Twelve investment migration programmes worldwide grant so-called "golden visas" without any physical presence requirement, according to a survey published by IMI Daily, a trade publication covering the investment migration industry.

The finding matters for applicants who want residency rights, visa-free travel within a host region, or a future path to citizenship without relocating. Under the 12 programmes identified, investors obtain and maintain residence status without a minimum number of days spent in the country each year.

Most golden visa regimes impose some form of stay obligation, even a minimal one, as a condition of renewal or of later progression to permanent residence or naturalisation. Programmes with a zero-day requirement are the exception rather than the rule, which is why the IMI Daily list has drawn attention from advisors and applicants comparing routes.

The report is a roundup rather than a regulatory change: it does not announce new rules, quotas, or deadlines. Instead, it consolidates the current positions of programmes that, as of publication, ask nothing of investors in terms of time on the ground.

Applicants should read the list with three cautions in mind.

First, "no physical presence requirement" applies to the residence permit itself. It does not guarantee that citizenship, where the programme offers one, will follow without residence. Naturalisation in most jurisdictions retains its own conditions, typically including actual residence, language, or integration tests. A permit that renews without a single day in the country can still sit behind a citizenship process that demands years of real presence.

Second, these rules change. Golden visa programmes across multiple regions have been tightened, capped, or closed outright in recent years, often with little notice. A zero-presence condition recorded today can be amended at the next legislative revision. Anyone relying on the list should verify the current terms of the specific programme directly with the issuing authority before committing funds.

Third, eligibility thresholds, qualifying investment types, and dependent rules differ from programme to programme and are set by national law, not by industry publications. The IMI Daily roundup signals which routes exist; it does not replace the official programme documentation issued by each country's immigration or citizenship-by-investment authority.

For prospective applicants, the practical significance of the list is comparative. Residence without a presence obligation suits investors whose goal is optionality — a second residence permit, broader travel access, or a hedge against future mobility restrictions — rather than relocation. Applicants who intend eventually to live, work, or naturalise in the host country gain less from a zero-day rule, since their longer-term goals will trigger presence requirements in any case.

Readers should consult the official government sources for each programme listed for current investment minimums, processing timelines, and renewal conditions. Investment migration advice is jurisdiction-specific, and the terms of any individual application depend on personal circumstances.

Passport File will continue to track changes to physical presence rules across residence-by-investment programmes as authorities update them.