What we decline.
Every firm in this category publishes what it sells. None of them publish what they turn away, which makes the first list worthless — a menu with no prices and no refusals is just an advertisement.
Clients we turn away
- Anyone who cannot evidence their source of funds. Not "will not" — cannot. If the money's history has a gap you cannot document, no programme will accept you, and any adviser who takes your fee anyway is selling you a refusal.
- Anyone whose actual objective is invisibility. CRS covers over a hundred jurisdictions. Opacity has not been a viable strategy for a decade, and the people still selling it are selling a decade-old product to people who will be found.
- Anyone under active investigation who wants a second citizenship as a response to it. That is not planning, and we are not the tool for it.
- Anyone who wants us to sequence a move to defeat a court order — a divorce settlement, a creditor, a custody arrangement.
- Anyone who will not tell their spouse. This sounds like a joke. It is not. It is a recurring request and it ends badly every time.
Programmes we will not sell you
- Any programme whose visa-free access is its entire value proposition, where that access is under active suspension review. Vanuatu is the cautionary tale: agents sold Schengen access; the EU suspended it; the clients kept the passport and lost the reason they bought it.
- Any "digital residency" sold as residency. Estonia's e-Residency and Palau's digital ID do not give you the right to live anywhere. They are useful products, misrepresented daily.
- Real estate we are paid to place. We take no developer commission, which means we have no reason to point you at a specific building — and no reason not to tell you the resale market for it is thin.
- Any route where the tax outcome is worse than staying put. This is more common than the category admits, particularly for US persons, for whom citizenship follows you regardless of where you live.
Why this page exists
Because the alternative is the industry norm: an "acceptance rate" of 100%, which is true only in the trivial sense that a firm can decline to file anything it might lose. A number like that tells you nothing about competence and everything about what the firm thinks of your ability to interrogate it.
When we have filed enough applications to report a real denominator — filed, approved, declined, and why — we will publish it here, annually, whether or not it flatters us. Today the honest number is that we are new, and we would rather say that than round it up.
Still think you have a case?
Tell us the awkward parts first. They are the only parts that matter.