Removal from Portugal: what to do if your residence permit has expired or not been renewed

An expired card does not mean removal yet

The first thing to understand: staying in Portugal illegally is an administrative offence, not a crime. Overstaying carries a fine, and the amount depends on how long the overstay is: from €80–⁠160 for an overstay of up to a month to €500–⁠700 if the person has been without documents for more than six months (Lei n.º 23/2007, article 192).

Removal is a separate procedure. It has grounds, listed in article 134, a decision by a specific official, a notice, a deadline and the right of appeal. Nobody comes for a person the day after their card runs out.

The second thing worth knowing in advance: you are asked to apply to renew your residence permit 30 days before it expires (article 78, paragraph 1), and under paragraph 7 of the same article the receipt for a renewal application counts as the residence permit itself for 60 days and is extended after that. So a person with an expired card and a paper showing that renewal has been applied for is not an ‘illegal’: they hold a document that the law puts on a par with a residence title. Carry it with you and keep a printout.

Since 11 September 2026 a new foreigners' law has been in force — Lei n.º 62/2026. It rewrote the deadlines, the procedure and the rules for the centres, and each of the following steps says exactly what changed. But nothing changed in this step: the fines under article 192 are the same, you are still asked to apply for renewal 30 days ahead, and the receipt still counts as a residence permit for 60 days and is extended.

It is harder for those waiting for their first AIMA appointment who haven't filed any application yet: they have no such paper, and lawyers in the chats give different answers. How booking, applying and renewal work is covered in detail in the guide How to book an AIMA appointment and renew your residence permit.

“Lots of people here live on expired visas while they wait for an AIMA appointment, but they still register as sole traders and pay taxes. You don't even have to tell AIMA you're working at the moment if you're down as accompanying your husband.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

RussosEmPortugal23.07.2026

“The lawyer at CNAIM said an AIMA appointment is grounds to be in the country, but you don't have to be here the whole time”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

ru_Portugal_pt17.08.2026

“dunno basically what I'm more interested in is how this will work in reality in cases where your residence permit formally expired and all the filing deadlines too - but not through your fault but because of AIMA etc but in the end you got the permit later - but there was still the gap when you were formally illegal for a while”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

Motorbike chat 🇵🇹07.07.2026

How the demand to leave arrives and how much time you get

From 11 September 2026 article 138 reads differently, and the first difference is who gets such a letter at all. Previously anyone who had entered or was living in the country illegally could be told to ‘leave voluntarily’, and, under a separate paragraph, so could someone whose residence permit had been cancelled. Now paragraph 1 refers to a person who has been served an administrative decision: an application for stay or for a residence permit refused, a visa or card cancelled. The time to leave is 20 to 30 days instead of the former 10–⁠20. And the article has a different name: not ‘voluntary departure’ but ‘duty to leave the country’.

The deadline can still be extended, and the same things are taken into account: how long the person has lived here, whether the children go to school, and whether they have other family members and social ties in the country. What has changed is who decides: not the authority that sent the notice, but the national director of the PSP — the Public Security Police, which since 2025 has had its own foreigners and borders unit; he may delegate this power to subordinates (paragraph 3).

Four paragraphs have been removed from the article in one go. Paragraph 4 is gone — the one under which, in special cases, people were required to leave immediately, on the first suitable flight, and failing to comply became a criminal case of aggravated disobedience; along with it, paragraph 3 of article 153 was repealed, under which such a charge was heard together with the expulsion case. Paragraphs 2, 5 and 6 were repealed too — including the one that allowed the notice to be skipped and forced-removal proceedings to be opened straight away.

What this means for someone whose stay has simply expired: article 138 no longer describes them and doesn't promise them a letter telling them to ‘leave on their own’. The law leaves them a different route — screening and forced-removal proceedings run by the police (articles 40-G to 40-N and 145); how that works is explained in the next steps. How it will turn out in practice, nobody knows yet: the law is a few days old, and there are no first-hand accounts of it in the chats yet.

What has stayed is worth knowing about the traces it leaves: the notice is entered in the border service's internal system and in the Schengen Information System as a return alert — for a year (paragraph 7). But paragraph 8 says the entry is removed immediately if the person has stopped staying illegally — including when they themselves have confirmed that they have left. When you leave, it makes sense to confirm this rather than simply disappear.

“and judging by the student chat AIMA has recently started handing out rejections and notices telling people to leave the country.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

chatlisboa26.03.2026

“Straight away they handed out a pile of refusals on residence permit renewals - to nomads specifically. And 20 days to leave the country”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

digitalnomadportugal03.04.2026

“And, as experience in Portugal shows, it's better to bring at least something - even if the amount is smaller, most likely they won't even read it, they'll just scan it and forget about it, than to get an order to leave the country within 20 days.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

digitalnomadportugal20.03.2026

Three different things: departure, removal and expulsion by a court

In conversation all of this goes by one word, ‘deportation’, but in law these are three different procedures, and it's best not to mix them up.

The duty to leave the country (dever de abandono) — the person leaves on their own within the set deadline. No removal decision is issued. Until 11 September 2026 article 138 was called ‘voluntary departure’ (abandono voluntário), and that's still what the chats call it.

Forced removal (afastamento coercivo) is an administrative decision. It is taken by the PSP national director, who may also delegate this power to subordinates (articles 140 and 149). Administrative removal has only one ground: illegal entry or illegal stay (article 145). Since 11 September 2026 the law has said this more directly than before: the section is actually called ‘Forced removal ordered by the police authority’, and article 145 itself names the PSP instead of an impersonal ‘administrative authority’. The cases are run by the police: since SEF was closed in 2023, foreigners and borders have been handled by AIMA — documents and civil matters — and by the PSP, where a separate unit, UNEF, was set up for this.

Judicial expulsion (expulsão judicial) is a court decision. It comes in two forms: as an additional penalty on top of a sentence (article 151) and as a stand-alone measure (article 152). The judicial route is used to expel those who entered and lived in the country legally (article 140, paragraph 4). The additional penalty is applied to a non-resident convicted of an intentional crime and sentenced to more than 6 months in prison, and to a resident sentenced to more than a year, and then the court must weigh the seriousness of the offence, the person's character, any reoffending, how integrated they are in society and how long they have lived in Portugal. For someone with a permanent residence permit such a penalty is possible only if their conduct is a serious threat to public order, security or national defence.

Both are carried out by the GNR and the PSP (article 159).

Who cannot be expelled under the new law

From 11 September 2026 article 135 works like this. Neither administrative removal nor judicial expulsion is allowed for anyone who:

— was born in Portugal and has lived here for at least five years; — actually has in their care minor children with Portuguese citizenship who live in Portugal; — has minor children who are third-country nationals living legally in Portugal, for whom they genuinely exercise parental responsibility, and whom they support and educate; — came to Portugal before the age of 10 and has lived here for at least five years; — is themselves a minor below the age of criminal responsibility (16 in Portugal, article 19 of the Criminal Code) and is here without accompanying adults; — has adult children who genuinely depend on them because of disability, serious illness or inability to manage without help.

The last two cases are new; they did not exist at all in the previous wording. And three of the previous ones have narrowed: those born in Portugal and those who came here before the age of ten are now protected not straight away but after five years of living in the country; children who are third-country nationals must be living here legally, whereas the previous wording simply said ‘living in Portugal’. It was precisely because of the first of these provisos that people wrote about ‘the expulsion of children under five born in Portugal’. The sub-paragraph on parents of minors who are Portuguese citizens has stayed word for word the same — but it is the one hit hardest by the new exceptions described below.

There are now three exceptions instead of one (paragraph 2). The protection does not apply if the person has been sentenced to five years or more in prison for a crime on the European arrest warrant list (Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002); if they are reasonably suspected of, or have been convicted of, terrorism, sabotage or crimes against state security; or if they threaten national security or public order — that is sub-paragraph b) of paragraph 1 of article 134. The previous wording recognised only the second case.

None of these exceptions applies automatically. The rule itself begins with a proviso: first the circumstances of the specific case must be considered, and the best interests of the child and the unity of family life weighed. The Constitutional Court made the same point when it examined the provisions of the law on 28 August 2026.

Those who have obtained long-term resident status (residente de longa duração) have separate and stronger protection. The new law did not touch article 136: such a person can be expelled only if they pose a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to public order or security; it cannot be done for economic reasons. Before the decision, the length of residence, age, the consequences for the person and their family, and their ties with the country of origin — or the lack of them — must be weighed. And the main difference: an appeal against such a decision suspends its enforcement, and anyone without sufficient means is given a free lawyer.

“by the way, about deporting parents So it turns out if the child only has Portuguese citizenship, they can't deport them along with the parents”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

beremennost_portugal17.08.2024

Where you cannot be sent

Article 143 prohibits removing or expelling a person to any country where they may be persecuted for reasons that by law give the right to asylum, or where they face torture or inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

But this protection doesn't switch on by itself. Paragraph 2 says it plainly: to rely on it, the person must state their fear of persecution and present evidence within the deadline they are given. If the protection applies, they are sent to another country that agrees to take them.

The practical upshot. Evidence means papers: detention records, administrative and court decisions, summonses, press reports about that specific person. General arguments that the country has bad laws do not count as evidence — and this is said in the chats by people who have already been through such proceedings.

The country to which the person cannot be sent must be named in the removal decision itself (article 149, paragraph 3).

“in this case, as in all similar ones, the main condition is having documentary proof that you specifically are being persecuted for your beliefs or activities. i.e. detention reports, administrative reports, court decisions, press coverage of it etc. etc. appeals to the general repressive legislation without specific facts of you personally being persecuted don't work.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

left4portugal02.07.2025

Screening, detention and forced-removal proceedings

From 11 September 2026 these proceedings have a beginning that the law never had before — screening (triagem, articles 40-G to 40-N). It covers four groups: people intercepted crossing an external border illegally; people who asked for protection at a border crossing point without meeting the entry conditions; people staying in the country illegally if they once crossed an external border without permission and have not yet been screened; and people disembarked after a rescue operation at sea. The person is taken to a screening centre; screening is carried out by the GNR and the PSP, and a doctor does the medical check. It takes up to seven days at the border and up to three inside the country.

What happens: identity is established and biometrics taken, databases are checked for any threat to internal security, public order and public health, a doctor examines the person and any vulnerability is noted — above all unaccompanied minors — and it is decided which procedure applies next. Two provisos in the law matter equally: being at the authorities' disposal during screening does not in itself count as detention, but nor does it count as authorised entry; and the outcome of screening is not a decision on the right of entry, only a choice of the next procedure, which must be communicated in writing, stating the consequences and the ways to appeal. A minor is accompanied by an adult family member, and if they are alone they are assigned an independent representative as quickly as possible. Respect for rights during screening is monitored by the Provedor de Justiça — the Portuguese ombudsman.

Then there are two routes (article 40-L): either the police detain the person for removal, in which case article 146 comes into play, or they don't — and then they notify the authority so that removal proceedings can be opened.

Detention. The GNR, the PSP, the judicial police and the maritime police have the power to detain. Within 48 hours of detention the person must be brought before a judge, who checks whether the detention is lawful and decides whether to apply coercive measures.

The coercive measures are listed in article 142, and the new law has widened the list. There were three: reporting regularly to the police, house arrest with electronic monitoring, and placement in a temporary holding centre. Three more have been added: bail or another financial guarantee, an obligation to hand over travel documents, and placement in a centre ‘under an open regime’ — that is, with the right to go out. They are applied only if there is a risk of absconding, and that risk is assessed on the circumstances — whether the person's address is unknown, whether they have family ties in the country, whether there are doubts about their identity, whether they were preparing to go into hiding.

If the court has ordered a temporary holding centre, the person may be held there no longer than needed to decide on removal, and no more than 180 days; this period can be extended by the same again, but only if the person does not cooperate or documents from a third country are slow to arrive (paragraph 3 of article 146). Until 11 September 2026 the limit was 60 days, with no extension at all.

Next the PSP runs the case: the person must be heard, and by law they enjoy all the guarantees of defence; their statement replaces the hearing provided for by law (article 148). At the end the investigating officer writes a report with a proposal, and the decision is taken by the PSP national director. The decision itself must set out the grounds, the person's obligations, the length of the entry ban and the country to which they cannot be sent, and the notice must state the right of appeal, the deadline and the fact that the person is being entered in the Schengen Information System or the national list of people refused entry (article 149).

Proceedings are not opened at all, or are suspended, in several cases (paragraph 5 of article 146): the person has a valid residence permit or another title allowing them to be here; they have a title from another EU country and go there immediately; another state takes them back under a readmission agreement. The sub-paragraph on asylum requested at any police station within 48 hours of illegal entry has been repealed. In its place the article has two new paragraphs: someone who entered illegally and whose application for international protection has been accepted waits for the decision at liberty (paragraph 6), but the application itself does not prevent removal proceedings from being opened or conducted — only the enforcement of the decision waits until the application has been answered (paragraph 8).

The temporary holding centre and your rights there

A temporary holding centre (centro de instalação temporária, CIT) is a closed facility: you cannot leave it of your own accord. People are placed there by a judge's decision while their removal is being decided. Since 11 September 2026 there have been three changes here.

Time limits. While the case is under way — up to 180 days, plus another 180 if the person does not cooperate or documents from a third country are slow to arrive (paragraph 3 of article 146). After a decision has been issued, a judge may order the centre for up to 180 days (sub-paragraph a) of paragraph 3 of article 160); the previous ceiling was 30 days, or three months in serious cases, and that separate paragraph on three months has been dropped from the law as no longer needed.

Who runs them. The centres and the facilities treated as equivalent to them are now run by the PSP (article 5 of Lei n.º 34/94 as amended), and those set up on humanitarian grounds by the PSP together with AIMA and the social services. And an important safeguard: the placement must be reviewed again by a court every 30 days (paragraph 2 of article 3 of the same law).

Open regime. The new article 5-A allows a centre to operate wholly or partly ‘under an open regime’: the person moves around the centre and goes outside without constant supervision, and is guaranteed authorised outings, contact with the outside world, and legal, social and medical assistance. This is done when it suits the circumstances of the person and their case and when there is no risk of absconding and no threat to public order, internal security or the enforcement of the decision. The hours, internal rules and escort arrangements are to be set by a separate ministerial order — until then the open regime remains a possibility written into the law.

The rights of a person in the centre are listed in article 146-A, and the new law left them untouched. On request, they must be allowed to contact their representatives, relatives and their country's consulate. They have the right to speak to a lawyer or defence counsel in private. They are entitled to emergency medical care and treatment for ordinary illnesses, and the law requires particular attention to vulnerable people — minors, including those who arrived unaccompanied, people with disabilities, the elderly, pregnant women, families with children, and those who have survived torture or violence. Families are housed separately so that they have some privacy. Children are entitled to games and activities suited to their age and, during a long stay, access to education. And everyone is given, on arrival, a document with the centre's rules and a list of their rights and obligations.

There are few places in the centres. The only full-scale centre is the Unidade Habitacional de Santo António in Porto: 48 beds, which according to Diário de Notícias are always full; another 80 places in modular containers are being added, and the work is promised to finish in September 2026. The second facility is a space treated as equivalent to a centre (EECIT) at Faro airport, which is being converted by October 2026. More than 700 people have passed through the centres since the start of 2026. The PSP also shared its own figures: from August 2025 to August 2026, 221 forced returns were carried out and 720 forced-removal cases opened. We covered this in our issue of 4 September.

To be honest about what we don't have: in two years of conversations in Russian-speaking chats there is not a single account from anyone who has been in such a centre. Everything written above comes from the law and from the police's answers to a newspaper, not from anyone's own experience.

Appeals: an appeal on its own won't stop removal

This is where people go wrong most often. A forced-removal decision can be appealed to an administrative court — but under article 150, paragraph 1, the appeal has a ‘devolutivo effect’: the decision stays in force while the court considers the case. To halt it, you have to ask separately for urgent proceedings or an interim measure suspending the decision — in Portuguese, providência cautelar — as paragraph 2 of the same article says.

This isn't our interpretation. That is exactly how the Constitutional Court explained it in its ruling of 28 August 2026: the person is protected by the combination of a court action and interim measures under the code of administrative court procedure, and suspension must be requested straight away, together with the appeal or before it.

What the person is entitled to. On request — legal aid under Lei n.º 34/2004, that is, a state-appointed lawyer, and in urgent cases a defence lawyer is appointed in the same way as for a defendant. Also on request — translation of documents and an interpreter for the appeal. The application for legal aid is made to Segurança Social.

Related cases work the same way. Cancellation of a residence permit is appealed to an administrative court, and the appeal does not suspend the decision either (article 85, paragraph 7). Judicial expulsion is appealed to the Tribunal da Relação — again without suspension (article 158). The only exception in this whole line-up is long-term residents: for them an appeal freezes the decision (article 136, paragraph 3).

And what the chats show: going to court over AIMA's inaction works. People who were refused a renewal, or who waited months for a decision, went to court and got both an appointment slot and a card. How to choose a lawyer is explained in the guide How to find and check a lawyer, and how the courts themselves work in the guide Courts in Portugal.

“Take it to court. My residence permit ran out in February, I applied for renewal in mid-January. Waited exactly the 90 days they're supposed to take and filed in court through a lawyer. About 3 weeks +/- after filing I got approved. Another week later the postman brought the card.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

Motorbike chat 🇵🇹07.07.2026

“yeah, but there are cases when people got refused a renewal, got told that's it, get lost - and they went to court and won and got their residence permit”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

Motorbike chat 🇵🇹07.07.2026

“The most foolproof grounds, from my modest experience, are the risk of facing deportation (which is very easy to justify given the delays in renewing residence permits) or humanitarian grounds (which you can easily bring the kids into). And above all, the inevitability of the risk of a right being violated or lost. On the whole they look at these requests more or less sensibly and reply within 5-10 days.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

myptaxes18.12.2025

Deadlines after the decision and the entry ban

Once a removal decision or judicial expulsion has been issued, the person is again given time to leave — 10 to 20 days (article 160, paragraph 1). The new law kept this period as it was, but added a cross-reference: it is extended under the same rules as the deadline in article 138, that is, by decision of the PSP national director and with regard to the children's schooling and family ties. During this period the law requires family unity to be preserved, emergency medical care and treatment for ordinary illnesses to be provided, and a minor to be given access to a state school.

The person is placed under police custody in four cases, and since 11 September 2026 these have been listed explicitly (paragraph 2): the residence permit has been cancelled under article 85; there are specific and objective signs of an intention to abscond; the person has forged documents; there are serious grounds or strong indications that they have committed or are about to commit serious crimes.

On request, the judge may also apply other measures until the decision is carried out: a temporary holding centre — now for up to 180 days instead of the former 30 — house arrest with electronic monitoring, reporting regularly to the police, or bail (paragraph 3).

If the person doesn't leave in time, under article 161 they are detained and taken to the border. If the decision cannot be carried out within 48 hours of detention, the case goes to a judge, who decides on the temporary holding centre.

The entry ban. Under article 144, after a removal decision, entry to and stay in Portugal are barred for up to five years; longer if there is a serious threat to public order, public or national security. The length is calculated starting from a simple illegal stay and increased for breaching the rules on entry and stay, for crimes and for breaching obligations under coercive measures, for repeated removal decisions, or for entering despite an earlier ban.

New and important: the article now has a paragraph 4. Anyone who left on their own — under the state voluntary return programme (article 139, paragraph 1) or within the deadline set after the decision (article 160, paragraph 1) — is barred from entry for up to three years. Until 11 September 2026 there was no such paragraph, and the difference between three years and five is exactly the price of leaving on the set day rather than waiting to be taken away.

There is also a very short option, which the new law did not change. Article 147: if a detained person says at their hearing before the judge that they want to leave Portugal and the other countries of the Agreement, the judge may hand them over to the police to be taken to the border as soon as possible. The entry ban in that case is one year.

If the person is not allowed to be in other Schengen countries either, the ban covers them too, and the notice must say so. All of this goes into the databases: both the Schengen Information System and the border service's internal system. What this means at the border is explained in the guide Passport control in Portugal and the EES system.

“When you go through the border, at best they'll turn you round and send you back to Portugal. Or they might just slap a SIS ban on you and let you go wherever you like. You won't get back in.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

ru_Portugal_pt18.06.2026

“I only know one case many, many years ago - the lady had overstayed badly, they processed her deportation, a 5-year ban and the blokes in uniform escorted her onto the plane. (Italy)”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

digitalnomadportugal11.03.2026

Voluntary return with state help

Article 139 allows the state to help those who have decided to go home of their own accord. Since 11 September 2026 its first paragraph has become shorter: it used to name cooperation programmes with international organisations — above all the International Organization for Migration — and with non-governmental organisations; now it simply says ‘under voluntary return programmes’. A new paragraph 6 adds that such programmes may be run by AIMA, without prejudice to the powers of the PSP.

The conditions for this help are strict, and you need to know them in advance. Anyone with a residence permit hands in the card at the border post when boarding. And most importantly: for three years after leaving, the person may enter Portugal and other Schengen countries only if they repay the money received, with interest at the statutory rate. An exception is made for those who had temporary protection — this rule does not apply to them; we have a guide on the protection itself, Temporary protection for Ukrainian citizens. Separately, the law allows a short-stay visa to be issued on humanitarian grounds even during those three years.

Alongside this there is now a new rule in article 144: anyone who left under the programme — like anyone who left within the deadline set after the decision — is barred from entry for up to three years. So the three years now rest on two grounds at once: the unrepaid money and the ban itself.

What we don't know and won't make up: how much such a programme pays today and where to apply. The international organisation's pages won't open from our server, we found no separate AIMA page on voluntary return, and Russian-speaking chats don't talk about it at all. When announcing the new law, the government promised to ‘encourage voluntary return, including with money’, but named no amounts.

If someone leaves on their own rather than under a programme, what remains is the purely practical side that the chats write about all the time: ending the tenancy, utility contracts, the internet, self-employment and taxes. Loose ends left open catch up with you later.

“How to leave Portugal properly For several years I wrote about how to move here properly, rent a flat and sort out your first local documents. Now, judging by what people are asking in the chats, it's time for some to get out of Portugal, and it will be useful for them to know what absolutely has to be done before leaving. You can buy a ticket and physically leave the country in a day. But properly ending your tenancy, getting your deposit back, closing utility contracts, the internet, recibos verdes, taxes, the car, the residence permit or temporary protection – that's a whole separate bureaucratic quest.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

left4portugal17.07.2026

What the new law changes and from when it applies

The law has been published. It is Lei n.º 62/2026 of 10 September 2026, Diário da República No. 176/2026, Series I. Its last, eleventh article says the law comes into force on the day after publication — that is, from 11 September 2026. Parliament passed it on 17 July, President António José Seguro signed it on 31 August, and the Prime Minister countersigned it on 1 September. Before signing, the President sent eleven provisions to the Constitutional Court; on 28 August the court decided not to declare them unconstitutional, while setting out guidance for courts and authorities — above all on expelling children, separating parents from their children, and expelling those entitled to international protection.

The law itself goes beyond removal: it implements seven European Union regulations of 2024, transposes two directives and amends three Portuguese laws — Lei n.º 34/94 on temporary holding centres, Lei n.º 23/2007 on foreigners and Lei n.º 27/2008 on asylum.

In brief, what has changed in the matters this guide covers:

— the deadline to leave after a refusal or cancellation is 20–⁠30 days instead of 10–⁠20, and it is extended by the PSP national director; the law no longer has the requirement to leave immediately or the criminal offence of disobedience; — screening (triagem) is an entirely new procedure: up to three days inside the country and up to seven at the border, and its outcome decides whether the person is detained for removal; — temporary holding centre — up to 180 days plus another 180 instead of the former 60; after a decision, up to 180 days instead of 30; the centres have passed to the PSP, a judge reviews the placement every 30 days, and there is now an open regime; — coercive measures — bail, the obligation to hand over travel documents and the open regime in a centre have been added; — who cannot be expelled — those born in Portugal and those who came here before the age of ten are now protected only after five years of living in the country, and there are now three exceptions instead of one, among them a threat to public order; on the other hand, unaccompanied minors and parents of adult children who depend on them have gained protection; — entry ban — up to three years for anyone who left on their own within the set deadline or under a return programme, instead of the general five.

The law has no transitional rules for these cases. Article 10 keeps the old procedure only for applications and cases that were already being considered under the asylum law on 11 September, and even then with a proviso about the effect of a court appeal. It says nothing about cases under the foreigners' law — which means the new rules apply immediately.

Two changes are not about removal but affect exactly the same people. First: paragraph 7 of article 82 has been repealed — the rule under which an application was deemed approved if AIMA failed to decide in time through no fault of the applicant, and the card was supposed to be issued immediately. Now the delay in itself gives you nothing; a decision on a first residence permit has 90 days, which can be extended by another 30, and renewals still have 60 days. Second: sub-paragraph k) of paragraph 1 of article 122, under which a residence permit without a visa was granted to a parent of minor children living in Portugal or of children with Portuguese citizenship, now names only the parent of minor children with Portuguese citizenship living in Portugal. We covered this in our issue of 10 September, and the asylum cases in another issue the same day.

And one thing that matters if you check for yourself: as of 12 September 2026 the consolidated text of Lei n.º 23/2007 on the Diário da República website had not yet been updated — it opens a version in which article 138 still reads the old way, and the latest amendment listed is Lei n.º 61/2025 of 22 October 2025. The new articles have to be read in the text of Lei n.º 62/2026 itself.

“In short: the President of Portugal, António José Seguro, didn't sign the new Lei de Estrangeiros straight away but sent it to the Constitutional Court (Tribunal Constitucional) for a preliminary review.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

HigherEducationPortugal10.08.2026

“Right now they're tightening the law on deporting immigrants without valid documents from the country - and it's absolutely unclear who it will affect and how.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

digitalnomadportugal20.03.2026

What to do so it never gets that far

A short list of what is in your own hands.

Apply for renewal early — the law asks you to apply 30 days before your card expires (article 78, paragraph 1). Keep the receipt for your renewal application and carry it with you: it stands in for the residence permit for 60 days and is extended.

AIMA's silence no longer works in your favour. Until 11 September 2026 a late decision on renewal was deemed an approval, and the card was supposed to be issued immediately; this provision (article 82, paragraph 7) has been repealed. The decision deadlines remain: 90 days for a first residence permit, which can be stretched by another 30, and 60 days for a renewal — but there is no longer any ‘consent by default’ behind them. So waiting in silence has become more costly: once the deadline passes, what's left is an appeal and the courts.

Don't stay away from the country for long. A temporary residence permit can be cancelled if the person has been absent without good reason for six months in a row or eight months in total over the card's validity; a permanent one — 24 months in a row or 30 months over three years (article 85, paragraph 2). A long absence has to be justified with a statement to AIMA — before leaving, or in exceptional cases afterwards (paragraph 3). The permit is not cancelled if the person proves that abroad they were working, running a business, or doing cultural or community work (paragraph 4).

Report a move or a change in marital status — you have 60 days to do so (article 86). Letters are sent to your address, and ‘I didn't get the notice’ won't help later.

Don't wait in silence if AIMA is dragging its feet. The courts do work in such cases: people get both an appointment slot and a renewal decision through them. Free support at the national migrant support centres (CNAIM) and local CLAIM centres also helps — that's where people go who can't afford a lawyer.

Gather your papers in advance. Anything that proves you live here rather than just happen to be here: a tenancy agreement and utility bills in your name, tax returns, an employment contract or recibos verdes, certificates from school and nursery, your children's birth certificates. These are exactly the circumstances the law says must be taken into account both when extending the deadline to leave and when deciding on expulsion.

“Generally CLAIM seems to work for slots (my husband waited a year for a slot through the court. Whether through his wife with a residence permit or through the child who's a citizen) In the end a month after going to Claim, a letter came from AIMA (definitely not the result of the court case, that would have come through the lawyer, not directly) But they say there are queues there now too, so if it's worth going to them at all, then go really quickly Well, if getting a residence permit is still relevant for you, ofc.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

chatlisboa26.06.2026

“To people like you I just want to say that your situation is already at the level of some crappy joke. But imagine people who've already been through one court case. The court ordered AIMA to give them a slot. Six months go by — AIMA simply doesn't give a toss about the court ruling. These people hire a lawyer again, go to court again, win again. And after that AIMA still acts as if court rulings only exist for wimps. Well, basically, there are countries where laws are a sort of notional thing. I ran away from a country like that myself.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

chatlisboa24.06.2026

“Sharing my experience of coming back without the physical residence permit card, but with the paper with the QR code saying the renewal is in progress Flew from Kazakhstan via Istanbul. In Kazakhstan they didn't even notice the permit had expired, let me through no problem. In Istanbul they noticed straight away, asked to see the paper, saw the word AIMA written on it and let me through straight away.”

Translated from Russian; the original is at the link

left4portugal13.07.2026