Another raft of changes to the immigration rules have recently been announced. The changes are principally aimed at easing the immigration regime for employers. However, they are relatively minor changes and their effect will not be significant for the vast majority of businesses currently labouring under a demanding and complex system.

Firstly, the Government is removing the English language requirement for intra-company transferees. This is a positive step, although it is doubtful that the effect of this will be great, given that intra-company transferees tend to have relatively strong language skills.

The Government also wishes to make it easier for graduate entrepreneurs to switch into Tier 2. This is a welcome development, although it remains to be seen how many graduate entrepreneurs, who in any event have to possess significant means to meet the onerous Tier 1 requirements, will choose the Tier 2 route. Again, this is unlikely to be of significant interest to employers.

The list of 'permissible activities' which business visitors are allowed to undertake in the UK has also been widened. Internal auditors from global corporations will now be allowed to undertake short internal audits as business visitors rather than have to use an Intra-Company Transfer visa.

Business visitors will also be able to come to the UK to receive corporate training for the purposes of their employment overseas. This appears to be a very welcome development for multinational companies who would, for example, prefer to organise centralised training from the UK. However, there are strings attached: the training has to be delivered by a UK company that is neither part of the person's employer's corporate group nor whose main activity is the provision of training. This would seem to preclude a UK-based group company from providing training to overseas group company personnel. I would suggest that this counters the principal benefit of the change, namely avoiding having to apply for an intra-company transfer visa. It would also preclude the possibility of engaging a third-party provider to deliver the training, given that their main business is likely to be the provision of training. The benefit of this change is, I would suggest, rather limited.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.