There have been a few of these stories floating around since the new policy came into force in February. While the people involved are clearly stuck in a tricky situation, I find it hard to give...
There have been a few of these stories floating around since the new policy came into force in February. While the people involved are clearly stuck in a tricky situation, I find it hard to give them much sympathy as the changes have been widely publicised over the last couple of years, and particularly in the couple of months prior to them coming into force in February. Indeed, the more time passes the less sympathy I feel for those involved!
To be very clear, prior to 25/02/2026, it was permitted for British dual nationals to travel in and out of the UK on their foreign passport, with no proof of their UK citizenship status. Basically you could just show up at the border and be waved through. This policy doesn’t work very well with the modern border, which as far as possible operates automatically and digitally, which is a great thing! E-gates, e-visas, pre-travel authorisations and the like make travel much easier and more convenient - ideal because we want to encourage people to travel to the UK - without compromising border security. In fact it’s better for security because we can check if you have the right to enter the UK before you get on a flight/train/ferry to the country.
So, as of 25/02/2026, there is a very simple requirement: if you are a British national travelling to the UK, you must carry proof of British citizenship (in the form of a British passport or certificate). There is no valid way for you to enter the country if you don’t have such a document in your possession - how could there be? You can’t be admitted via the foreign visitor entry system, because you aren’t relying on any sort of travel visa for your entry; you are entering as a British citizen, so it only makes sense that you would need proof that you are, in fact, a British citizen.
I’ll add, as relevant context, that I’m a British dual national living in the UK, I was aware of the changed well in advance of the changes, but I didn’t have to change how I travel because I already always passed through the British border using my British passport. I guess it just always seemed like the most sensible thing to do?
Why wouldn’t she be able to get an ETA? Spanish citizens can get an ETA in minutes and travel through the gates for non-UK citizens. It’s strange to not allow someone to do that just because...
Why wouldn’t she be able to get an ETA? Spanish citizens can get an ETA in minutes and travel through the gates for non-UK citizens. It’s strange to not allow someone to do that just because they’re also a British citizen.
Yeah, this is the bit I can’t square. The BBC article makes the rule sound pointless and bureaucratic, @LumaBop’s explanation makes it much clearer why the rule exists - similar reason you’ve...
Yeah, this is the bit I can’t square. The BBC article makes the rule sound pointless and bureaucratic, @LumaBop’s explanation makes it much clearer why the rule exists - similar reason you’ve gotta use the same card to tap in and out at the train station, by the sound of it, the system has to link entries and exits.
But neither seem to account for why she can’t just enter as a Spanish person rather than entering as a British one… she might have a bit of annoyance on her next trip if there’s a hanging entry or exit unpaired in the system because of it, but that’s life when it comes to automation that needs to interact with the real world’s many edge cases. She crosses the border as a Spanish person (which she is), and then remains in the UK as a British person (which she also is), and someone in the Home Office call centre somewhere manually cleans up whatever record is messed up by the mismatch when it becomes apparent.
My understanding of the situation is that, in practice, if she arrived at the British border, she would be allowed through (although there might be some faff since she doesn’t have the right...
My understanding of the situation is that, in practice, if she arrived at the British border, she would be allowed through (although there might be some faff since she doesn’t have the right documents).
The bigger issue is that no airline or other transport provider (ferry, Eurostar etc.) will allow her to board without the right documents.
I found this parliamentary briefing on the matter to be clarifying, particularly the section What will happen if someone arrives without the appropriate documents:
The Home Office has told groups representing British dual nationals that “the intention of the ETA scheme is not to penalise people who unwittingly travel without the correct permission, or with a permission to which they are not legally entitled”.
The government says UK Border Force staff will take “a compassionate and pragmatic approach to travellers who experience genuine difficulty while this process settles”. Mike Tapp, Minister for Migration and Citizenship, has given assurances that enforcement of the ETA requirement will not result in dual citizens who arrive with incorrect documentation being detained or families being separated at the border.
I guess the disconnect for me is that she does have the right documents to board transport and even enter the UK as a Spanish citizen. It’d perhaps be a better idea for her to board the plane on...
I guess the disconnect for me is that she does have the right documents to board transport and even enter the UK as a Spanish citizen. It’d perhaps be a better idea for her to board the plane on her Spanish documents and then explain the situation at the UK border, but even then I don’t see that she’d be breaking any law (although I’m far from an expert) by entering as Spanish but remaining as British. Or is it the case that she’d actually be blocked from getting an ETA on her Spanish passport due to the system picking up her British nationality? (In which case I’m with @stu2b50 - if the system picks her up as British, that should be enough for her to travel as British! If it doesn’t, she can travel on an ETA, no?)
AFAIK, assuming she can indeed board the flight, this approach would work perfectly fine - indeed I understand that it is explicit border control policy to permit entry in this case. The issue is...
It’d perhaps be a better idea for her to board the plane on her Spanish documents and then explain the situation at the UK border
AFAIK, assuming she can indeed board the flight, this approach would work perfectly fine - indeed I understand that it is explicit border control policy to permit entry in this case.
The issue is more likely that she will be denied boarding. The airline will ask for your travel documents, and if you’re travelling on a Spanish passport they will check if you have an ETA. The ETA is obtained from the UK Home Office. I don’t know the exact process, but I assume it involves them asking for your nationality. So your options would be:
a) declare British citizenship, in which case you will automatically be prevented from applying for an ETA.
b) don’t declare your British citizenship. One would guess that the Home Office might be able to automatically detect if this is wrong, but it would depend on what they know about you. Since the woman in the article doesn’t have a passport or (from the sounds of it) any formal proof of citizenship, it may well be that be that the Home Office would not notice a problem and allow her to obtain an ETA.
(Of course if you can sneakily obtain an ETA by not declaring British citizenship, who knows if you will later face problems where the HO thinks you have overstayed, and you struggle to prove your right to remain in the UK). [Edit: see bottom]
We don’t know whether she tried to obtain an ETA or not, or whether or not she declared British citizenship to the airline or Home Office. If you tell the HO that you are British, but you/they can’t verify it, I think it’s only natural that you would not be granted entry.
So, I think as far as what @stu2b50 suggested, I fully agree that if HO can automatically verify your British citizenship you should just be allowed entry. As I say above, I suspect the problems come when what you declare doesn’t match up with what can be automatically verified.
The intention of the ETA scheme is not to penalise people who unwittingly travel without
the correct permission, or with a permission to which they are not legally entitled. It is
about securing the UK border. In terms of specific ‘penalties’ for British dual nationals, I am
sure you are aware that s.24A (1) of the Immigration Act 1971 disapplies the offence of
obtaining an ETA by deception to British nationals.
This seems to state that if you are able to obtain an ETA by lying to HO about your British citizenship, you cannot face any legal consequences.
Just came back to this thread and wanted to say thanks for such an informative reply (and an actual citation!) - the fact it's not an autodetection issue but one where you're obliged to...
Just came back to this thread and wanted to say thanks for such an informative reply (and an actual citation!) - the fact it's not an autodetection issue but one where you're obliged to self-declare and at least in theory obliged not to lie or make omissions in that declaration puts that final missing piece in place for me. It makes sense that they can end up in a "we know, but we haven't verified" situation from that.
But yeah, sounds like that legal nuance of the offence not applying to British nationals is a pretty solid practical answer for her if she'd known about it, not that I'd remotely expect her to know that level of detail!
Why would the airline know that she’s a British citizen? To them, she’s a a Spanish citizen flying to the UK, a very routine and allowed occurrence. One of my friends flew to the UK and literally...
Why would the airline know that she’s a British citizen? To them, she’s a a Spanish citizen flying to the UK, a very routine and allowed occurrence.
One of my friends flew to the UK and literally got to just before customs before realizing they didn’t have an ETA and frantically applied and received one before entering the country. So evidently the airlines are not checking that.
Almost certainly because she declared it. Theoretically this shouldn’t happen as airlines should be checking ETAs before allowing passengers to board, but clearly enforcement varies. If the woman...
Why would the airline know that she’s a British citizen?
Almost certainly because she declared it.
One of my friends flew to the UK and literally got to just before customs before realizing they didn’t have an ETA
Theoretically this shouldn’t happen as airlines should be checking ETAs before allowing passengers to board, but clearly enforcement varies.
If the woman in the article didn’t declare her British citizenship to her airline, in theory it should have checked that she had an ETA, and in theory she should not be able to obtain an ETA, but in my reply to @Greg I speculate that she might have been able to obtain an ETA depending on details of her situation which we don’t know.
Another spanner in this whole works is that Spain doesn't recognise dual Spanish-British citizenship. If she has a Spanish passport, she'll be only Spanish in their eyes. The British government...
Another spanner in this whole works is that Spain doesn't recognise dual Spanish-British citizenship. If she has a Spanish passport, she'll be only Spanish in their eyes. The British government does recognise dual British-Spanish, but perhaps there's also some reluctance to put her British passport into the system (I mean when booking tickets, checking in at the airport etc.) that makes choosing what documentation to use more difficult.
She assumed that too, as I understand it, but the new rules state that this isn't allowed. Because she is a British citizen, she must present evidence of her British citizenship to enter the UK....
She assumed that too, as I understand it, but the new rules state that this isn't allowed. Because she is a British citizen, she must present evidence of her British citizenship to enter the UK. If she has no evidence of that, she cannot enter. The only valid documents she can present are a passport (that it's not clear she's entitled to), or the £600 digital document mentioned in the article.
Of course it isn’t allowed, otherwise she would have done it already. But the question is why - what reason is there that a Spanish citizen can enter the UK with their Spanish passport unless...
Of course it isn’t allowed, otherwise she would have done it already. But the question is why - what reason is there that a Spanish citizen can enter the UK with their Spanish passport unless they’re a British citizen.
Like, the fact that the border can enforce this rule means that when she presents her Spanish passport at the border, they know she’s also a British citizen. That must be a validated fact. And they use this information… to reject her entry? As a UK citizen into the UK?
The fuck?
Either they can’t prove she’s a British citizen, and they should not reject her entry as an EU member citizen visiting the country, or they can prove she’s a British citizen, in which case, why would she need to prove that she’s a British citizen, you had to know that to even enforce the rule!
From the article it kind of sounds like she is not actually a British citizen (it says her father couldn't automatically pass the citizenship to her, and lawyers advised her she is in a "grey...
From the article it kind of sounds like she is not actually a British citizen (it says her father couldn't automatically pass the citizenship to her, and lawyers advised her she is in a "grey area" and "risks rejection" if she applied for a UK passport ?) - but she lived in the UK as if she was a citizen. Couldn't UK refuse her entry as a Spanish citizen, if she claimed she lives in the UK (i.e. is not a Spanish tourist) ?
It could be pragmatic to effectively overlook their British citizenship and allow them to travel as if they were a tourist. One barrier is that the UK government is legally obligated to allow...
It could be pragmatic to effectively overlook their British citizenship and allow them to travel as if they were a tourist. One barrier is that the UK government is legally obligated to allow citizens to pass through the border, so you can’t require a British citizen to obtain an ETA. If the rules were that you could either enter on British passport or on a foreign passport but with an ETA, it could quite likely be subject to a legal challenge. However, simply requiring that proof of British citizenship is provided is entirely legal.
If the UK rules are like the US rules, it's strictly speaking against them to overlook her UK citizenship. But her citizenship seems like a weird edge case situation anyway tbqh, so who knows....
If the UK rules are like the US rules, it's strictly speaking against them to overlook her UK citizenship. But her citizenship seems like a weird edge case situation anyway tbqh, so who knows.
That said, I know a US dual citizen friend who made it through customs using his foreign passport because he'd recently lost his US passport and couldn't get the replacement in time to travel. iirc he was given an eyebrow raise and/or a lecture, but they let him in.
According to the Home Office: I agree that from what I know they can’t ignore the fact that you are British if you tell them, but sounds like if you just pretend not to be British you can get away...
The intention of the ETA scheme is not to penalise people who unwittingly travel without
the correct permission, or with a permission to which they are not legally entitled. It is
about securing the UK border. In terms of specific ‘penalties’ for British dual nationals, I am sure you are aware that s.24A (1) of the Immigration Act 1971 disapplies the offence of
obtaining an ETA by deception to British nationals.
I agree that from what I know they can’t ignore the fact that you are British if you tell them, but sounds like if you just pretend not to be British you can get away with it.
Regarding the story you mentioned: the original article, and the other stories I’ve seen, are all about people being denied boarding their flights/travel, not denied at the border. It seems that it is explicitly policy that in any weird edge case, as long as you actually are a British citizen, you will be allowed through the border (probably with delays as they figure it out), the big issue is currently people being prevented from boarding their flights because the airlines believe they are not entitled to travel (and have been asked by the UK government to check this).
yeah the friend in question just only input his non-US passport info to the airline. ngl telling the airline you're a UK citizen when you don't have a UK passport seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.
yeah the friend in question just only input his non-US passport info to the airline. ngl telling the airline you're a UK citizen when you don't have a UK passport seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.
As a counterpoint, as the father of a baby with British dual citizenship, this is genuinely the first I, or any of my British family have heard of this rule, so I don't think it's been...
As a counterpoint, as the father of a baby with British dual citizenship, this is genuinely the first I, or any of my British family have heard of this rule, so I don't think it's been communicated so clearly. Indeed, we've apparently visited and left the UK since this rule came into force without using a British passport.
If you live outside of the UK, it's often easier to travel on your non-British passport (this is what we've found with my kid at least) because it's easier to get hold of and you don't need additional documentation when arriving back home. Whenever we visit the UK, we are essentially visiting as tourists, so it seems reasonable to me that as long as you fulfil at least one criteria (in this case EU national visiting the UK for a short stay) there shouldn't be much of a problem.
The other side is that nearly £600 is an insane amount of money for a digital document that is essentially a document stating a fact that is already true, especially given that a physical passport is significantly cheaper.
I guess I'm just really fed up of my government consistently making it harder for me to get to or stay in the UK, and consistently making it easier to stay here in Europe. Some of it is these sorts of travel regulations (my wife's ETA, for example), while some of it is the increasingly ridiculous visa requirements (we will probably never be able to move back to the UK now unless my wife changes careers or regulations change). And that's not including the lack of motivation to move in the first place - I've been over the last week telling people about my parental leave plans, and the responses and stories from my UK-based family and friends has been just depressing in terms of how little they've been able to take.
I’m sorry that’s your experience. I think it’s very true that the UK still has a lot to learn from European countries, and I’m glad to see developments towards mending our relationship across the...
I’m sorry that’s your experience. I think it’s very true that the UK still has a lot to learn from European countries, and I’m glad to see developments towards mending our relationship across the channel. I hope to see free movement restored one day.
My only other comment is that I strongly suspect the digital certificate is priced that way to encourage you to get a British passport. It’s obviously the preferred document, and to be fair they are relatively cheap (I recently had to renew my foreign passport at a cost of almost three times the price of a British passport).
And here's me with friends complaining about the price of the Brit passport! I'll let them know that they can quit complaining, things could be worse >< (mostly joking).
And here's me with friends complaining about the price of the Brit passport! I'll let them know that they can quit complaining, things could be worse >< (mostly joking).
Does the UK government have computers where they could look up someone's citizenship status? It seems like in principle, they could have all the information available to them that's in a passport....
Does the UK government have computers where they could look up someone's citizenship status? It seems like in principle, they could have all the information available to them that's in a passport.
At that point the physical passport just serves as proof of identity and there could be other acceptable proofs.
Relying on physical documents has downsides. A common tactic in human trafficking is to take peoples' passports as a way of controlling them.
I assume such systems exist, and I would speculate that they would rely on connecting to a valid document proving British citizenship. So perhaps we could say that, so long as you have a British...
I assume such systems exist, and I would speculate that they would rely on connecting to a valid document proving British citizenship. So perhaps we could say that, so long as you have a British passport (or certificate proving right to abode), the UK government could connect your foreign passport to that document so when you pass through the border with your foreign passport, they can easily look it up and check that you have the right to enter as a British citizen.
I had a look, and this is in fact how the digital certificate of right to abode works - great! I guess with the British passport, they could do this, but equally why not just carry the passport with you (since you would need to own the passport in any case, else they could not connect it in the system).
Maybe there are some reasons why linking a passport is less trivial than a digital certificate? I tend to think, surely, if it were practical to do so, it would have been done. But that might be naive.
I guess maybe I can chime in as a UK dual national living abroad, I had no idea about this rule change and if my wife and I travelled to the UK would not have been aware. Historically I use...
I guess maybe I can chime in as a UK dual national living abroad, I had no idea about this rule change and if my wife and I travelled to the UK would not have been aware.
Historically I use whatever passport either 1. gets me through customs fastest or 2. is the passport of my current "home country". I live in the US currently, so if I'll be coming back home and not want to justify why I don't have a stamp in my passport, I'd be going into the UK on my US passport. If you've ever come back to the US, particularly under this administration, it's a no no to have used another passport. Conversely, when living in the Netherlands I would often use my UK passport so I could skip the longer line and I was just going back to the Netherlands so no worry of a check in the US.
So while I understand that we should probably all be aware of these changes, if you don't live in country I'm not sure where this would have been made apparent for me. Yes, it's a good idea to be up to date on all the new laws, regulations, etc; but rarely does anyone do that. I do travel with both passports if I am going to the UK, but I don't begrudge those who don't.
All to say, trying to navigate multiple citizenships and bureaucracy can be difficult.
That’s fair! My approach has always been to pass through the border of either of my home countries using the local passport. So when travelling between the two I would carry both. Sounds like...
That’s fair! My approach has always been to pass through the border of either of my home countries using the local passport. So when travelling between the two I would carry both. Sounds like maybe the US doesn’t like that for some reason?
It seems that the way this ought to be have been communicated is really when people are booking their flights. Since airlines ask for your nationalities, the UK government should have required them to display a notice to all people registering as dual nationals about the changes.
I looked into this while traveling with US dual-citizens and it was confirmed by the immigration officers on both sides during the trip: for both the US and the other country in our case, it is...
I looked into this while traveling with US dual-citizens and it was confirmed by the immigration officers on both sides during the trip: for both the US and the other country in our case, it is mandatory to use the local passport at the immigration checkpoint (i.e. US to enter/exit US, other to enter/exit other). This is separate from the airline check-in and airport security, which I believe has some flexibility as long as you are ready to present both passports.
So she knows it's a "grey area", her family and her have had a couple decades to clear it up, it's been over a decade since Brexit, and she hasn't done anything to clarify her citizenship. It...
She told BBC London her case was "nuanced" due to historical nationality laws because her parents were unmarried when she was born in 1999, which meant her British father could not automatically pass on his citizenship. Despite paying taxes and voting in the UK, she said immigration lawyers had told her the situation put her in a legal "grey area".
So she knows it's a "grey area", her family and her have had a couple decades to clear it up, it's been over a decade since Brexit, and she hasn't done anything to clarify her citizenship. It probably would've been a good idea to have addressed that earlier.
That's true. Having inhabited a "grey area" at one point regarding immigration, I can attest that facing it can be almost paralysingly scary, because you worry that your case might actually be on...
That's true. Having inhabited a "grey area" at one point regarding immigration, I can attest that facing it can be almost paralysingly scary, because you worry that your case might actually be on the "illegal" side, and that any proactive steps you take may actually just be hastening your own downfall. Having resolved an issue like this, it feels like an obvious step, but I can understand just pushing it into the background and getting on with life in the meantime.
I believe Canada has a similar rule, but seems pretty dumb. For Canada, at least, there's an exception for Americans IIRC where Americans can use their American passport if they want (I bring both...
I believe Canada has a similar rule, but seems pretty dumb. For Canada, at least, there's an exception for Americans IIRC where Americans can use their American passport if they want (I bring both and just use Canadian into Canada, American into the US, but I didn't get a Canadian passport until 2023 despite being a* citizen all my life). It seems like the UK should have a similar rule for the EU even without being in the Schengen zone anymore, but wouldn't surprise me if they're just implementing this out of spite.
I hope Taiwan never gets this rule, it's actually kinda funny because something like this kinda happened to me when I was younger. I'm a dual citizen and I went to Taiwan with my American and...
I hope Taiwan never gets this rule, it's actually kinda funny because something like this kinda happened to me when I was younger. I'm a dual citizen and I went to Taiwan with my American and Taiwanese passport. When I came back a year or so later, I was stopped at border patrol in Taiwan while using my Taiwanese passport with them telling me I was already in the country. It was a long explanation from my parents that day, but nothing too crazy. Now I don't use my Taiwanese passport at all because my passport from there is expired and my parents are afraid that I'd be drafted.
The last time I was in the country as a citizen I used my passport! Then I just never used it again, and I just use my american passport nowadays to get in and out so as a Taiwanese citizen I've...
The last time I was in the country as a citizen I used my passport! Then I just never used it again, and I just use my american passport nowadays to get in and out so as a Taiwanese citizen I've just never gone back.
There have been a few of these stories floating around since the new policy came into force in February. While the people involved are clearly stuck in a tricky situation, I find it hard to give them much sympathy as the changes have been widely publicised over the last couple of years, and particularly in the couple of months prior to them coming into force in February. Indeed, the more time passes the less sympathy I feel for those involved!
To be very clear, prior to 25/02/2026, it was permitted for British dual nationals to travel in and out of the UK on their foreign passport, with no proof of their UK citizenship status. Basically you could just show up at the border and be waved through. This policy doesn’t work very well with the modern border, which as far as possible operates automatically and digitally, which is a great thing! E-gates, e-visas, pre-travel authorisations and the like make travel much easier and more convenient - ideal because we want to encourage people to travel to the UK - without compromising border security. In fact it’s better for security because we can check if you have the right to enter the UK before you get on a flight/train/ferry to the country.
So, as of 25/02/2026, there is a very simple requirement: if you are a British national travelling to the UK, you must carry proof of British citizenship (in the form of a British passport or certificate). There is no valid way for you to enter the country if you don’t have such a document in your possession - how could there be? You can’t be admitted via the foreign visitor entry system, because you aren’t relying on any sort of travel visa for your entry; you are entering as a British citizen, so it only makes sense that you would need proof that you are, in fact, a British citizen.
I’ll add, as relevant context, that I’m a British dual national living in the UK, I was aware of the changed well in advance of the changes, but I didn’t have to change how I travel because I already always passed through the British border using my British passport. I guess it just always seemed like the most sensible thing to do?
Why wouldn’t she be able to get an ETA? Spanish citizens can get an ETA in minutes and travel through the gates for non-UK citizens. It’s strange to not allow someone to do that just because they’re also a British citizen.
Yeah, this is the bit I can’t square. The BBC article makes the rule sound pointless and bureaucratic, @LumaBop’s explanation makes it much clearer why the rule exists - similar reason you’ve gotta use the same card to tap in and out at the train station, by the sound of it, the system has to link entries and exits.
But neither seem to account for why she can’t just enter as a Spanish person rather than entering as a British one… she might have a bit of annoyance on her next trip if there’s a hanging entry or exit unpaired in the system because of it, but that’s life when it comes to automation that needs to interact with the real world’s many edge cases. She crosses the border as a Spanish person (which she is), and then remains in the UK as a British person (which she also is), and someone in the Home Office call centre somewhere manually cleans up whatever record is messed up by the mismatch when it becomes apparent.
My understanding of the situation is that, in practice, if she arrived at the British border, she would be allowed through (although there might be some faff since she doesn’t have the right documents).
The bigger issue is that no airline or other transport provider (ferry, Eurostar etc.) will allow her to board without the right documents.
I found this parliamentary briefing on the matter to be clarifying, particularly the section What will happen if someone arrives without the appropriate documents:
I guess the disconnect for me is that she does have the right documents to board transport and even enter the UK as a Spanish citizen. It’d perhaps be a better idea for her to board the plane on her Spanish documents and then explain the situation at the UK border, but even then I don’t see that she’d be breaking any law (although I’m far from an expert) by entering as Spanish but remaining as British. Or is it the case that she’d actually be blocked from getting an ETA on her Spanish passport due to the system picking up her British nationality? (In which case I’m with @stu2b50 - if the system picks her up as British, that should be enough for her to travel as British! If it doesn’t, she can travel on an ETA, no?)
AFAIK, assuming she can indeed board the flight, this approach would work perfectly fine - indeed I understand that it is explicit border control policy to permit entry in this case.
The issue is more likely that she will be denied boarding. The airline will ask for your travel documents, and if you’re travelling on a Spanish passport they will check if you have an ETA. The ETA is obtained from the UK Home Office. I don’t know the exact process, but I assume it involves them asking for your nationality. So your options would be:
a) declare British citizenship, in which case you will automatically be prevented from applying for an ETA.
b) don’t declare your British citizenship. One would guess that the Home Office might be able to automatically detect if this is wrong, but it would depend on what they know about you. Since the woman in the article doesn’t have a passport or (from the sounds of it) any formal proof of citizenship, it may well be that be that the Home Office would not notice a problem and allow her to obtain an ETA.
(Of course if you can sneakily obtain an ETA by not declaring British citizenship, who knows if you will later face problems where the HO thinks you have overstayed, and you struggle to prove your right to remain in the UK). [Edit: see bottom]
We don’t know whether she tried to obtain an ETA or not, or whether or not she declared British citizenship to the airline or Home Office. If you tell the HO that you are British, but you/they can’t verify it, I think it’s only natural that you would not be granted entry.
So, I think as far as what @stu2b50 suggested, I fully agree that if HO can automatically verify your British citizenship you should just be allowed entry. As I say above, I suspect the problems come when what you declare doesn’t match up with what can be automatically verified.
Edit: I found this Home Office document which states at the bottom of section 4:
This seems to state that if you are able to obtain an ETA by lying to HO about your British citizenship, you cannot face any legal consequences.
Just came back to this thread and wanted to say thanks for such an informative reply (and an actual citation!) - the fact it's not an autodetection issue but one where you're obliged to self-declare and at least in theory obliged not to lie or make omissions in that declaration puts that final missing piece in place for me. It makes sense that they can end up in a "we know, but we haven't verified" situation from that.
But yeah, sounds like that legal nuance of the offence not applying to British nationals is a pretty solid practical answer for her if she'd known about it, not that I'd remotely expect her to know that level of detail!
Why would the airline know that she’s a British citizen? To them, she’s a a Spanish citizen flying to the UK, a very routine and allowed occurrence.
One of my friends flew to the UK and literally got to just before customs before realizing they didn’t have an ETA and frantically applied and received one before entering the country. So evidently the airlines are not checking that.
Almost certainly because she declared it.
Theoretically this shouldn’t happen as airlines should be checking ETAs before allowing passengers to board, but clearly enforcement varies.
If the woman in the article didn’t declare her British citizenship to her airline, in theory it should have checked that she had an ETA, and in theory she should not be able to obtain an ETA, but in my reply to @Greg I speculate that she might have been able to obtain an ETA depending on details of her situation which we don’t know.
Another spanner in this whole works is that Spain doesn't recognise dual Spanish-British citizenship. If she has a Spanish passport, she'll be only Spanish in their eyes. The British government does recognise dual British-Spanish, but perhaps there's also some reluctance to put her British passport into the system (I mean when booking tickets, checking in at the airport etc.) that makes choosing what documentation to use more difficult.
She assumed that too, as I understand it, but the new rules state that this isn't allowed. Because she is a British citizen, she must present evidence of her British citizenship to enter the UK. If she has no evidence of that, she cannot enter. The only valid documents she can present are a passport (that it's not clear she's entitled to), or the £600 digital document mentioned in the article.
Of course it isn’t allowed, otherwise she would have done it already. But the question is why - what reason is there that a Spanish citizen can enter the UK with their Spanish passport unless they’re a British citizen.
Like, the fact that the border can enforce this rule means that when she presents her Spanish passport at the border, they know she’s also a British citizen. That must be a validated fact. And they use this information… to reject her entry? As a UK citizen into the UK?
The fuck?
Either they can’t prove she’s a British citizen, and they should not reject her entry as an EU member citizen visiting the country, or they can prove she’s a British citizen, in which case, why would she need to prove that she’s a British citizen, you had to know that to even enforce the rule!
From the article it kind of sounds like she is not actually a British citizen (it says her father couldn't automatically pass the citizenship to her, and lawyers advised her she is in a "grey area" and "risks rejection" if she applied for a UK passport ?) - but she lived in the UK as if she was a citizen. Couldn't UK refuse her entry as a Spanish citizen, if she claimed she lives in the UK (i.e. is not a Spanish tourist) ?
It could be pragmatic to effectively overlook their British citizenship and allow them to travel as if they were a tourist. One barrier is that the UK government is legally obligated to allow citizens to pass through the border, so you can’t require a British citizen to obtain an ETA. If the rules were that you could either enter on British passport or on a foreign passport but with an ETA, it could quite likely be subject to a legal challenge. However, simply requiring that proof of British citizenship is provided is entirely legal.
If the UK rules are like the US rules, it's strictly speaking against them to overlook her UK citizenship. But her citizenship seems like a weird edge case situation anyway tbqh, so who knows.
That said, I know a US dual citizen friend who made it through customs using his foreign passport because he'd recently lost his US passport and couldn't get the replacement in time to travel. iirc he was given an eyebrow raise and/or a lecture, but they let him in.
According to the Home Office:
I agree that from what I know they can’t ignore the fact that you are British if you tell them, but sounds like if you just pretend not to be British you can get away with it.
Regarding the story you mentioned: the original article, and the other stories I’ve seen, are all about people being denied boarding their flights/travel, not denied at the border. It seems that it is explicitly policy that in any weird edge case, as long as you actually are a British citizen, you will be allowed through the border (probably with delays as they figure it out), the big issue is currently people being prevented from boarding their flights because the airlines believe they are not entitled to travel (and have been asked by the UK government to check this).
yeah the friend in question just only input his non-US passport info to the airline. ngl telling the airline you're a UK citizen when you don't have a UK passport seems like a pretty dumb thing to do.
As a counterpoint, as the father of a baby with British dual citizenship, this is genuinely the first I, or any of my British family have heard of this rule, so I don't think it's been communicated so clearly. Indeed, we've apparently visited and left the UK since this rule came into force without using a British passport.
If you live outside of the UK, it's often easier to travel on your non-British passport (this is what we've found with my kid at least) because it's easier to get hold of and you don't need additional documentation when arriving back home. Whenever we visit the UK, we are essentially visiting as tourists, so it seems reasonable to me that as long as you fulfil at least one criteria (in this case EU national visiting the UK for a short stay) there shouldn't be much of a problem.
The other side is that nearly £600 is an insane amount of money for a digital document that is essentially a document stating a fact that is already true, especially given that a physical passport is significantly cheaper.
I guess I'm just really fed up of my government consistently making it harder for me to get to or stay in the UK, and consistently making it easier to stay here in Europe. Some of it is these sorts of travel regulations (my wife's ETA, for example), while some of it is the increasingly ridiculous visa requirements (we will probably never be able to move back to the UK now unless my wife changes careers or regulations change). And that's not including the lack of motivation to move in the first place - I've been over the last week telling people about my parental leave plans, and the responses and stories from my UK-based family and friends has been just depressing in terms of how little they've been able to take.
I’m sorry that’s your experience. I think it’s very true that the UK still has a lot to learn from European countries, and I’m glad to see developments towards mending our relationship across the channel. I hope to see free movement restored one day.
My only other comment is that I strongly suspect the digital certificate is priced that way to encourage you to get a British passport. It’s obviously the preferred document, and to be fair they are relatively cheap (I recently had to renew my foreign passport at a cost of almost three times the price of a British passport).
And here's me with friends complaining about the price of the Brit passport! I'll let them know that they can quit complaining, things could be worse >< (mostly joking).
Does the UK government have computers where they could look up someone's citizenship status? It seems like in principle, they could have all the information available to them that's in a passport.
At that point the physical passport just serves as proof of identity and there could be other acceptable proofs.
Relying on physical documents has downsides. A common tactic in human trafficking is to take peoples' passports as a way of controlling them.
I assume such systems exist, and I would speculate that they would rely on connecting to a valid document proving British citizenship. So perhaps we could say that, so long as you have a British passport (or certificate proving right to abode), the UK government could connect your foreign passport to that document so when you pass through the border with your foreign passport, they can easily look it up and check that you have the right to enter as a British citizen.
I had a look, and this is in fact how the digital certificate of right to abode works - great! I guess with the British passport, they could do this, but equally why not just carry the passport with you (since you would need to own the passport in any case, else they could not connect it in the system).
Maybe there are some reasons why linking a passport is less trivial than a digital certificate? I tend to think, surely, if it were practical to do so, it would have been done. But that might be naive.
I guess maybe I can chime in as a UK dual national living abroad, I had no idea about this rule change and if my wife and I travelled to the UK would not have been aware.
Historically I use whatever passport either 1. gets me through customs fastest or 2. is the passport of my current "home country". I live in the US currently, so if I'll be coming back home and not want to justify why I don't have a stamp in my passport, I'd be going into the UK on my US passport. If you've ever come back to the US, particularly under this administration, it's a no no to have used another passport. Conversely, when living in the Netherlands I would often use my UK passport so I could skip the longer line and I was just going back to the Netherlands so no worry of a check in the US.
So while I understand that we should probably all be aware of these changes, if you don't live in country I'm not sure where this would have been made apparent for me. Yes, it's a good idea to be up to date on all the new laws, regulations, etc; but rarely does anyone do that. I do travel with both passports if I am going to the UK, but I don't begrudge those who don't.
All to say, trying to navigate multiple citizenships and bureaucracy can be difficult.
That’s fair! My approach has always been to pass through the border of either of my home countries using the local passport. So when travelling between the two I would carry both. Sounds like maybe the US doesn’t like that for some reason?
It seems that the way this ought to be have been communicated is really when people are booking their flights. Since airlines ask for your nationalities, the UK government should have required them to display a notice to all people registering as dual nationals about the changes.
I looked into this while traveling with US dual-citizens and it was confirmed by the immigration officers on both sides during the trip: for both the US and the other country in our case, it is mandatory to use the local passport at the immigration checkpoint (i.e. US to enter/exit US, other to enter/exit other). This is separate from the airline check-in and airport security, which I believe has some flexibility as long as you are ready to present both passports.
So she knows it's a "grey area", her family and her have had a couple decades to clear it up, it's been over a decade since Brexit, and she hasn't done anything to clarify her citizenship. It probably would've been a good idea to have addressed that earlier.
It's easy to judge from afar.
That's true. Having inhabited a "grey area" at one point regarding immigration, I can attest that facing it can be almost paralysingly scary, because you worry that your case might actually be on the "illegal" side, and that any proactive steps you take may actually just be hastening your own downfall. Having resolved an issue like this, it feels like an obvious step, but I can understand just pushing it into the background and getting on with life in the meantime.
I believe Canada has a similar rule, but seems pretty dumb. For Canada, at least, there's an exception for Americans IIRC where Americans can use their American passport if they want (I bring both and just use Canadian into Canada, American into the US, but I didn't get a Canadian passport until 2023 despite being a* citizen all my life). It seems like the UK should have a similar rule for the EU even without being in the Schengen zone anymore, but wouldn't surprise me if they're just implementing this out of spite.
When talking about immigration you don't want to be more in line with the USA or Australia. It's unfortunate that this happened to her though.
I hope Taiwan never gets this rule, it's actually kinda funny because something like this kinda happened to me when I was younger. I'm a dual citizen and I went to Taiwan with my American and Taiwanese passport. When I came back a year or so later, I was stopped at border patrol in Taiwan while using my Taiwanese passport with them telling me I was already in the country. It was a long explanation from my parents that day, but nothing too crazy. Now I don't use my Taiwanese passport at all because my passport from there is expired and my parents are afraid that I'd be drafted.
Why would they not let you use your passport to leave?
The last time I was in the country as a citizen I used my passport! Then I just never used it again, and I just use my american passport nowadays to get in and out so as a Taiwanese citizen I've just never gone back.