Starting 25 February, dual nationals may face entry denial to the UK unless they carry a British passport. New border controls from the Home Office require dual British citizens to present a UK passport or purchase a £589 "certificate of entitlement" for their second nationality passport.

Get the latest headlines in your email

This policy change arises from a border digitisation programme aimed at streamlining travel and enhancing security. However, the unexpected requirements have sparked concern among British citizens living or traveling abroad, who feel the financial and logistical demands are burdensome.

Individuals like a British woman in Germany worry about the impact on family travel plans, especially for her son’s upcoming trip to the UK. Another woman residing in Spain, who had to renounce her British nationality to acquire Spanish citizenship, faces potential complications. Presenting a British passport could jeopardize her Spanish status, highlighting the difficulties of complying with dual citizenship regulations.

Many dual nationals express frustration over inadequate communication from authorities about these changes. James, a dual national preparing for a work trip to New York, finds himself scrambling to meet requirements. Without the chance to secure alternative documentation before his return, he risks being unable to re-enter the UK.

Critics argue that while the rules aim to bolster border security and immigration control, they have inadvertently caused distress to law-abiding citizens. The EU citizens’ campaign group, The 3 million, advocates for a more affordable travel authorization option, calling for a system similar to Canada's low-cost, one-off authorisation.

Monique Hawkins, head of policy and advocacy at The 3 million, underscores the urgency, stating that British citizens must not be effectively barred from their own country. Authorities have yet to address these concerns comprehensively, leaving many dual nationals anxious about their future mobility.

Key Takeaways

• Dual nationals must carry a UK passport or costly certificate for entry.

• The policy is part of a digitisation effort for enhanced border control.

• Critics urge more communication and affordable travel solutions.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

  Adapted by ASEAN Now · Source · 13 Feb 2026

View full article

Security theatre for catching those honest enough to jump through the hoops instead of lying about their second passport. What nonsense?

7 hours ago, ASEAN NOW News said:

Another woman residing in Spain, who had to renounce her British nationality to acquire Spanish citizenship

Means she is no longer a dual citizen/national. She is Spanish and can enter on the Spanish passport with ETA.

Or she lied to the Spanish authorities by renouncing it to them but not actually renouncing it to the UK authorities. Lies usually have consequences.

It used to be that until you renounced your right to UK domicile you remained a citizen with right of entry. I have not renounced domicile or citizenship for many good reasons I won't go into here. I entered on an EU passport last year with ETA. Haven't needed a UK passport for travel since decades.

I wouldn't usually bother with this c5@p money grab (that's what it is), but unfortunately I face the prospect of some family funerals in the not too distant future and so the extortion will work. Getting a UK passport is both cumbersome, expensive and time consuming. My EU PP is easy, relatively cheap and streamlined.

It is bleeding galling. To put it diplomatically.

It's astonishing to me that anyone would ever expect to be able to enter a country of which they are a citizen using a passport from some other country.

It's doubly astonishing to expect to still be a citizen of a country after having renounced that country's citizenship... what does a UK passport have to do with that woman in Spain mentioned in the article, given that she renounced her UK citizenship?

I probably don't understand some of the nuance here with respect to the UK specifically.

I don't understand this article or those complaining.

If you are a citizen of a country, you want to travel abroad and return, get a passport.

Simple.

On 2/14/2026 at 7:17 AM, ASEAN NOW News said:

the rules aim to bolster border security and immigration control

Must be a joke !

2 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

I don't understand this article or those complaining.

If you are a citizen of a country, you want to travel abroad and return, get a passport.

Simple.

Amazingly, that's not the reason passports were introduced in the modern era.

The modern passport was introduced during WW1 not as a means to facilitate entry into a country, but to facilitate exit. Governments were worried engineers and scientists would leave during a war. This followed the ancient passports, which were proof of permission to travel. In China, needed a passport to travel anywhere in the Empire. In the Islamic Caliphate, you only got travel documents if you had paid your taxes. Henry V introduced the English passport, so bearers could prove who they were; "safe conduct" passes, hence the wording in the opening pages of the British passports.

His Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State Requests and requires in the name of His Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary

Until the first world war, women in the UK weren't able to get a passport. They had to be written in as an accompanying traveller on a man's passport. Yet women did travel on their own. Because passports weren't needed to travel in the 19th Century.

For the UK, technically the proof of my citizenship is my birth certificate, because its pre-1983. Why isn't that accepted as proof to enter the country of my birth. The onus is on Border Force to prove who I am.

Elsewhere, its discussed that overseas British citizens are entitled to vote. Since 2022, the 15 year limit has been removed. This 15 year limit was originally introduced by the Blair government to overturn the 20 year limit the Tories used. Getting rid of this limit was a Conservative Party election manifesto. Overseas voting rights were introduced in 1985, also by the Conservatives.

Many UK expatriates are still subject to UK taxation, if they retain property and assets in the UK.

A passport is not necessary to vote. We know it doesn't actually cost the government £100 to issue a passport. In Spain, a passport costs £25, in Ireland, £65, Germany, £70.

The Certificate of Entitlement is a tax. It doesn't cost the government £586 to verify citizenship. If you were born before 1983, the only document needed for a first time passport is a birth certificate, or if you have lost that, a certified replacement, cost £12.50. A UK emergency travel document costs £125.

It seems a conscious effort by the Labour party to try and disenfranchise 1 million people who are overseas dual nationals. Essentially this is national ID by a backdoor; you are required to possess a passport to prove who you are. Note, currently not only is it not mandatory to have a passport, the government has the power to withdraw a passport due to criminality etc, and restrict your ability to travel. Like Sir David Davies, I am viscerally opposed to the idea of a national ID card in the UK. We don't need it. The justification is spurious, and at odds with British traditions of freedom. I fully expect the next step is to formalise legislation to strip UK dual citizenship, innate or naturalised, from people who don't exercise residency rights. The legislation already exists in the case of UK terrorists. Just needs minor adjustment.

Presumably if my daughter were to enter in a rubber dinghy over the beach at Folkestone, or wearing a bhurka in the back of a fruit and veg lorry from Calais, she would not need any such documentation?

I only ask as all conventional attempts to get her a British Passport over the last 15 years or so have simply been ignored.

She was born to a Thai mother one year before she would have automatically have been a British Citizen by virtue of the fact that I am her father. She could (should) be able to become one, all that is required is a case review by the authorities. They point blank refuse to do that, and all subsequent enquiries have simply been ignored. I even wrote to my MP (ironically a German national who was granted British Citizenship!), that too was ignored.

Meanwhile people with no passport at all get a free bus from the dingy to a free migrant hotel and 3 buffets a day.

3 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Amazingly, that's not the reason passports were introduced in the modern era.

The modern passport was introduced during WW1 not as a means to facilitate entry into a country, but to facilitate exit. Governments were worried engineers and scientists would leave during a war. This followed the ancient passports, which were proof of permission to travel. In China, needed a passport to travel anywhere in the Empire. In the Islamic Caliphate, you only got travel documents if you had paid your taxes. Henry V introduced the English passport, so bearers could prove who they were; "safe conduct" passes, hence the wording in the opening pages of the British passports.

Until the first world war, women in the UK weren't able to get a passport. They had to be written in as an accompanying traveller on a man's passport. Yet women did travel on their own. Because passports weren't needed to travel in the 19th Century.

For the UK, technically the proof of my citizenship is my birth certificate, because its pre-1983. Why isn't that accepted as proof to enter the country of my birth. The onus is on Border Force to prove who I am.

Elsewhere, its discussed that overseas British citizens are entitled to vote. Since 2022, the 15 year limit has been removed. This 15 year limit was originally introduced by the Blair government to overturn the 20 year limit the Tories used. Getting rid of this limit was a Conservative Party election manifesto. Overseas voting rights were introduced in 1985, also by the Conservatives.

Many UK expatriates are still subject to UK taxation, if they retain property and assets in the UK.

A passport is not necessary to vote. We know it doesn't actually cost the government £100 to issue a passport. In Spain, a passport costs £25, in Ireland, £65, Germany, £70.

The Certificate of Entitlement is a tax. It doesn't cost the government £586 to verify citizenship. If you were born before 1983, the only document needed for a first time passport is a birth certificate, or if you have lost that, a certified replacement, cost £12.50. A UK emergency travel document costs £125.

It seems a conscious effort by the Labour party to try and disenfranchise 1 million people who are overseas dual nationals. Essentially this is national ID by a backdoor; you are required to possess a passport to prove who you are. Note, currently not only is it not mandatory to have a passport, the government has the power to withdraw a passport due to criminality etc, and restrict your ability to travel. Like Sir David Davies, I am viscerally opposed to the idea of a national ID card in the UK. We don't need it. The justification is spurious, and at odds with British traditions of freedom. I fully expect the next step is to formalise legislation to strip UK dual citizenship, innate or naturalised, from people who don't exercise residency rights. The legislation already exists in the case of UK terrorists. Just needs minor adjustment.

That's twice now you've quoted me and gone off on a tangent. Your post still doesn't explain the article.

51 minutes ago, JAG said:

Presumably if my daughter were to enter in a rubber dinghy over the beach at Folkestone, or wearing a bhurka in the back of a fruit and veg lorry from Calais, she would not need any such documentation?

I only ask as all conventional attempts to get her a British Passport over the last 15 years or so have simply been ignored.

She was born to a Thai mother one year before she would have automatically have been a British Citizen by virtue of the fact that I am her father. She could (should) be able to become one, all that is required is a case review by the authorities. They point blank refuse to do that, and all subsequent enquiries have simply been ignored. I even wrote to my MP (ironically a German national who was granted British Citizenship!), that too was ignored.

She still is a British citizen by virtue of having a British father.

When was she born?

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Meanwhile people with no passport at all get a free bus from the dingy to a free migrant hotel and 3 buffets a day.

Not all.

If that's the way you want to live, fine. Not for me. I find it much easier having a passport and living with the freedoms I have.

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Not all.

If that's the way you want to live, fine. Not for me. I find it much easier having a passport and living with the freedoms I have.

What a bizarre reply.

Did you quote the wrong post?

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

What a bizarre reply.

Did you quote the wrong post?

Nope.

You have a habit of thinking asylum seekers lead a great life. I assumed you'd like to live such a life.

I wouldn't.

4 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

That's twice now you've quoted me and gone off on a tangent. Your post still doesn't explain the article.

I don't care. Report the post if it offends you.

9 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

She still is a British citizen by virtue of having a British father.

When was she born?

2005

7 hours ago, JAG said:

2005

In that case, I don't understand your comment " one year before she would have automatically have been a British Citizen by virtue of the fact that I am her father."

Our daughter was born in 2002 and qualified under that rule.

12 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

I don't care. Report the post if it offends you.

5555

You've done it again.

I don't think theres a reason such as "waffle" for reporting a post.

59 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Our daughter was born in 2002 and qualified under that rule.

Prior to 2006, if the child was born outside the UK, to only one UK citizen and that citizen acquired their citizenship through descent then citizenship was not automatic. This has since been abolished.

3 minutes ago, Gaccha said:

Prior to 2006, if the child was born outside the UK, to only one UK citizen and that citizen acquired their citizenship through descent then citizenship was not automatic. This has since been abolished.

Irrelevant, as you can see if you read the entire comment I quoted.

13 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

since been abolished.

Irrelevant, as you can see if you read the entire comment I quoted.

I've read it. I'm clearing up the obvious confusion.

Prior to 2006 there was no automatic right to citizenship in the circumstances of one parent holding citizenship.

47 minutes ago, Gaccha said:

I've read it. I'm clearing up the obvious confusion.

Prior to 2006 there was no automatic right to citizenship in the circumstances of one parent holding citizenship.

There most certainly was. Our daughter was born in 2002. British father, Thai mother.

She is a British Citizen. Passport application was a breeze.

2 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

In that case, I don't understand your comment " one year before she would have automatically have been a British Citizen by virtue of the fact that I am her father."

Our daughter was born in 2002 and qualified under that rule.

I was not married to but living with her mother at the time. We married subsequently. One year later she would have qualified irrespective of our marital status. The rules allow for a case by case review and decision. The Home Office simply refuse to do so. They simply refuse to answer any correspondence on the matter, either from me or a solicitor I engaged.

3 minutes ago, JAG said:

I was not married to but living with her mother at the time. We married subsequently.

Our daughter was born in 2002. We weren't officially married until May 2006. There were no issues when applying for our daughter's UK passport. We hadn't even bothered to register her birth at British embassy, even though people seem to think that's a must.

Advice now from Gov.UK is to apply using UKF form. It's specifically for those who "would have qualified for citizenship had father been married to mother".

20 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Meanwhile people with no passport at all get a free bus from the dingy to a free migrant hotel and 3 buffets a day.

You forgot the free mobile phone with unlimited internet, free bus passes and a discount coupon for the Sunday lunch special at Wetherspoons.

Just now, NanLaew said:

You forgot the free mobile phone with unlimited internet, free bus passes and a discount coupon for the Sunday lunch special at Wetherspoons.

He didn't forget. It doesn't happen.

4 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

He didn't forget. It doesn't happen.

Neither does anything else @JonnyF posted.

3 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

5555

You've done it again.

I don't think theres a reason such as "waffle" for reporting a post.

You add whatever reason you like. Or you add me to your blocked list.

7 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

You add whatever reason you like. Or you add me to your blocked list.

3.

12 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

There most certainly was

There most certainly wasn't.

I suspect in your case, the parent was not a British citizen by descent but a British citizen born within the UK, or fully naturalized etc. "By descent" has a meaning not obvious and requires a reading of the law.

I strongly suspect you don't understand this key point and because of that on three occasions now you have failed to grasp the legal position pre-2006.