Golden visas are not just about real estate: deposits, bonds, and funds are options too

For many investors, “golden visas” and “golden passports” are closely associated with real estate: buying an apartment, house, villa, or commercial property to obtain residence rights or citizenship. The reason is simple: real estate is tangible and emotionally compelling – it is a physical asset that can be shown to a client, inspected in person and, at least in the client’s mind, sold as a last resort.

However, investment migration is not limited to real estate. Depending on the country, other assets may also qualify: government bonds, bank deposits, fund units, stakes in companies and other financial instruments. As with a property purchase, this creates a genuine investment decision: the investor must assess the investment’s reliability, expected return, liquidity, lock-up period, non-refundable costs, inflation and currency risk.

This should not be overstated, of course. Far fewer programs link migration status directly to deposits or securities. After 2022, the options available to citizens of Russia and Belarus narrowed even further: some programs were discontinued, while others formally remain in place but are difficult to use in practice because of sanctions, banking requirements and source-of-funds checks. Securities have not become a true substitute for real estate in investment migration, but such options do exist. And when a program is built around a financial instrument, that instrument should be considered as part of the investor’s overall capital, not merely as an attractive line in a migration consultant’s brochure.

Why everyone thinks about real estate

Real estate has become the public face of investment migration: the formula “buy a property = obtain status + preserve capital” is intuitively appealing to an affluent investor.

Of course, this apparent simplicity is deceptive. Property investors still face taxes, transaction fees, maintenance costs, valuation risk and liquidity constraints.

By contrast, the main drawback of financial instruments for many people is their intangibility: there is no apartment by the sea and no sense of “physical security” – only documents, deposits, government bonds and fund units held “somewhere in a depository.” Is this really an investment?

Yes, securities are assets too. Some countries officially recognize them as a qualifying basis for an investment migration program. The investment amount is known, the minimum holding period is fixed, the issuer or management company provides reporting, and the asset may be relatively easy to sell once the required period ends.

It would, of course, be wrong to claim that in this case financial instruments are inherently superior to real estate. For many investors, property remains psychologically easier to understand: there is a specific asset, the possibility of renting it out and a sense of direct control. This is especially true when the alternative is an opaque venture fund – what it will look like in five years is anyone’s guess. The “concrete box,” by contrast, has been there for years and appears likely to remain.

But if we are talking about government bonds, a bank deposit, or a regulated fund with a clear structure and composition, things are not so straightforward.

The key is to determine which asset best serves the specific purpose: obtaining status, preserving liquidity, controlling risk and recovering the capital after the mandatory holding period at the lowest reasonable cost.

Securities in investment migration programs: historical examples

Before 2022, a number of European programs allowed Russians to obtain migration status not only through real estate purchases, but also through investments in financial instruments.

For example, Spain’s Investor visa originally allowed investment in government debt, shares and funds, as well as bank deposits. The regime remained in force until April 2025.

Under Malta’s former Individual investor programme, investors were required to purchase and hold a specified amount of government bonds (Malta government stocks). The program was later revised, while the broader concept of citizenship by investment in the EU encountered legal challenges under European law.

Bulgaria offers another example: the country once had immigration programs that allowed investment in financial assets, including government bonds. In 2022, its citizenship-by-investment route was finally abolished.

Italy’s investor visa is available through financial investments, including government bonds and investments in companies and startups, but the program has been suspended for citizens of Russia and Belarus.

Saint Lucia’s program has been affected as well. Formally, the option of obtaining citizenship by purchasing government bonds still exists , but, unfortunately, it is not available to us. The terms are a minimum investment of 300,000 dollars and a five-year holding period. These bonds pay no interest and are not conventional zero-coupon bonds purchased at a discount: in effect, the investor receives back the amount originally invested. In addition to the principal, the investor must pay a separate non-refundable administrative fee of 50,000 dollars.

What changed after 2022

After 2022, the situation with migration programs became more complicated – especially for citizens of Russia and Belarus.

Formally, a program may remain open to foreign applicants. In practice, however, migration authorities, agents and law firms often decline to work with Russian or Belarusian citizens, or accept their applications only after extensive preliminary checks. Banks, management companies and depositories may also refuse to open the required account.

In many cases, the banking side becomes decisive. The funds may have been earned legitimately, but the available documentation may still be insufficient to satisfy strict compliance requirements, including due diligence, sanctions screening and source-of-funds verification. Financial intermediaries may also simply be unwilling to assume the perceived reputational risk.

What still works

Turkey is one of the few countries with an active program. A foreign investor may qualify for citizenship through financial investments:

• deposit in a Turkish bank
• purchase of Turkish government bonds
• acquisition of units in a real estate fund or venture investment fund

In each case, the minimum investment is 500,000 dollars and the required holding period is three years.

In Portugal, the approach is different: the program does not grant citizenship directly, but provides a route to a residence permit under the ARI framework. After the real estate options were narrowed, one of the main routes became investment in funds that meet the following criteria:

• the fund is established under Portuguese law
• it is not a real estate fund
• at the time the units are purchased, at least 5 years remain before the fund is wound up
• at least 60% of the fund’s assets are invested in Portuguese companies (startups, small and medium-sized businesses, technology projects)

The minimum investment is 500,000 euros, with a five-year holding period.

In Hungary, investors may also acquire fund units, although in this case the qualifying vehicle is a real estate fund. The management company must be included in a special register, and at least 40% of the fund’s net assets must consist of Hungarian residential property. The minimum investment is 250,000 euros, with a five-year holding period. In return, the investor receives a residence permit valid for up to ten years, renewable, with an unrestricted right to work in Hungary.

Getting your capital back does not make the investment free

The promise that the capital is “returned” can make it sound as though the money is simply locked up for several years and then repaid without loss. A proper analysis, however, must take other factors into account.

• Does the instrument generate current income, such as coupons on government bonds or dividends and distributions from funds? How does the return compare with alternative investments over a 3–5 year horizon?
• In what currency is the asset denominated, and in what currency are the family’s obligations? How has that currency performed historically against major reserve currencies? For example, from 1990 to 2026, the Turkish lira depreciated against the US dollar by an average of 31% a year – which, incidentally, is also bad news for local real estate.
• Can the asset be sold early if necessary, and how would breaching the program conditions affect the investor’s migration status?
• Where are the financial assets held – at a bank, with a broker or in a separate depository? Who manages them? Which authority regulates the relevant institution, and how financially sound are they?
• What liquidity is available on exit? Is redemption at par guaranteed? Is there an active secondary market? Can units be redeemed directly by the management company, or must the investor find a buyer independently?
• Which payments are non-refundable – government fees, due diligence costs, legal and agency fees, administrative and banking charges, spreads or taxes? What is the total cost of the investment once all expenses are included?

After all, we are talking about investments of 300,000 or 500,000 dollars – or more. These funds are effectively carved out of the broader portfolio for years. This part of the portfolio cannot be freely rebalanced or used as a liquidity reserve; the capital is concentrated in one country and one currency, while the legal structure itself introduces additional risks.

At the same time, a financial instrument used in a migration program cannot be assessed as an ordinary investment. It is acquired primarily to achieve a legal and practical outcome – a residence permit, permanent residency or citizenship; access to the international banking system; the ability to live in another country and educate one’s children there; and, more broadly, a “Plan B” for the investor and the family.

The role of an investment advisor

As an investment advisor, I neither can nor should replace a migration consultant. I do not promise second citizenship, advise on migration law, choose a country on the client’s behalf, file applications or prepare source-of-funds documentation – these matters are handled by specialist colleagues.

My responsibility is to provide an independent assessment of the financial instrument underlying the program, whether it is a deposit, a bond, a stake in a company, units in a real estate fund or an interest in a venture fund. I analyse the key parameters: the capital lock-up period, currency risk, expected return, fee structure, issuer or management company risk, liquidity and related factors.

As an advisor, I help the client distinguish the recoverable portion of the investment from non-refundable costs and compare the program with a conventional portfolio. This shows which opportunities are given up by committing a substantial amount to one instrument, country and currency – and which opportunities are gained in return. The aim is to weigh the trade-offs and make a more objective decision.

The analysis may also lead to the opposite conclusion: a particular fund or financial instrument may prove too complex, expensive or illiquid, making real estate look more transparent and easier to understand. That is precisely the value of an independent assessment: its purpose is not to sell a product, but to provide an objective picture.

Where necessary, I involve specialist professionals, such as lawyers and tax advisers, who have no interest in selling the product.

The terms of investment migration programs may change. A program may formally exist but remain unavailable in practice to citizens of certain countries. Completing the transaction may also prove more complicated than the program’s legal terms suggest, including because of the internal policies of individual financial institutions.

This material is current as of July 2026 and does not constitute legal, tax, migration or investment advice. Please, consult a qualified professional before making any decision.