Sometimes even the big name publications can get their facts (and law) wrong… do you need to have been physically present in Hong Kong for a full seven years (i.e 2555 days all told) in order to qualify for Hong Kong permanent residency?
The Wall Street Journal guide to HK states (here: http://guides.wsj.com/hong-kong/guide-to-hong-kong/visas-and-residency/ ), concerning the application for the right of abode, that “foreign nationals need to have stayed in Hong Kong for a continuous seven years.
” If one traveled for a month outside Hong Kong within a seven-year period, then he or she needs to have resided in Hong Kong for at least seven years and one month.”
Is that last sentence accurate?
A related question:
In some sources, I have read that any continuous absences from Hong Kong of over 6 months need to be listed (and explained) in the application.
Some sources say that whenever one is absent more than 6 months within a year (whether continuous or not), this has to be listed (and explained).
Could you clarify?
Thanks so much.
More Stuff You May Find Interesting or Useful
How considered advance planning might save a doomed right of abode application & spare the loss of several years ordinary residence in Hong Kong
Does time spent outside of Hong Kong working for your employer overseas automatically break your continuity of ordinary residence for PR purposes after 7 years?
I have an employment visa to take me through to 7 years but now I’m unemployed – can I ‘cruise’ the last year without working and still qualify for permanent residency?
How to apply for the right of abode in Hong Kong without any professional help – the documents you need