A New Regime for Digital Nomads in Greece
Article 68 of the Greek Immigration Code — Law, Administration, and Real-World Application
The concept of the “digital nomad” has become almost over-exposed. A simple online search produces thousands of articles promising easy visas, lifestyle freedom, and frictionless relocation. What is far less common—and far more valuable—is a clear explanation ofhow the Greek Digital Nomad regime actually operates in law and, more importantly, how it is applied by the administration in practice.
Greece did not introduce its Digital Nomad framework as a marketing initiative or a loosely drafted policy programme. Instead, it chose a far more serious path: it embedded the regimedirectly into its Immigration Code, through Article 68 of Law 5038/2023, and subsequently clarified its scope and application through Explanatory Circular ΕΓΚ 6/2024 of the Ministry of Migration and Asylum.
Taken together, these two instruments reveal a legal architecture that isdeliberate, structured, and far more precisethan most public commentary suggests. For professionals considering Greece as a base for remote work—and for advisors guiding them—understanding this architecture is essential.
A Structurally Autonomous Legal Status
One of the most important points, consistently overlooked in online discussions, is that the Greek Digital Nomad status isnot derivative. It is not a subcategory of “financially independent persons”, nor a relaxed variant of a residence permit with sufficient resources.
As confirmed explicitly in Circular 6/2024, Digital Nomads are placed under Category “Z” (national long-stay visas), alongside other specific-purpose entries such as artists, researchers, and specialised short-term professionals. They are deliberately excluded from:
- employment residence permits (Category “E”),
- investor residence permits (Category “B”),
- and passive residence regimes.
This systematic placement matters. It reflects the central philosophy of the new Immigration Code:each migration purpose must remain legally distinct, with clear boundaries that prevent overlap, misuse, or informal integration into categories for which the applicant does not qualify.
Digital Nomads, under Greek law, are therefore recognised asworking professionals, but with an economic footprint that remains entirely outside Greece.
The Foundational Rule: No Greek Economic Activity
Everything in Article 68—and everything clarified byCircular 6/2024—turns on one foundational rule:
Any form of professional or economic activity connected to Greece is prohibited.
This is not a peripheral condition. It is the organising principle of the entire regime.
The Explanatory Circular leaves no doubt that:
- the required declaration of non-activity in Greece is a substantive compliance obligation, not a formality,
- even limited or “incidental” professional engagement with Greek entities may be treated as a breach,
- and violations may result in rejection, non-renewal, or withdrawal of the Digital Nomad title.
This point alone distinguishes legally grounded advice from the vast majority of online articles, which often downplay or entirely ignore the consequences of crossing this boundary. In practice, this is also where most problematic cases arise.
A Procedural Exception within Greek Migration Law
Article 68 is notable not only for its substance, but also for itsprocedure. Both the statute and Circular 6/2024 acknowledge that Digital Nomads benefit from one of the most streamlined administrative processes in Greek migration law.
The application for the national Digital Nomad visa may be submitted:
- in person,
- by electronic mail,
- or by registered post.
More importantly, the competent Greek consular authority islegally obliged to:
- respond within ten (10) days, and
- complete the process through a “one-stop” administrative action.
This is not aspirational language. It is a conscious policy choice. The administration treats Digital Nomads as alow-risk, self-sufficient, and predictable category, precisely because the economic relationship remains external to Greece.
Income Thresholds: Identical Figures, Different Legal Meaning
Another area of persistent confusion concerns income requirements. The figure of€3,500 per month appears in multiple parts of the Immigration Code, and many commentators treat this as evidence that Digital Nomads and financially independent residents are functionally equivalent.
Circular 6/2024 corrects this misunderstanding explicitly.
While thenumerical threshold is the same, the legal logic is entirely different:
- For Digital Nomads, income must derive from active professional activity—employment, services, or projects carried out remotely.
- For holders of residence permits with sufficient resources (Ι.8), income may derive from passive or mixed sources.
This distinction becomes critical during renewals and transitions. A Digital Nomad cannot simply “park” funds in a bank account and rely on passive income while retaining the Z.1 logic. The administration expectscontinuity of professional activity, even if that activity remains entirely external to Greece.
Family Members: A Deliberately Closed Model
Family accompaniment is permitted under Article 68, but here too the Explanatory Circular adds important clarity.
Circular 6/2024 confirms that Digital Nomads are excluded from the standard family reunification approval mechanism that applies to many other residence categories. Instead:
- family members follow the entry logic of the principal applicant,
- their status remains strictly dependent,
- and no right to employment or economic activity in Greece is created.
This approach is consistent with the overall design of the regime. The Digital Nomad framework is conceived as aclosed professional ecosystem, not as a stepping stone toward broader economic or labour-market integration.
Transition to a Residence Permit Ι.8: Continuity, Not Liberalisation
Article 68 allows Digital Nomads, under conditions, to apply for atwo-year residence permit with sufficient resources (Ι.8). In practice, this provision is frequently misunderstood as a pathway toward greater flexibility.
Circural 6/2024 dispels this interpretation.
First, the Circular clarifies that competence for Digital Nomad residence permits lies with theone-stop services of the Decentralised Administrations, not centrally. Second, the wording of the law—“δύναται να χορηγείται”—confirms administrative discretion, not an automatic right.
Most importantly, the Circular confirms that the core restrictions of Article 68 continue to apply:
- no Greek employment,
- no Greek clients,
- no establishment of business presence in Greece.
In legal terms,Ι.8 functions as a mechanism of lawful continuity of stay, not as a transformation of economic status.
Why This Framework Matters More Than It Appears
The Digital Nomad regime is often presented as “flexible”. In reality, it isprecise. Greece has chosen openness to global remote professionals, but it has done so without blurring legal categories or undermining domestic labour-market controls.
For applicants, the principal risk does not usually lie in eligibility. It lies inmischaracterising professional reality, underestimating compliance obligations, or relying on informal advice that ignores how the administration actually applies the law.
This is precisely why generic, copy-paste articles fail to serve serious professionals.
A Note from Practice
In recent years, Digital Nomad enquiries have shifted from a niche topic to a dominant stream of international immigration work. This change reflects broader global mobility patterns, but it also means that applications are examined with increasing consistency and scrutiny.
Success, in practice, depends less on enthusiasm for remote work and more onstructural alignment with Article 68 and its administrative interpretation.
How Amoiridis Law Services® Approaches Digital Nomad Matters
At Amoiridis Law Services®, Digital Nomad cases form a substantial part of our international practice. Our approach is neither checklist-driven nor superficial. It is structure-driven.
We focus on:
- accurately mapping professional activity onto Article 68,
- stress-testing compliance under ΕΓΚ 6/2024 from the outset,
- anticipating renewal and transition issues before they arise,
- and coordinating with consular and decentralised authorities with full awareness of jurisdictional competence.
For globally mobile professionals, immigration status is not an administrative afterthought. It is alegal architecture that must support long-term planning.
For any further information and clarifications please do not hesitate to contact our qualified legal team, ready to provide you with further personalized information tailored to your needs and your profile.
You can email us: or call/text us directly at: +306908351705 (WhatsApp/Viber)
Athens, December 2025
Follow us on
