Koh, S. Y., & Prabhakar, N. A. (2022). Contesting reproduction migration: Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) controversies during the COVID-19 pandemic. MoLab Inventory of Mobilities and Socioeconomic Changes. https://doi.org/10.48509/MOLAB.9800

“The Government of Malaysia has decided to temporarily suspend the Malaysia My Second Home Program (MM2H) to allow the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) and related agencies to comprehensively review and re-evaluate the MM2H program since its inception in 2002. The suspension is in line with the Government’s decision not to allow foreigners to enter Malaysia following the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic.”[1]

Figure 1: The Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (Photo by the author)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Malaysia’s Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) announced the temporary suspension of the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) programme, one of the world’s most popular lifestyle migration programmes.[2] The announcement, issued on 4 August 2020, had been preceded by a series of state-led and COVID-19 related disruptions since late 2018.

Together, these disruptions sent shock waves throughout the country and globe, especially amongst lifestyle migration communities. The sudden suspension of the programme triggered shock (im)mobilities,[3] causing fear, outrage and disappointment amongst current and potential MM2H visa holders. These developments also unsettled MM2H consultants and the diverse industries in Malaysia that engaged with and serviced programme participants

The programme was reactivated in October 2021 with new conditions, including substantially higher financial requirements, such as a four-fold increase in the minimum monthly offshore income from RM10,000 (under pre-2021 requirements) to RM40,000.[4] Initially, these new conditions were also extended to existing MM2H visa holders, who had a year’s grace period to meet the requirements, or leave Malaysia. However, in the face of pleas and lobbying by various stakeholders, existing visa holders were eventually exempted from most of the new conditions.[5]

Using the case of the MM2H programme, this entry examines lifestyle migration through the lens of reproduction migration. It explores how the controversies surrounding the programme during the COVID-19 pandemic raised questions about the assumptions, operations and practices of lifestyle migration. It draws upon a pilot study conducted in 2021, involving interviews with various stakeholders, including current visa holders, aspiring applicants, and representatives of intermediary firms and organisations that deliver programme-related services.

Lifestyle migration as reproduction migration

Lifestyle migration can be understood through the lens of ‘reproduction migration’, which is defined as “the movements of people for the purposes of maintaining, reproducing and enhancing life”.[6] Lifestyle migrants include retirees, families with school-going children, digital nomads and business people (especially those running regional and/or transnational operations). Lifestyle migrants are considered relatively privileged as they tend to pursue migration and transnational mobility by choice rather than necessity. Moreover, they tend to have the resources to maintain their transnational lives, such as keeping a second home in another country.[7]

To meet the demand and desire for lifestyle migration, some destination countries have offered lifestyle migration programmes. These programmes typically offer attractive features such as fixed-term residence, coupled with multiple-entry visas and some flexibility in the nature of the residential stay in exchange for financial investments in the country (e.g., through business ventures, the purchase of property, or simply monetary wealth). As such, lifestyle migration programmes are said to contribute to destination countries’ economic growth and productivity. Indeed, the MM2H is said to have been initially established to capture the “lucrative” international retirement migration market segment, as a development strategy for Malaysia.[8]

However, since early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has created diverging trajectories for lifestyle migration and second home industries and programmes across the globe. On the one hand, second homes have been sought for safety during the pandemic, though cultural and national contexts may differ.[9] On the other hand, national governments have used the COVID-19 pandemic to justify changes in bordering and residency practices and policies,[10] as in the case of Malaysia and the MM2H programme. These recurrent changes during a global pandemic not only disrupted MM2H participants’ lifestyle migration plans and experiences.

The MM2H programme and reproduction migration

The programme has its origins in the Silver Hair Programme (SHP) established in 1987 under the purview of the Immigration Department. The SHP was initially created to attract foreign pensioners aged 50 and above. It offered a one-year social visit pass renewable annually for up to five years. The programme further evolved as follows:

• In March 2002, the SHP was rebranded the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H). The programme was expanded to include applicants aged 18 to 49.
• In 2006, management of the programme was transferred to MOTAC. Participants were offered a ten-year multiple entry social visit pass which included guaranteed renewal for another ten-years, provided holders did not violate Malaysian laws. MOTAC organised international roadshows promoting the MM2H, often with the participation of property developers and international schools in Malaysia.[11]
• In 2009, the programme underwent a revamp. Fresh inducements were introduced, including allowing MM2H visa holders aged 50 and above to work under certain conditions (e.g. not more than 20 hours a week). Other incentives included investment and business participation opportunities, and the relaxation of conditions relating to spouses and children.

The programme had remained competitive and popular by maintaining relatively low financial barriers – a monthly offshore income of RM7,000-10,000 (1550-2223 USD) and fixed deposits of RM100,000-300,000 (22,230-66,695 USD) –, and the possibility for visa holders to enjoy a relatively affluent lifestyle in Malaysia. Since its initial launch in 2002, the programme has been utilised by diverse individuals looking to fulfil various aspirations.

Indeed, in our interviews, desk research and literature review, we have encountered those using the programme for their children’s international education, business objectives, property acquisition, tax evasion, and political asylum, amongst others.[12] The majority of these reasons and motivations can arguably be encompassed under the concept of reproduction migration, as MM2H participants utilise the programme as a means to actualise geographic arbitrage.[13]In other words, through participating in the MM2H programme, they make use of the geoeconomic differentials between Malaysia and their country of origin to maximise their spending power, socioeconomic status, and capacities to accumulate and convert capital. In doing so, they are maintaining, reproducing and enhancing their lives transnationally.