Call for 'tax on love' visa rules to be changed

Campaigners have welcomed a much-anticipated review into family visa requirements previously labelled a 'tax on love' by a Bristol MP.

The Home Office said it is considering recommendations which include lowering the minimum income required for a British citizen or settled resident to apply for a visa for their foreign spouse in the UK, currently set at £29,000.

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has reviewed the impact of the current visa process on families, including on children's mental health and the right to family life.

Executive director of Reunite Families UK, Caroline Coombs, from Bristol, said "children are the biggest victims of these rules".

The minimum income requirement (MIR) has long been contested by couples who are unable to meet the threshold and, in some cases, are therefore forced to live apart.

First introduced in 2012, it increased from £18,600 to £29,000 in April 2024, as part of measures by the previous Conservative government to reduce immigration.

The Labour government commissioned an independent review of the policy, which has been carried out by the MAC, and was published on Tuesday.

The current threshold applies only to the British partner or settled resident and does not account for potential earnings from the foreign partner once in the UK - a rule the review is also calling on the Government to reconsider.

The review received 2,089 responses - the highest ever for a MAC consultation - and contributions from 36 organisations.

Reunite Families UK, a not-for-profit helping families navigate the UK family visa route, provided evidence including testimonies from families relating to the mental health of the children involved.

Their analysis reported, as well as feeling stress and loneliness, some children showed symptoms of anxiety, selective mutism and inability to focus in school.

One testimony included in the review reads: "My daughter's lived without her dad since she was six. From six to 11, the main memory of childhood is with her dad through a screen."

Caroline Coombs, co-founder and executive director of Reunite Families UK, said: "The Home Secretary previously said that her work would be led by evidence.

"We ask her to look to that evidence - those very real-life experiences - when it comes to making her decisions which could ultimately make or break British citizens and settled residents' family life."

The MAC review considered various factors including whether lowering the income requirement would increase net migration.

It suggested a range of possible new thresholds. For example, it said a level between £23,000 to £25,000 would enable families to support themselves.

It did suggest lowering the threshold from £29,000 to roughly £24,000 may increase net immigration by up to 8,000 people.

But Ms Coombs said the Government should consider removing the MIR altogether:

"Any threshold even at minimum wage would still separate many groups of people who just want to be a family here in the UK," she said.

Carla Denyer, Green Party co-leader and MP for Bristol Central, described the minimum income requirements for family visas as a "cruel tax on love".

"[It] tears families apart and puts untold stress on those with the misfortune to simply fall in love with someone who is not from this country," she said.

She said she has heard "devastating stories" from constituents who have been "forced to move halfway across the world" because of the income threshold.

"Whether it's for love, for work, or to flee violence or oppression, people move – that's a fact of life, and it's down to the government to make it work," she said.

Net migration in 2024 was an estimated 431,000 people, down almost 50% on the previous year. This followed record high levels in recent years, with the government under political pressure to get numbers down further.

The previous Conservative government planned to increase the family visa salary threshold further, to £38,700, thus aligning it to the Skilled Worker Visa.

But the MAC said it "did not understand the rationale" for it and said a higher threshold was "likely to conflict with international law and obligations", referring to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which enshrines the right to family life.

Committee chairman Prof Brian Bell said balancing family life and economic wellbeing was a "real trade-off".

"There is a cost to the UK economy and UK taxpayers of having this route, and we should just be honest about that and say there is a trade-off," he said.

"But similarly, on the other side, people who say 'we should set it at very high numbers to make sure that we don't lose any money' ignore the massive impact that has on families and the destruction of some relationships and the harm it causes to children."

A Home Office spokesperson said the government was considering the review's findings and would respond in due course.

Follow BBC Bristol on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630.