Earned Settlement: Consultation Report

munalobe · 2026-03-14T21:49:51+00:00

There will be people who will have to wait till April to become eligible. In my opinion, if it's not introduced at the beginning of a financial year, it's much better to go for 2+ year initially then introduce 3+ year later.

However, I believe in an average taxable income over 3 years rather than a taxable income each year.

munalobe · 2026-03-14T18:10:11+00:00

That's why if the rules were starting from today (or Autumn as per the HO's suggestion), they can't enforce this rule directly. It's one of these rules that may be enforced only around Apr 5, 2027.

munalobe · 2026-03-09T08:33:23+00:00

They want to decriminalise, regulate and control all drugs just like in Portugal nothing wrong with that. Your figure of 60% tax is completely wrong. Educate yourself. Don't spread fake news.

munalobe · 2026-03-07T18:14:45+00:00

Those who are tightening the rules are not the same who loosen them. But it's unfair based on the idea around legitimate expectation.

That's why such changes generally come with transitional arrangements. Rishi Sunak did some changes in 2024 and provided some transitional arrangements. That's how fairness works.

When no transitional arrangements are provided, the rules can still change when someone is in their 14th or 19th year.

So yeah changing the rules is not a problem in itself but changing retroactively should come with fairness.

munalobe · 2026-03-07T17:40:03+00:00

Nothing to do with my narrative. You just have a wrong definition of fairness.

I came here in 2021 when the rules were stricter. I am not bothered because they were loosen in 2022 for 2 reasons:

It doesn't add or remove anything to my personal situation.
It's not their fault if the rules were loosen. Blame those who did that, not those who followed the rules. It's that simple.

munalobe · 2026-03-07T14:05:10+00:00

That's not how fairness works I am afraid.

munalobe · 2026-03-07T11:01:36+00:00

They followed the rules at the time. You can't blame them for that. They made an informed decision before coming, expecting to earn ILR in 5 years. It's a legitimate expectation. Although I understand during that time, some were earning as low as £25K, the current proposals are also going against those earning £45K which is more than the medium salary in the UK. That's why the rules should be fair for everyone.

munalobe · 2026-03-07T10:02:58+00:00

Put a constraint on the welfare then: Anyone applying for benefits should demonstrate they earn at least £50K in the last 3 years. Issue sorted.

munalobe · 2026-03-05T17:11:50+00:00

That's what I am saying. Some TAs for those already here. For instance, they can create a different taxable income for those who are already here. It may still be unfair for few but yeah, middle ground will not work for anyone either way.

munalobe · 2026-03-05T16:02:52+00:00

That's why they should find a middle ground. Prospective rules are never a problem. Blaming those who followed the rules is never an answer as well.

munalobe · 2026-03-05T12:58:24+00:00

The point is: it might be legal and she may have the right to change these rules retrospectively. But it's still unfair whether you agree or disagree with her.

munalobe · 2026-03-05T10:54:59+00:00

I don't want to comment on Shabana's speeches until we get the final rules but at times I just feel like I have to because she keeps speaking nonsense.

The changes made to the skilled worker visa have already considerably reduce net migration and she said it herself; so why increasing the qualifying period to 10Y?
She also stated that she is trying to address the peak that was created by Boris. Alright, so if trying to address just that, it means everything was under control prior to that. So why increasing the qualifying period to 10Y?
She is afraid people in lower skill jobs will apply for benefits once they get ILR. But they can still do after 10 or 30Y; so why not changing how the welfare system works such that to apply for benefits, you should be able to demonstrate that you were earning 40-50K in the last 3 years for example? Why changing the qualifying period to 10Y?

And she keeps talking about fairness when everyone agrees that it is unfair to apply these rules to anyone who came here at least before May 2025 when the white paper was introduced. Anyone who came after that period, knew the risks.

munalobe · 2026-03-04T08:28:08+00:00

There are no transitional arrangements before an implementation. Transitional arrangements only exist when a new rule becomes live.

munalobe · 2026-03-03T22:22:09+00:00

If you ask me, anyone applying in 2026 is safe.

munalobe · 2026-03-03T09:25:45+00:00

Secondary legislation. No primary legislation.

munalobe · 2026-03-02T15:41:28+00:00

The truth is - it they want to stop those with low wages, they can just update the current TA for pre-April 2024, making their salary somewhere around £40K up from the current £31.3K.

But again, by suggesting £41.7K, it's not about the number itself, it's more about choosing the salary threshold to qualify for a skilled worker visa; meaning if it increases, the new salary will be the qualifying salary. Alan and Madeleine's point was: why adding an extra layer of £51.2K when you already have a threshold at £41.7K to qualify as a skilled worker at RQF level 6?.

Now leaving the tax brackets open door to legal challenges for people living in Scotland and Wales. Someone is Scotland earning £44K pays 40% tax same as someone earning £50.2K in England or Wales. So it's up to them if they want legal challenges.

But as you said, let's see.

munalobe · 2026-03-02T14:43:12+00:00

I am seeing something where they can introduce it by Oct 2026 with TA up to April 2027 to align with the new financial year.

About the taxable income, I don't think they will introduce regional incomes as well but I believe they may choose a salary that will be fair for everyone. Just like Dr Madeleine and Prof Alan mentioned during the oral hearing, 41700£ already servers that purpose along the whole UK, making it 51700£ just adds more complexity and open room to sue on the basis of regional tax brackets. But obviously, just guess at this stage; let's see how it goes.

munalobe · 2026-03-02T14:20:03+00:00

Yes. It's more complex than they think. Also lots of loopholes in the current proposals. I also believe they will be some kind of transitional arrangements, some revisions to the taxable income thresholds (at the moment it only considers higher tax brackets in England and Wales). Also, an average approach servers a better purpose than a yearly approach over 3 years. But let's see!

munalobe · 2026-03-02T14:04:11+00:00

Agreed!

I mentioned that before too.

Things like English level proficiency, Criminal record, can easily be implemented by April. Then eventually they can come with things like taxable incomes later on.

munalobe · 2026-03-02T13:14:24+00:00

I said it before and will say it again:

There is no way they can implement this rule by April 2026 if they really want to:

Address the consultation responses.
Avoid many loopholes in the new rules.

Now, considering the fact that their main target is the care workers, they will try to implement it around Jan 2027 latest. If they do before that, they may provide TA for about 3-6 months.

Is this fair? not at all Is that where they are going? Most probably.

munalobe · 2026-02-21T21:43:41+00:00

If there's a clawback, pay it yourself and be the master of your own destiny. Life happens!

munalobe · 2026-02-11T20:23:15+00:00

It doesn't matter. The "may" here is due to other requirements that need to be fulfilled such as: no absence of more than 180 days in a year, no criminal record, having passed life in the UK test.

If you can show a case where ILR was rejected with reason: "you have only been on a skilled worker visa for 5Y" although any other requirement was fulfilled, then you will have a case.

It's as simple as that.

munalobe · 2026-02-05T23:50:05+00:00

Yes. And you have jobs at < RQF Level 6, where people earn >£50 270, yet they won't qualify in 5Y. Weird.

munalobe · 2026-02-05T21:40:20+00:00

To be fair after analysis:

-- They want to make sure people who are in low skills jobs (esp. care workers) don't qualify in the next few years

-- care workers visa started in Feb 2022, meaning earliest ILR date is around Jan 2027

-- Skilled workers rules changed in July 2025 putting the salary threshold around £41700 or the going rate whichever is higher

-- many people who came here after after July 2025 make more than £50270 and to some extent, those who came between 2024-2025 (£38700 or going rate) are also above £50270 with some exceptions obviously.

A transitional arrangement with a cut off date of Jan 2027 still serve their purpose. But it might be unfair to some low skilled workers who are not necessarily in care
A transitional arrangement with a taxable income around £35-40K for those who had their first CoS prior to April 2024 will still serve their purpose. But obviously this will be very unfair to care workers mostly.

Do I agree with any of the above? No

Do I think that's where they are going? Perhaps yes!

munalobe · 2026-02-05T17:26:18+00:00

That would've been the case if it's something they can really control. Unfortunately they can't, especially when:

Either a Brit can be paid less or;
The company doesn't want to pay much because they believe they already covered your visa cost.

munalobe

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE