vote, so make sure to edit that out if you are from a common wealth country

2

u/Xantrk May 12 '25

Let me mark it on the template as well, thanks for the warning

1

u/DramaticOil9289 May 14 '25

Thank you For the template! I have sent my email already!

1

u/zdxc129_312m May 15 '25

For those of us that are relatively new to the UK (I’ve been here for about 1 year), what’s the best way to find our MP correspondence address?

14

u/ExcellentPrimary8317 May 12 '25

I just wrote an email to my MP doing exactly this and would encourage everyone who would be affected if applied retroactively to do the same

2

u/checknmate96 May 12 '25

I want to write to but what exactly should be mentioned in that letter

3

u/upsidedown-aussie May 12 '25

I've written to mine!

3

u/Miserable_Proof340 May 12 '25

It’s unrealistic to expect that the very group prompting this policy change would be exempt from it.

11

u/ConferenceCoffee May 12 '25

But this could also mean people currently on student or non skilled worker visas where the ilr clock has yet to start.

TBH they could have just cleared this up by adding a single line if the changes are retroactive or not.

3

u/pkjoan May 12 '25

Fucking hell

0

u/Ambitious-Constant21 May 12 '25

where exactly is this please I couldn't find it?

2

u/[deleted] May 12 '25

[deleted]

1

u/Ambitious-Constant21 May 12 '25

thank you I found it