The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) is currently reviewing how the UK’s immigration system could best be used to attract global talent. Their consultation included a call for evidence which our Immigration Partners submitted last week, Chetal Patel commenting on the Global Talent visa route and Smruti Jeyanandhan providing commentary on the Innovator Founder route.
On the Global Talent (GT) route, Chetal agreed that ultimately it works in principle for those in the creative sector, where traditional sponsored employment is less common and freelance work, portfolio careers, short-term engagements and multiple income streams are more likely. However, Chetal pointed out that there are gaps; “We routinely encounter highly credible candidates whose work does not fit neatly within the existing endorsement frameworks. This includes DJs, interior designers, music video professionals, and individuals working in film and television who are commercially successful but have not yet won or been nominated for major awards. While alternative awards are theoretically accepted, the prestigious prize lists are overly restrictive, excluding much of the industry’s emerging and mid-career talent.” Likewise, the framework for evidencing outstanding contributions to the industry discounts those working on the commercial or strategic side.
Chetal concluded; “The UK’s creative sector is a major driver of economic growth and global influence. GT visa holders routinely contribute far beyond a single employer, generating revenue, supporting UK-based productions, transferring skills, mentoring talent and strengthening the UK’s international cultural reputation. The framework for evidencing this contribution should better reflect how modern creative industries actually function. Consideration should also be given to introducing an “exceptional promise” pathway for film and television, where it does not currently exist. Enabling the UK to attract high-potential talent earlier in their careers would help secure the next generation of creative leaders and maintain the UK’s position as a global creative hub.”
Regarding the Innovator Founder visa, Smruti Jeyanandhan stated that the practical implantation of the route has several drawbacks which limits its overall effectiveness. She highlighted a high degree of subjectivity, a significant administrative and compliance burden and a mismatch between visa timelines and commercial realities as a few of the ways the route may deter the founders it aims to attract. She pointed out that, straight out of the gate, “when it comes to assessments of whether a business is sufficiently “innovative, viable, and scalable” can vary considerably between endorsing bodies, leading to inconsistent outcomes and uncertainty. It makes it difficult for founders to understand or predict what will be considered acceptable.” Should the founders feel their business meets the criteria, they then are faced with ongoing monitoring, frequent checkpoints, and the ongoing risk of endorsement withdrawal which diverts time and attention away from building the business itself. For startups with limited resources, this is disruptive at best. Smruti also adds, “building a sustainable and scalable business frequently takes longer than the route allows for demonstrating measurable progress, increasing the need for viable founders to extend their permission”.
Smruti also emphasised that “the route favours a narrow subset of entrepreneurs, often those with strong UK networks, prior immigration experience, or businesses that fit conventional innovation models (such as venture-backed tech startups). Founders from non-traditional backgrounds, first-time entrepreneurs, or sectors where growth is incremental rather than rapid may struggle to meet endorsement expectations, despite having businesses that could deliver long-term value to the UK.”
The MAC review is due to conclude in Winter 2026 following further research and engagement with stakeholders over the coming year.