The risk referenced by @canuck78 is real enough that any PR who has been allowed to keep PR status based on H&C relief should seriously consider it if they plan on leaving Canada before they have stayed in Canada long enough they will have spent at least 730 days in Canada during the five years preceding the date they return to Canada. Especially if they are planning a lengthy trip abroad.
How big a risk is involved varies widely and can be very difficult to quantify.
One aspect of this that some tend to overlook is that PR status is NOT renewed. A renewed PR card does NOT renew PR status. A new or renewed PR card does NOT restart the Residency Obligation clock.
The risk referenced by @canuck78 is a subset of the general risk faced by any PR who goes abroad and who will be short of having spent 730 days in Canada within the preceding five years on the day they return. This includes PRs recently issued a brand new five year PR card.
The "rule," after all, requires PRs spend at least 730 days in Canada during any and every five year period. A PR who has not been IN Canada at least 730 days within the five years preceding the day they arrive at a Canadian Port-of-Entry, during a return to Canada, is at risk of being subject to inadmissibility proceedings and potentially losing PR status. Again, they are at risk even if they are carrying and presenting an almost brand new PR card. (Subject to being allowed H&C relief, and if not allowed H&C relief, subject to appeal.)
For a PR who has obtained H&C relief and is IN Canada, there is no risk of inadmissibility proceedings for a breach of the RO as long as they remain in Canada, and almost no risk if they make a PR card application or an application to sponsor a family member (two kinds of transactions which typically trigger a RO compliance examination).
If, however, a PR who has obtained H&C relief is outside Canada, or goes outside Canada, they may be questioned about RO compliance when they return to Canada. The "rule" remains the same: to be in RO compliance the PR needs to have spent at least 730 days in Canada within the five years preceding THAT DAY. And a PR in breach is at risk of being deemed inadmissible and losing PR status (which again is subject to H&C relief if appropriate, and if not allowed H&C relief, subject to appeal).
One of the differences, a really big difference, between those two situations (PR still in Canada versus the one at a PoE returning to Canada), is that for the PR who has remained in Canada there has been no change in circumstances which would constitute a more negative factor in the H&C analysis. At the worst, the factors weighing in favour of H&C relief remain the same. In contrast, for the PR who has been outside Canada since an earlier grant of H&C relief, there is the additional factor of the recent absence from Canada. A positive H&C calculation in December 2022 does not guarantee a positive H&C calculation in September 2023 if the PR has been outside Canada for a significant part of 2023.
Remember, even with a new PR card, if a PR arriving at Canada's border in September 2023 is examined regarding RO compliance, that examination will be based on the five year period September 2018 to September 2023 . . . and if short of meeting the RO as of then, thus in need of H&C relief, the H&C calculation will likewise be based on that same period, September 2018 to September 2023. That calculation can be significantly different than the earlier one based on December 2017 to December 2022, and it will be different at least to the extent the PR has been abroad in 2023.
Whether the difference is such that it will result in a different outcome, no H&C relief, rather a Removal Order, is very difficult to forecast. What most matters in these scenarios is whether there is a significant or material change in circumstances (since the earlier H&C relief was allowed). What that means can vary widely depending on the individual situation. But the most obvious factor, still, is the length of time abroad, the longer abroad the greater the risk. Another factor, which can go either way, is the extent to which PR has become more established in Canada since the previous H&C decision, or the extent to which the PR has not settled in Canada. (It warrants noting that H&C relief is generally predicated on the expectation the PR is now in Canada to stay, or if the H&C relief was attendant a PR TD application, that the PR is coming to Canada to stay.)
Brief travel abroad probably has low risks. After all, the PR presenting a valid PR card at the border after a brief absence from Canada is likely to be waived through without being questioned about RO compliance. And brief trips are not likely to constitute a material change in circumstances.
