Is Citizenship by Investment Ethical? A Critical Analysis

Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programs offer individuals the opportunity to obtain a second passport in exchange for significant financial contributions to a host country. These schemes—often marketed as “economic citizenship”—exist in nations such as St. Kitts and Nevis, Dominica, Malta, and even some EU states. For the wealthy, they offer visa-free travel, tax advantages, and geopolitical insurance. For governments, they promise economic inflows and foreign investment.

But beneath the surface of economic pragmatism lies a deep ethical debate. Is it fair that citizenship—a marker of national identity and legal belonging—can be bought? Or is it simply a modern expression of global capitalism and state sovereignty?

In this article, we examine the ethical dimensions of citizenship by investment, including questions of fairness, inequality, national sovereignty, and global justice.

1. What Is Citizenship by Investment?

Citizenship by Investment (CBI) allows foreign nationals to acquire citizenship of a country through a government-approved investment. Investments typically range from:

Real estate purchases
Contributions to a national development fund
Business ventures or job creation

CBI programs are often justified on economic grounds, particularly by smaller nations with limited industries. The logic is simple: attract high-net-worth individuals in exchange for capital that can support development goals.

2. Ethical Arguments in Favor of Citizenship by Investment

a. Sovereign Right of States

Supporters argue that nations have the sovereign right to determine the criteria for citizenship. If a country believes economic contributions align with its national interest, it should have the freedom to offer citizenship on that basis.

b. Economic Development Tool

CBI programs can provide much-needed foreign direct investment (FDI). In small economies or those recovering from disasters or instability, CBI funds can finance infrastructure, health, and education initiatives that benefit citizens at large.

c. Global Mobility and Freedom

In a world where freedom of movement is largely tied to the privilege of birthplace, CBI may be seen as a way to reduce inequality of opportunity—at least for those who can afford it. For politically or economically unstable regions, a second passport can be a lifeline.

3. Ethical Concerns and Criticisms

Despite these justifications, citizenship by investment raises serious ethical questions. Critics argue that it fundamentally undermines the values of citizenship, promotes global inequality, and can lead to security risks and corruption.

a. Inequality and the Commodification of Citizenship

CBI programs put a price tag on something that should be based on identity, belonging, or contribution to society over time. By allowing the wealthy to bypass traditional routes—such as long-term residence, cultural integration, or familial ties—CBI turns citizenship into a commodity.

This is ethically problematic because it:

Favors the wealthy and excludes the poor
Reinforces global inequality and privilege
Devalues the meaning of citizenship for those who earned it through traditional means

b. National Loyalty and Civic Integration

Traditional naturalization processes require residency, language proficiency, and sometimes civic education. These criteria aim to ensure that new citizens understand and integrate into the society they join.

CBI, on the other hand, often requires no residency or cultural ties. This raises ethical concerns:

Can one be a true citizen without any social or cultural integration?
Does this weaken the civic fabric and trust within a nation-state?

c. Corruption and Lack of Transparency

Many CBI programs lack robust transparency. This creates opportunities for:

Money laundering and tax evasion
Corruption in government processes
Admission of individuals with questionable backgrounds

A notable example is the “Golden Passport” scandals in the EU, where citizenship was granted without adequate due diligence. This can damage a country's international reputation and undermine the rule of law.

d. Security and National Interest

From a national security perspective, poorly vetted CBI applicants may pose serious risks. Without stringent background checks, CBI may inadvertently grant access to criminal actors or those seeking to evade justice.

This raises the ethical dilemma: Is short-term economic gain worth the potential long-term security and reputational cost?

4. Global Justice and the Ethics of Mobility

A broader ethical critique centers on the global system of inequality in citizenship rights. A passport from a wealthy, stable country unlocks access to healthcare, education, and international mobility. Meanwhile, millions of refugees, stateless persons, and economically disadvantaged individuals have no such options.

CBI programs exacerbate this injustice by:

Allowing the rich to “shop” for better rights
Leaving behind those most in need of protection and opportunity

This fuels the perception that borders and rights are increasingly only for sale to the highest bidder, eroding global solidarity and justice.

5. Case Study: Malta’s Citizenship Program

Malta’s Individual Investor Programme (IIP) was one of the most controversial CBI schemes in the EU. Though it brought in hundreds of millions in revenue, the European Commission criticized it for violating EU citizenship norms, which emphasize shared identity and civic commitment.

Under pressure, Malta restructured its program in 2020, requiring residency and increased due diligence. However, the ethical questions around "buying into the EU" remain.

6. Possible Ethical Reforms

If CBI programs are to exist, ethical reforms are essential. These could include:

Stronger due diligence and transparency
Residency and integration requirements
Public disclosure of applicants and funds usage
Exclusion of applicants from sanctioned countries or illicit industries

Governments should also consider reinvesting CBI revenues directly into programs that reduce inequality and promote civic engagement.

7. Conclusion: Is Citizenship by Investment Ethical?

The ethics of citizenship by investment lie at the crossroads of sovereignty, economic necessity, and global justice. While CBI programs can be defensible in specific contexts—especially for small, economically vulnerable nations—their current implementation often prioritizes profit over principles.

Ethically, the idea that citizenship—a cornerstone of identity, belonging, and political rights—can be bought, raises troubling questions about fairness, inclusion, and the role of wealth in shaping the modern world.

Ultimately, the answer may depend less on whether CBI exists, and more on how it is regulated, implemented, and aligned with broader values of equity, accountability, and civic responsibility.