Which countries still sell residency for property?

Residency-by-investment through property has been closing across Europe, which is why attention has shifted east.

What has closed or narrowed

Portugal removed the real estate route from its golden visa programme, ending the option that made it the most popular in Europe. Fund and business investment routes remain.

Spain ended its golden visa programme.

Ireland closed its immigrant investor programme.

The Netherlands ended its wealthy foreign investor scheme.

Greece substantially raised investment thresholds, with higher minimums in Athens, Thessaloniki, Mykonos and Santorini than elsewhere.

Hungary reintroduced a guest investor programme, running against the trend.

The pattern is clear. European property-linked residency has been closing under pressure over housing affordability, security screening and EU-level criticism of schemes granting Schengen access.

Why they closed

Three reasons, consistently.

Housing affordability. Golden visas were blamed, fairly or not, for pushing prices beyond locals in Lisbon, Porto and elsewhere.

Security and money laundering concerns, particularly after scrutiny of who was acquiring EU residency and on what funds.

EU pressure. Residency in one member state carries Schengen mobility, which made national programmes an EU-wide issue.

None of those pressures have reduced. Assume further tightening rather than reopening.

What remains

Greece, at higher thresholds.

Hungary, reintroduced.

Malta and Cyprus in modified forms, both having faced significant EU scrutiny.

The UAE offers long-term residence visas linked to property investment at defined thresholds, and this has absorbed a substantial share of the demand that used to go to Portugal.

Thailand offers the Long Term Resident visa and the Elite programme, neither of which is strictly property-linked but both of which serve the same purpose.

Malaysia's MM2H, revised repeatedly with moving thresholds, plus Sarawak's separate programme.

Indonesia's second home and golden visa routes, which are newer and where administrative practice is still settling.

Where Indonesia actually sits

Indonesia's programmes exist and they are used. They are also less mature than the UAE's or Thailand's, with practice around eligibility, processing and renewal still developing.

The important distinction: Indonesia's routes are generally based on funds, investment or qualifications, not straightforwardly on buying a property. Buying a villa does not by itself produce residency in the way a Dubai property purchase can.

That matters because a good deal of Bali marketing implies a property purchase brings residency with it. Check the actual requirement for the actual programme rather than the implication.

The thing worth saying plainly

Residency and property should be separate decisions.

A property bought primarily to obtain residency is usually a bad property, because the selection criteria were the threshold and the paperwork rather than the location, the term and the income.

And programmes change. Portugal, Spain and Ireland all closed routes that buyers had built plans around. A property bought to satisfy a programme that subsequently changes leaves you holding the property and not the benefit.

Buy property because the property is good. Obtain residency through whichever route fits your circumstances. Where the two happen to align, that is a bonus rather than a strategy.

If residency is the actual objective

The UAE and Thailand currently offer the most predictable, well-documented routes for someone who wants long-term residence in a low-tax jurisdiction without running a business.

Indonesia is viable and less certain administratively.

Europe has largely closed, and what remains costs considerably more than it did.