Reform UK vows to scrap indefinite leave to remain, sparking migrant-benefit crackdown debate

Reform UK has vowed to abolish indefinite leave to remain (ILR) for migrants, a policy move that would apply to both new applicants and those who already hold the status if the party wins the next general election. Nigel Farage, the party’s leader, said ending ILR could lead to deportations for people who have lived in Britain for years and mounted a claim to settlement, while contending the change would save about £234 billion in future benefits for migrants and their dependants. The proposal drew quick pushback from opponents who described the plan as half-baked and unworkable, arguing it would complicate enforcement and threaten people who have contributed to the country’s economy and communities.

ILR is an immigration status that lets a migrant live, work and study in the UK without time limits. It also allows access to the National Health Service without the Immigration Health Surcharge and enables claimants to pursue certain benefits. Most applicants must have held ILR for at least 12 months before they can apply for British citizenship. The policy outlined by Reform would mean there would be no future ILR awards, and current holders could see their status rescinded if the plan were enacted. This would be coupled with new requirements, including a higher salary threshold and improved English-language standards for those seeking permission to stay on a renewed basis.

Under the present framework, most migrants are eligible to apply for ILR after five years of legal residence, though some visa routes have different timelines. For entrepreneurs, tier 1 variants, and newer visa categories such as Innovator Founder or Global Talent, the path to ILR can be shorter or longer depending on the route. Refugees, for example, may be able to apply for ILR five years after their refugee status is granted. The current landscape means that ILR has become a de facto gateway for long-term settlement and access to public services without a time limit, a status that has already altered the balance of rights and responsibilities for migrants in the UK.

Migration researchers estimate the scale of those affected. Oxford University’s Migration Observatory found that roughly 430,000 non-EU citizens were granted an initial visa from 2005 onward and now hold ILR but not citizenship; some have since left the country. Adding those who arrived before 2005 would push the total into the hundreds of thousands. For EU nationals, more than 4 million were granted settled status under the post-Brexit framework, though the Migration Observatory notes it lacks precise data on how many remain in the UK or have become citizens. Reform’s own estimates place the number of post-pandemic arrivals eligible for ILR between 2026 and 2030 at about 3.8 million, underscoring the potential fiscal and social implications of removing the status or forcing renewals.

Reform’s plan envisions abolishing indefinite leave to remain and replacing it with a system in which migrants must renew their status every five years, subject to meeting specified criteria such as a higher salary threshold and improved English proficiency. The party did not provide a concrete salary cap in its briefing but said it would establish one as the policy develops. The idea would cover people currently on ILR even if they have not yet sought citizenship, a move that could force substantial numbers to requalify on an annual or five-year cycle.

Who would be affected? Farage’s rollout indicates that no new ILR awards would be made, and those already living in the country under ILR could face a reduction or revocation of their status as the five-year renewal regime takes hold. Dr Ben Brindle, a Migration Observatory researcher, warned that refugees and family members of British citizens—groups often less able to meet higher language or wage criteria—could feel the most acute impact. He noted that the policy would likely create significant uncertainty for people who have lived in the UK for years and contributed to local economies and communities. Farage has said the rule would not apply to around six million EU nationals who hold settled status after Brexit, a carve-out that would leave those already medically or legally settled outside the ILR framework in place.

The policy has drawn swift criticism from across the political spectrum and among experts. Critics question the NHS implications of deporting workers who earn lower salaries, a concern given that many migrants are employed in health and care sectors. Ashley Stothard, an immigration lawyer at Freeths, called the plan outrageous and argued it would undermine the rights of lawful migrants who have contributed to the UK socially, economically, and culturally. The Centre for Policy Studies, which previously published a £234 billion estimate of benefits costs from axing ILR, later withdrew that figure, acknowledging uncertainty over the policy’s fiscal impacts. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said the numbers show Reform’s plans “have no basis in reality,” signaling potential fiscal and administrative complications of the reform.

The Conservative Party branded the proposals as half-baked and unworkable, while London Mayor Sadiq Khan urged caution about deporting thousands of people who have indefinite leave to remain and live and work in the capital. Khan said such moves would be unacceptable to thousands of Londoners who are neighbours, friends and colleagues, underscoring the practical consequences of changes to settled and longstanding migrant rights.

Beyond the immediate political battle, Reform’s proposal enters a broader debate about migration, public services, and the UK’s social contract with long-term residents. Projections tied to ILR reform hinge on how the policy would be implemented, how it would intersect with existing settled statuses, and how exemptions for vulnerable groups would be managed. Proponents argue that tightening the path to settlement could curb economic and housing pressures associated with long-term migration, while opponents warn that the plan risks undermining the contributions of migrants and destabilizing lives and families with deep ties to communities across Britain. The policy analysis remains unsettled as parties prepare for elections and as officials weigh the administrative costs of potential changes to ILR, citizenship routes, and the ongoing dynamics of post-Brexit migration.