The UK Government has proposed a new “earned settlement” system that would reshape how many migrants qualify for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). It is still only a consultation proposal, so the final rules may change and will only take effect once new Immigration Rules are formally introduced.
What does the 10‑year pathway mean?
The core idea is to move most settlement‑leading work and family routes from a five‑year qualifying period to a ten‑year period of continuous lawful residence. Time spent in the UK would remain essential, but the Government’s intention is that time alone will no longer be enough, and that settlement should be more closely tied to behaviour, contribution and integration.
How will the new 10‑year baseline operate?
The ten‑year period is described as a “baseline” that applies to most routes, which currently lead to ILR after five years. Some categories, such as certain sponsored workers in lower‑skilled roles or those on particular protection routes, may have a longer baseline, for example, fifteen or twenty years. That baseline can then be adjusted up or down for each individual, subject to an overall cap, depending on positive or negative factors in their record.
What are the core principles of the earned settlement model?
The model is built on the principle that settlement should be earned rather than granted automatically once a fixed timeframe has passed. It focuses on four main pillars: character, integration, contribution and residence. In practice, this means that criminality and immigration breaches weigh against settlement, while strong English language, knowledge of life in the UK, sustained work and tax contributions, and long‑term lawful stay all form part of the assessment.
What are the mandatory requirements for earned settlement?
The proposals suggest that certain requirements will be mandatory for all applicants, regardless of any time discounts they might otherwise qualify for. These include passing stricter suitability and criminality checks and not having serious outstanding debts to public bodies, such as HMRC or the NHS. Applicants are also expected to show at least upper‑intermediate English (for example, around CEFR B2 or higher), pass the Life in the UK Test and evidence a minimum period of National Insurance contributions and a compliant tax and immigration history.
How can the 10‑year baseline be reduced?
The “earned” element appears most clearly in the way that some applicants may be able to shorten the settlement pathway if they can demonstrate particularly strong contribution and integration over time.
First, a high level of English language ability is treated as an important factor. Where an applicant can demonstrate English that is significantly above the minimum requirement, for example, at the CEFR C1 level through an approved test or a relevant degree, this may be taken as evidence that their level of integration exceeds the basic standard. Such advanced language skills are viewed as a strong indicator of social and economic integration and could justify reducing the baseline period by one year or more.
Second, sustained earnings in the higher‑rate or additional‑rate income tax bands are being considered as another key factor. If a person has, over a period of time, paid UK income tax at these higher bands, this is understood not simply as high pay but as proof of a long-term, substantial contribution through tax and National Insurance. That kind of record is being discussed as a ground for reducing the number of years required before settlement can be obtained.
Third, holding a high-value immigration route is also being highlighted. Visa categories such as Global Talent or Innovator Founder, which the UK uses to attract highly skilled individuals, innovators and investors, are regarded as bringing significant benefit to the UK’s economy and society. For people in these categories, it is envisaged that larger or faster reductions in the qualifying period could apply than for standard work routes, and in some situations, the total time to settlement could be significantly shorter than ten years.
Fourth, long-term engagement in community and civic life is being treated as a further positive factor. A sustained record of involvement in local organisations, schools, charities, faith-based bodies or structured volunteering is seen as concrete evidence of social integration. The government is considering treating this kind of civic engagement as a basis for additional reductions in the qualifying period, where a sufficient level of activity can be objectively demonstrated.
These reduction factors are also being discussed as capable of being applied in combination, subject to an overall limit. For example, a person who can show advanced English, higher‑rate earnings, a high-value visa route, and long-term community engagement might, in principle, benefit from several reductions at once and therefore reach eligibility for settlement in substantially less than ten years. However, the exact number of years that each factor might remove, and the maximum total reduction that will be allowed, have not yet been fixed and will only become clear when the final Immigration Rules and official guidance are published.
How can the 10‑year baseline be increased?
First, lower-skilled sponsored workers and many people on Health and Care visas are expected to face a higher threshold. For Skilled Workers in roles below RQF Level 6, including a large proportion of Health and Care workers, a settlement baseline of around fifteen years has been suggested. Unless they move into higher-skilled or better-paid roles, or meet additional contribution and integration criteria, many lower-paid health and care staff could therefore be required to complete roughly fifteen years of qualifying residence before they can apply for settlement.
Second, refugees who remain within a new “core protection” support route are expected to have a significantly longer timeline. For this group, a settlement baseline in the region of twenty years has been discussed, with the possibility of reductions only if they later move into defined work or study routes. The stated intention is that refugees should not, overall, reach settlement faster than labour migrants who are subject to the standard rules.
Third, some analyses suggest that migrants who are lawfully resident but heavily reliant on state welfare over a long period could see their effective route extended beyond ten years, potentially towards fifteen to twenty years. This approach reflects a policy aim to link settlement more tightly to long-term financial self-reliance and contribution rather than to mere passage of time.
Finally, people with serious immigration non-compliance, such as illegal entry, very long periods of overstay or systematic abuse of the rules, are likely to face the longest routes. In the most serious cases, expert commentary indicates that cumulative increases could mean an overall qualifying period approaching thirty years before settlement might become available, especially where twenty-plus years of overstay, repeated breaches and criminal history are combined.
Which existing route is expected to be removed?
One of the key proposed changes is the abolition of the standalone ten‑year “long residence” route, which at present allows a person who has accumulated ten years’ continuous lawful residence, often across multiple immigration categories, to qualify for ILR. Under the new model, long residence would be dealt with inside each main route and through the earned settlement framework, rather than through a separate category. This would make settlement planning more complex for those with a mixture of visas or irregular histories, as they would no longer be able to rely simply on reaching ten years’ lawful presence.
When are these changes expected to take effect?
At the moment, the earned settlement reforms are still under consultation, and no firm implementation date has been confirmed. The Government has expressed an ambition to start introducing reforms from 2026, potentially in phases and with transitional measures to protect some people already on existing settlement routes. The definitive timetable and detailed transitional rules will only become clear once the consultation has closed, decisions have been taken, and the new Immigration Rules and guidance have been published.
What do these proposals mean for migrants?
If implemented broadly as described, the proposals would make settlement a longer and more demanding process for many migrants, particularly those who previously expected to qualify after five years or through the ten-year-long residence route. At the same time, the system could benefit people who can show consistently strong English language, stable employment, good tax and National Insurance records and clear social integration, by allowing them to reduce the path from the ten‑year baseline. Because the final form of the rules is not yet settled and each person’s situation is different, it is important for migrants to follow official updates and to take tailored advice before making long‑term decisions about work, family, study or settlement plans.
These proposals could come into force as early as April 2026, so anyone thinking about a 10-year route to settlement should start preparing now. Migrants for whom the increase “triggers” might apply should seek legal advice as soon as possible to see whether there are ways to mitigate the impact before any changes take effect.
Migrants planning to apply under the 10-year long residence route should also consider taking legal advice to explore whether alternative options may be available to them. To discuss your situation and prepare in advance, please call 020 3865 6219 or leave a message.