In recent years, the number of individuals in China interested in investment immigration has been steadily increasing, with Chinese investment immigrants making up a significant majority in various immigration countries. This group includes wealthy entrepreneurs, affluent individuals, celebrities, and some small to medium-sized business owners, primarily seeking property security, education for their children, and other benefits.
Among the countries that have raised the thresholds for investment immigration, some are traditional immigration powerhouses such as Australia and Canada, where the proportions of skilled immigration, family reunification immigration, and student immigration are also considerable, with investment immigration being just one segment; other countries and regions, such as Singapore and Hong Kong, also have immigration programs aimed at attracting scarce talent, but the annual intake is limited, making investment immigration the main avenue for immigration.
The motivations behind these countries raising the thresholds for investment immigration are quite different. Australia is primarily concerned about the impact of excessive immigration on its society, while Canada claims that the volume of immigration applications has led to significant backlogs. Singapore and Hong Kong are worried about the potential destabilization of their real estate and financial sectors due to investment immigration. Consequently, the specific implementation details vary widely: Canada is tightening policies for investment and skilled immigration while relaxing those for student immigration; Australia is tightening policies across the board; and Hong Kong and Singapore have not yet affected their limited talent introduction programs, but one commonality remains: significant price increases.
The reason for this is related to the fact that the previous thresholds have become ineffective at deterring applicants: with the skyrocketing real estate prices in mainland China, the once high investment immigration thresholds have now become attainable simply by selling one’s home, leading to a surge in the number of investment immigrants. Moreover, as the wealth gap in China widens and various social issues intensify, both vested interests and those who feel they have lost out are eager to seek a safer environment and more reliable guarantees, making the prospect of spending an affordable sum to "become a foreigner" for themselves and their families particularly appealing.
The price increases for investment immigration in various countries are not solely about money. Many commentators have pointed out that, compared to skilled immigrants, investment immigrants tend to have a weaker sense of belonging to their host countries and are less inclined to actively integrate into their new societies; due to their relatively affluent economic status, they are not as preoccupied with finding jobs or pursuing education as traditional immigrants, and their children often find it more challenging to connect with local peers. In the eyes of many locals, these "wealthy foreigners" contribute less to the community than ordinary skilled immigrants, especially since they have driven up the prices of local real estate and other "hard assets."
However, despite the constant changes in immigration policies, no country or region has explicitly stated that its adjustments to investment immigration policies are aimed at China (or any other specific country), yet it is evident that the new policies have the most significant impact on the investment immigrant community from mainland China.
