"Am I Candian tool?" - Am I a citizen?

[canuck91]

Hi all,
I was hoping to get some insight as to whether I am a Canadian citizen by descent. I have done some reading on the 1947 and 1977 Citizenship Acts, but I am still confused about my specific situation. Below is my family's scenario, to the best of my knowledge:

-My grandfather was born in Canada around 1888. He did not become an alien prior to 1947 and never became a U.S. Citizen. He also kept property in Canada throughout his lifetime. It seems he became a citizen under 4(a) of the 1947 act.​

​

-My father was born in New York in 1932. My grandfather remained a citizen when he was born, so he became a citizen under 4(b) of the 1947 act.​

This is where my situation gets tricky:

-I was born in 1965. To my knowledge, I was required to retain my citizenship under section 5(1)(b) of the 1947 act by having my birth abroad registered. I saw that this process was allowed until 2004, which would have made me a citizen under 1(e) of the current act. What confuses me, however, is the "Am I a Canadian?" tool from the CIC website.​

When I plug in my scenario, this is what I see:

-I was born outside of Canada​

[...]​

-I was born between 1947 and 1977 and one of my birth parents was a Canadian citizen when I was born​

-He or she was born outside Canada to a Canadian parent​

-One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born​

This says that I am a Canadian citizen.​

I'm confused as to which logic is applied here. Since my father was a citizen when I was born (and not due to the recent regulations), was this sufficient enough for me to inherit citizenship? The tool seems to think so. Additionally, 1(d) of the current act says that anyone who was a citizen prior to 1977 is a citizen after that year. Would I fall within this regulation?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated! All of these rules are making my head spin...

Thanks for all your help!

 

[hawk39]

I believe your father was required to declare to retain his Canadian citizenship per paragraph 6 of the 1947 Act; if he didn't do so within one year of turning 21 or after the commencement of the Act, he would have lost his citizenship when he turned 22. So unfortunately, I don't believe you are a citizen by descent because your father was no longer a citizen when you were born.

 

[canuck91]

I read that having "Canadian domicile" on one's 24th birthday was an acceptable alternative for retaining citizenship under the 1947 act. My father's primary residence was in Canada during that time. Would this change anything?

 

[hawk39]

I read that having "Canadian domicile" on one's 24th birthday was an acceptable alternative for retaining citizenship under the 1947 act. My father's primary residence was in Canada during that time. Would this change anything?

I don't believe it would change anything in your favor today. I researched the domicile alternative and found it as described as an amendment to the 1947 Act, as Statutes of Canada 1952-53, chapter 23, section 3(1). The domicile alternative would mean that he did not lose his citizenship and that it would have granted you the opportunity during the delayed registration period to register your birth, but the fact that your father was born outside of Canada still makes him the first generation born-abroad under 3(1)(d) of the current Act. 3(1)(e) describes people that became citizens by registering their birth during that extended period. People that did not register, such as yourself, would now be described under 3(1)(g), which is subject to the first-generation limit under 3(3) of the current Act; more specifically 3(3)(b)(iv) which states:

• (3) Paragraphs (1)(b), (f) to (j), (q) and (r) do not apply to a person born outside Canada
• (b) if, at any time, only one of the person’s parents was a citizen and that parent was a citizen under any of the following provisions, or both of the person’s parents were citizens under any of the following provisions:
• (iv) paragraph 5(1)(b) of the Canadian Citizenship Act, S.C. 1946, c. 15, as enacted by S.C. 1950, c. 29, s. 2 and amended by S.C. 1952-53, c. 23, s. 3(1),

​

 

[canuck91]

Thanks @hawk39, your research here is incredibly detailed!

I would argue that I would not fall under 1(g) of the act (which was introduced in 2009, and limits second generation citizenship), as I was considerded a Canadian citizen under the prior legislations, before 2009.

I would guess that subsection would apply to those born to Canadian fathers out of wedlock, or those who had lost citizenship under the prior acts (by losing British subject status, acquiring U.S. citizenship, etc.) as they were never eligible for the grant of citizenship under 1(e) to begin with.

I feel I would more likely fall under 1(d) or 1(e) of the act, since I was born to a Canadian citizen father, and I would either be considerded a citizen, or eligible to be "registered" as one. But since I never registered, I'm not sure where that would leave me.

The "Am I Canadian?" tool seems to think that I am a citizen if my parent was one before I was born. I guess the only way to know for sure is to apply.

Thanks for all your help. And if you celebrate, happy (American) Thanksgiving!

 

[hawk39]

Thanks @hawk39, your research here is incredibly detailed!

I would argue that I would not fall under 1(g) of the act (which was introduced in 2009, and limits second generation citizenship), as I was considerded a Canadian citizen under the prior legislations, before 2009.

I would guess that subsection would apply to those born to Canadian fathers out of wedlock, or those who had lost citizenship under the prior acts (by losing British subject status, acquiring U.S. citizenship, etc.) as they were never eligible for the grant of citizenship under 1(e) to begin with.

I feel I would more likely fall under 1(d) or 1(e) of the act, since I was born to a Canadian citizen father, and I would either be considerded a citizen, or eligible to be "registered" as one. But since I never registered, I'm not sure where that would leave me.

The "Am I Canadian?" tool seems to think that I am a citizen if my parent was one before I was born. I guess the only way to know for sure is to apply.

Thanks for all your help. And if you celebrate, happy (American) Thanksgiving!

Good luck if you decide to apply. If you plan to claim your father's citizenship under the domicile alternative, include a letter mentioning the amendment and provide evidence that he was permanently residing in Canada at age 24. I suspect that if you apply for your father, or both together at the same time, the applications will be deemed non-routine and be sent to the Program Support Unit, so you might not hear from them for a year or two. Let the forum know how it turns out.

 

[canuck91]

My Father received his citizenship certificate a few years ago, retroactive to 1947 (and not because of the 2009/2015 changes, I'd argue). I included that, a letter to explain the circumstances, as well as proof of his domicile/various property acquisitions throughout the years in my application. (I was also able to find naturalization records from Ancestry.com that show that my Grandfather never became a U.S. Citizen).

I hope I'm in luck, and that it all goes smoothly! Thanks again for all your help.

 

[hawk39]

My Father received his citizenship certificate a few years ago, retroactive to 1947 (and not because of the 2009/2015 changes, I'd argue). I included that, a letter to explain the circumstances, as well as proof of his domicile/various property acquisitions throughout the years in my application. (I was also able to find naturalization records from Ancestry.com that show that my Grandfather never became a U.S. Citizen).

I hope I'm in luck, and that it all goes smoothly! Thanks again for all your help.

All certificates for citizenship by descent are dated retroactively to the person's date of birth or the commencement of Canadian citizenship, whichever is later, because, by law, that is when a person became a citizen. This still means that you would be governed under the 1947 Act; if they now accept that his citizenship was because of the domicile amendment, you would still have been required to have your birth registered within two years of your birth per 5(b)(ii) [in order to be described under current 1(d)], or during the delayed registration period between 1977 until 2004 [in order to be recognized under current 1(e)]. Unfortunately, I still believe you can't claim through your father but applying is the only way to find out, so once again, good luck.

 

[canuck91]

Your explanation does make sense, which would be an unfortunate outcome for me. I figured it was worth a shot to apply, regardless.

If I may ask, however, do you have any insight regarding my circumstances with the Am I Canadian tool? I guess I ultimately got hung up on the answer "One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born" (after specifying he was born outside Canada to a Canadian parent). This answer seems to best describe my father, and determined that I am probably a citizen. I'm not sure how this would realistically change anything, but the tool seems to think it does.

The circumstances you described seem to be applicable if I select the option "my parents never applied for citizenship" and specify that I never registered my birth.

Perhaps his proof of citizenship is my saving grace, here? Do you have any thoughts on this?

 

[scylla]

Your explanation does make sense, which would be an unfortunate outcome for me. I figured it was worth a shot to apply, regardless.

If I may ask, however, do you have any insight regarding my circumstances with the Am I Canadian tool? I guess I ultimately got hung up on the answer "One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born" (after specifying he was born outside Canada to a Canadian parent). This answer seems to best describe my father, and determined that I am probably a citizen. I'm not sure how this would realistically change anything, but the tool seems to think it does.

The circumstances you described seem to be applicable if I select the option "my parents never applied for citizenship" and specify that I never registered my birth.

Perhaps his proof of citizenship is my saving grace, here? Do you have any thoughts on this?

IMO the answer to "One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born" should be "no" in your case. Your father only did this a few years ago.

The Am I Canadian tool does not account for every single scenario and is a bit of a "best guess" based on the responses provided. You'll notice is uses language like may be or likely when it provides an answer at the end. IRCC officers do not rely on the tool to determine if you are a citizen. They look at the regs.

IMO his proof of citizenship is not a saving grace since he only obtained it a few years ago and not before you were born. Also, your birth was not registered.

You can always submit an application and see what happens. Good luck and let us know what happens.

 

[hawk39]

Your explanation does make sense, which would be an unfortunate outcome for me. I figured it was worth a shot to apply, regardless.

If I may ask, however, do you have any insight regarding my circumstances with the Am I Canadian tool? I guess I ultimately got hung up on the answer "One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born" (after specifying he was born outside Canada to a Canadian parent). This answer seems to best describe my father, and determined that I am probably a citizen. I'm not sure how this would realistically change anything, but the tool seems to think it does.

The circumstances you described seem to be applicable if I select the option "my parents never applied for citizenship" and specify that I never registered my birth.

Perhaps his proof of citizenship is my saving grace, here? Do you have any thoughts on this?

The tool works just as @scylla describes, just on general responses to the general questions it asks, and generality is just another word for ambiguous interpretation. It's OK to use it to "see the odds", but to really understand your chances, it is best to do research and go through the laws, which you seemed to have tried to do, but you just kept falling back to the tool's response.

Here's an "easier-to-read" version of the current Act that is on IRCC's website. It might help clear some things up for you:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/canadian-citizenship/acquisition-loss/acquisition.html

 

[armoured]

If I may ask, however, do you have any insight regarding my circumstances with the Am I Canadian tool? I guess I ultimately got hung up on the answer "One of my parents was granted citizenship before I was born" (after specifying he was born outside Canada to a Canadian parent). This answer seems to best describe my father, and determined that I am probably a citizen.

Caveat that I'm a bit of an amateur on the ins and outs of citizenship - but I would read this a different way. Usual terminology in Canada is that 'grant' of citizenship refers to receiving citizenship through an active process (naturalization basically) - as opposed to receiving citizenship 'by right' (by dint of birth in Canada or descent).

So as I read your history, it seems your father received it by descent, and I would therefore say he was not 'granted' citizenship. He simply - at some point - registered and applied for documentation of his citizenship (which I guess one could say was a latent or conditional citizenship).

Now must admit that my use/reading of the term may not correspond to the historical/legislative use, I'm not a lawyer.

Background: I was born abroad myself and once had an unpleasant encounter with a foreign official who insisted I must have a date of naturalization (as a Canadian), which ended in the grudging compromise that (for their purposes) my naturalization would be recorded as the exact instant of my birth.

 

[canuck91]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7067039&ved=2ahUKEwj8iPacla-DAxUkEFkFHV0dCawQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0d2GyhpIjylXMW2BQv0E4n

Well, this is an interesting turn of events!

I have done some preliminary reading on Bill S-245, and it doesn't seem to do anything in my favor today (or for anyone in the second generation born before 2009, for that matter) but this definetly seems like a step in the right direction.

It seems that a "substantial connection to Canada" test will be applied for second generation applicants, which appears to be defined as a three year residency requirement of their Canadian parent. It looks like this change could happen sooner rather than later (perhaps in as soon as six months, per the terms of the lawsuit).

Overall, this seems like a positive development! It will be interesting to see how this ultimately plays out.

 

[armoured]

It seems that a "substantial connection to Canada" test will be applied for second generation applicants, which appears to be defined as a three year residency requirement of their Canadian parent. It looks like this change could happen sooner rather than later (perhaps in as soon as six months, per the terms of the lawsuit).

Thank you, I will look at this draft bill - although I think it's too early to say how the government will proceed (they might yet appeal).

But it does potentially give one way that I've been saying FOR YEARS could be applied without that much difficulty, as we can see from the not-so-different case of how the USA approaches this.

For background, USA effectively uses a test of a certain number of years (six I believe?) residing in USA after the age of 16 or something; crucially, they also allow / recognize some time abroad if working for US government, international agencies, or some other specific cases (I don't follow all the details).

Bottom line is that it is not remotely difficult to administer or use a test of ties to/residence in Canada. In my specific case it would have made all the difference for a series of problems that arose (which were eventually resolved but not without some difficulty and inconvenience). Which was all quite annoying as the only member of my (multiple generatiosn in Canada) family born abroad, and who moved back to Canada while I was still an infant.

A side note: the thing I find so ridiculous about this is the line 'just move back to Canada to give birth' line - something that is INCREDIBLY difficult to do if one is not already covered by provincial healthcare. (Do the people who recommend this have any idea of how healthcare works in Canada?)

 

[hawk39]

I hope they more narrowly define the timeframe for physical presence, because as of right now, it says it does not have to be consecutive; that could mean the month I spent each year visiting my family since I was born to age 36 would accumulate the 3 years needed for me to pass on citizenship to any children.

I think something like 'an established physical presence at (an) established Canadian residence(s) for 3 years within the last 10 years' could be a fair and adequate compromise.