Hi, did you receive your PR card yet? I had the same question regarding submitting proof of residency. We dont need to submit that if we spent more than 730 days in Canada right? In the document checklist, there is a checkbox for "Proof of residency" ..we just leave it unchecked? or does the travel history section in the form count as proof?
Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation
- Thread starter tarekahf
- Start date
As of June 6th, ALL PR Card renewal applicants must now include at least 2 pieces of evidence of residency. The Travel History does NOT prove residency, but is certainly useful for IRCC. The Document Checklist was also updated (in April?) to corroborate the change. Make sure that you submitted that latest version of the form and checklist!
Last edited:
On 5644e, it says "Proof showing that you meet the residency obligation in the past five (5) years immediately before this application. Please refer to Appendix A of the instruction guide for a list of documents required". Has the requirement changed? Do you need to show the prof even if you have been there for 730 days ?
You didn't say how long you have your driver license and health card. So here's a scenario why not:
A) The driver license and health card were only issued 4 months ago. Btw, many people moved out of province without cancellation / surrender their health card and driver license.
B) There're no activities or transactions (such as interac e-transfers, bill payments) in the bank account for the last 3 months
As @armoured said, you need to show two docs showing evidence of residing in Canada.
I'm wary of any specific advice saying what specifically is good; the requirement is new and not all that many reports from others here.* Have you looked at the instructions?
*But to extent we have seen some files, there are no clear trends about what is good evidence and what is enough. Except that for those who clearly have been residing in Canada, and no questions about the 730 days, IRCC does not seem to be all that picky. Again, these are preliminary impressions.
Use common sense and you should be okay. And my common sense says your suggestions are probably okay.
Supporting documents showing residency: This is simple. Really simple.
Documents that show residency in Canada are now required (since implementation of April 2023 version of the checklist) as "supporting documents" for an application which otherwise shows RO compliance based on days IN Canada, at the least in the travel history, and otherwise also supported by other information in the application, including address and work history. Documents that show residency in Canada will not necessarily be much or strong evidence the PR meets the Residency Obligation.
So . . .
That, in conjunction with considering the examples spelled out in Appendix A in the instructions, says what needs to be said about this.
It does NOT need to be any more complicated than that.
So . . .
That should have been the long and short of it.
To be clear, these will suffice as pieces of evidence showing residency. Which is what is requested, what is required to make a complete application, and which is sufficient to constitute the "supporting documents" IRCC has been requiring since April 2023 (again for those PRs who are in RO compliance not relying on credit for days outside Canada).
Some here seem to apprehend, or even advocate, these "supporting documents" must themselves establish or prove the PR meets the Residency Obligation, or that at least their adequacy or sufficiency will be measured based on how strongly they show RO compliance. But there is no hint in Appendix A or other IRCC information that suggests this. So, NO, NOT the case for PRs who meet the RO without relying on credit for days outside Canada.
This has been a source of unnecessary confusion in this forum.
In contrast, it is the application in total that needs to sufficiently show RO compliance. The primary information showing RO compliance is set out in question 5.5 in the application, where the PR provides a complete, accurate, and precise account of all time outside Canada (or runs the risk of problems if they fail to provide a complete, accurate, and precise account of all time outside Canada). But yeah, IRCC asks for additional information to help evaluate the veracity of the travel history, and now (since April) that includes providing supporting documents that evidence actually residing in Canada.
Notwithstanding some confusion caused by the checklist item referring to "Proof showing that you meet the residency obligation," for PRs in RO compliance and not relying on credit for days outside Canada, Appendix A makes it clear that this checklist item is satisfied by including just two pieces of evidence showing residency. That may include documents that prove the PR met the RO, but that is just one example and it is the last example in the list of examples in the instructions, a catch-all, and one that makes perfect sense: proof of meeting the RO would easily constitute evidence of actually residing (at the least temporarily) in Canada.
The documents @sudu89in queries about, health card, driver's license, and bank statements, are ALL clearly, squarely within the scope of documents described in the instructions. There should be no doubt these are documents that will suffice as evidence showing residency.
So . . .
Copies of Canadian provincial driver's license and provincial health card will suffice, definitely, easily. Instructions explicitly list documents showing receipt of benefits from Canadian government programs as an example of what to submit. Since residency is a requirement for being issued a health card (government program providing health care benefits) or driver's license (government program granting individuals the privilege, an important benefit, to operate vehicles on public roadways), both of those are absolutely evidence of residency in the respective province. There should be no doubt about this.
The instructions explicitly list "bank statements" as an example of what to submit, near the top of the list in fact. So a bank statement for one month (let alone three), any month within the previous five years (so long as it is for a time period the PR was actually residing in Canada at the address on the statement), plus either a driver's license or health card, will suffice.
NO NEED to be at all wary of whether such documents will suffice. They fit squarely within the examples described in the instructions.
Accuracy and Validity:
Of course what is submitted needs to be accurate copies of valid documents that are honestly what they purport to be and which honestly are evidence of the PR's residency. If not, yeah that can cause problems. One might say IRCC frowns on deception, even if a bureaucracy cannot actually frown.
A bank statement for a time period the PR was not actually residing at the address shown on the statement, for example, only appears to be evidence of residency but of course the PR knows better, knows that is at best misleading if not an outright misrepresentation. Might suffice nonetheless unless caught (or until caught; remember there is effectively no statute of limitations for imposing the legal consequences for misrepresentations made in immigration matters), but of course if it is inconsistent with the PR's address and travel history, that might be an inconsistency hard to overlook, rather likely to be caught.
So, sure, not any bank statement will suffice, but a bank statement showing the actual address where the PR was residing in Canada for that period of time will.
Likewise any other document. If the PR has a driver's license displaying an address the PR was able to use, a friend's address, maybe a brother's, but the PR never actually resided at that address, submitting that as evidence of residency in Canada is deceptive, at best misleading, potentially misrepresentation. Probably easy to get away with, but if caught (and typically that happens because it is inconsistent with other information the PR provides -- cross-checking information has long been the heart of processing applications like this), yeah there is the potential for significant, negative consequences.
This really is not that complicated. This subject really should not need a wordy exposition from a resident legalese gardener, like me, digging in the weeds.
MEANWHILE . . . a Head's Up . . . Automated Decision Making . . .
It has been, at the very least, more than a decade since CIC (now IRCC) began implementing formal checklist driven triage decision-making which automatically directed applications into different processing streams based on the triage criteria. It was over five years ago that IRCC initiated pilot programs in which "advanced analytics" and "machine learning technology" (what others might call AI or Artificial Intelligence) have been employed. In the pilot programs (beginning 2018), advanced analytics and machine learning technology was used in processing certain types of online applications, in which the first stage of processing consisted of a triage approach to separating applications into three levels of "complexity," low, medium, and high, dictating separate processing streams. In the pilot program for temporary resident visas, the low complexity applications were entirely processed electronically, resulting in most being approved and finalized with NO officer review.
To what extent this has been expanded I cannot say. No great power of prophesy necessary to recognize that more and more bureaucracy-decision-making (at least in terms of decisions like determining which applications to question), has already been significantly automated. Not much of a stretch to speculate that adding the evidence of residency requirement to the PR card application could be about obtaining sufficient data-points to facilitate automated decision making employing advanced analytics.
Someone should be making the ATI requests for relevant information about this; I'm too old and tired to keep up, obviously, just catching on to this use of advanced analytics five years after the fact. But given that PR card applications are mostly processed and approved almost immediately when opened, and otherwise referred to a processing path that can take months, my guess is that to some extent what IRCC refers to as "advanced analytics" and "machine learning technology" is already in use in processing at least the online PR card applications (and which perhaps accounts for the number of returned applications, as it may only take something being slightly off for it to not be machine processable).
Documents that show residency in Canada are now required (since implementation of April 2023 version of the checklist) as "supporting documents" for an application which otherwise shows RO compliance based on days IN Canada, at the least in the travel history, and otherwise also supported by other information in the application, including address and work history. Documents that show residency in Canada will not necessarily be much or strong evidence the PR meets the Residency Obligation.
So . . .
That is clear. It is succinct. That's what the instructions specify . . . with the caveat this is only about a PR who (1) is in compliance with the RO and (2) who is not relying on any credit for days outside Canada (thus, in the application shows a total of less than 1095 days outside Canada in the question 5.5 chart for reporting time outside Canada).
That, in conjunction with considering the examples spelled out in Appendix A in the instructions, says what needs to be said about this.
It does NOT need to be any more complicated than that.
So . . .
Any two of these will suffice.
That should have been the long and short of it.
To be clear, these will suffice as pieces of evidence showing residency. Which is what is requested, what is required to make a complete application, and which is sufficient to constitute the "supporting documents" IRCC has been requiring since April 2023 (again for those PRs who are in RO compliance not relying on credit for days outside Canada).
Some here seem to apprehend, or even advocate, these "supporting documents" must themselves establish or prove the PR meets the Residency Obligation, or that at least their adequacy or sufficiency will be measured based on how strongly they show RO compliance. But there is no hint in Appendix A or other IRCC information that suggests this. So, NO, NOT the case for PRs who meet the RO without relying on credit for days outside Canada.
This has been a source of unnecessary confusion in this forum.
In contrast, it is the application in total that needs to sufficiently show RO compliance. The primary information showing RO compliance is set out in question 5.5 in the application, where the PR provides a complete, accurate, and precise account of all time outside Canada (or runs the risk of problems if they fail to provide a complete, accurate, and precise account of all time outside Canada). But yeah, IRCC asks for additional information to help evaluate the veracity of the travel history, and now (since April) that includes providing supporting documents that evidence actually residing in Canada.
Notwithstanding some confusion caused by the checklist item referring to "Proof showing that you meet the residency obligation," for PRs in RO compliance and not relying on credit for days outside Canada, Appendix A makes it clear that this checklist item is satisfied by including just two pieces of evidence showing residency. That may include documents that prove the PR met the RO, but that is just one example and it is the last example in the list of examples in the instructions, a catch-all, and one that makes perfect sense: proof of meeting the RO would easily constitute evidence of actually residing (at the least temporarily) in Canada.
The documents @sudu89in queries about, health card, driver's license, and bank statements, are ALL clearly, squarely within the scope of documents described in the instructions. There should be no doubt these are documents that will suffice as evidence showing residency.
So . . .
On the contrary . . . As the instructions state, all the PR needs to provide is copies of just 2 pieces of evidence of residency in Canada.
Copies of Canadian provincial driver's license and provincial health card will suffice, definitely, easily. Instructions explicitly list documents showing receipt of benefits from Canadian government programs as an example of what to submit. Since residency is a requirement for being issued a health card (government program providing health care benefits) or driver's license (government program granting individuals the privilege, an important benefit, to operate vehicles on public roadways), both of those are absolutely evidence of residency in the respective province. There should be no doubt about this.
The instructions explicitly list "bank statements" as an example of what to submit, near the top of the list in fact. So a bank statement for one month (let alone three), any month within the previous five years (so long as it is for a time period the PR was actually residing in Canada at the address on the statement), plus either a driver's license or health card, will suffice.
NO NEED to be at all wary of whether such documents will suffice. They fit squarely within the examples described in the instructions.
Accuracy and Validity:
Of course what is submitted needs to be accurate copies of valid documents that are honestly what they purport to be and which honestly are evidence of the PR's residency. If not, yeah that can cause problems. One might say IRCC frowns on deception, even if a bureaucracy cannot actually frown.
A bank statement for a time period the PR was not actually residing at the address shown on the statement, for example, only appears to be evidence of residency but of course the PR knows better, knows that is at best misleading if not an outright misrepresentation. Might suffice nonetheless unless caught (or until caught; remember there is effectively no statute of limitations for imposing the legal consequences for misrepresentations made in immigration matters), but of course if it is inconsistent with the PR's address and travel history, that might be an inconsistency hard to overlook, rather likely to be caught.
So, sure, not any bank statement will suffice, but a bank statement showing the actual address where the PR was residing in Canada for that period of time will.
Likewise any other document. If the PR has a driver's license displaying an address the PR was able to use, a friend's address, maybe a brother's, but the PR never actually resided at that address, submitting that as evidence of residency in Canada is deceptive, at best misleading, potentially misrepresentation. Probably easy to get away with, but if caught (and typically that happens because it is inconsistent with other information the PR provides -- cross-checking information has long been the heart of processing applications like this), yeah there is the potential for significant, negative consequences.
This really is not that complicated. This subject really should not need a wordy exposition from a resident legalese gardener, like me, digging in the weeds.
MEANWHILE . . . a Head's Up . . . Automated Decision Making . . .
It has been, at the very least, more than a decade since CIC (now IRCC) began implementing formal checklist driven triage decision-making which automatically directed applications into different processing streams based on the triage criteria. It was over five years ago that IRCC initiated pilot programs in which "advanced analytics" and "machine learning technology" (what others might call AI or Artificial Intelligence) have been employed. In the pilot programs (beginning 2018), advanced analytics and machine learning technology was used in processing certain types of online applications, in which the first stage of processing consisted of a triage approach to separating applications into three levels of "complexity," low, medium, and high, dictating separate processing streams. In the pilot program for temporary resident visas, the low complexity applications were entirely processed electronically, resulting in most being approved and finalized with NO officer review.
To what extent this has been expanded I cannot say. No great power of prophesy necessary to recognize that more and more bureaucracy-decision-making (at least in terms of decisions like determining which applications to question), has already been significantly automated. Not much of a stretch to speculate that adding the evidence of residency requirement to the PR card application could be about obtaining sufficient data-points to facilitate automated decision making employing advanced analytics.
Someone should be making the ATI requests for relevant information about this; I'm too old and tired to keep up, obviously, just catching on to this use of advanced analytics five years after the fact. But given that PR card applications are mostly processed and approved almost immediately when opened, and otherwise referred to a processing path that can take months, my guess is that to some extent what IRCC refers to as "advanced analytics" and "machine learning technology" is already in use in processing at least the online PR card applications (and which perhaps accounts for the number of returned applications, as it may only take something being slightly off for it to not be machine processable).
hi,
one question on documents to be provided in order to "
Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation
how many notice of assessment should be provided. Is it any one from past 5 years or all NOA of 5 years?
Also, provincial health card, provincial photo ID (provice provice photo id to those who dont have driving lic) - can these documents eligible to provide?
This pr card renewal is for old person who does not work, just stay at kids home so really dont have any pay stub, etc
one question on documents to be provided in order to "
Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation
how many notice of assessment should be provided. Is it any one from past 5 years or all NOA of 5 years?
Also, provincial health card, provincial photo ID (provice provice photo id to those who dont have driving lic) - can these documents eligible to provide?
This pr card renewal is for old person who does not work, just stay at kids home so really dont have any pay stub, etc
Apart from the instructions themselves, which the PR absolutely should read and follow, and which are mostly straight-forward, your question has been answered in the discussion above and in many other topics here.
The instructions for what to include with a PR card application, as supporting documents showing the PR meets the Residency Obligation, are in the appendix to the guide, which is here: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides/guide-5445-applying-permanent-resident-card-card-first-application-replacement-renewal-change-gender-identifier.html#appendixA
However, what needs to be included is NOT the same for all PRs.
PRs meeting Residency Obligation based on actual presence in Canada:
The instructions are straight-forward for a PR who meets the RO based on actual presence IN Canada, that is any PR for whom the total number of days outside Canada, as calculated in the chart in question 5.5, does not exceed 1095 days. And it should be easy for any such PR: just 2 pieces of evidence that show residency. That's it. Two documents which show:
-- the PR's residential address in Canada, or
-- show employment in Canada, or
-- show activity in Canada consistent with residing in Canada
One example among scores and scores of possibilities: a copy of one year NoA from CRA plus a copy of provincial health card.
The guide appendix lists numerous examples. These include
-- bank statements, rental agreements, CRA documents (documents showing the PR's residential address in Canada)
-- employment records or pay stubs (documents showing employment in Canada)
-- evidence of government benefits (like health card), club memberships (documents showing activity in Canada consistent with residing in Canada)
Just two items . . . just two pieces of evidence of residency.
Other PRs (not meeting RO based on actual presence):
If the PR does not meet the RO based on days actually present in Canada (such as a PR relying on credit for days outside Canada in the employ of a Canadian business, or a PR relying on a H&C waiver), it is more complex and involves providing more documents. See the guide for particular instructions depending on the PR's situation, depending on which exception applies.
Should PR submit Better Evidence? For PRs meeting RO based on actual presence . . .
Not all evidence is created equal. Some is better (stronger, carries more weight). Should a PR be concerned about the quality and strength of the evidence they submit with the PR card application?
Good idea to use common sense. Bears repeating: Good idea to use common sense.
That said, any two pieces of evidence of residency will suffice to make a complete application. And there has been no hint it matters UNLESS for some reason IRCC has concerns about the completeness and accuracy of the travel history showing the PR meets the RO based on actual presence.
Reminder: For the PR who meets the RO based on actual presence, the primary proof of meeting the RO is the complete and accurate travel history detailed in the chart in question 5.5. Beyond that, the next biggest factor (in most situations) is whether the PR is currently well settled and living PERMANENTLY in Canada and whether that is how it appears as well.
So, for a PR who is objectively confident they clearly meet the RO and that is reflected in the information submitted in conjunction with information IRCC has otherwise (GCMS and CBSA records), which particular supporting documents are submitted should not matter (assuming, of course, what is submitted is evidence of residency during a period of time the PR was actually, IN FACT, residing in Canada).
In contrast, for a PR who has reason to apprehend IRCC might have concerns, the quality or weight of the evidence submitted might make a difference. It might (emphasis on "might") make a difference, for example, if instead of a copy of a gym membership the PR submits a bank statement not only showing the PR's address in Canada but also displaying a number of transactions consistent with presence and residence in Canada.
HOWEVER, going to why "might" in this context warrants emphasis, generally PR card applications are completely processed upon opening and soon approved, except those applications raising concerns or questions which are separated into a processing stream for complex cases. The strength of the supporting documents may have some influence in which way it goes, but the odds are that is NOT much influence. In contrast, other information and circumstances will have far more influence in determining which applications are not promptly processed and approved, but rather directed into processing for complex cases (which might involve requests for additional documents, proof of RO compliance).
That is, for those cutting-it-close, or those who are not clearly settled and living in Canada permanently, or those whose travel history (question 5.5) raises questions (if inconsistent with CBSA travel history records for example), among other potential reasons to question residency, submitting stronger supporting evidence with the application is not likely to change how IRCC handles the application, not likely to save it from complex case processing.
Hi All,
I am a homemaker residing in Canada with my family. I am now working on PR card renewal application. I meet the residency obligation of 730 days. I am confused about the documents to be submitted as proof of residency obligation. As I am a homemaker I do not have paystubs. will a credit card statement showing my address and NOA be sufficient? Please advise
I am a homemaker residing in Canada with my family. I am now working on PR card renewal application. I meet the residency obligation of 730 days. I am confused about the documents to be submitted as proof of residency obligation. As I am a homemaker I do not have paystubs. will a credit card statement showing my address and NOA be sufficient? Please advise