Earned settlement proposals: An extraordinary betrayal of migrant communities
Just days after major changes to the UK’s asylum policy landscape were announced, further details were released on the government’s plans to reform how migrants acquire settlement in the UK. While many migrants were already bracing for an increase to the qualifying period required before being able to apply for settlement, the government’s plans in this area are far more concerning than initially envisaged.
These sweeping changes set new conditions that individuals must meet to obtain settlement sooner. Among other things, the conditions will penalise migrants who get sick, are exploited or become destitute. They also extend the qualifying period for migrant care workers who arrived on the Health and Care worker route to 15 years, abandoning the promise of five years that enticed them to come in the first place.
Below, we dissect the government’s future plans for settlement policy, why they are unjustified and unnecessarily punitive, and how individuals can feed into the consultation process.
Changes to settlement policy and the introduction of the ‘earned’ settlement model
The government’s future plans on settlement policy rest on a new “earned” settlement model. Individuals applying for settlement will have to meet minimum requirements. Some of these mirror existing requirements for settlement - for example, meeting suitability requirements under the Immigration Rules, passing the Life in the UK test, and being proficient in the English language (though now at a higher level B2 under the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages).
However, there is now a new contribution based requirement which means that individuals must have contributed to the Exchequer by earning above £12,570 for a minimum of three to five years (or an alternative amount of income yet to be specified).
Beyond this minimum set of requirements, the baseline qualifying period to acquire settlement will be increasing from five to 10 years. However, this initial period can be reduced or extended depending on the individual circumstances of each applicant’s case. For example, someone may be able to reduce their qualifying period down to three years if they have been an additional rate taxpayer for three years prior to settlement. Someone claiming benefits, on the other hand, even if only for a short period, could see their qualifying period extended by a further five to 10 years.
In the case of multiple factors that either extend or reduce the baseline qualifying period, one from each category will be picked and traded off against each other to produce the final qualifying period (the factors that have the biggest impact on extending or reducing the baseline qualifying period will be selected).
How individual paths to settlement would be calculated
| Attribute | Adjustment to baseline qualifying periods |
|---|---|
| Applicant has competency in English language at C1 Level under the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages | Minus 1 year |
| Applicant has earned a taxable income of £125,140 for 3 years immediately prior to applying for settlement | Minus 7 years |
| Applicant has earned a taxable income of £50,270 for 3 years immediately prior to applying for settlement | Minus 5 years |
| Applicant has been employed in a specified public service occupation for 5 years | Minus 5 years |
| Applicant has worked in the community (volunteering, etc) | Minus 3-5 years |
| Applicant holds a permission as the parent/partner/child of a British citizen and meets core family requirements. (Not subject to consultation) | Minus 5 years |
| Applicant holds a permission granted under the British National Overseas route . (Not subject to consultation) | Minus 5 years |
| Applicant has 3 years continuous residence as the holder of a permission as a Global Talent worker or Innovator Founder | Minus 7 years |
| Acknowledgement of specific and vulnerable groups having a reduction | Subject to consultation |
| Applicant has been in receipt of public funds for less than 12 months during route to settlement | Plus 5 years |
| Applicant has been in receipt of public funds for more than 12 months during route to settlement | Plus 10 years |
| Applicant arrived in the UK illegally e.g. via small boat/ clandestine | Plus up to 20 years |
| Applicant entered the UK on a visit visa | Plus up to 20 years |
| Applicant has overstayed a permission for six months or more | Plus up to 20 years |
Source: Home Office consultation on Earned Settlement
Applicants holding permission as the dependant of a British citizen or under the British National Overseas route will be subject to the existing five-year qualifying period for settlement and there will be no consultation on this aspect of the changes. There is still some uncertainty here around whether dependants of non-British citizens with permission under Appendix FM of the immigration rules will benefit here, but given the tone of the government’s consultation, this might be wishful thinking. As confirmed in the previous statement on asylum changes, a 20-year qualifying period for settlement for confirmed refugees will be the starting point, while those arriving on official government resettlement schemes will be subject to the 10-year baseline.
Seemingly to address the misconceived public perception that settled migrants are too easily able to access public funds, the government intends to increase the baseline qualifying period for anyone sponsored in a role below RQF Level 6 (in practice mainly those who arrived to work in the social care sector) to from five to 15 years, while also imposing a No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) condition when they eventually do acquire settlement.
Thankfully the government has confirmed that it will not strip people of settled status where this has been acquired already. The government is consulting on whether transitional arrangements should be put in place for those individuals who are already in the UK and thus arrived thinking they would benefit from the old rules.
Dependants will be individually assessed based on their own individual circumstances, meaning they may not acquire settlement at the same time as other family members.There will be a mixed approach for children depending on the child’s age and the point at which they were initially given permission to enter the UK.
The punitive nature of ‘earned settlement’
The government’s anticipated changes to the settlement system are a dangerous betrayal of migrant communities in the UK. Far from bridging societal divides as depicted by the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood in her foreword to the changes, the government’s plans will hinder integration by driving a wedge between migrants and British citizens. They will also create tensions within migrant communities as different cohorts are arbitrarily placed at different starting points on the timeline to settlement and citizenship.
From an exploitation angle, the increases will tie people to employer sponsored visas for longer, increasing their exposure to precarity in the workplace. Settlement will be put out of reach for thousands of people, leaving them in a permanent state of immigration related precarity and increasing the chances that they become undocumented at some point.
Many aspects of the changes are unjustifiably punitive. For example, a migrant worker may see their qualifying period for settlement extended by as much as 10 years if they claim public funds during their stay in the UK. Most migrants are by default already excluded from accessing public funds as a result of the NRPF condition. Where access is permitted, it is only because, facing destitution, the Home Office has agreed that they are in such a vulnerable position that a change of conditions is necessary. These new proposals effectively punish migrant families for getting sick, being exploited or becoming destitute, even where this was no fault of their own.
It is important to note here that even when migrants do acquire settlement and the ability to claim public funds, they make up a small percentage of overall claims. Data gathered by the Department of Work and Pensions in July 2025 confirmed that of the 7.9 million people on Universal Credit in June 2025, the vast majority of claims (83.6%) were made up of British nationals, Irish nationals and people with right of abode in the UK. Only 2.7% of people on Universal Credit were in the Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) category, and 32% of these were in employment anyway (which is broadly in line with the employment figure of 34% for the British, Irish and right of abode category). While the proportion of people with ILR claiming benefits has increased slightly (by 0.5%) since June 2024, this increase is slower than that of the British, Irish and right of abode category (1.1%). These figures were mentioned in the consultation, but they were expressed in whole figures rather than percentages, giving a misleading picture of the Universal Credit context.
Broken promises to carers who answered the UK’s call for help
Extending the qualifying period for migrants working in social care from five to 15 years is a major betrayal. The government has attempted to justify this by saying this cohort tends to be formed of lower wage workers who are less likely to make a positive fiscal contribution to the UK, seemingly forgetting that they were called upon to help the UK recover from Covid. Social care workers were only made eligible for the Health and Care Worker visa after the previous Conservative government recognised significant staff shortages in social care brought about by the pressures of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Despite their efforts to steady a creaking social care system in the aftermath of a global pandemic, the government is actively placing this group of workers in a worse position than other migrants (including doctors and nurses who will actually retain the five-year qualifying period to settlement under plans to exempt certain public service occupations from the changes). This ultimately demonstrates a core lack of appreciation for the social care sector, those delivering care and tarnishes the government’s separate plans to reform the sector.
How to challenge these damaging proposals
These plans are the biggest overhaul of the legal migration model in 50 years and will undoubtedly make it much harder for most migrants to ever settle permanently, hindering their ability to integrate and participate in civic life.
The plans are a cause for major concern for migrant communities across the country and UK employers that rely on the labour of migrant workers. People who came to the UK perfectly lawfully with the expectation that they would be able to settle after five years will have their lives upended by the government’s proposals.
We plan to use every tool in our arsenal to show the government and the general public why these proposals are a betrayal of migrant workers who have contributed so much already to the UK, and a betrayal of the values of honesty and integrity that drew them here in the first place.
How to speak out against the changes
Anyone likely to be affected by the proposals can contribute to the goverment's consultation.
Contributing to the consultation will not affect your immigration status.
Submissions must be sent in by 11.59pm on 12 February 2026.