Do you want to destroy Finland’s brand, Petteri Orpo?

Orpo’s government is drafting act after act on immigration. The plan seems to be to make immigrants’ life more difficult and decrease Finland’s appeal.

For anyone keeping an eye on internationality and immigration, Orpo’s government looks especially industrious. The Citizenship Act, for instance, has been amended in two separate projects, with a third one including plans to introduce a citizenship test under way. The conditions for permanent residence permits have been changed, and even a short period of unemployment may now lead to the cancellation of a residence permit.

Students’ status has also been weakened. Simply seeking education in a Finnish higher education institution from outside the EU comes with a fee, tuition fees covering the entire cost of education enter into force on 1 August and, this spring, the government aims to make the process of cancelling residence permits easier in cases where students need to resort to social assistance. Further changes are also under way, including tighter requirements for language skills and income levels as well as family reunification being made more difficult.

Thankfully, there are some flickers of light too. In the future, immigrants who complete a bachelor’s or master’s degree at a Finnish university may get a permanent residence permit easier than before, without any requirements for their period of residence. However, the change does not apply to students who have completed a bachelor’s degree at a university of applied sciences.

At this point, I am sure there will be someone asking, ‘Where is the problem?’ Is it not a good idea to change the law when needed?

There are two major problems with the changes. Firstly, the amendments clearly make immigration more difficult by creating additional requirements and bureaucracy. Secondly, immigration is not a simple process, and Orpo’s government is intentionally setting further obstacles for immigrants. This communicates to everyone that settling in Finland is not worth it. However, we need more immigration: as generations get smaller, the only way we can increase the workforce is through immigration – and without this, our welfare state will crumble.

The second problem lies with the assessment of the overall situation. The acts are drafted one by one, which means that the effects of the acts are also assessed separately. While the number of changes is getting dizzyingly high, the effects have not been assessed as a whole at any point. Even though the effects of an individual change may be considered small in the government’s proposal, the cumulative effect of several amendments is considerably larger.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs’ 2025 report on Finland’s brand shows that Finland made global headlines with its racism scandals. Even though the country brand changes slowly and, in terms of education, for instance, Finland still has a good reputation, the scandals combined with a difficult immigration process do not encourage people to move to Finland for study or work. The probability of this result could have been assessed if the amendments concerning immigration had been assessed as a whole, as was done with the changes to social security. Is it finally time to look at the overall picture, Petteri Orpo?

Tiia Niemi

Specialist in international affairs