No recourse to public funds

Migrants in the UK on visas, illegally or seeking asylum are usually ineligible for welfare benefits and social housing. This is referred to as having ‘no recourse to public funds’, or ‘NRPF’.

Most temporary migrants have no recourse to public funds, with human rights exceptions

Under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, people who do not have any immigration permission or whose visa comes with an individual NRPF condition are excluded from benefits and housing. An NRPF condition is mandatory for most types of visa.

Migrants can apply for a ‘change of conditions’ granting them recourse to public funds. This is primarily aimed at people on family, human rights or Hong Kong visas, although in theory there is discretion to allow it in other cases. A successful application requires evidence of destitution, child welfare concerns or exceptional financial circumstances.

The list of public funds covers a wide range of social security benefits, tax credits and housing assistance. Local authorities have some statutory duties to support people with NRPF, in particular families with children.

The Home Office does not know how many people have no recourse to public funds

This is partly because the total includes unauthorised migrants, but also because the department did not keep a central record of how many visas are issued with NRPF. A new database may allow for improved statistics in future.

Around 3.3 million people held visas that would usually have an NRPF condition at the end of 2023. This figure does not necessarily reflect the number of people experiencing hardship as a result.

As of June 2024, there were around 225,000 people in various stages of the asylum system. Asylum seekers have no recourse to public funds in the sense addressed in this briefing, but do have access to state-provided accommodation and limited financial support.

NRPF policies have been in place for decades but were especially prominent during covid-19

No recourse to public funds has been a standard visa condition since 1980. Successive governments have taken further steps to limit or eliminate access to mainstream benefits for migrants without visas, such as EU citizens (pre-Brexit) and asylum seekers. This notably included the general bar on temporary, unauthorised and asylum-seeking migrants claiming benefits, under the Immigration and Act 1999.

In 2012, the NRPF condition was extended to people granted permission to stay in the UK for human rights reasons, which has been controversial.

The covid-19 pandemic drew attention to the lack of a mainstream welfare safety net for people with NRPF. The government did not waive normal benefits rules during the crisis, but did allow migrants to access temporary schemes such as the furlough programme.

Successive governments have implemented NRPF despite civil society objections

As a Home Office minister said in 2019, it is longstanding government policy that migrants should not be entitled to claim benefits until they have been granted indefinite leave to remain, “reflecting the strength of their connection to the UK”. Ministers typically argue that NRPF rules are important to prevent migrants becoming a burden on the taxpayer, to promote integration, and to sustain public support for immigration.

Opponents say NRPF creates destitution, particularly for minority groups such as Black women, and shifts responsibility for dealing with the consequences to local government.

MPs have held several debates on NRPF in recent years, including in May 2024 and May 2023. The Work and Pensions Committee has also published a report on the policy’s contribution to child poverty.