UK Earned Settlement: Proposed ILR Changes Explained

The UK Government has opened a formal consultation on a proposed restructuring of how migrants qualify for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). The proposals, described as “earned settlement”, would represent a major departure from the current five-year ILR framework used across most work and family routes. Although the consultation is now live, none of the proposals have yet been translated into Immigration Rules and there is no legal change in force. Existing ILR routes remain fully operational.

What this article is about: This article explains the content of the earned settlement consultation, how it relates to the Government’s broader immigration agenda, and what has and has not changed in law. It provides clear analysis for workers, families and employers who need to understand the direction of travel while the current ILR provisions remain legally binding.

The consultation introduces the possibility of a new settlement structure built around a ten-year qualifying baseline, supplemented by mandatory conditions covering suitability, English language, financial responsibility, contribution and long-term compliance. It also includes indicative scenarios showing how timelines might be shortened for higher earners or extended where income, benefit use or immigration breaches are present. These scenarios are illustrative only and do not form part of the Immigration Rules.

Throughout this article, the existing law is distinguished clearly from policy proposals. Where the Government has set out examples or exploratory options, these are identified as consultation-stage material only. Current ILR routes, including the familiar five-year provisions under work and family categories and the separate long residence route, continue unchanged unless and until amended through a published Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules.

Section A: Overview of the Earned Settlement Proposals

The Government’s earned settlement consultation sets out a potential redesign of the UK’s long-term immigration system. Instead of settlement being achieved primarily through a five-year qualifying period linked to specific routes, the consultation outlines a model built around a ten-year baseline and a stronger link between long-term residence, contribution and compliance. While the proposals reflect a significant policy shift, they remain at consultation stage. No changes have been made to the Immigration Rules and all current ILR routes continue to apply in full.

The earned settlement consultation positions settlement as a status to be achieved rather than a default consequence of time spent in the UK. The proposed framework introduces a ten-year starting point for most applicants, supplemented by mandatory suitability and contribution requirements that would need to be satisfied regardless of route. The consultation also sets out illustrative reductions for higher earners and potential extensions for individuals with periods of benefit use or breaches of immigration conditions. These examples are not draft Rules and hold no legal force at this stage.

The consultation is part of a wider policy direction established in the Government’s immigration strategy for 2025 and beyond, which emphasises reducing net migration, strengthening the integrity of long-term settlement and placing greater weight on English language, conduct, economic participation and self-sufficiency. These themes underpin the earned settlement model, though the specifics remain under development and will only become binding if incorporated into the Immigration Rules following parliamentary scrutiny.

1. Background to the Government’s 2025 Immigration Strategy

The earned settlement proposals sit within the broader direction of travel outlined in the 2025 immigration strategy, which focuses on tightening long-term migration routes and placing greater emphasis on contribution and integration. The strategy argues that the current settlement framework does not sufficiently distinguish between categories of migrants with different levels of economic or social impact. It highlights concerns that:

• time-based eligibility does not adequately differentiate between routes with unequal levels of contribution
• the link between long-term residence and positive economic or social outcomes could be strengthened
• existing settlement checks may not fully reflect suitability, conduct and integration considerations

As a policy document, the strategy signals intention rather than delivering legislative change. Its statements do not alter the Immigration Rules. Only a Statement of Changes laid before Parliament can amend the legal requirements for ILR.

The earned settlement consultation therefore builds on strategic policy objectives but does not itself modify the existing five-year or ten-year ILR routes. These routes continue to operate exactly as set out in the current Immigration Rules.

2. Publication of the Earned Settlement Consultation

The detailed proposals for earned settlement are contained in the command paper and consultation document released to Parliament on 20 November 2025. The consultation is open until 12 February 2026 and invites responses from individuals, employers, sector bodies and legal practitioners on the practicality and fairness of the proposed model.

The consultation outlines the Government’s potential approach to reshaping how settlement is achieved. Key features included within the consultation materials are:

• a ten-year baseline qualifying period for most routes, replacing the current assumption of a five-year standard timeline
• removal of the stand-alone ten-year long residence route, with long residence incorporated into the baseline and time-adjustment structure
• a universal set of mandatory conditions covering suitability, English language, financial responsibility and continuous compliance
• a time-adjustment model allowing reductions or extensions depending on earnings, occupation, benefit use and immigration history

These features are conceptual and subject to revision. The consultation makes clear that none of the proposals have been drafted into Immigration Rules and that existing ILR provisions remain legally unchanged. Any future system will need transitional arrangements to avoid unfair outcomes for those already progressing towards settlement under current rules.

3. Strategic Direction and Policy Signals

Although the consultation does not create new law, the documents offer a clear indication of how the Home Office may seek to reshape settlement. Several policy themes recur across the materials:

• settlement no longer as a routine five-year milestone but as a status earned through longer, more conditional residence
• residence counting towards settlement only where paired with sustained economic participation, tax contributions and compliance
• tighter integration requirements, including higher English standards and strengthened suitability assessments
• clearer differentiation between groups of migrants, allowing accelerated timelines for high earners and extended timelines where benefit use or compliance issues arise

The consultation also signals that any new system may apply in principle to individuals who have not yet reached ILR at the point new Rules take effect. However, no transitional provisions have been published, and the Government acknowledges that transitional arrangements will be critical to ensuring fairness and legal certainty.

For individuals nearing eligibility under current ILR routes, the consultation creates a strategic consideration rather than a legal change: whether to apply under existing law while it remains available or wait to see whether future Rules introduce a different pathway. Until a Statement of Changes is published, the legal position remains unchanged.

Section A Summary:
The earned settlement proposals outline a potential shift from the UK’s longstanding five-year ILR structure towards a ten-year baseline supported by mandatory conditions and time adjustments. Although the proposed model would significantly alter how settlement is achieved, none of the changes have legal effect and all existing ILR provisions remain fully in force. The consultation provides insight into policy direction but does not modify the current Immigration Rules.

Section B: Understanding the Proposed Earned Settlement System

The earned settlement consultation outlines a possible replacement for the UK’s established five-year ILR routes. Instead of settlement flowing from a defined period of lawful residence under specific categories, the proposed model is built around a ten-year baseline combined with mandatory conditions relating to conduct, integration, contribution and long-term compliance. These proposals represent a significant shift in how settlement could be assessed in future, but they remain at consultation stage. The current Immigration Rules continue to govern all ILR applications.

This section explains the core components of the proposed model: the ten-year baseline, the universal mandatory conditions, the income-linked reductions, the illustrated extensions and the cohorts explicitly identified as outside the scope of reform. It also sets out circumstances that the consultation suggests could bar settlement entirely. None of these elements have legal force until incorporated into a Statement of Changes.

1. The Proposed Ten-Year Baseline Model

The central element of the consultation is a proposed ten-year qualifying baseline for most settlement categories. This would replace the current structure under which many workers, partners and long-term residents can qualify for ILR after five years, provided they meet the route-specific requirements. Under the proposed model, the existing ten-year long residence route would also be withdrawn as a separate category and absorbed into the new baseline and time-adjustment structure.

The consultation treats ten years as the default starting point. From there, an individual’s timeline could be reduced or extended depending on earnings, occupation, benefit use and immigration compliance. The Home Office indicates that it is seeking views on whether ten years is the appropriate baseline and whether different groups should be subject to different qualifying periods.

If implemented, the ten-year model would shift settlement from a largely time-based entitlement to a status achieved through a combination of long residence, economic participation and compliance. The consultation recognises that transitional arrangements will be necessary to ensure that individuals already progressing towards ILR under current rules are treated fairly. These arrangements have not yet been drafted.

2. Proposed Universal Mandatory Conditions

A key feature of the consultation is a set of mandatory conditions that would apply to all settlement applicants, regardless of route. These conditions would form a new suitability and contribution framework for long-term status. Failure to meet any one of them would prevent an applicant from qualifying for ILR, even if they exceed the ten-year baseline.

The mandatory conditions set out in the consultation include:

• Suitability criteria: A strengthened suitability test for long-term status, potentially exceeding the current Part 9 provisions.
• English language: A proposed increase from B1 to B2 English for settlement applicants, with details on acceptable tests to follow in draft Rules.
• Life in the UK test: Continued use of the test as an integration requirement.
• Earnings and contributions: A requirement to show sustained earnings above the income tax and National Insurance threshold, assessed primarily through HMRC data.
• Debt to the state: No unresolved public debt at the point of applying, including unpaid NHS charges, tax arrears, penalties or litigation costs.
• Continuous compliance: Adherence to visa conditions throughout the qualifying period, including sponsorship duties where applicable.

These conditions mark a shift towards tighter scrutiny of long-term conduct and financial responsibility. The consultation acknowledges that individuals with interrupted work histories, caring responsibilities or health conditions may face challenges meeting these requirements, and it invites feedback on how such circumstances should be treated.

3. Income-Linked Reductions to the Qualifying Period

The consultation introduces a time-adjustment mechanism through which the ten-year baseline could be reduced for applicants with sustained higher earnings. The Government presents these examples to illustrate how contribution could be linked to settlement timelines:

• Applicants with taxable income above £125,140 for three consecutive years could receive a seven-year reduction, creating a potential three-year route.
• Applicants earning above £50,270 for three consecutive years could receive a five-year reduction, effectively restoring a five-year ILR timeline for this group.

These thresholds reflect current higher-rate and additional-rate income tax bands, though the consultation notes they may be updated if fiscal thresholds change. High-earning individuals in priority routes, such as Global Talent or Innovator Founder, may benefit even where income fluctuates due to entrepreneurial activity. However, reductions would only apply if all mandatory conditions are met. The exact evidential standards will only be confirmed through draft Immigration Rules.

4. Proposed Extensions and Upward Adjustments

In addition to reductions, the consultation outlines several illustrative scenarios where the qualifying period could exceed ten years. These examples are designed to prompt discussion rather than propose firm Rules. They include:

• Lower-paid or sub-RQF level 6 roles: A potential qualifying period of 15 years for sponsored workers in lower-paid or lower-skilled positions.
• Public funds use: Less than 12 months of public funds use adding five years, and 12 months or more adding ten years to the baseline.
• Immigration breaches: Past overstaying, irregular entry or misuse of visit permission resulting in substantial extensions, in some examples creating timelines approaching 30 years.
• Debt to the state: Settlement deferred until public debt is fully resolved.
• NRPF considerations: The consultation explores whether some future ILR grants could include a “no recourse to public funds” condition, though no final proposal is set out.

These upward adjustments signal an intention to link settlement eligibility more closely to long-term economic self-sufficiency and compliance. The consultation invites feedback on proportionality, particularly for sectors such as social care where low pay is structural.

5. Groups Clearly Identified as Out of Scope

The consultation states that certain cohorts would not fall within the earned settlement model. These include:

• individuals who already hold ILR
• those with status under the EU Settlement Scheme
• individuals granted status under the Windrush Scheme
• children in care and care leavers

These groups are protected under separate statutory and policy frameworks and will not be affected by earned settlement reforms. The consultation does not yet explain how people part-way through existing ILR routes will be treated, although it recognises that transitional arrangements will be essential.

6. Circumstances That Could Bar Settlement Entirely

The consultation makes clear that meeting the residence requirement alone would not guarantee ILR under the proposed model. Even long periods of lawful residence would not qualify an applicant for settlement if mandatory conditions are not met. Examples of disqualifying factors include:

• criminal convictions falling within strengthened suitability criteria
• failure to meet the proposed B2 English requirement
• gaps in National Insurance contributions
• unresolved public debt, including NHS charges or tax arrears
• periods of public funds use, depending on how the final Rules are drafted

These examples underline the shift from a predominantly time-based approach to one in which long-term compliance, contribution and financial responsibility become central to achieving ILR. The consultation acknowledges that the proposed model could lead to individuals holding temporary leave for many years without ever meeting settlement requirements.

Section B Summary:
The earned settlement consultation sets out a possible framework built around a ten-year baseline, mandatory suitability and contribution conditions, and a time-adjustment model allowing accelerated or extended settlement timelines. High-earning individuals and certain priority routes could see shorter pathways, while lower-paid roles or individuals with periods of benefit use or compliance issues could face significant extensions. None of these proposals have legal effect, and all current ILR routes remain fully operational.

Section C: Impact on Workers and Entrepreneurs

The earned settlement consultation presents a potential shift in how workers and entrepreneurs build long-term futures in the UK. If implemented in a form resembling the structures outlined in the consultation, the current five-year ILR routes for most work categories could give way to a ten-year baseline accompanied by mandatory conditions covering earnings, compliance and financial responsibility. The consultation also includes illustrative scenarios showing how timelines may be reduced for high earners or extended for lower-paid roles, individuals with public funds use or those with past immigration breaches. These are not draft Rules, but they offer insight into how the Home Office may restructure the settlement landscape.

This section examines how the proposals could affect different groups of workers and entrepreneurs, acknowledges the uncertainties created by fluctuating income patterns and highlights how the proposed mandatory conditions could influence long-term immigration planning. While the legal position remains unchanged, the consultation signals outcomes that may diverge significantly from the predictable five-year routes familiar under the current Immigration Rules.

1. Workers in Standard Salary Bands

For workers earning below higher-rate tax thresholds, the consultation’s proposed starting point is a ten-year qualifying period. If implemented, this would double the time currently required for most employees in the Skilled Worker and related routes. The consultation also indicates that workers may need to show a sustained period of earnings above the income tax and National Insurance threshold, verified through HMRC data.

Under the illustrative model, disruptions in employment could affect eligibility. For example:

• periods of reduced hours or lower-paid work
• gaps between roles due to redundancy, contract changes or economic downturns
• periods of low income caused by sickness, caring responsibilities or part-time work

These periods may interrupt the earnings and NI patterns required to satisfy future mandatory conditions. The consultation also proposes examples in which public funds use could lengthen settlement timelines: less than twelve months adding five years and twelve months or more adding ten years. While these examples do not form part of any current Rules, they demonstrate the potential direction towards linking settlement with long-term economic resilience.

Combined with the proposed mandatory conditions, these changes could result in some workers maintaining lawful residence for extended periods without ever meeting the criteria for settlement. Someone with consistent employment but modest earnings, intermittent NI contributions or tax issues could find themselves relying indefinitely on temporary leave, depending on the design of future Rules.

2. High Earners and Priority Talent Routes

High earners are among those most likely to benefit from the time-adjustment structure set out in the consultation. The illustrative examples suggest that:

• individuals earning above £125,140 for three consecutive years could receive a seven-year reduction, potentially leading to a three-year settlement route
• those earning above £50,270 for three consecutive years could receive a five-year reduction, restoring the familiar five-year ILR timeline for this group

The consultation’s rationale is that higher levels of sustained economic contribution should be reflected in shorter qualifying periods. Assessments are expected to rely heavily on HMRC-verified income data. For many PAYE employees, this may be straightforward, but individuals with more complex remuneration structures—such as bonuses, variable pay or mixed PAYE and self-employed income—may face greater evidential complexity.

Priority routes such as Global Talent and Innovator Founder are also referenced in the consultation as potential candidates for accelerated settlement, even where income fluctuates due to entrepreneurial activity or research funding cycles. The consultation seeks views on how contribution should be measured for individuals whose economic value is not captured solely by taxable income.

Importantly, even for high earners, accelerated timelines would only apply if all mandatory conditions are met. A criminal conviction, failure to reach B2 English, unresolved public debt or inconsistent NI contributions could bar settlement entirely. The consultation does not propose that high income can override the suitability or integration requirements.

3. Lower-Paid Workers and Health and Care Roles

The consultation’s illustrative examples present some of the most significant potential impacts for lower-paid workers, particularly those in roles below RQF level 6. These examples suggest a possible standard qualifying period of 15 years for workers in sub-RQF level 6 roles, which includes many positions within the Health and Care Worker route. This represents a substantial departure from the current five-year route to ILR for eligible workers.

When combined with the benefit-related extensions in the illustrative examples, these adjustments could generate very long pathways. For instance:

• a sub-RQF 6 worker with less than twelve months of public funds use could face a fifteen-year baseline plus a five-year extension (20 years total)
• twelve months or more of benefit use could add ten years to a fifteen-year baseline (25 years total)

These figures are examples only, but they highlight how settlement for lower-paid workers could become significantly more conditional. The consultation recognises that these scenarios raise questions about fairness, particularly in sectors where wages are structurally low and access to public funds may be influenced by circumstances outside an individual’s control.

The consultation also raises questions about career progression. It is not yet clear whether time spent in lower-paid roles would permanently lock an applicant into a longer timeline, even if they subsequently move into higher-paid or higher-skilled positions. Stakeholder feedback is likely to shape how progression is treated in any future framework.

4. Entrepreneurs and Self-Employed Contributors

Entrepreneurs and self-employed individuals face distinctive challenges under a system that ties settlement eligibility to consistent income and NI contributions. Early-stage businesses often experience variable profits, fluctuating revenue and periods of reinvestment, resulting in irregular taxable income. These patterns may make it difficult to satisfy both the proposed mandatory earnings condition and the thresholds required for accelerated timelines.

The consultation acknowledges these complexities and seeks views on how contribution should be measured for those whose economic input is not captured by a standard PAYE profile. For example:

• self-employed professionals may have variable profits across tax years
• individuals with mixed income (salary, dividends, project fees) may fall above or below thresholds unpredictably
• early-stage founders may generate low profits for several years while investing in business growth

The consultation signals that certain innovation-linked categories—such as Global Talent and Innovator Founder—may receive more flexible treatment. However, specific evidential standards or exceptions have not been drafted. It remains unclear how the Home Office would treat periods of low income, gaps in trading caused by economic conditions or irregular Class 2 and Class 4 NI contributions.

Overall, entrepreneurs and self-employed individuals could find themselves disproportionately affected by the structure of the mandatory conditions, unless future Rules incorporate allowances for fluctuating income or alternative indicators of long-term economic value.

Section C Summary:
The earned settlement consultation suggests very different potential outcomes depending on income level, occupational type, benefit use and immigration history. Standard and lower-paid workers could face significantly longer settlement timelines, especially where employment patterns or reliance on public funds trigger extensions. High earners and certain priority routes could benefit from accelerated pathways, but only if they meet all proposed mandatory conditions. Entrepreneurs and self-employed individuals face particular uncertainty due to fluctuating income patterns and the absence of detailed Rules. All existing ILR routes remain unchanged during the consultation period.

Section D: Impact on Family Members

The earned settlement consultation proposes a structural shift in how partners and children of migrants progress towards Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). Under the current Immigration Rules, most dependants align with the main applicant’s five-year route, provided they meet residence and relationship requirements. The consultation, however, outlines a model in which dependants may have independent qualifying periods, their own exposure to mandatory conditions and separate time adjustments linked to income, public funds use and immigration compliance. None of these proposals have legal force at present, but they signal a potential move away from the principle of household alignment at settlement stage.

This section explores how partners, children and household members could be affected if the earned settlement framework were introduced. It highlights the Consultation’s focus on individual assessment, the role of earnings and benefit use in shaping dependants’ timelines and the potential divergence of settlement journeys within the same family unit. The current legal position remains unchanged: dependants qualify under existing Rules until any new framework is drafted and implemented.

1. Inclusion of Family Members in the Earned Settlement Framework

The consultation proposes bringing dependants—partners and children—within the same earned settlement structure applied to main applicants. Under the illustrative model, partners of British citizens or settled persons may retain a pathway equivalent to the current five-year period, but this is framed as a reduction from the proposed ten-year baseline rather than a standalone entitlement. This signals a shift towards treating partner routes as part of a wider contribution-based system rather than as separate family life exceptions.

For dependants of sponsored workers and entrepreneurs, the consultation signals a more significant change. Dependant partners may be assessed independently rather than aligning automatically with the main applicant. This could result in situations where a partner qualifies for ILR earlier, later or separately, depending on their individual income levels, benefit use, suitability factors or compliance history. Such an approach diverges sharply from the current Appendix FM and work-route framework, where dependants typically qualify at the same time as the main applicant if they have five years’ continuous residence as dependants.

The Home Office acknowledges that independent assessment marks a major policy shift with wide-reaching implications for household stability. It invites evidence on whether dependants should be subject to identical conditions, a lighter framework or distinct rules reflecting their differing economic positions.

2. Income, Work Patterns and Benefit Use for Dependants

One of the most consequential elements of the consultation is the potential extension of time adjustments and contribution assessments to dependants. Under the illustrative model, benefit use by a dependant—rather than the main applicant—could lengthen that dependant’s settlement timeline. This could occur even where the main applicant maintains continuous full-time employment and does not access public funds.

The consultation’s examples show how this might work:

• less than twelve months of public funds use by a partner could add five years to their qualifying period
• twelve months or more could add ten years, creating a fifteen- or twenty-year pathway for the dependant

These examples raise practical issues for households where one partner temporarily steps back from work due to childcare, study, illness or caring responsibilities. Under the illustrative model, such decisions—common in many families—could affect the dependant’s progression to settlement.

The consultation also asks whether income should be assessed individually or based on combined household income. The two approaches could lead to vastly different outcomes. An individual income test may disadvantage households with uneven earning patterns, while a combined test may obscure household members’ differing immigration circumstances. The consultation explicitly seeks views on which approach is more proportionate and workable.

3. Children and the Transition to Adulthood

The consultation raises specific questions about how children should be treated under a ten-year baseline model. Under current Rules, children typically obtain ILR at the same time as their parents if they have completed five years as dependants. The proposed framework, however, does not automatically align children with parents and instead signals a need for new mechanisms to reflect differences in arrival age, residence length and contribution potential.

Key issues highlighted in the consultation include:

• children arriving in the UK at older ages may be unable to complete ten years before turning eighteen
• teenagers in full-time education are unlikely to meet contribution-based requirements linked to earnings or NI thresholds
• sixteen to eighteen may become a high-risk period if transitional provisions do not protect children who cannot meet proposed contribution indicators
• siblings may accumulate residence at different times, leading to diverging settlement timelines

The consultation does not propose a defined structure for children and invites feedback on whether alignment with parents should continue, whether separate rules should apply or whether education-based residence should be treated differently in a contribution-led system.

4. Diverging Settlement Timelines Within a Household

A central implication of the consultation is the possibility that different members of the same household may progress towards settlement at different speeds. Under current law, whole households often qualify together after five years. Under the illustrative model, however, the following scenarios may occur:

• a main applicant on a high-income trajectory could reach ILR after five or even three years
• a partner who has taken time out of the workforce could remain on a ten-year baseline
• a dependant working in a sub-RQF 6 role could face a proposed fifteen-year timeline
• children may reach ILR at different times depending on age at arrival

These potential divergences may introduce complexity into family planning, decision-making and long-term stability. Everyday choices—such as taking parental leave, reducing hours, pursuing education or responding to health issues—could have disproportionate consequences under a system tied closely to contribution and benefit use.

The consultation makes clear that transitional arrangements will be crucial, especially for households already progressing under current ILR routes. However, no transitional Rules have yet been published.

Section D Summary:
The earned settlement consultation signals a significant shift from the current model in which dependants typically align with the main applicant’s five-year timeline. Under the proposed framework, partners and older children may face independent assessments, their own qualifying periods and time adjustments linked to income, benefit use and compliance. This could result in diverging settlement trajectories across the same household. All existing ILR Rules remain unchanged until any new framework is formally drafted and implemented.

Section E: Impact on Employers

The earned settlement consultation introduces changes that, if implemented, would significantly reshape the landscape in which UK employers recruit, sponsor and retain overseas workers. By moving away from predictable five-year ILR routes and towards a ten-year baseline combined with mandatory conditions and contribution-based assessments, the proposed framework would increase the duration and complexity of sponsorship relationships. Although the proposals are not yet law, they highlight the direction of travel and the potential operational impact on employers across multiple sectors.

This section examines how the proposed model may influence recruitment strategies, sponsorship management, HR processes and long-term workforce planning. It also considers how different sectors may be affected if the consultation’s illustrative structures form the basis of future Immigration Rules. Throughout this period, current Rules remain fully in force and employer duties remain unchanged.

1. Recruitment and Retention Considerations

One of the most immediate implications for employers concerns the attractiveness of UK roles to overseas candidates. Under current Rules, a five-year route to ILR provides many workers with a stable and predictable path to long-term status. The consultation’s proposed ten-year baseline—combined with possible fifteen-year or longer timelines for lower-paid roles—could reduce the appeal of UK employment in competitive global labour markets.

Employers may face several challenges:

• Reduced attractiveness of sponsorship: Longer and more conditional settlement routes may deter candidates who are comparing the UK with countries offering shorter or clearer pathways.
• Increasing turnover risk: Workers who previously planned to remain until ILR may reconsider long-term career plans if the settlement horizon becomes significantly extended.
• Sector-specific impact: Industries reliant on lower-paid or sub-RQF 6 roles—such as social care, hospitality, logistics and food production—may experience recruitment difficulties if extended timelines reduce the perceived long-term benefits of UK roles.
• Polarised outcomes: Employers of high earners or workers in priority categories may gain a competitive advantage if accelerated timelines are incorporated into future Rules.

The consultation acknowledges the potential impact on sectors with chronic skills shortages and invites evidence from employers on how settlement timelines influence recruitment and retention.

2. Extended Sponsorship Relationships and Compliance Risk

The consultation’s proposed ten-year baseline—and possible fifteen-year timelines for some roles—would extend sponsorship relationships significantly. Under current Rules, a worker may move from temporary to permanent status within five years, reducing the sponsorship burden. Under the proposed model, employers could remain responsible for sponsorship duties for a decade or more.

Longer sponsorship periods increase exposure to compliance obligations, including:

• More reportable events: Over long periods, changes to duties, work location, salary, hours or work arrangements are more likely and must be reported promptly.
• Greater audit exposure: Longer timelines increase the likelihood of Home Office compliance visits, document checks or licence reviews.
• Heightened dependency on payroll accuracy: With HMRC data potentially feeding into future settlement assessments, payroll errors or incorrectly reported income may have downstream consequences for a worker’s eligibility.
• Long-term document retention: Employers may need to preserve records for extended periods to evidence compliance if queries arise during a future ILR application.

Taken together, these factors could significantly increase the administrative burden on sponsors. Employers may need to enhance compliance frameworks, invest in robust HR systems or seek specialist support to manage extended sponsorship cycles effectively.

3. HR and Workforce Management Implications

HR teams may face new challenges under a settlement system centred on earnings thresholds, NI contributions and continuous compliance. Employment decisions—such as scheduling, leave arrangements or contractual changes—could have a more direct impact on a worker’s settlement trajectory under the proposed model.

Key considerations include:

• Income stability: Reduced hours, temporary part-time arrangements or pay fluctuations may affect an employee’s ability to satisfy future contribution-based requirements.
• Statutory leave: Periods of maternity, paternity or sickness leave could alter NI patterns or taxable income, potentially affecting accelerated timelines if such mechanisms are introduced.
• Conduct and disciplinary matters: Misconduct leading to criminal convictions could trigger refusal under the strengthened suitability framework proposed in the consultation.
• Support with debt resolution: Workers may require employer documentation to resolve tax arrears, NHS charges or penalties that could otherwise hinder settlement eligibility.

As a result, HR departments may experience increased demand for employment records, historical payslips, tax documentation and evidence of compliance over extended periods. Employers may need to adopt more structured internal policies for handling immigration-related queries.

4. Operational Planning and Cost Considerations

The proposed earned settlement framework has implications for long-term workforce stability and operational continuity. Employers may need to factor settlement timelines into recruitment planning, particularly in sectors that rely heavily on international labour.

Potential impacts include:

• Increased workforce turnover: Workers may leave the UK if extended settlement timelines reduce the perceived benefits of long-term residence.
• Budgeting for compliance: Longer sponsorship cycles may require additional investment in HR systems, legal advice or internal audits.
• Compensation considerations: Employers may need to adjust salary progression or bonus structures to support workers in meeting future contribution thresholds, where appropriate.
• Long-term role planning: Employers may need to integrate sponsorship and settlement forecasting into broader workforce strategies.

The consultation specifically seeks sector-by-sector evidence to assess whether the proposed timelines are realistic and proportionate.

5. Sector-Specific Impacts

The consultation highlights several sectors where the proposed model may have substantial operational effects. These include:

• Health and Social Care: Roles below RQF level 6 could face substantially longer qualifying periods, potentially worsening recruitment and retention challenges.
• Professional Services: Firms employing high earners may gain advantages through potential accelerated settlement pathways.
• Technology and STEM: Talent-driven sectors may continue attracting global candidates if priority routes retain shorter settlement timelines.
• Hospitality, Retail and Logistics: Lower-paid roles may become less attractive due to extended settlement prospects, affecting workforce supply.
• Education and Research: Academics and researchers entering through Global Talent or Innovator Founder routes may benefit from continued flexibility.

The consultation invites detailed evidence from employers in these and other sectors, recognising that extended settlement timelines may have far-reaching economic effects.

Section E Summary:
The earned settlement consultation indicates that employers may face longer sponsorship relationships, increased compliance obligations and new challenges in recruitment, retention and workforce planning. The proposed ten-year baseline and contribution-based model could create divergent outcomes across sectors, particularly between high earners and lower-paid roles. These proposals are not yet law, and current ILR routes remain fully in effect, but the consultation provides a clear indication of how employer responsibilities may evolve in future.

Section F: Strategic Perspective on the Earned Settlement Proposals

The earned settlement consultation represents more than a technical adjustment to qualifying periods. It signals a wider strategic repositioning of how the UK may approach long-term immigration status in the future. Although the proposals are not yet law, the model outlined in the consultation materials indicates a potential shift from predictable, route-based settlement after five years to a more conditional framework centred on contribution, conduct, integration and sustained compliance. This section examines the broader implications of the proposed changes for individuals, families and organisations navigating long-term immigration planning.

The consultation introduces a system that would differentiate more sharply between groups of migrants, prioritise economic participation and incorporate increased scrutiny into the settlement process. These developments could reshape long-term decision-making for both individuals considering the UK as a long-term home and employers relying on overseas talent.

1. A Move from Automatic Progression to Conditional Permanence

Under current Rules, many individuals on eligible routes progress towards settlement on a generally predictable five-year timeline, provided they meet the relevant route requirements. The consultation proposes a structural departure from this approach. Settlement would no longer be treated as a routine milestone following a set period of residence, but instead as a status earned through a longer period of compliance, consistent financial contribution and fulfilment of strengthened suitability and integration requirements.

This development reflects a strategic emphasis on:

• embedding integrity within long-term routes
• requiring sustained economic participation as a condition for permanence
• tightening suitability checks to ensure good character and conduct over time
• setting higher thresholds for English language and integration

If implemented, this model would reinforce a distinction between temporary residence and permanent settlement. It may require individuals to demonstrate a multi-year history of compliance and contribution that extends beyond the conditions currently assessed at the point of an ILR application.

2. Uneven Outcomes and the Emergence of Distinct Groups

The consultation’s illustrative examples indicate that the future settlement environment could be characterised by noticeably different timelines for different groups. High earners, individuals on priority talent routes and applicants able to demonstrate sustained economic contribution may qualify for settlement more quickly through accelerated pathways. By contrast, lower-paid workers, individuals with periods of public funds use and those with historical immigration breaches may face extended qualifying periods.

These differences could create defined groups within the settlement system, shaped by factors such as:

• income level and tax contributions
• occupation and skill level
• benefit use and financial resilience
• historical compliance patterns
• access to opportunities supporting integration

The consultation acknowledges that this divergence may raise fairness concerns, particularly in sectors where low pay is structural rather than a reflection of individual effort. It also recognises that life events—illness, caring responsibilities or economic shocks—may disrupt contribution patterns in ways that are not fully within an individual’s control.

3. Heightened Compliance Exposure for Employers

A shift towards longer settlement timelines has significant implications for employer compliance. Organisations sponsoring workers may need to maintain sponsorship duties for extended periods, potentially ten or fifteen years depending on the final Rules. This prolonged sponsorship relationship increases exposure to compliance checks, reporting obligations and administrative oversight.

Strategic risks for employers include:

• greater likelihood of sponsor licence audits over longer time horizons
• increased dependency on accurate payroll and HR systems that integrate with HMRC data
• a higher volume of reportable events as employment arrangements evolve over many years
• the need to retain records and evidence of compliance for extended durations

These risks may necessitate more robust internal governance, investment in specialised HR infrastructure and closer integration between immigration management and broader corporate compliance systems.

4. Workforce Planning Under an Extended ILR Horizon

Extending the route to settlement from five years to ten or more could reshape workforce planning. Workers who may previously have viewed the UK as offering a stable and predictable route to settlement may now reassess whether the long-term horizon aligns with their personal or career objectives.

Possible consequences include:

• higher turnover if workers decide not to remain for extended qualifying periods
• reduced long-term retention among staff who value predictable routes to settlement
• increased competition for global talent if other jurisdictions offer shorter pathways
• changes to recruitment strategies to prioritise applicants able to meet future mandatory conditions

Employers may need to incorporate settlement forecasting into workforce strategies, particularly in sectors that depend on long-term recruitment of international labour.

5. Navigating Uncertainty and Preparing for Transition

The consultation introduces a period of uncertainty for individuals, families and employers. While the policy direction is clear, the specifics—such as transitional arrangements, evidential standards for earnings, treatment of dependants and the handling of self-employed income—remain undefined. Until draft Immigration Rules are published, the legal position remains unchanged, and any future system may differ significantly from the illustrative model.

During this period, stakeholders may benefit from:

• Monitoring developments: The Home Office may revise proposals following consultation feedback.
• Scenario planning: Organisations may wish to model different settlement timelines for current and future employees.
• Reviewing internal systems: Employers may assess whether HR and payroll systems are capable of supporting extended compliance demands.
• Identifying vulnerable cohorts: Individuals close to qualifying for ILR under current Rules may need to consider whether to apply sooner while existing pathways remain available.

Any new settlement structure will only take effect after draft Rules are published and approved. Until then, preparation and awareness can help individuals and organisations manage uncertainty and protect existing opportunities.

Section F Summary:
The earned settlement consultation signals a strategic move towards a more selective and contribution-led approach to long-term immigration status. High earners and individuals in priority categories may benefit from accelerated pathways, while others could face extended timelines shaped by income, role type and compliance history. Employers may encounter heightened compliance responsibilities and workforce planning challenges as a result of longer settlement horizons. Although no legal changes have been made, the consultation highlights a policy direction that could substantially reshape the UK’s settlement framework if implemented.

Section G: Summary of the Earned Settlement Proposals

The earned settlement consultation outlines a potential restructuring of how long-term immigration status is achieved in the UK. Although the proposals remain at consultation stage, they represent a meaningful shift away from the established five-year ILR framework and towards a more conditional, contribution-focused system built around a ten-year qualifying baseline. Under the model described in the consultation materials, settlement would rely not only on length of residence but also on compliance, earnings, integration and financial responsibility over an extended period.

The consultation proposes a settlement structure where higher earners and individuals in priority talent routes could benefit from accelerated timelines, potentially reducing their qualifying period to three or five years. Conversely, lower-paid workers, individuals with periods of public funds use and those with past immigration breaches could face significantly longer qualifying routes—fifteen, twenty or even thirty years under the illustrative examples provided. Partners and children may no longer align automatically with the main applicant, and employers may need to manage longer sponsorship relationships with increased compliance and record-keeping obligations.

Importantly, none of these proposals have legal effect. The current Immigration Rules remain in full force, including the five-year settlement routes for most work and family categories and the ten-year long residence route. Any future system will require formal amendments to the Immigration Rules, accompanied by transitional provisions to avoid unfair outcomes for individuals part-way through current routes.

This section summarises the key features of the consultation and the potential implications for workers, families and employers. It reflects the policy direction indicated by the Government while emphasising that no changes have been enacted and that consultation responses may lead to further refinement or substantial alteration of the proposed framework.

Section G Summary:
The earned settlement consultation suggests a move towards a more conditional and differentiated settlement system in which a ten-year baseline is paired with mandatory conditions and time adjustments. The proposals indicate faster routes for higher earners and those in priority categories, and longer routes for lower-paid workers or those with benefit use or compliance issues. Family members could experience independent and diverging settlement timelines, while employers may face longer and more complex sponsorship obligations. Existing ILR Rules remain unchanged, and the consultation serves as an indicator of potential reform rather than a source of legal change.

Section H: Need Assistance?

The earned settlement consultation introduces a period of uncertainty for individuals, families and employers planning long-term futures in the UK. Although the Government has set out a clear policy direction through the consultation materials, none of the proposals have yet been incorporated into the Immigration Rules. This means the existing five-year and ten-year ILR routes remain fully operational, and applicants must continue to rely on the current legal framework until any formal changes are announced and approved.

Understanding the distinction between current law and proposed policy is critical during this transitional phase. Individuals nearing eligibility for ILR under existing Rules may wish to consider applying sooner rather than later, particularly if future changes could lengthen their settlement timeline. Families may need guidance on how the proposals could affect dependants with varying residence patterns or life circumstances. Employers may benefit from analysing how different versions of the earned settlement model might affect recruitment pipelines, sponsorship duties and workforce stability.

Tailored advice can help individuals and organisations assess risks, plan ahead and identify any immediate steps that may protect existing opportunities. This may include reviewing documentation, assessing contribution patterns, understanding potential vulnerabilities and ensuring that current eligibility for settlement is not inadvertently missed while the consultation process continues.

Section I: Frequently Asked Questions

This section addresses common questions arising from the earned settlement consultation. It clarifies the difference between existing Immigration Rules and the proposals under review, helping individuals, families and employers understand the current legal position and the potential implications of any future changes. All answers reflect the fact that the consultation remains open and that no amendments to the Immigration Rules have yet been made.

1. What is “earned settlement”?

Earned settlement is the term used by the Government to describe its proposed overhaul of the UK’s long-term immigration system. The consultation outlines a model in which settlement would no longer be achieved automatically after a set period of residence. Instead, most applicants would start from a ten-year baseline and would need to satisfy mandatory requirements relating to English language, conduct, financial responsibility, economic contribution and immigration compliance. These proposals do not yet form part of the Immigration Rules.

2. Have the ILR rules changed?

No. All current ILR routes remain in full legal force, including the five-year provisions for most work and family categories and the ten-year long residence route. The consultation has no legal effect. Any changes to settlement pathways will require a published Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules, followed by parliamentary scrutiny.

3. Will most people now need ten years before applying for ILR?

Not at this stage. The consultation suggests a ten-year baseline for most applicants in any future system, but this has not been implemented. The final qualifying period, and any exceptions, will depend on the outcome of the consultation and the content of future draft Rules. Current ILR categories continue to operate exactly as they do now.

4. Can workers still qualify for settlement in five years?

Yes. Under current law, many workers qualify for ILR after five years if they meet the route-specific eligibility requirements. The consultation’s illustrative model proposes the possibility of a five-year reduction for applicants earning above £50,270 for three consecutive years, but this is not a current legal route. Any future system must be confirmed through amendments to the Immigration Rules.

5. Who might qualify for the proposed three-year accelerated route?

The consultation includes an example showing that applicants with taxable income above £125,140 for three consecutive years could receive a seven-year reduction from the ten-year baseline, creating a three-year timeline. Priority routes such as Global Talent may also benefit from accelerated timelines. These examples are illustrative only and have no legal effect.

6. What happens if someone claims public funds during the qualifying period?

The consultation contains illustrative scenarios in which public funds use could lengthen settlement timelines by five or ten years depending on duration. These examples are provided for discussion and do not reflect current law. Under the existing Rules, public funds use does not automatically affect ILR eligibility unless a route-specific condition is breached.

7. What will happen to the ten-year long residence route?

The consultation proposes removing the long residence route as a stand-alone basis for settlement and incorporating long-term residence into the ten-year baseline structure. This is not yet law. Transitional provisions will be required to avoid unfairness to those already accruing residence under existing rules, but no such provisions have been published.

8. Will dependants qualify for ILR at the same time as the main applicant?

Under current law, dependants usually qualify for ILR after five years as dependants, aligning with the main applicant. Under the consultation proposals, dependants may face independent assessments and separate qualifying periods based on income, benefit use and compliance. This is a proposal only. Existing ILR alignment rules for dependants remain unchanged.

9. Will care workers face longer routes to settlement?

The consultation’s illustrative examples suggest a potential fifteen-year qualifying period for workers in roles below RQF level 6, which includes many Health and Care Worker roles. These are examples for discussion and not current legal requirements. Current Health and Care Worker ILR provisions remain unchanged at five years.

10. What should employers do now?

Employers should continue to apply the current Immigration Rules. No immediate procedural changes are required. However, employers may benefit from monitoring consultation developments, reviewing right-to-work and sponsorship processes, assessing long-term workforce needs and considering how different versions of the proposed model could affect recruitment and retention if introduced in the future.

Section J: Glossary

This glossary explains key terms used throughout the earned settlement consultation and this article. Definitions reflect the consultation-stage nature of the proposals and the current legal position under the Immigration Rules.

Section K: Useful Links

The following resources provide authoritative background on the earned settlement consultation, the current ILR framework and the wider immigration policy context. These links support further research and help readers distinguish between existing Immigration Rules and proposals that are still under review.

Author

Anne Morris

Website

Anne Morris is the founder and Managing Director of DavidsonMorris. A highly experienced lawyer, she is recognised by Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 UK as a trusted adviser to multinationals, large corporates and SMEs, delivering strategic immigration and global mobility advice. Anne is also an active commentator on UK immigration and HR matters.

• Anne Morris

  https://www.lawble.co.uk/author/anne-morris/

  UK Visit Visa Rules for Employers
• Anne Morris

  https://www.lawble.co.uk/author/anne-morris/

  Unsponsored UK Work Visas
• Anne Morris

  https://www.lawble.co.uk/author/anne-morris/

  How to Manage Your Sponsor Licence
• Anne Morris

  https://www.lawble.co.uk/author/anne-morris/

  Self Sponsorship Visa UK (An Ultimate Guide!)