The 2026 reform of the Portuguese Nationality Law represents the most significant restriction of access to Portuguese citizenship in over two decades. For expatriates resident in Madeira and mainland Portugal, and in particular for Golden Visa investors who structured their immigration strategy around the previous five-year naturalisation timeline, the Portugal nationality law updates of 2026 demand careful legal review.
This analysis, prepared by the legal team at MCS, examines three interconnected developments: (i) the substantive amendments to the Nationality Law (Lei da Nacionalidade); (ii) the partial unconstitutionality declared by the Constitutional Court in Acórdão n.º 409/2026; and (iii) the realistic legal avenues, including potential State liability claims, available to those whose expectations have been frustrated by the new regime.
Key Takeaways
- The standard residency period for naturalisation has been extended from 5 to 10 years; nationals of EU Member States and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP) now require 7 years.
- Special acquisition regimes for Sephardic Jewish descendants and persons born in former Portuguese overseas territories have been revoked.
- Jus soli (acquisition by birth in Portugal) has been tightened, with stricter integration requirements imposed on foreign parents.
- Pending applications are safeguarded under Article 7 of the new diploma, the prior regime continues to apply.
- The Constitutional Court (Acórdão 409/2026) struck down the proposed loss-of-nationality criminal penalty as discriminatory and disproportionate.
- A successful State liability action based purely on the extended residency periods faces substantial legal obstacles under Article 15 of Law 67/2007.
What Are the Main Portugal Nationality Law Updates in 2026?
The Portugal nationality law updates of 2026 introduce four principal changes: extended residency periods for naturalisation (10 years general, 7 years for EU/CPLP nationals), tightened jus soli criteria, the abolition of special regimes for Sephardic descendants and former overseas territories, and immediate entry into force with a transitional safeguard for pending applications.
1. Extended Residency Requirements for Naturalisation
The most consequential amendment concerns the qualifying period of legal residence required to apply for Portuguese citizenship by naturalisation:
| Applicant Category | Previous Regime | 2026 Regime |
|---|---|---|
| General (third-country nationals) | 5 years | 10 years |
| EU Member State nationals | 5 years | 7 years |
| CPLP nationals | 5 years | 7 years |
| Golden Visa investors | 5 years (treated under general rule) | 10 years |
For Golden Visa holders, many of whom relocated to Lisbon, the Algarve, or Madeira on the explicit premise of a five-year path to citizenship, the doubling of the qualifying period is, in practical terms, a redefinition of the entire investment thesis.
2. Reconfiguration of Jus Soli (Birth in Portuguese Territory)
Under the previous regime, a child born in Portugal to foreign parents acquired Portuguese nationality directly where at least one parent had resided in the country for one year, regardless of formal residence permit status. The 2026 reform eliminates this automaticity and imposes a heightened threshold of formalised, integrated residence on the parents, a material change for foreign families settled in Funchal, Lisbon, Porto, and elsewhere.
3. Termination of Special Acquisition Regimes
Two long-standing pathways have been definitively closed:
- Sephardic Jewish descent: the regime permitting nationality acquisition on the basis of Sephardic ancestry, in force for approximately a decade, has been revoked.
- Former Portuguese overseas territories: the regime granting nationality to persons born in territories that have since become independent has likewise been terminated.
4. Entry into Force and Transitional Safeguard
The new law entered into force upon publication, without a general transitional period. However, Article 7 of the diploma expressly provides that pending applications are governed by the prior version of the Nationality Law — a safeguard underscored by the President of the Republic in the act of promulgation.
The legal consequence is critical: applicants whose files were submitted before the entry into force of the reform retain their entitlement to evaluation under the five-year regime. Those who anticipated reaching the five-year threshold “shortly” must now satisfy the new periods.
Why Did the Constitutional Court Reject the Loss-of-Nationality Penalty?
The Constitutional Court declared the proposed Article 69.º-D of the Penal Code partially unconstitutional in Acórdão n.º 409/2026 on grounds of discrimination between original and naturalised citizens (Article 13 of the Constitution) and disproportionality in criminal sanctioning (Articles 18(2) and 26(1) of the Constitution). The penalty would, in practice, have applied only to naturalised Portuguese citizens.
The Decreto da Assembleia da República n.º 49/XVII
In parallel with the Nationality Law reform, the Assembly of the Republic approved a decree introducing Article 69.º-D of the Penal Code, creating an accessory criminal penalty of loss of Portuguese nationality applicable, in summary, to dual nationals convicted of effective imprisonment of five years or more for specified serious offences (qualified homicide, slavery, human trafficking, certain sexual offences, crimes against State security, terrorism, and related criminal association), where the underlying facts occurred within fifteen years of acquisition of nationality.
Fifty-one Members of Parliament requested a priori constitutional review.
The Court’s Reasoning
Violation of the Principle of Equality (Article 13 CRP)
Although the legislative text refers neutrally to “acquisition” of nationality, the architecture of the fifteen-year window, read together with the Nationality Law and its Regulation, meant the penalty would, in practice, only be capable of being applied to naturalised citizens. Original nationals see their citizenship produce effects from birth; the fifteen-year period therefore expires before they reach the age of criminal responsibility (16 years). The Court held this created a second-tier citizenship for naturalised Portuguese, a constitutionally impermissible “citizenship under reservation.”
Violation of Proportionality and Necessity in Criminal Law
The Constitutional Court reaffirmed that citizenship is a fundamental right of reinforced status, intimately connected to human dignity, and that its deprivation is admissible only in exceptional circumstances supported by strong material justification. Loss of nationality is constitutionally compatible only where there is a functional connection between the offence and the bond of allegiance to the State, typically crimes against State security or terrorism.
Serious common-law offences, however grave, do not necessarily express a rupture of the politico-legal relationship with the State; their punishment is adequately addressed by the principal sentence. Their inclusion in the catalogue of offences triggering loss of nationality was therefore disproportionate and violated the principle of necessity in penal sanctions.
What Survived the Ruling
The Court did not strike down the residency reforms within the Nationality Law itself. The Acórdão expressly notes that the prior version of the Nationality Law reform (Decreto 48/XVII) had already been the subject of constitutional purging and that the version now in force passed constitutional scrutiny. Accordingly:
- The extended residency periods (10/7 years) remain in force.
- The abolition of the Sephardic and overseas-territory regimes remains in force.
- The revised jus soli criteria remain in force.
- The accessory penalty of loss of nationality is, in its core elements, not promulgable.
Can Golden Visa Holders Sue the Portuguese State Over the New Law?
A State liability action premised solely on the extension of residency periods faces significant legal obstacles. While Article 22 of the Constitution and Law 67/2007 establish State liability for legislative acts, Article 15 requires both qualified illegality (proven unconstitutionality or breach of EU/international law) and abnormal damages, neither of which is straightforwardly satisfied by the 2026 reform.
The Legal Framework: Article 22 CRP and Law 67/2007
Article 22 of the Portuguese Constitution enshrines the general principle of public-entity liability:
“The State and other public entities are jointly civilly liable (…) for actions or omissions practised in the exercise of their functions (…) from which results a violation of rights, freedoms and guarantees, or damage to others.“
This principle is operationalised by Law n.º 67/2007, the Regime da Responsabilidade Civil Extracontratual do Estado e Demais Entidades Públicas. Article 15 governs liability arising from the politico-legislative function and imposes two cumulative requirements:
- Qualified illegality — the legislative act must contravene the Constitution, international law, EU law, or a statute of reinforced value, as recognised by judicial decision.
- Abnormal damages — the harm must constitute a special sacrifice exceeding the general burden borne by all citizens affected by legislative change.
A 2010 Opinion of the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Parecer n.º 39/2010) confirms that liability is exclusive to the State — there is no recourse against Members of Parliament, and underscores the restrictive character of liability for legislative acts.
Protection of Legitimate Expectations
Portuguese case law has been consistently prudent in recognising compensation for legislative change. The Lisbon Court of Appeal, in its judgment of 20 May 2003 (Proc. n.º 1314/2003-7), confirmed that:
- Article 22 CRP encompasses the legislative function.
- The principle of protection of legitimate expectations derives from Article 2 CRP (democratic rule-of-law State).
- However, there is no subjective right to the immutability of the legal framework.
- The legislator may adjust public policy where the change is foreseeable, justified by public interest, and proportionate.
Application to the Golden Visa Scenario
The reported intention of more than 500 Golden Visa investors to bring a collective action confronts three structural difficulties:
(i) No Declaration of Unconstitutionality
Acórdão 409/2026 addresses the criminal penalty, not the residency-period extension. Absent a constitutional pronouncement against the new periods, the Article 15 requirement of “non-conformity with the Constitution” is unmet.
(ii) The Golden Visa Conferred a Residence Permit, Not a Promise of Citizenship
The Golden Visa regime grants a residence authorisation, never an autonomous, contractually guaranteed right to nationality after five years. Access to citizenship has always been governed by the Nationality Law, which is ordinary legislation subject to revision. The risk of legislative amendment is, in principle, a political-legislative risk inherent in any investment based on legal incentives.
(iii) The “Abnormal Damages” Threshold
The extension from 5 to 10 years undeniably worsens the conditions of access to nationality. Yet Article 15 distinguishes between:
- General sacrifice (onus generalis) — borne by all affected by a legislative change of general application; and
- Abnormal sacrifice — a disproportionate, exceptional burden falling on a restricted group, justifying compensation.
A general extension of qualifying periods, applicable to all foreign residents (with relative attenuation for EU/CPLP nationals), is more readily characterised as a generalised consequence of migration policy than as a special sacrifice.
Where Litigation Strategy Has Greater Prospects
The realistic litigation space lies not in challenging the Nationality Law in abstract, but in concrete administrative situations:
- Cases where the applicant objectively satisfied the prior requirements but was prevented from filing, or whose process was anomalously delayed by the registry services — engaging State liability for abnormal functioning of the public service under Law 67/2007.
- Cases where the transitional rule (Article 7) is applied restrictively, in tension with its protective purpose.
- Individual constitutional review (fiscalização concreta) raised in administrative court proceedings against a specific denial.
In these scenarios, the legal debate shifts from liability for legislative acts in the abstract to liability for concrete administrative acts, where standards of judicial review are finer and proof of illegality less dependent on structural assessments of legislative policy.
What Should Expats in Madeira and Portugal Do Now?
Expats in Madeira and Portugal should (i) audit their current residence status and accumulated qualifying time, (ii) determine whether their pending nationality application is protected by Article 7 of the new diploma, (iii) preserve all evidence of legal residence, and (iv) obtain qualified legal advice before initiating or restructuring any naturalisation process under the 2026 regime.
Practical Action Points
- Audit your timeline: confirm precisely when your legal residence began and whether you fall under the general (10-year) or favoured (7-year) regime.
- Verify pending-application status: if your file was submitted prior to the reform’s entry into force, the prior regime applies under Article 7.
- Document continuity of residence: the longer the qualifying period, the more rigorous the evidentiary requirements regarding effective and uninterrupted residence.
- Consider EU pathways: nationals of EU Member States benefit from the reduced 7-year period and additional protections under EU free-movement law.
- Assess Madeira-specific factors: the Autonomous Region of Madeira applies the same Nationality Law as the Republic, but residency, fiscal, and registry procedures may present regional particularities.
- Preserve administrative remedies: in cases of refusal or abnormal delay, judicial review and State-liability claims for administrative malfunction remain viable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are pending nationality applications affected by the 2026 reform?
No. Article 7 of the new diploma expressly provides that pending applications are governed by the prior version of the Nationality Law. Applicants who filed before the reform’s entry into force retain entitlement to evaluation under the five-year regime, including the prior eligibility criteria.
Do the new residency periods apply to Golden Visa holders?
Yes. Golden Visa investors fall within the general regime and are now subject to the 10-year residency requirement for naturalisation, unless they hold CPLP nationality, in which case the 7-year period applies. The Golden Visa programme grants a residence permit; it has never conferred an autonomous right to nationality.
Did the Constitutional Court strike down the new Nationality Law?
No. Acórdão 409/2026 declared unconstitutional the accessory penalty of loss of nationality introduced into the Penal Code (Article 69.º-D), not the residency-period extensions in the Nationality Law itself. The new 10-year and 7-year periods remain in force.
Can naturalised Portuguese citizens lose their nationality under the new law?
Following Acórdão 409/2026, the core of the loss-of-nationality regime cannot be promulgated. Loss of nationality remains constitutionally admissible only in narrow circumstances involving a functional rupture of allegiance to the State, typically crimes against State security and terrorism, and never on a basis that discriminates between original and naturalised citizens.
Is it worth suing the Portuguese State over the extended residency periods?
A broad collective action premised solely on the extension of residency periods faces significant obstacles under Article 15 of Law 67/2007. Litigation prospects are stronger in concrete cases of administrative malfunction, undue delay, restrictive application of the transitional rule, or refusals contrary to the prior regime, rather than in abstract challenge to the legislative reform.
Does the 2026 reform affect residence rights or only nationality?
The reform addresses nationality acquisition, not the underlying residence permit regime. Existing residence permits, including Golden Visas, D7, D8 (digital nomad), and other titles, continue to be governed by their respective regimes under the immigration legislation, subject to renewal requirements.
Strategic Clarity in a Changed Legal Landscape
The Portugal nationality law updates of 2026 mark a clear policy shift toward the restriction of access to Portuguese citizenship. The Constitutional Court, through Acórdão 409/2026, has reaffirmed two foundational principles: there is no place in the Portuguese constitutional order for second-tier citizenship, and deprivation of nationality is admissible only in extreme circumstances of rupture with the political community.
For expats and investors in Madeira and mainland Portugal, the appropriate response is neither resignation nor expectation of rapid mass compensation. The realistic legal terrain lies in case-by-case strategic litigation, protection of pending applications, scrutiny of administrative delays and refusals, and rigorous defence of legally consolidated positions, rather than in abstract challenge to the legislative reform itself.
The legal team at MCS regularly advises individual clients, families, and Golden Visa investors on Portuguese nationality matters. For a confidential assessment of your specific position under the 2026 regime, we invite you to contact our office.
This article has been prepared by MCS for general informational purposes only and reflects the legislation, case law, and constitutional jurisprudence in force at the time of publication. It does not constitute legal advice and does not establish a lawyer-client relationship between MCS and the reader. The application of the Portuguese Nationality Law and of the regime of State civil liability depends on the specific factual and legal circumstances of each case. Readers should not act, or refrain from acting, on the basis of any content contained herein without obtaining qualified legal advice from a lawyer admitted to the Portuguese Bar Association (Ordem dos Advogados). MCS expressly disclaims any liability arising from reliance placed on the content of this article. Legislative and jurisprudential developments subsequent to the date of publication may affect the conclusions presented.
Last updated: May 9, 2026. For the most current position on Portugal nationality law updates, please consult MCS directly.
Catarina graduated in Law in 2021 from the Faculty of Law of the University of Coimbra. She has been a member of the Bar since 2023.
