Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Do you think the new £38K income visa threshold for UK spouse visas is fair?

936 replies

zendeveloper · 04/12/2023 19:32

It is set at the same level as for work visas.

Feels completely crazy to me, but then, I am also an immigrant (although the changes don't affect me), so probably too sensitive to the topic. Would be interesting to hear MN opinion.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
22
CuteOrangeElephant · 05/12/2023 00:09

Tacotortoise · 04/12/2023 23:54

Yes well it's not a prison, he chose to leave and that's fine. But I'm OK with the rules being changed to suit those of us who live here rather than those who've left but want to keep their options open.

Show quote history

I hope you or your children will never fall in love with a foreign citizen.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/12/2023 00:19

beanontoast · 04/12/2023 23:58

Where did I say that? The poster I replied to presumably can return as a native citizen but whether her husband can not as a native is another matter. Personally I think it’s fairly obvious moving abroad for 20 years makes it risky as to whether you’ll be able to return with your family in tow and I’d expect the rules to change during that time too?

Show quote history

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that a British citizen should have the right to return to the UK and that they should have the basic right to a life with their immediate family members such as their spouse and dependent children?

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that anyone who tries to argue against that is quite simply devoid of any kind of basic moral compass?

wordler · 05/12/2023 00:23

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/12/2023 00:19

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that a British citizen should have the right to return to the UK and that they should have the basic right to a life with their immediate family members such as their spouse and dependent children?

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that anyone who tries to argue against that is quite simply devoid of any kind of basic moral compass?

Show quote history

Thank you 🙏

user1477391263 · 05/12/2023 00:23

Those of us impacted by this are going to have to decide: Are we going to push for:

a) Freer rules for every international couple
b) The creation of a sort of “Most Favored Nation” list, where couples containing a spouse from NZ, Oz, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, USA, Canada, Singapore, Malaysia and EU countries (wealthy countries, basically) get a different set of rules applied to them. I may have missed out a couple of countries, but you get the gist.

Given that there is understandably some disquiet about people making use of international marriage for economic reasons, the second route may be more practicable.

ElevenSeven · 05/12/2023 00:26

Arafina · 04/12/2023 23:39

What a disgusting way to treat people, they want people to come and work here but not have a life here if they have to leave their partner and kids behind, we really are just numbers to them, humanity is dead with this government

They don’t want people to come, that’s the whole point. This measure was announced as part of a policy to reduce migration.

saltinesandcoffeecups · 05/12/2023 00:26

wordler · 04/12/2023 23:59

I'd worked enough in the UK before I left to have earned my full pension credits in the UK, so definitely contributed to the UK.

My whole family outside of my husband and daughter are in the UK and I've visited 2-3 times a year since I moved apart from the Covid years.

I returned for five months to nurse one parent through end of life illness, and another for four months for the other parent to support through a major operation. I'm an only child so all falls on me.

I do consider the UK home. I am only living abroad while my husband has to work here.

I have had a freelance career to enable me to take care of my daughter through the early childcare years, to return to nurse and take care of my parents through their needs, and here in the US to take care of my inlaws through their operations. My spouse has earned enough to take care of the family here and our private healthcare.

As I mentioned I'd been planning to bring DH and DD to the UK to live for a period of time so that we can look after my Dad and keep him in his own home.

These rules are discriminatory. They affect anyone like me living abroad who has had to take time out of a regular job and income to take care of family. (this is usually the wife in the marriage).

But they also discriminate against any UK worker (who has never left the country like me) who happens to live in the part of the country where a good full time job for certain professions just doesn't meet this new level. The previous one was far more reasonable.

Without any provision for using a third party sponsor, or other economic options to tally the 'risk' to the country of a burden by the immigrant - it is a horrible policy.

Edited
Show quote history

I have had a freelance career

As I mentioned I'd been planning to bring DH and DD to the UK to live for a period of time so that we can look after my Dad and keep him in his own home.

I’m just curious and clearly you don’t have to answer. But how are you going to support the family if you are caring for your father and your husband can’t work?

bombastix · 05/12/2023 00:35

user1477391263 · 05/12/2023 00:23

Those of us impacted by this are going to have to decide: Are we going to push for:

a) Freer rules for every international couple
b) The creation of a sort of “Most Favored Nation” list, where couples containing a spouse from NZ, Oz, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, USA, Canada, Singapore, Malaysia and EU countries (wealthy countries, basically) get a different set of rules applied to them. I may have missed out a couple of countries, but you get the gist.

Given that there is understandably some disquiet about people making use of international marriage for economic reasons, the second route may be more practicable.

A list of nations would be unlawful. You cannot discriminate by country lawfully. Income is however legal and will hold up on court. This policy does discriminate, but it does so lawfully.

user1477391263 · 05/12/2023 00:38

Seems to me like a lot of immigration policies would work “as intended” a lot more smoothly if it were lawful to make distinctions based on country of origin! We do treat different countries differently when trading with them; why not immigration?

RedRidingGood · 05/12/2023 00:38

user1477391263 · 05/12/2023 00:08

I live in Japan with my Japanese husband. He earns about 120K a year and I am a part-time worker who earns below this threshold. Pretty sure we’d be barred from the UK under these rules, even though my husband is a high earner and our family would be a net contributor to the public purse!

Can they not at least look at both spouses’ incomes or the combined income, and make some sort of distinction between developed and developing countries? The rules are being brought in, I suspect, to stop “chain migration” where people bring in cousins from developing countries as spouses. Perhaps that is a bit dysfunctional, but there are surely more sensible ways of stopping such migration.

Hi, is this 38k income threshold something the govt is talking about or is it actually in place? I'm reading about it on the Telegraph but I'm not clear on this. Surely it takes time for something like this to be put into place?

I'm an immigrant in the UK (originally from Asia) and a so-called high income earner. I am here on a Spousal visa but both DH and I are well above the income threshold. Still, I think it is a shame that there are people supporting this policy, it's obvious that Cleverly is using this as a way to get more Tory votes.

The trouble is, people think all immigrants and foreigners are low income earners, here to leech off etc. This isn't true, there's a wide variety of people. Also what % of spousal visas would consist of sham marriages? Why put something in place that will affect genuine couple to weed out what would be a very small % of people who are using it as a means to obtain a visa. I recall my immigration lawyer here mentioning that statistically it's a very small percentage that tries to manipulate the system.

This truly is a xenophobic policy.

BritinDelco · 05/12/2023 00:39

Agreed! In response to @wordler

Recently emigrated to the US from the UK on a spouse visa and while health insurance is especially with the co-pays(excess) is expensive I got 2 MRIs and 2 treatments within 4 months. Out about 2k in total but with the FAR lower taxes I'm no worse off, even with the higher cost of living.

We had to jump a lot of hoops and spend thousands in the process, but it's worked out so far. DH makes decent money but below the median for our State, there are some V high earners here. The UK equivalent of the income threshold would be 125% of the living wage.

With an ageing parent in the UK we planned to return if necessary but now it won't be possible

beanontoast · 05/12/2023 00:43

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/12/2023 00:19

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that a British citizen should have the right to return to the UK and that they should have the basic right to a life with their immediate family members such as their spouse and dependent children?

Personally, I think it's fairly obvious that anyone who tries to argue against that is quite simply devoid of any kind of basic moral compass?

Show quote history

Okay, I still don’t care 🤷🏻‍♀️

wordler · 05/12/2023 00:47

saltinesandcoffeecups · 05/12/2023 00:26

I have had a freelance career

As I mentioned I'd been planning to bring DH and DD to the UK to live for a period of time so that we can look after my Dad and keep him in his own home.

I’m just curious and clearly you don’t have to answer. But how are you going to support the family if you are caring for your father and your husband can’t work?

Show quote history

Well -

  1. my DH can and would work but the level of income he would provide isn’t taken into account in the initial application so he can’t get here to start a job
  2. I’d be able to work too - between us we’d be able to cover any caretaking needs but likely looking at local wage rates not enough on my own to meet the 38,000 threshold, however
  3. We’d have no rent or household bills those would be covered by family and we’d have enough from savings and work to cover everything else including the NHS fees for spouse.
bombastix · 05/12/2023 00:49

user1477391263 · 05/12/2023 00:38

Seems to me like a lot of immigration policies would work “as intended” a lot more smoothly if it were lawful to make distinctions based on country of origin! We do treat different countries differently when trading with them; why not immigration?

Honestly you cannot have what would appear to the world as a wyattz only immigration policy which is potentially what such s change would represent.

Money works well as a proxy. The Home Office won this point in principle nearly a decade ago.

saltinesandcoffeecups · 05/12/2023 00:52

wordler · 05/12/2023 00:47

Well -

  1. my DH can and would work but the level of income he would provide isn’t taken into account in the initial application so he can’t get here to start a job
  2. I’d be able to work too - between us we’d be able to cover any caretaking needs but likely looking at local wage rates not enough on my own to meet the 38,000 threshold, however
  3. We’d have no rent or household bills those would be covered by family and we’d have enough from savings and work to cover everything else including the NHS fees for spouse.
Edited
Show quote history

Fair enough. I missed that those on a spouse visa can work.

wordler · 05/12/2023 00:55

saltinesandcoffeecups · 05/12/2023 00:52

Fair enough. I missed that those on a spouse visa can work.

Show quote history

Thanks - that’s what makes this such a messed up system

Rocket1982 · 05/12/2023 01:00

Of course it's not fair. Rich people can marry whoever they like (and live in the same country as them). Poor people can't. That's the bottom line.

Dibbydoos · 05/12/2023 01:08

£38k is high. The av salary in the UK is below this ffs https://www.statista.com/statistics/416139/full-time-annual-salary-in-the-uk-by-region/

How does it affect non economic immigrants? In and amongst real refugees/asylum seekers are the freeloaders and isn't it those people we can't afford to house/support?

I honestly think they've done nothing but put in jeopardy what is a good process for economic migration.... Another Tory failing.

UK full-time annual salary by region 2023 | Statista

Average earnings in London were higher than the rest of the UK in 2023, with earnings varying significantly across UK regions.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/416139/full-time-annual-salary-in-the-uk-by-region

BestBadger · 05/12/2023 01:14

Crababbles · 04/12/2023 19:58

It’s completely fair. If two married low earners want visas, they can both apply for work visas. You can’t support two people on 18k.

Depends who you ask. Apparently Income support for a couple, where both are over 18 is £133.30 a week, or £6931.60 a year. Less if one or both are under 18.

Is that right? Is it really for a couple or do they get that each? I know people who spend more than that on their pets.

No wonder we're regularly admonished by the UN for our treatment of the poor.

Crispedia · 05/12/2023 01:19

lkwhjis · 04/12/2023 19:46

It’s high. As long as we have jobs that the lazy 5 million brits on out of work benefits don’t want to do.

2.6 million of those receive sickness benefits due to long-term sickness or disability. This was the same number in 2010, decreased a bit (about 200,000) now back to 2.6 million. Get away with your lazy accusations!

Crispedia · 05/12/2023 01:19

It’s too high.

Kokeshi123 · 05/12/2023 01:35

bombastix · 05/12/2023 00:49

Honestly you cannot have what would appear to the world as a wyattz only immigration policy which is potentially what such s change would represent.

Money works well as a proxy. The Home Office won this point in principle nearly a decade ago.

Show quote history

Money works well as a proxy. The Home Office won this point in principle nearly a decade ago.

It doesn't work well as a proxy, though, does it?
There are loads of British women married to men from developed, wealthy countries who earn decent salaries who can't come in. Even if their husbands are in roles that are in demand in the UK.

At the very least, they need to look at the combined family income; I mean, you'd think that would be common sense, frankly.

Kokeshi123 · 05/12/2023 01:37

Honestly you cannot have what would appear to the world as a wyattz only immigration policy which is potentially what such s change would represent.

Half the countries on that list are mostly nonwhite.

Tinkerbyebye · 05/12/2023 01:39

Yes. If it’s to support two people it’s more than fair

Crispedia · 05/12/2023 01:40

“Madeleine Sumption, the director of the Migration Observatory at Oxford University, said the home secretary’s decision to raise the family income threshold to £38,700 could have the most significant impacts on individuals.
“This threshold determines whether British citizens can bring a foreign partner to live with them in the UK, and the level has been more than doubled,” she said.

“Family migration makes up a small share of the total, but those who are affected by it can be affected very significantly.. “The largest impacts will fall on lower-income British citizens, and particularly women and younger people who tend to earn lower wages.”

user1492757084 · 05/12/2023 01:42

I'm surprised the level was set so much higher all in one swipe!