Connect with us

News

Countries wooing corporate digital nomads hope to make them stay

Published

on

Countries wooing corporate digital nomads hope to make them stay

“Digital nomad” visas are increasingly being used by countries to attract remote corporate workers, according to tax experts, as governments seek to outbid each other in a global war for talent.

More countries have introduced a form of digital nomad visa — allowing a person to live in a country and work remotely — since the pandemic increased demand from employees to “work from anywhere”.

The notion of a “digital nomad” has tended to suggest footloose freelancers backpacking across countries or working on beaches from their laptops.

But self-employed digital nomads make up a relatively small slice of the total community. While their numbers have grown by more than 50 per cent since the pandemic, according to figures from MBO Partners, they were not the main group governments are trying to attract, global mobility experts told the FT.

“The ‘nomad’ visa is ironically not done for nomads,” said Gonçalo Hall, CEO of NomadX, a remote work consultancy, who advises governments on how to launch digital nomad communities.

Advertisement

“Most governments are seeing [nomad visas] as a way to attract remote workers with the clear intention of getting them to stay and become permanent residents in their countries.”

Gonçalo Hall, the Portuguese founder of a digital nomad village in Madeira © Goncalo Hall
Images from Goncalo Hall’s Instagram promoting work as a digital nomad © Goncalo Hall/Instagram

The total number of US digital nomads hit 17.3mn in 2023, according to MBO Partners, of which just 6.6mn were self-employed. The survey only tracks Americans, thought to be the largest group of digital nomads by nationality. Remote salaried workers are not taking jobs from locals and their consumer activity contributes to their host economy.

Countries were jumping on the “buzzword” of digital nomads, but really the visas “should be called remote worker visas”, Hall said.

Italy last month became the most recent country to introduce a digital nomad visa, joining several European countries, including Portugal, Estonia, Greece, Malta and Spain, that are trying to attract a growing global remote workforce.

Pallas Mudist at Enterprise Estonia, a government agency, said: “Estonia’s digital nomad visa is specifically designed to attract not just entrepreneurs and freelancers but also salaried remote workers.”

The visas are only open to non-Europeans, with about 600 issued since the scheme launched in August 2020. But overall the government estimates that 51,000 digital nomads visited Estonia in 2023, including Europeans who do not need a visa.

Advertisement

Similar programmes have also been introduced in Barbados, Brazil, Cape Verde, Costa Rica, Mauritius and the UAE among others. While there are no official figures on the number of countries that have introduced the visas, tax experts point to sources compiled by digital nomads such as nomadgirl.co, which says there are now 58 countries offering them.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Daida Hadzic, a global mobility tax expert at KPMG, said that ageing societies was one reason governments were seeking to attract remote corporate employees using digital nomad visas. If such employees settle permanently in the country, they will contribute their skills and labour over the longer term too.

“The driving force behind digital nomad visas is that these countries are in competition with each other over labour,” she said.

Giorgia Maffini, tax expert at PwC UK, said countries offering digital nomad visas tended to be “a bit less competitive” at attracting foreign workers, citing Costa Rica, Croatia and Indonesia as examples.

Steve King, researcher at US-based workforce consultancy MBO Partners, said countries with digital nomad visa programmes often preferred salaried employees.

Advertisement

“Many countries see digital nomads with traditional jobs as tourists on steroids who will spend money locally, but won’t take local jobs or be a burden on local social services,” he said.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Marta Aguilar, who lives in Spain, said she spent almost half the year travelling the world while working for Coverflex, a flexible compensation company based in Portugal.

The company has no offices and employees work fully remotely, with a €1,000 a year remote working budget.

“I don’t like winter. So, I haven’t had winter for two years. I just skipped it,” said Aguilar.

However, the international tax system is often difficult to navigate for remote workers as the rules were not designed for a more mobile workforce.

Advertisement

For companies, a key risk when employees work remotely is that the country they are in can be deemed a de facto business branch, or “permanent establishment” of the employer for tax purposes. That imposes tax reporting requirements on the business and means some of the business’s profits are potentially liable for tax in the country in which the employee is working.

Remote workers can also expose themselves to income and social security taxes on earnings generated while working abroad and potentially end up liable for tax in multiple places, also exposing the employer to liability.

Several intergovernmental bodies, including the EU, OECD and UN, are examining ways to make it easier for businesses and countries. In February, the European Economic and Social Committee recommended the taxation of remote employees take place in the country of the employer’s residence, with some tax revenue shared with the employee’s resident country.

Column chart of Number of US digital nomads (mn) showing Digital nomads have increased since the pandemic but growth has slowed

Experts also warn that some countries risk losing tax revenues as workers relocate — particularly if they move to lower-taxed jurisdictions.

“The problem with, say, the UK is we are so dependent on labour, and our weather is not great. [The trend for more remote working] may well lead to a lot of people going to, say, Greece, and undermining our tax base,” said Grant Wardell-Johnson, global tax policy leader at KPMG International.

These risks are thought to be small, for now. Rough estimates by the IMF in 2022 found that increased remote working reallocates about $40bn of the income tax that workers pay globally. This represents roughly 1.25 per cent of the global income tax base. The potential revenue either lost or gained across countries was found to be between 0.1 and 0.2 per cent of GDP.

Advertisement

Small emerging market economies “with below-average tax rates and good remote work capability” typically gain the most from the trend, the research found — underlying the potential for tax winners and losers. 

Dino Jangra, a partner at Crowe, said: “In most countries, payroll wage tax is the biggest take. If you start to see a lot of people leaving your country, that becomes a problem.”

However, growth in remote working has slowed of late. According to MBO, the numbers of US digital nomads rose by just 2 per cent last year.

“I don’t think the digital nomad concept has so far quite turned out how people thought it would. There’s definitely been a wave of ‘get your bums back to the office’ happening all around the world,” said Jangra.

Advertisement

News

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

Published

on

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.

Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.

A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.

The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.

The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”

Advertisement

Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”

But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.

In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.

Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.

Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.

Advertisement

Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.

Continue Reading

News

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Published

on

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.

The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.

The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.

Advertisement

According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.

Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.

“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”

Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.

The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.

Advertisement

Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.

Continue Reading

News

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

Published

on

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

The Senate early Thursday morning adopted a Republican budget blueprint that would pave the way for a $70 billion increase for immigration enforcement and the eventual reopening of the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans pushed through the plan on a nearly party-line vote of 50 to 48. It came after an overnight marathon of rapid-fire votes, known as a vote-a-rama, in which the G.O.P. beat back a series of Democratic proposals aimed at addressing the high cost of health care, housing, food and energy. The debate put the two parties’ dueling messages on vivid display six months before the midterm elections.

Republicans, who are using the budget plan to lay the groundwork to eventually push through a filibuster-proof bill providing a multiyear funding stream for President Trump’s immigration crackdown, used the all-night session to highlight their hard-line stance on border security, seeking to portray Democrats as unwilling to safeguard the country.

Democrats tried and failed to add a series of changes aimed at addressing cost-of-living issues, seizing the opportunity to hammer Republicans as out of touch with and unwilling to act on the concerns of everyday Americans.

Here’s what to know about the budget plan and the nocturnal ritual senators engaged in before adopting it.

Advertisement

The budget blueprint is a crucial piece of Republicans’ plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end a shutdown that has lasted for more than two months. After Democrats refused to fund immigration enforcement without new restrictions on agents’ tactics and conduct, the G.O.P. struck a deal with them to pass a spending bill that would fund everything but ICE and the Border Patrol. Republicans said they would fund those agencies through a special budget bill that Democrats could not block.

“We can fix this with Republican votes, and we will,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and the Budget Committee chairman. “Every Democrat has opposed money for the Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great peril.”

In resorting to a new budget blueprint, Republicans laid the groundwork to deny Democrats a chance to stop the immigration enforcement funding. But they also submitted themselves to a vote-a-rama, in which any senator can propose unlimited changes to such a measure before it is adopted.

The budget measure now goes to the House, which must adopt it before lawmakers in both chambers can draft the legislation funding immigration enforcement. That bill will provide yet another opportunity for a vote-a-rama even closer to the November election.

Democrats took to the floor to criticize Republicans for supercharging funding for federal immigration enforcement rather than moving legislation that would address Americans’ concerns over affordability.

Advertisement

“This is what Republicans are fighting for,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the Democratic leader. “To maintain two unchecked rogue agencies that are dreaded in all corners of this country instead of reducing your health care costs, your housing costs, your grocery costs, your gas costs.”

Democrats offered a host of amendments along those lines, all of which were defeated by Republicans — and that was the point. The proposals were meant to put the G.O.P. in a tough political spot, showcasing their opposition to helping Americans afford high living costs. Fewer than a handful of G.O.P. senators crossed party lines to support them.

The G.O.P. thwarted an effort by Mr. Schumer to require that the budget measure lower out-of-pocket health care costs for Americans. Two Republicans who are up for re-election this year, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, voted with Democrats, but the proposal was still defeated.

Republicans also squelched a move by Senator Ben Ray Lujan, Democrat of New Mexico, to create a fund that would lower grocery costs and reverse cuts to food aid programs that Republicans enacted last year. Ms. Collins and Mr. Sullivan again joined Democrats.

Also defeated by the G.O.P.: a proposal by Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, to address rising consumer prices brought on by Mr. Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran; one by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, to require the budget measure to address rising electricity prices, and another by Mr. Markey to create a fund to bring down housing costs.

Advertisement

Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat who is up for re-election in Georgia, also sought to add language requiring the budget plan to address health insurance companies denying or delaying access to care, but that, too was blocked by Republicans.

While Republicans had fewer proposals for changes to their own budget plan, they also sought to offer measures that would underscore their aggressive stance on immigration enforcement and dare Democrats to vote against them.

Mr. Graham offered an amendment to allocate funds toward a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the apprehension and deportation of adult immigrants convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor after illegally entering the United States. It passed unanimously.

Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, sought to bar Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and other services, and criticized the organization for providing transgender care to minors. Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also attempted to tack on the G.O.P. voter identification bill, known as the SAVE America Act. Both proposals were blocked when Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, voted to strike them as unrelated to the budget plan.

The Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose their own party’s proposals for new voting requirements were Ms. Collins along with Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Advertisement

Ms. Collins and Ms. Murkowski also opposed the effort to block payments to Planned Parenthood.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending