Vanuatu DSP vs CIIP in 2026: How to Choose Between the Two Investment Routes

Vanuatu is one of very few citizenship-by-investment programmes in the world offering two distinct qualifying investment routes under a single framework. Both are administered by the Government of Vanuatu through the Vanuatu Citizenship Commission and the Citizenship Office. Both deliver the same passport, the same rights, and the same processing timeline. Where they differ — materially — is in how the qualifying investment is structured, priced, and, in the case of the newer route, partially refunded.

Advance Citizenship has been a designated agent of the Vanuatu Citizenship Commission for the Development Support Programme and the Capital Investment Immigration Plan since 2018. Over that period we have submitted applications across both routes for applicants at every family size, budget, and profile. This piece sets out the honest decision framework we work through with clients, using the current 2026 pricing structure.

The Development Support Programme (DSP)

The DSP is Vanuatu's original citizenship-by-investment route, established in 2017 under the Citizenship Act [Cap 112]. It is structured as a straight non-refundable contribution to the Government of Vanuatu, priced by family size. The contribution amount rises with the number of applicants included in the application, on a documented per-tier basis.

DSP pricing in 2026 follows a graduated structure. A single applicant contributes USD $130,000. A married couple contributes USD $150,000 — a marginal cost of $20,000 for adding the second applicant. A family of three contributes USD $165,000 — a further $15,000 for the third member. A family of four contributes USD $180,000 — again a further $15,000 for the fourth. Beyond four applicants, additional dependants are USD $25,000 each.

These figures represent the contribution to the Government of Vanuatu only. Applicants also pay a $5,500 due-diligence fee per application, plus additional government fees of $3,000 for the main applicant and $2,000 for each other family member. None of the DSP contribution is refundable.

The Capital Investment Immigration Plan (CIIP)

The CIIP was formally established in 2023 under the Citizenship (Capital Investment Immigration Plan) Regulation Order No. 8 of 2023, pursuant to Section 13C of the Citizenship Act [Cap 112]. It was briefly suspended and then reopened on 29 May 2025 following regulatory refinements by the Government of Vanuatu. It is now fully operational.

CIIP is a hybrid structure. The applicant's total contribution is USD $165,000, of which USD $115,000 is a non-refundable contribution to the Government of Vanuatu and USD $50,000 is placed into a government-approved investment fund. That USD $50,000 becomes redeemable after five years, subject to fund performance and the applicable governmental redemption process. Net cost after redemption is therefore USD $115,000.

The distinguishing feature of CIIP is its flat-rate pricing. The USD $165,000 face value applies to a single applicant, a married couple, a family of three, or a family of four — identically. Additional dependants beyond four are USD $25,000 each, aligned with DSP's incremental structure. This flat-rate structure fundamentally changes the DSP-versus-CIIP calculation as family size grows.

The government-approved CIIP funds currently include the Cocoa Sustainable Fund (CSF), supporting Vanuatu's cocoa export sector, and the Coconut Oil Future Fund (CNO), supporting the domestic coconut oil industry as part of Vanuatu's Net Zero 2030 objectives. Both funds target a projected annual return, though returns are not guaranteed and depend on underlying fund performance. The applicant selects a fund at the point of application.

The full pricing comparison

All figures USD. Contribution amounts only; due-diligence and additional government fees payable separately.

Reading the math honestly

The pattern the table reveals is clean and worth stating explicitly.

For a single applicant, DSP wins on upfront cash outlay by $35,000. CIIP wins on net cost after five years by $15,000. The decision is therefore about whether the applicant needs the $50,000 in the interim, and whether they are comfortable with the fund performance risk over five years. If cash preservation matters and the applicant does not want any exposure to fund performance, DSP is the cleaner choice. If they can hold the $50,000 with the fund for five years and want the lower net cost, CIIP is cheaper by $15,000.

For a married couple, CIIP is still $15,000 more upfront but $35,000 cheaper on a net basis. The proposition is more favourable to CIIP than for a single applicant.

For a family of three, CIIP is the same upfront cost as DSP but $50,000 cheaper net. There is no reason for a family of three to choose DSP on price alone — the CIIP net saving is substantial.

For a family of four, CIIP is cheaper both upfront and net — a $15,000 saving immediately and a $65,000 saving after refund. CIIP is unambiguously the more cost-efficient route.

"CIIP is a family-oriented structure. Every incremental dependant added to a CIIP application is essentially free up to family of four. That is not a feature we see in any comparable global programme."

Scenario-by-scenario view

Opportunity cost — the honest caveat

The math above uses nominal figures. It ignores the opportunity cost of the $50,000 CIIP fund investment locked for five years. In practice, if the applicant could earn even a modest return on $50,000 over five years — say 5% per annum compounded — the opportunity cost is roughly $13,800 in foregone returns. This narrows the CIIP net advantage but does not eliminate it.

Adjusted for a 5% opportunity cost assumption, the effective net cost of CIIP moves from $115,000 to approximately $128,800 for a single applicant. That still leaves CIIP marginally cheaper than DSP's $130,000, though the margin is narrower than the nominal comparison suggests. For families of three or four, the CIIP advantage remains substantial even after full opportunity-cost adjustment.

Different assumptions produce different figures, and every applicant's alternative use of capital is different. The right way to think about this is not to trust any single break-even number, but to compare CIIP's structural advantage against the applicant's own actual reinvestment options. In our experience with clients since 2018, applicants comparing CIIP against fixed-income yields tend to favour CIIP; applicants with active equity or business reinvestment options that materially outperform 5% tend to favour DSP on cash-flow grounds.

Where DSP still wins

Where CIIP wins

Common misconceptions to correct

"CIIP is a different programme with different rights." No. CIIP applicants receive identical citizenship under identical terms. There is no distinction in passport, visa-free access, tax residency treatment, or any other benefit of Vanuatu citizenship.

"The $50,000 refund is guaranteed." The redemption mechanism is established by regulation. The refund itself is contingent on fund performance and the applicable governmental redemption process. In practice, the funds are structured to preserve capital and target modest returns, but "guaranteed" overstates the position. Any adviser presenting the refund as a certainty is oversimplifying.

"CIIP takes longer to process." No. Both DSP and CIIP are processed within the standard 30-to-60-day Vanuatu Citizenship Commission timeline. Route choice does not affect speed.

"DSP is being phased out." No. Both routes are fully operational and there is no published intention to phase out either. The Government of Vanuatu's Orders Nos. 39 and 40 of 2026, published in Official Gazette No. 25 on 19 March 2026, addressed currency-conversion arrangements only and did not affect programme structure.

How the decision usually resolves

Across our own client base, the decision typically follows family size. Single applicants and couples split roughly evenly between DSP and CIIP, with the choice driven mostly by cash flow preferences and comfort with the fund investment. Families of three and four choose CIIP in the substantial majority of cases, because the flat-rate structure delivers a saving that is difficult to justify walking away from.

The right route is a function of the applicant's actual circumstances — not a universal answer. What matters is understanding both structures honestly, and matching the choice to the applicant's family, capital position, time horizon, and risk tolerance. That is the conversation we have with every client at Advance Citizenship, working within the framework established by the Vanuatu Citizenship Commission.