Digital nomad visa: the consulate can request documents

The Lazio Regional Administrative Court annuls the refusal issued by the Italian Consulate General in London (judgment No. 15170 of 23 September 2026)

Anyone who has applied for a digital nomad visa knows the scenario well. You gather the documents required by law and submit the application. Then a request for additional documents arrives asking for something else: bank statements, tax returns from previous years, evidence that no rule mentions. In many cases, the application is then rejected precisely on the basis of these additional requests.

In judgment No. 15170 of 23 September 2026, the Lazio Regional Administrative Court (TAR Lazio, Fifth Section Quater) established a simple but important principle: a request for additional documents serves to complete the application. It cannot become a tool for adding requirements that the law does not provide for.

The legal framework in brief

The visa for digital nomads and remote workers was introduced in 2022 by letter q-bis of Article 27(1) of Legislative Decree No. 286/1998 (Consolidated Immigration Act). It only became operational with the interministerial decree of 29 February 2024, which sets out its conditions. These include an income requirement: an annual income from a lawful source of no less than three times the minimum level required for exemption from healthcare cost-sharing (approximately €28,000).

The rule specifies what income is required. It does not say that the administration may verify it by going back five or more years, nor that a certain balance in a bank account is required.

The case: a psychological counselor and the London consulate’s request

The applicant, a British national working as a psychological counselor, applied for a national digital nomad visa on 11 July 2025 at the Italian Consulate General in London. To prove the financial requirement, she documented her income for the British tax year 2024/2025, which exceeded the threshold set by the decree.

The Consulate did not stop there. Through a request for additional documents, it extended the check to her income for the previous five years and also took into account the cash available in her bank account. On 6 August 2025, it notified her of the refusal for failure to meet the financial requirement.

The applicant challenged the decision before the Lazio Regional Administrative Court, which upheld her appeal.

What the Court said: four principles

1. Additional documents serve to complete the application, not to make the procedure more burdensome.

The power to request additional documents (Article 6(b) of Law No. 241/1990) is intended for so-called procedural assistance (soccorso istruttorio). It allows the applicant to fill gaps with respect to what the law already requires. Used to extend checks beyond what is provided for, it unduly burdens the procedure without legitimate investigative grounds, thereby breaching the prohibition on aggravating the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of the same law.

2. The income requirement is assessed according to the rule, and no further.

Neither Article 27(1)(q-bis) of the Consolidated Immigration Act nor the interministerial decree of 29 February 2024 allows the check to be extended to the last five years of income. Moreover, the Consulate had not challenged the reliability of the documentation on the 2024/2025 income, which exceeded the reference threshold more than threefold. For the Court, the amount of cash in the bank account is also irrelevant: the requirement concerns income, not the bank balance.

3. A national visa does not authorize practices stricter than the law.

This is a national visa and not a Schengen visa, but that does not give the consular mission the power to introduce, without a provision of general application, practices stricter than the rules in force.

4. A refusal cannot be defended with reasons added during the proceedings.

The further arguments contained in the Consulate’s report were deemed inadmissible ex post reasoning. The lawfulness of the refusal is assessed on the basis of what the decision states, not on what the administration adds afterwards.

The Court therefore annulled the refusal and ordered the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to pay €1,500 in legal costs. It also clarified a practical point: when it re-examines the application, the Consulate may not repeat the refusal on the basis of the current findings.

What does not change

The judgment should be read for what it is: a first-instance decision, issued in a single case, concerning a visa on which case law is still scarce.

The judgment does not reduce the visa requirements: the minimum income, professional qualifications, health insurance and other conditions laid down by the decree remain fully in force. It concerns a different issue: the limits of what a consulate can add to those requirements.

Your Way to Italy: our assistance

Our team is available to provide support and assistance regarding Italian citizenship and immigration law! Contact us to schedule your first consultation! #Yourwaytoitaly

The content of this article is intended to provide general information on the topic. For doubts or specific cases, it is advisable to seek specialized legal advice tailored to your particular situation.

Article written by Alessia Ajelli, Managing Associate of LCA Studio Legale, Italian lawyer specialized on Italian immigration and citizenship law.