top of page
VISAGUARD Logo

Corporate Immigration Lawyers (CILG) publishes statement on the work-and-stay agency


Germany faces a formidable challenge: To maintain a stable workforce, net immigration of up to 368,000 workers from third countries is required annually. However, the reality within the authorities tells a different story. As a law firm specializing in visa law, we witness daily how highly qualified talent and committed employers become frustrated by a system that hinders rather than fosters economic growth. In this context, the Corporate Immigration Lawyers Germany (CILG) association – a network of leading experts handling tens of thousands of cases annually – has now issued a groundbreaking statement on the proposed Work and Stay Agency (WSA) . Today, we report on this draft, which calls for nothing less than a paradigm shift in German migration administration.


Diagnosing a system failure: Why "piecemeal" solutions are no longer sufficient

The experts at CILG leave no doubt in their draft that the current administration has reached its limits . Around 550 municipal immigration offices act as a bottleneck in migration policy. Particularly worrying is the finding that, despite numerous legislative reforms such as the FEG 2.0 (Federal Law on Foreigners and Integration) , the fundamental structures of the authorities have hardly changed since 2004. In our practice, we see precisely what the CILG criticizes: an administrative dysfunction in which even simple legal questions are decided differently depending on the postal code . A prominent example from the statement is the interpretation of the qualification-appropriate employment requirement for the EU Blue Card under Section 18g Paragraph 1 of the German Residence Act (AufenthG) , which is often handled more restrictively by domestic authorities than by foreign missions, leading to significant uncertainty for applicants.


The WSA options under expert review: From inadequate to preferable

The CILG draft provides a clear, expert assessment of the models discussed by the federal government. The so-called Option 1, a purely digital rollout while maintaining responsibility with local authorities, is deemed "unsuitable for achieving the objectives." The experts warn that technical solutions alone will only mask, but not resolve, structural deficiencies such as staff shortages and a lack of local service orientation .


Option 4, which proposes the complete centralization of responsibility for temporary residence permits at the Federal Office for Foreign Affairs (BfAA) , is viewed much more positively . This consolidation would create synergies, as information from the visa process could be seamlessly used for domestic decisions. We support this view, as only a central authority can guarantee consistent application of the law that meets the requirements of a modern business location.


The sponsor pass model: An innovative "middle ground"

We find the alternative proposal for a sponsorship pass model included in the draft particularly compelling . This model would establish a new administrative pathway for the Waterways and Shipping Administration (WSA) alongside existing structures. Employers could act as "sponsors" for an internationally standard fee (approximately €500 to €5,000) to apply for an expedited and legally secure process for their skilled workers. This model is compelling due to its shift in perspective: the WSA acts as a state service provider for the business sector . It not only relieves the burden on municipalities but also offers companies much-needed planning certainty. Furthermore, it addresses fiscal challenges, as the business sector's fee contributions would make migration administratively efficient. We believe this approach is extremely viable from a practical political standpoint, as it minimizes federal conflicts while simultaneously allowing for the scaling of immigration figures.


Conclusion

The statement from Corporate Immigration Lawyers Germany makes it clear that the introduction of the WSA is a historic opportunity, but one that requires the courage to undertake structural reform. Simply "cementing an eroded foundation" through superficial digitalization will fail . We endorse the recommendation to focus on models that enable genuine centralization and stronger employer involvement – be it through full centralization in Option 4 or the flexible sponsor pass model. Only in this way can Germany remain competitive in the global race for talent.


You might also be interested in:

bottom of page