Other grounds for loss and renunciation of citizenship

We assess possible loss of your German nationality against the specific statutory ground; moving abroad, an expired passport or using another nationality alone is not enough. Loss requires a ground specified by law. Apart from withdrawal of fraudulently obtained naturalisation, the main relevant grounds are voluntary renunciation and certain forms of military or terrorist activity. For events further in the past, it is also necessary to examine whether a ground for loss that has since been abolished had already taken effect at the time.

A passport documents citizenship, but does not create it afresh every time it is issued. Its period of validity is therefore not the period of validity of citizenship. Failing to renew a passport or losing it does not make someone stateless. Nor is it sufficient to surrender a German identity document or inform the registration authority that one no longer wishes to be German.

We distinguish actual loss from a finding that nationality was never acquired. This may be relevant, for example, where a chain of descent was incorrectly assumed. § 30 StAG provides a determination procedure to clarify acquisition and continued possession. The legal question that needs to be asked therefore depends on the earlier basis of acquisition and subsequent events.

The central overview of grounds for loss is contained in § 17 StAG. The provision refers to renunciation, the specific grounds in § 28 and withdrawal under § 35. It also regulates certain retrospective losses affecting children. These limited statutory possibilities must not be replaced by a general notion that citizenship can be taken away for any breach of duty.

It does not matter whether multiple nationality has existed since birth or arose later. However, the specific other nationality must be proved. A residence permit, a right of permanent settlement or membership of a particular ethnic group is not a substitute. Any doubts about foreign nationality must be resolved before renunciation becomes definitive.

The German authority decides only on German citizenship. It can neither give a binding promise that another state will naturalise someone nor preserve a foreign nationality contrary to that state's law. Anyone considering renunciation because of another state's requirements therefore needs a coordinated assessment of both legal systems. The article on multiple nationality and consequences in the country of origin explains the general relationship between them.

§ 26(2) StAG specifies particular grounds for refusing approval. These concern, in particular, civil servants, judges, soldiers in the Bundeswehr and other people in a public-law service relationship or holding public office, for as long as that relationship continues. People serving in an honorary capacity are excluded from this statutory group. Employment with a public employer therefore needs to be legally classified; a private-law employment contract is not automatically a public-law service relationship.

For people subject to compulsory military service, the law generally requires a declaration from the Federal Ministry of Defence or the designated body that there are no objections to approval. Whether this ground applies in an individual case cannot be inferred solely from whether the person is actually performing military service at that moment. Their statutory status and the specific military-law rules must be assessed separately.

The law contains exceptions to these grounds for refusal. They apply in particular after at least ten years of habitual residence abroad or, for the relevant military service situation, after military service has been completed in a state whose nationality the person holds. Reliable information about periods of residence and, where applicable, service records is needed. A long holiday or merely formal deregistration does not replace habitual residence abroad.

We assess the significance of ten years abroad for the specific ground for refusal; it is not a general condition for every renunciation. It is relevant as an exception to the grounds for refusal mentioned above. Anyone who is not subject to such an obstacle and meets the other requirements does not first have to live abroad for ten years. Equally, the ten-year period alone never causes automatic loss of citizenship.

Parents cannot give up their child's citizenship merely because the whole family wishes to live abroad in future. Renunciation by a German minor must be declared by their legal representative and, under § 26(4) StAG, requires approval from a German family court. The parents' simultaneous renunciation does not dispense with this judicial scrutiny.

If the child has reached the age of 16 and has capacity to act under § 34 StAG, their consent is additionally required. General capacity to act in citizenship proceedings therefore replaces neither legal representation nor family court approval here. The special requirements for renunciation take precedence. Where parents are separated, it must also be clear who may validly represent the child.

For a child, we focus on the child's own legal interests and the specific consequences. These include their ties to Germany, the possibility of later living or undertaking education or training here and the rights they give up along with citizenship. A financial or organisational advantage for the parents does not answer these questions. Even where the child lives permanently abroad, German status may be significant for their later independent life plans.

For certain adults who lack legal capacity, or adults under legal guardianship with a relevant reservation of consent, § 26(4) also requires special representation and approval by the German guardianship court. However, the mere fact that someone receives help with administrative matters does not automatically mean that they cannot decide for themselves. The precise legal situation and the scope of the guardianship ordered are decisive.

EU citizenship continues only if the person still holds the nationality of another EU Member State. The nationality of a third country is not sufficient. Freedom of movement rights and access to consular protection under EU law may therefore also change. If you use EU rights for work, family or education in another Member State, we assess those effects before the renunciation certificate is handed over.

A parent's effective renunciation does not automatically deprive children who are already German of their own citizenship. For children born later, however, it may mean that this parent can no longer transmit German citizenship to them by descent. The date of birth and any possible acquisition through the other parent therefore remain important. Each family member's citizenship must be considered separately.

§ 28(1), no. 1 StAG concerns voluntarily joining the armed forces or a comparable armed organisation of a foreign state whose nationality the person holds. Loss is generally possible if the required consent from the Federal Ministry of Defence or the designated body is absent. What matters is a voluntary commitment; merely fulfilling a statutory obligation to perform military service abroad must be distinguished from this.

Not every stay in a military facility and not every activity for a foreign public employer satisfies this ground. The legal affiliation, type of organisation, actual entry into service, voluntariness and nationalities held must be examined. A right to join based on a treaty between states may also exclude loss under § 28(2), no. 2. This means a treaty between states, not the personal service or enlistment contract with the military employer. Minors are exempt from loss under § 28(2); in addition, statelessness must not result.

We check whether a general consent applies for the state concerned. The Federal Foreign Office explains the consent in force since July 2011 for certain groups of states, including EU, EFTA and NATO states and the other states specified there. We check the specific unit and joining date rather than assuming blanket consent. The specific organisation and the consent applicable at the relevant time must be clarified before entering into a commitment.

Another ground in § 28 covers actual participation in combat operations of a terrorist organisation abroad. This is a separate, narrowly defined statutory requirement. General political disapproval, any arbitrary criminal offence or a mere allegation of closeness to a group must not be equated with this ground. Criminal responsibility and loss of citizenship are subject to different assessments.

Here too, minors are exempt and statelessness is excluded. Where the person is habitually resident in Germany, the highest state authority or the authority designated under state law decides on the determination of loss provided for by law. If the person is still abroad, § 28(3) excludes the administrative objection procedure; a court action has no suspensive effect. Interim judicial relief may therefore also be necessary.

If EU citizenship would also be lost, the requirements of EU law and § 30(1) StAG must additionally be observed. Establishing a second nationality alone is not sufficient: another EU nationality preserves EU citizen status, whereas holding only an additional third-country nationality does not. The following section explains the significance of the proportionality assessment, particularly for earlier cases of statutory loss.

Since 27 June 2024, acquiring a foreign nationality on application no longer causes the loss of German citizenship. German permission to retain citizenship is no longer required for such a subsequent acquisition. The decisive date is when the other nationality was actually acquired, not simply when the foreign application was submitted.

The former release procedure, the special ground for loss through adoption by a foreign national and the obligation to choose between nationalities were also abolished. Voluntary relinquishment is now possible through renunciation, subject to its own requirements. People who acquired multiple nationalities as children therefore do not have to choose between them upon reaching a particular age because of the former obligation to choose.

The reform does not automatically restore citizenship that had already been lost. The German diplomatic and consular representations in the United States expressly explain the absence of retrospective effect for earlier cases. Where a foreign nationality was acquired earlier, the law applicable at the time must therefore be examined, including possible exceptions and any earlier permission to retain German citizenship. Old foreign naturalisation certificates remain important evidence for this purpose.

For example: if a parent had already effectively lost German citizenship before the child's birth, the reform does not retrospectively create an acquisition by descent that did not occur at the time. If the parent was still German when the child was born, the starting position may be different. Such differences in timing explain why siblings or different generations of a family can have different legal statuses despite similar documents.

Where a statutory loss would also remove EU citizenship, § 30(1), sentence 4 StAG requires the consequences to be proportionate. Although sentence 5 provides an exception where an application to avert loss was omitted or unsuccessful, that exception must not be applied where effective access to the EU-law assessment was lacking or the required assessment was not carried out. The authority or court must then perform it, even if no application for permission to retain citizenship was made at the time.

In the individual case, we examine earlier notices, applications and decisions and the effects on your family and working life protected by EU law. If the consequences are disproportionate, retention or retrospective reacquisition must be made possible. This does not amount to blanket reacquisition for all earlier cases. The determination procedure clarifies status; a new naturalisation is a different route and generally does not retrospectively close an earlier gap in status.

§ 17(2) StAG also covers certain cases in which the basis for acquisition by operation of law ceases to exist retrospectively. These include an effective determination that paternity does not exist, the loss of a relevant parental right of residence or the invalidity of an adoption. Not every later change in family circumstances has this effect. For example, the parents' separation does not simply end descent for citizenship purposes.

The law contains protective rules, particularly concerning age, a continuing relationship with a German parent, another basis for acquisition by birth in Germany and the prospect of statelessness. However, the age limit of five years is not an unconditional guarantee for every ground: where immigration authority consents or determinations concerning acknowledgement of paternity under § 85d(2) to (5) AufenthG in conjunction with § 1598(1), sentence 2 BGB are withdrawn, this age protection does not apply. This is precisely the situation specified in § 17(2), sentence 2, no. 1(b). The other protective grounds remain independently applicable. By contrast, where a parent's naturalisation is withdrawn under § 35, point (e) applies; the exception to age protection does not apply in that case. The decisive point in each instance is the time specified by law, particularly when the retrospective decision becomes final and no longer open to challenge, not merely when its examination begins.

The effects of the retrospective withdrawal of a parent's naturalisation are discussed in detail in fraudulently obtained naturalisation and consequences for family members. The overview of withdrawal and loss provides initial guidance. We first reconstruct the precise acquisition route from the certificates, then assess the ground for loss and the legal protection needed.